Loading...
PC Min - 08/11/2009CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. The Planning Commission meeting of August 11, 2009, was called to order at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair Ebner and the following proceedings were had, to wit: AUGUST 11, 2009 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY ROLL CALL Commissioners Present Chair: Commissioner: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Mark Ebner Bob Alderete EIIZabeth GlbbonS (arrived late) Gary Gairaud Bob Roseberry Commissioners Absent Commissioner: Commissioner: Theresa Alster Michael Rocha Staff Present: Community Development Director: Kirk E. Heinrichs Planning Manager: Paul Kermoyan Senior Planner: Tim J. Haley Associate Planner: Steve Prosser Assistant Planner: Daniel Fama City Attorney: William Seligmann Acting City Attorney (Item 5): Celestial Gassman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roseberry, seconded by Commissioner Alderete, the Planning Commission minutes of the meeting of July 28, 2009, were approved as submitted. (3-0-3-1; Commissioner Gibbons arrived after this vote was taken; Commissioners Alster and Rocha were absent and Commissioner Gairaud abstained) Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 2 SPECIAL PRESENTATION This item was continued to the next meeting. COMMUNICATIONS There were no communications items. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS Director Kirk Heinrichs suggested that as there are a number of people present this evening for Agenda Item No. 5 that this item be considered first. ORAL REQUESTS There were no oral requests. *** PUBLIC HEARINGS City Attorney William Seligmann advised that he would recuse from participation in this Appeal, as he has been involved in enforcement actions with this matter. He advised that Attorney Celestial Gassman would provide legal counsel to the Commission for this item in his place. He left the dais and chambers for the hearing. Chair Ebner read Agenda Item No. 5 into the record as follows: 5. PLN2009-16 Public Hearing to consider the Appeal by Mr. David Eisbach Support Systems of a Reasonable Accommodation Request recently approved Homes, Inc. by the Community Development Director permitting a Residential Service Facility, Large (12 residents) in an existing residence on property owned by Richard & Irene Francis, Trustee, located at 889 Scott Court in an R-1-6 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission action final. Project Planner: Tim J. Haley, Senior Planner Mr. Tim J. Haley, Senior Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the Appeal before the Commission this evening is of the decision made by the Community Development Director to conditionally approve a Reasonable Accommodation Request to allow a Residential Service Facility Large, which serves 10 residents with two staff within an existing residence located at 889 Scott Court. • Reported that the appellant's letter has been attached to the staff report. He added that he is glad to address the items raised in this letter. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 3 • Informed that this use of this residence was originally brought to the attention of the Planning Department in February 2006. There is a fairly extensive history of dealing with this use of a residence as a Residential Service Facility, Large, at this location. • Said that this issue was brought before the Planning Commission for an Interpretation. It also went into the court system to determine the use of this property. • Stated that the applicant was provided with several options. One option available to Support Systems Homes was to apply fora Reasonable Accommodation Request. Another option was to appeal the Interpretation. A third option was to reduce the number of clients residing on the property to six or less. • Explained that the Zoning for this property is R-1-6 where a Residential Service Facility is a permitted use for up to six. However, a specific request was made by this facility to accommodate additional residents - 10 residents plus two house managers for a total occupancy of 12. • Said that on June 15, 2009, the Director held an Administrative Hearing at the request of one of the neighboring property owners. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Director considered comments from the neighbors and requested an inspection by the Building Division. On June 25, 2009, the Director conditionally approved the Reasonable Accommodation Request fora Residential Service Facility, Large, on this property. • Added that the conditions imposed addressed concerns raised at the hearing regarding parking, traffic, noise concerns, and other potential impacts from use of this residence with 12 residents. • Advised that the Director's action was appealed to the Planning Commission. • Recommended that the Commission adopt a resolution upholding the Director's decision to approve the Reasonable Accommodation Request. Commissioner Roseberry asked staff who owns this property. Planner Tim J. Haley said that the owner rents the property to Support Systems Homes, the operators of this sober living facility. Commissioner Gairaud asked if the action taken by the Planning Commission on this item could later be appealed to Council. Planner Tim J. Haley replied no. He added that the final decision rests with the Planning Commission this evening. Commissioner Alderete: • Advised that he had read all of the materials provided and has several short questions. • Reminded that this proposal/business came before the Commission in 2007 on the basis of needing the Commission to make a determination as to whether this is a "small" or "large" residential environment. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 4 Planner Tim J. Haley agreed. He said that the Director had made the determination that this was a "large" facility versus being a "small" facility. A small facility equals six or fewer residents and as such is permitted in the R-1-6 Zoning District. Commissioner Alderete clarified that per Code a small facility is allowed but a large one is not. Planner Tim J. Haley replied yes. Commissioner Alderete asked why this is back before the Planning Commission, which had already made the determination on whether to allow a large facility where only small facilities are provided for in the Zoning Code for R-1-6. Planner Tim J. Haley said that the issue was the appeal of the determination made by the Director at that time that this use did not meet the definition of a small facility. It is more a large facility. Commissioner Alderete restated that the determination reached was that this was a large facility proposed where only a small facility was allowed. Planner Tim J. Haley agreed that was the Planning Commission's determination at that time. Commissioner Alderete: • Stated that following the Planning Commission's determination, the applicant then challenged the Commission's action in Superior Court. The Superior Court upheld the position of the Planning Commission. Planner Tim J. Haley said that was correct. Commissioner Alderete: • Said that following that step, he would have thought that this was settled. • Added that he understands that there was a provision in the law that allowed the applicant to pursue another avenue -- to apply for a Reasonable Accommodation Request. Planner Tim J. Haley: • Agreed, saying that is correct. • Added that a letter sent to the applicant outlined three options available to them (Support Systems Homes). One option was to appeal the Director's interpretation to the Planning Commission. Another option was to reduce the number of clients to six individuals or less. A third option was to apply for a Reasonable Accommodation Request. Commissioner Alderete asked staff to define and/or describe in layman's terms what Reasonable Accommodation Request means. He said he wants to be sure that the terminology is straight and that all people can understand what it means. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 5 Planner Tim J. Haley: • Explained that the Reasonable Accommodation provision of the Zoning Ordinance was placed there to allow reasonable access to persons with disabilities. • Added that individuals serviced by this facility suffer both from alcohol and substance abuse addictions, which has been identified as a protected class by State and Federal legislation that requires that communities make provisions to be sure that fair access is available to persons with disabilities. • Said that under that provision, Support Systems Homes has applied for Reasonable Accommodation. Commissioner Alderete asked if it is fair to say that there are prevailing sets of laws at a number of levels that define anon-using addict as a disabled class of people. Is that correct? He added that he believes that is why we're here and talking about this. Ms. Celestial Gassman, Acting City Attorney for the City: • Said that Commissioner Alderete is correct. • Added that staff gave a good summary of a layperson's version. Commissioner Alderete: • Said that he was looking for a layperson's version. • Added that, in terms of what is defined by law as fair and reasonable efforts to provide fair housing for this disabled class (non-using addicts in this case), the City has to look past its own Zoning Ordinance and make these accommodations for folks. Is that a good bottom line there? Acting City Attorney Celestial Cassman said yes. She elaborated that it is an accommodation to a Zoning code that is necessary to afford people an equal opportunity to housing. The reasonable aspect of it is being reasonable as long as it doesn't interfere with the fundamental program or cause an undue financial or administrative hardship. Commissioner Alderete asked who determines that limiting this business in this residential neighborhood to six to eight people would pose an economic hardship and basically render the business non-viable unless we allow them to have more people there. Acting City Attorney Celestial Cassman replied that she believes this is the Commission's decision based on evidence before it. Commissioner Alderete asked if staff has the financial numbers yet. Is there an income statement, balance sheet or financial projections for this business? Director Kirk Heinrichs: • Explained that they have provided staff with information regarding the rent they charge. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 6 • Reported that the staff people (guardians) don't pay rent. Their pay/compensation is rent-free living space. • Added that the residents pay a fee that ranges between $550 and $675 a month. • Said that staff had requested a cost for rental insurance, which was not provided. Commissioner Roseberry said he had a follow up question. Page 4 of the staff report reads that Reasonable Accommodation Requests are provided to avoid discrimination based on disability. Does it mean that all must have equal access to housing available to residents without disabilities? Acting City Attorney Celestial Gassman replied yes. She added that there is a lot of law in this area with different iterations to mean equal given the disability. One common iteration is, "does a business such as this need accommodation because a minimum size or economy of scale is necessary to make it economically viable?" Commissioner Roseberry asked if this means that we are not talking about equal access to individuals but rather to the applicant who is a proxy for the individuals in this case. Acting City Attorney Celestial Cassman said if it is viable for the applicants, it gives the residents the opportunity. Commissioner Alderete: • Said that we are talking about law and we've seen case law. • Added that what we haven't heard is, "what is fair for the other residents on Scott Court?" • Asked, "What, if anything, does this mean for their quality of life or impact on their life." • Added that he would like to understand if that has been assessed. • Said that he is waiting to hear from those folks when they get their chance to come up and speak. • Stated that he wants to try to provide for a fair situation for the rest of the community as well. Director Kirk Heinrichs: • Reported that at the Administrative Hearing, the residents were given the opportunity to express their concerns. Staff tried to use that as a basis for formulating some conditions that might mitigate some of those things related to noise, on-street parking, traffic, loitering, littering and those kinds of things. • Said that the conditions in the staff report are what staff came up with. Commissioner Alderete: • Said that he wants to make sure. • Added that when this business was before the Planning Commission before, the Commission was deciding whether or not it had the basis to increase the number of residents. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 7 • Added that the Commission decided it would encourage this business to abide by the Ordinance of the City of Campbell that provided for six or eight residents to be living there. • Said that was the decision that was made and it was upheld by the Superior Court by a judge. Now, here we are again talking about the same business. • Asked if it is fair to say that all that went into that decision itself is now just the past and doesn't matter any more and that we're here to decide whether to uphold the Director's decision, which was definitely a surprise to me. • Repeated his question. Is that all we're here for now? The original intent of the Zoning Code is no longer an issue. Director Kirk Heinrichs: • Reiterated the three options that had been made available to this applicant. • Said that one option was to conduct the use as a Residential Service Facility, Small. This is allowed outright. • Reminded that another option available was to apply for a Reasonable Accommodation Request, which is mandated by State and Federal law, which requires cities to make exceptions to their rules for these types of uses. • Explained that the first time around, the Commission's task was to make a determination as to the appeal, as to whether it was a Small or Large Family Living Facility. • Reported that the Commission decided it was a Large Family, which is not allowed in the single-family zone, and the Court upheld that decision. Commissioner Roseberry: • Said that Commissioner Alderete has asked some good questions that helped him to better understand this matter. • Pointed to the reference on page 4 to two levels of inspections on this house. One was by the house manager and another was by the District Attorney's Office. • Said his question is whether anyone has seen the written reports. Was there a checklist? Director Kirk Heinrichs: • Reported that at the Administrative Hearing, there was concern about the legality of certain parts of the house. Therefore, he arranged to have the Building Department make an inspection of the house to determine if there were any deficiencies. • Added that the inspector found several deficiencies. Commissioner Roseberry said that wasn't his question. His question was has anyone seen the house manager's inspection sheet and/or report. Director Kirk Heinrichs replied no. Commissioner Roseberry said he just wonders how formal this document is. Is it a checklist? Do they file a report that is kept somewhere? Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 8 Director Kirk Heinrichs said that staff has not seen any reports but the applicant might be able to answer that question. Commissioner Roseberry: • Said that what is really being discussed here is a Reasonable Accommodation Request that would go to the operator of the property. • Added that the Commission is not talking about a Reasonable Accommodation Request that would go to any individual who might be staying at the property. Nor is the Commission talking about a Reasonable Accommodation Request that is being made to the owner of the property. The Commission is talking about a Reasonable Accommodation Request that goes to the operator of the property. Acting City Attorney Celestial Gassman said that technically the accommodation is for the disability or the disabled but by virtue of accommodating the facility. The benefit will inure to the residents. Commissioner Roseberry thanked Acting City Attorney Celestial Cassman for using that legal term because he hadn't known that one. Commissioner Gibbons apologized for her tardiness this evening and said her next question may have already been asked. She stated that the Director, through an Administrative Hearing, made a decision allowing a Reasonable Accommodation Request that allows these 10 residents and two on-site managers to be on this site with conditions. Is it the conditions that are being appealed this evening? Director Kirk Heinrichs replied that it is the actual decision to approve the Reasonable Accommodation Request that is being appealed. Commissioner Gibbons asked by whom. Director Kirk Heinrichs said by a nearby resident. Chair Ebner reminded that this facility was operating illegally prior to complaint by neighbors. Director Kirk Heinrichs said that was correct. Chair Ebner added that this facility is not licensed by the State. Director Kirk Heinrichs said that too was correct. Chair Ebner said that the facility is overseen by the District Attorney's Office. Director Kirk Heinrichs said that was correct. Chair Ebner asked why State law is being considered here if it does not apply. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 9 Acting City Attorney Celestial Crisman clarified that State and Federal laws absolutely apply. There is a hierarchy between Federal, State and local laws. All of these laws are at issue. Chair Ebner asked why this use is not licensed by the State or don't they need to be? Acting City Attorney Celestial Crisman said that she did not believe that they need to be licensed by the State but the applicant could speak better to that. Commissioner Gairaud asked if the applicant could speak first. Chair Ebner said that he thinks the neighbors should have the opportunity to speak first. Other questions might be raised by the neighbors that the applicant can later answer. Chair Ebner opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 5. Ms. Ordetta Hovland, Resident on Waterford Drive, Cupertino: • Explained that she owns a property, together with her sister, as an income property for retirement. They have owned it since 1963. • Said that this property backs onto 889 Scott Court. • Stated that she can understand having six people living there but not 12. Having 12 people live within 1,800 square feet is really cramped quarters. • Said that she and her husband raised three children in the same amount of space. • Reported that smoking at 889 Scott Court is only allowed in the back and side yards. • Advised that her renter of 13 years is very allergic to things such as smoke and any kind of spraying. • Expressed concern over the possibility of losing this long-time tenant as a result of this use. • Said that the income derived from this rental property represents a third of her retirement income and half for her sister. • Stated that parking on this Court is abominable. The cul de sac is very little. • Reported that the house at 889 Scott Court was bought by Richard and Irene Francis in 1987 for $221,000. They transferred it to a trust in 2005. They refinanced and pulled money out over the years and are now into it for $650,000. They must need to charge a high rent to recover their investment. Commissioner Alderete said that it is important to determine if this is a case to strive for economic viability. He asked Ms. Hovlund if she has any documentation to reflect the numbers she has just provided. Ms. Orletta Hovlund said she could get that documentation tomorrow. Commissioner Alderete asked if these are legal documents. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 10 Ms. Ordetta Hovlund said yes. They are public record. Ms. Amy Rose, Resident on Sheila Court: • Advised that her Court is located adjacent to Scott Court. • Reported that she had attended the previous hearing. • Said that she is surprised that it is back again. • Pointed out that the average occupancy in this area is about five people. • Added that the sober living population is transient and turns over every few months. • Stated that if this home were located on her own street, her children would not be allowed to play out front. • Said that if they cannot park in front of their own home, they must park down the street in front of other people's homes that also have children. • Stated that this is "just not okay." • Said that she did not think that the City of Campbell is not offering Reasonable Accommodations. The City has several zones that allow for Large Residential Service Facilities with 12 or more people. • Added that this site is zoned for six because it is 6,000 square foot lots. That really doesn't allow for 12 people. • Assured that the neighbors are not discriminating against people with addictions. Having a facility with six or fewer in this neighborhood is normal. • Reminded that they are free to open other facilities in Campbell. They can go to places that are zoned for 12 people or more. • Said that the problem is that they don't break even at six residents so they're trying every loophole they can. • Reported that the last time, they were saying that they operated as a single housekeeping unit and that they acted as a family rather than as a business. • Said that when that was shot down in Superior Court, they now are claiming a need for Reasonable Accommodation in this location. They don't. They can have Reasonable Accommodation in Campbell in another facility that allows for it through the zoning. Chair Ebner said he too was concerned about the transient nature with regular turnover. Ms. Amy Rose reported that the Police had to be called before to this location. She added that there is between a 25 and 30 percent recidivism rate. Mr. Casey Wend, Resident on Scott Court: • Distributed a couple of handouts to the members of the Commission. • Reported that a part of the June 24th inspection report there were a number of items that needed to be addressed. • Asked if those issues have been addressed. • Asked if this house is permitted for five or six bedrooms. Director Kirk Heinrichs said that per the conditions of approval, those issues would have to be met prior to occupancy. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 11 Mr. Casey Wend said that there was a 30 day deadline. Director Kirk Heinrichs said that the conditions don't set that deadline but perhaps the inspection letter did. Commissioner Roseberry asked staff if building permits have been applied for. Director Kirk Heinrichs replied not to his knowledge. Mr. Casey Wend: • Read out some of the infractions outlined in the inspection report, including lack of smoke detectors. • Pointed out that there are no access ramps on site as required under ADA. One cannot pick and chose. To him, that's discriminatory. • Reminded that the zoning is R-1-6. This is a small residential area of cul de sacs. • Advised that six to 12 cars per day is a significant impact. Their friends come and go and this traffic adds to the burden on their street and affects every resident since this home is located at the back of this cul de sac. • Asked how long this approval would be for. How will it be monitored? Director Kirk Heinrichs advised that the conditions go with the permit. The City does not do periodic inspections but rather it would be complaint driven. Mr. Casey Wend: • Reported that his home is six down from this one. • Expressed his experiences with loitering, including people standing in his front yard talking on cell phones. • Advised that he once had to call the Police when one resident from this home got confrontational when asked why is was standing in front of my house on the phone. • Stated that he sees suspicious car traffic that includes short transactions. • Added that he's not too sure what's going on there. • Said that he gets stuck cleaning up the trash left in front of his house. This is a burden on them. • Recounted how in May 2007 the Police were called to this house when the house manager was unable to control one of the residents. • Stressed that this is a serious concern and that he hopes the Commission takes that into consideration. • Stated that Reasonable Accommodation should not put a burden on neighbors. Equal opportunity should apply to everyone. Mr. Dean Birge, Resident on Scott Court: • Said that he is opposed to this large facility. • Reminded that the zoning allows for small not large facilities. • Added that it is not fair to impose this large facility in a small area. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 12 • Said that they are 12 residents versus the 70 to 80 others who currently live in this immediate area. • Suggested that if this home is not economically viable, they should find a location that is. Ms. Jennifer Clark, Resident on Patricia Court: • Reported that her home is located directly across from Scott Court. • Added that they moved here about four years ago from ahigh-density residential area in San Jose. • Said that her young children ride bikes in this neighborhood. Now there is lots of traffic traveling at unreasonable speeds and that is not safe. This is not fair to the neighborhood. • Stated that this facility limits her young daughters from fully using and enjoying their home and neighborhood. Mr. David Medlicott, Resident on Sheila Court: • Said that his street is right next to Scott Court and his backyard is toward the Scott side. • Reported that Sheila Court is a quiet court. On the opposite side, the Scott Court side, there is a lot of noise. • Stated his confusion as to why we're here tonight and said that he appreciated Commissioner Alderete's questions. • Added that he had thought this issue was handled two years' ago. • Stated that Reasonable Accommodation is not reasonable here. • Said that it might be different for individuals with long-term leases but this is a business. • Stated he is not sure why the City is making a Reasonable Accommodation for a business located in a residential neighborhood. • Said that he can't believe that they can't find a more appropriate neighborhood rather than this family neighborhood. • Reiterated that he is not sure why everyone is here again. • Said that this is too many people in a house on a court. There is too much in and out. There is too much noise. • Stated that he was opposed to it. Ms. Bryce Wend, Resident on Scott Court: • Expressed her agreement with the neighbors' comments about negative impacts on their neighborhood. • Said that Support Systems Homes operates 18 homes successfully in the Bay Area. They have been in business for 18 years now. • Added that clearly they have found a sustainable and successful business model or they wouldn't be in business. • Said that she highly doubts that this business has been losing money. • Stated that Reasonable Accommodation was an option two years ago. • Questioned why they waited for two years to come in with a request for Reasonable Accommodation. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 13 • Said that until a financial audit is provided, one will never know if 12 residents are really necessary. • Said that looking at this as a stand alone entity is not accurate. Rather one needs to look at the big financial picture. • Said that if this use is losing money, why is it the City's responsibility to cover for an unsound business model? That doesn't make sense to her. • Said that clearly they've got it right in the other 17 homes that they operate. • Reminded that this type of business is allowed to operate in four other residential zoning districts already. • Said that R-1-6 zoning reflects small homes on small 6,000 square foot lots. This type of use would be better served in other residential zones on larger lots. • Reiterated that this property is located at the end of a one-way court. • Said that there are other sites available in the City. • Suggested that the system appears to be clearly skewed in favor of Support Systems Homes. If they do not get approved for 12, they can next apply for 11, 10, 9 and so on and so on, continuing to draw out the process. • Said that their neighborhood has no recourse if the Planning Commission upholds this decision. If it does, traffic gets worse, there will be more crime and generally a less safe neighborhood. • Said that short of a lawsuit against the City, they have no recourse. That doesn't seem fair or right. • Said that if the Commission approves this, she asks for a condition limiting the approval to six months. In February of next year, should they wish to continue with 12, they come up for review. If it's all working out with minimal impact, it can be approved as status quo. • Agreed that there is no doubt there is need for affordable housing. We live in an expensive area of the United States. • Said that it seems like the Planning Department has taken the easy way out at the expense of the residents on Scott Court. • Stated that there is a point where fair access to housing can go too far and she believes that point has been crossed at this point. Chair Ebner told Ms. Bryce Wend that her comments were nicely stated. Ms. Tracie Bunyan, Resident on Scott Court: • Said that her home is located two houses away from 889 Scott Court. • Advised that she has two small children, atwo-year-old daughter and aseven-year- old son. • Added that they do not play outside in their front yard, which is big and beautiful, because of the house that is two doors down from them. • Said that they are affected by the traffic on a daily basis. Every time she has to back out of her driveway. • Added that she has to park a truck and two cars on her driveway because there is no room for street parking. • Reported that speeders are always speeding down the street. • Said that there is a problem with garbage and broken glass, etc. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 14 • Said that this use seems to work with six but will not with 12. • Reminded that this has affected them so much. There is no parking and no space. • Added that she cannot live the way she wants in her own home. They live behind closed doors. • Reminded that there is nowhere for six cars to park at 889 Scott Court. • Pointed out that she does not see managers there on a regular basis. • Said that if this does go through it should be required to have every resident checked against the Megan's Law database. • Stated that as a parent of small children, it should be required to screen these people. • Said that they want their neighborhood back. Mr. Robert Haskell, Resident on Scott Court: • Advised that he just moved in across the street on the corner. • Said that he just found out about this unlicensed use. • Questioned whether he would be allowed to have an unlicensed business from his residence. • Said that he sees a lot of traffic and that people park in front of his home and leave debris there. • Pointed out that only one of four of those in recovery will make it (succeed) while three of four will not. • Said that he feels blessed to have such beautiful neighbors while these folks look like gang members or thugs. One can clearly pick out the people who technically don't belong there. Mr. David Eisbach, Appellant: • Said that he owns duplexes adjacent to Ordetta's. • Stated that they are the recipients of the backyard smoke. • Said that he does not believe that Support Systems Homes has been completely forthcoming. • Reminded that they had begun this process of putting people in without informing City Hall until they received neighborhood complaints in February 2006. • Advised that he is also a licensed real estate broker and has been since 1970. • Said that the garage is not supposed to be used as living space. • Said that while this is called 2,225 square feet of living space, in reality it is only 1,798 square feet. The base house is three bedrooms with two bathrooms on 1,280 square feet. The addition on top is 518 square feet. This causes confusion and the FAR is based upon that. Using the incorrect larger number is not acceptable from his standpoint. • Reminded that at the Administrative Hearing Director Kirk Heinrichs asked Mr. Janoff how many bedrooms there are in this house. Mr. Janoff replied that it depends on how you define a bedroom. • Said that the "sixth" bedroom is a sitting room upstairs outside of the two bedrooms there. There really are only five bedrooms. • Pointed out that the floor plan provided does not offer any dimensions for the room sizes. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 15 • Said that the issue is how to put people into these bedrooms if there are 12 people. If there are five bedrooms and two managers and 10 occupants, do the managers get their own room or do they double up? If they share, there are still 10 other people in four bedrooms. Even in a bunk bed situation, there is no room for any other furniture. • Questioned if the managers work outside of this home. It appears all they get is $625 worth of free rent. For $625, they cannot be on call 24 hours a day. Do these managers have a job on their own? • Stated that he is amazed by the lack of curiosity on the part of the City. • Played with the numbers. If 10 people are each paying $625, that equals $6,250 per month income. The rent is $3,000 each month but he added that he would like to see the lease. If PG&E costs about $1,000 that equals about $4,500 to $5,000 a month in expenses. • Said that he is a property manager with two adjoining duplexes, both of them three bedroom and 2.5 bathrooms and 1,800 square feet. The house families of five, four and three members. There are 10 toilets between these units. Those properties are nowhere near that kind of expense. • Asked if these residents are fed. • Said that Support Systems has a number of businesses including detox and other related uses. • Asked if it is the job of the manager to make sure that each individual in this house goes someplace each day. • Said it is a fair question to ask if Support Systems Homes benefits in any way than in this home. Questioned if residents are offered other services by their company? And if the City help them in some way financially. • Reiterated his belief that the City seems to be very incurious. • Said that it is a major decision to break the rule of zoning in some sort of fairness doctrine. Questioned what's fair. • Questioned why the lack of smoke detectors was not noticed if a Fire inspection was performed within the last few months as claimed by Mr. Norton. • Added that there is no heat source upstairs and questioned how that could pass City inspection. • Said that it behooves the City to ask where the money is coming from. Questioned who gets it and why. • Said that problems began in 2006 when they had the place packed. Since it went down to six it has been relatively peaceful but that will change if they jack the number back up to 12. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff, Attorney for Support Systems Homes: • Said that he wanted to take a minute to calm things down and provide another perspective. • Gave an example of a type of client - Mr. John Smith. Perhaps Mr. Smith was a high-tech engineer who works for a large company like Cisco. He might have lost his job. He may have experienced anxiety and started to drink, which leads to a divorce. He goes into detox in a treatment facility. When he gets detoxed, now where does he go? Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 16 • Said that is the model for the Oxford House Model. That's why a sober living environment is in a residential neighborhood so the client can become a member of society again. • Added that no one wants people to be addicted to drugs and alcohol. Chair Ebner said that the need for treatment is not the issue of discussion. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff: • Said that there is a good reason for the Reasonable Accommodation laws. • Assured that issues can be dealt with. • Reminded that the District Attorney's Office certifies the house. There are no violent felons, no child molesters in the house. The residents are regulated. This is not a treatment facility but rather a sober living environment. • Added that there are inspections and lots of oversight. If something goes wrong in the neighborhood, they want to automatically attribute it to these residents. • Pointed out that anyone in the neighborhood can smoke in their yard, use their cell phone wherever they want and park in their driveway. In this house, they can't. They must obey the rules or leave the house. There is no tolerance. • Reminded that there is history here and has been disagreement under the law of what this house is. They had thought it was family but the Planning Commission disagreed. Judge Elving agreed with the City. • Reported that they have undergone a lengthy negotiation with the Community Development Director in working through the application for Reasonable Accommodation. This is the first case for a sober living environment in Campbell. The application had to be altered to fit the sober living environment. A lot has gone on and they have paid a $2,500 fee to process this application. • Said that he believes they have complied and the City staff appears to agree. That's why we are here today and hope to continue to live in this neighborhood and not disrupt it. Commissioner Alderete pointed out that this neighborhood has been dealing with spillover into the neighborhood for some time. When can they expect to stop having to deal with it and have the problems go away at some point? Mr. Jeffrey Janoff said that there is no factual evidence that the problems are actually generated by these residents. No one really knows. Commissioner Alderete reported that he personally had visited Scott Court and had seen cell phone use, drug deals and parking issues first hand. He asked Mr. Jeffrey Janoff if he doesn't want to even consider neighbors' concerns. He said he had made these observations and wonders when they will cease to occur. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff reminded the Commission that the residents are checked (tested) for drugs. He expressed doubt that drug use happens but if they found out about it they would be gone. He reiterated that he does not accept that as a premise. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 17 Commissioner Alderete said that Mr. Janoff does not have to believe him or the neighbors but questioned what would happen if that occurs. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff said that the District Attorney's Office approves residents. They have house managers on site. There is drug (urine) testing done and the residents attend AA or NA meetings. They are there because they want to recover. Commissioner Alderete said that they are there because they have been ordered by the Court because they have violated the law in some manner. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff said that even if true, they have a disability under the law and Reasonable Accommodation is required. Commissioner Alderete said fine, the deliberation on this comes later. This is the time to ask questions. He asked about the actual expenses and revenues of this business and said he would like to see some documents, which they are entitled to see. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff said that Mr. Norton is here and can address that. He reminded that a document was provided on March 30th. He added that the issue is not the financial aspect. Really, money is not being made on this part of the process. It (sober living facilities) functions much like a retainer after braces. It comes after completion of a detox program. He said that financial issues are not mentioned in the statute. Commissioner Alderete said fine, another thing to disagree on. Commissioner Roseberry: • Said that we were here just over two years ago and we "were a family" back then. • Asked how many of the family are still there. • Questioned if a record is kept of where they go and what the average length of stay is. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff said the average length of stay is about six months although some may stay a year or two. Commissioner Roseberry asked if the clients are male or female. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff replied male only. Commissioner Roseberry asked if inspections, checklists or other reports are kept on file. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff said that the District Attorney keeps a file. Commissioner Roseberry asked Mr. Jeffrey Janoff if he gets paid to be here. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff replied that this is not an appropriate question. He added that he has done a lot of work pro bono to help those who are less fortunate. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 18 Commissioner Roseberry asked Mr. Jeffrey Janoff if he had looked into the concept of Reasonable Accommodation with the owner of this property. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff said that it is up to the operator to obtain Reasonable Accommodation. It goes with the house. Commissioner Roseberry said that he thought that this was a financial issue -that they cannot make their rent without more residents. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff said that is true. Commissioner Roseberry asked what the upper limit is as to how many people this property can accommodate and if it could hold 25 people. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff replied no. He added that there's a Fire Code that only allows so many people. He reminded that the City of Campbell inspected it. All of the things in the City inspection are in process but pending this appeal. Commissioner Roseberry asked if the building permits had been applied for. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff said that if the appeal is successful they can't have more people in the house. Commissioner Roseberry asked if Mr. Jeffrey Janoff means to say that they wouldn't still need smoke detectors or heat upstairs. Mr. Jeffrey Janoff said that they probably wouldn't be there. He added that it is the owner's responsibility if he wants to get the house up to Code. He said that if they do stay there they would be doing those things on behalf of the owner at Support Systems' own expense where normally the owner would be paying for those things. Mr. Robert Norton, Support Systems Homes. • Said that he is the founder of Support Systems Homes. • Said that they have facilities in Fresno, Sacramento, Hayward, San Lorenzo, San Jose, Cupertino, Los Gatos, Milpitas, etc. • Stated that there are no stipulations/guidelines for sober living homes. • Added that there used to be lots of them in Southern California and that he has been through battles like this one. • Advised that every time they have won because that's the law. • Said that it is not about personalities or about whether he is liked or not. It's about what Federal law states he can have. • Reminded that he has never been denied and the Commission can check that out. • Stated that they are here to help people. • Said that he has had some of these homes for 18 years. His is a very reputable business. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 19 • Agreed that they are here to make money but also to help people. • Advised that he makes money in the detox process and has contracts with many organizations including many unions. They are card certified at the highest level available. They just got a $568,000 a year contract. • Informed that there is the Hippocratic law that prevents him from providing specific client information. • Said that his heart goes out to those who are in the disease and reported that his own father died of alcoholism at 47 years of age. • Added that he knows many alcoholics in many professions including attorneys and others. • Stated that calling his clients "thugs" equals profiling. • Said that he is here to take care of the house that he's got. Problems in this neighborhood are not necessarily related to his house. • Reminded that they provide a service. • Discussed the financial situation a bit saying that they actually charge $625 per month and the rent is $3,200 per month. They also have PG&E, cable, garbage and insurance expenses. • Advised that they make no money on the sober living homes but rather are providing a service. The other part of the business carries it over. • Said that he used to charge only $425 a month. • Reiterated that there is not a heck of a lot of money in this but that his heart and soul are into this. He works 17 hours a day, seven days a week. Chair Ebner: • Explained to Mr. Norton that everyone knows that alcoholism is a problem. • Added that if he had established his business here in the right way, we wouldn't be here. Instead they went in illegally. • Stated that they should have behaved like a good neighbor. • Reminded that this is a residential neighborhood. Commissioner Roseberry asked Mr. Robert Norton if he knows how many square feet are allocated per person. Mr. Robert Norton said that they go by the Fire Department standards. He said he thought it was between 50 and 70 square feet. A 150-square-foot room can house four people. Commissioner Roseberry asked Mr. Robert Norton if they offer any other services to these residents beyond housing and if meals are included. Mr. Robert Norton said that some of the homes use house funds for food and others do not. If not, the residents each put in about $20 to buy food. Commissioner Roseberry asked about washers and dryers. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 20 Mr. Robert Norton said that they lease them and provide soap. The residents pay as they are coin-operated machines. Commissioner Gairaud asked if a six-month average stay is accurate. Mr. Robert Norton said six months is good. Commissioner Gairaud asked Mr. Robert Norton what is the recidivism rate. Mr. Robert Norton said that only about 15 percent come back in. Commissioner Gairaud said that he was hoping for more concrete numbers. Mr. Robert Norton said that he has those numbers but didn't bring that information to this meeting. He added that sometimes residents go into other programs. As for relapse rates, that is probably about 15 percent. Commissioner Gairaud: • Said that it is important to give some weight to what is reasonable here. • Asked if the residents pay additional fees besides the $625 monthly rental. • Pointed out that with six residents the revenues are $3,750 a month. The lease is $3,200. Perhaps if they raise the fees a little bit they could keep within the six resident formula and keep a more civil feeling with the neighbors who are really having a hard time. • Questioned what it is that these neighbors should have to put up with. Mr. Robert Norton pointed out that the residents of his facility have fallen on hard times. Commissioner Gairaud said that he understands the difficulties of our times but that jumping from six to 10 residents is a large jump for these neighbors. Mr. Robert Norton said that he has another 14 homes like this one throughout Santa Clara County. Commissioner Gairaud asked how many of those are on courts. Mr. Robert Norton said two of them. The other is on Arbor Valley Court, which is located off of Blossom Hill Road. It has been there for 18 years. Commissioner Gibbons asked Mr. Robert Norton if he has other Residential Service Facilities, Large, which are located in the City of Campbell. Mr. Robert Norton replied no. Commissioner Gibbons asked if his other facilities have fewer than six residents. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 21 Mr. Robert Norton said they have seven residents, he thinks. Commissioner Gibbons asked if they are all small family units. Mr. Robert Norton replied yes. Commissioner Gibbons asked if those facilities work. Mr. Robert Norton asked Commissioner Gibbons what he means by small units. Commissioner Gibbons said units serving six residents or less. Mr. Robert Norton replied no. Commissioner Gibbons asked him if he has other units in Campbell with 12 residents or more. Mr. Robert Norton replied yes. He added that they have been here for 18 years. Commissioner Gibbons said that this proves that Mr. Robert Norton knows that this model is doable. Mr. Robert Norton pointed out that the County does not require zoning clearance. Commissioner Gibbons asked Mr. Robert Norton whether he is currently operating a Residential Service Large located in Campbell. Mr. Robert Norton said with above six, yes. Commissioner Alderete reminded Mr. Robert Norton that earlier this evening he had asked his attorney (Janoff) for documents on the finances, the specific finances of this operation. Mr. Robert Norton that he has brought no documentation this evening but had submitted something in March that he thought was sufficient. Commissioner Alderete asked Mr. Robert Norton if that documentation represents the complete and total submission that he would offer. Mr. Robert Norton said that this is all that he has today. He offered his copy of the District Attorney's inspection report for the Commission to review although he asked for it back as it is his only copy. Commissioner Roseberry asked about the testing fees and if they were $30 per bottle. He asked if testing occurs regularly. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 22 Mr. Robert Norton explained that if a resident has a violation they pay for the testing. Additionally, they do random testing. Commissioner Alderete referred to a letter sent by Senior Planner Tim J. Haley in which he asked for specific information regarding a revenue analysis, raised issues about parking for two being available in the garage and other issues. Mr. Robert Norton advised that the City came out and looked at the garage and he provided some information on finances. Commissioner Alderete asked Mr. Robert Norton if he is saying that the garage that had been built out into living space has been returned to garage space. Mr. Robert Norton replied no. He said that there were (and are) couches there. Residents smoke there. The couches were relocated in the garage space so that there is still room left available for the parking of vehicles in the garage. Commissioner Gairaud asked Mr. Robert Norton how often the District Attorney's Office monitors the activities of each house. Mr. Robert Norton replied every four to six months or two to three times a year. If there is a complaint, they investigate. Commissioner Gairaud asked Mr. Robert Norton if his house managers are former residents. Mr. Robert Norton replied yes. Commissioner Gairaud asked Mr. Robert Norton if these house managers are considered his employees. Mr. Robert Norton replied no. They are not there 24/7. They go to work. He added that it's a working house. Commissioner Gairaud asked if there is a dead time, say between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., when no one is supposed to be in the house. Mr. Robert Norton replied pretty much so, unless there is a medical reason that they are staying in. Commissioner Gairaud asked if that is a provision of their contract that they have to adhere to. Mr. Robert Norton replied no. He added that they (house managers) are always there at night. Commissioner Gairaud clarified that these house managers are not employees. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 23 Mr. Robert Norton explained that the house managers do it because they are giving back what they received in their own recovery. Commissioner Gairaud asked if there is a list of responsibilities on how they are supposed to monitor the house. Mr. Robert Norton said yes. He said that information is not with him tonight but had previously been submitted. He added that he thought they were here tonight regarding the guidelines under the law and to determine if they have the right to be there or not. He said that they have had meetings to set the standards. Commissioner Gairaud: • Said that none of the Commissioners are going to argue with him that he has the right to be there. • Added that the issue is the ambiguous question of "what is reasonable?" • Said that when considering whether to go from five residents to 10 there is not enough information provided. • Stated that the Commission should be able to make a determination on that and needs accurate and thorough information to make those decisions. We just don't have that information. Mr. Robert Norton said that they brought the information at the last hearing in 2006. That was submitted. Commissioner Gairaud asked Mr. Robert Norton if he agrees that this information is important. Mr. Robert Norton said that he thought it would be here as part of the old file. He added that they use the same process today as in 2006. It is cookie cutter. He reported that the house parents hold meetings once a month at Denny's where they go over guidelines and structure. He said that they have had the same client and cleanliness standards for the last 15 years. Chair Ebner clarified that Mr. Robert Norton has 14 homes now. He asked him if he had not realized how many people he would need to make this location work. Mr. Robert Norton said that he thinks that he got this house lined up before he had the requirements. Chair Ebner asked if he had crunched the numbers prior to leasing this house. Mr. Robert Norton explained that he had liked this location. It was a big enough house with a long driveway and a big back yard. Commissioner Gairaud asked if the garage is being used for parking. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 24 Mr. Robert Norton replied yes. Mr. Harvey Gilliam, Resident on Scott Court: • Advised that he lives next door to 889 Scott Court. • Said that his neighbors have done a better job speaking to this issue than he will do right now. • Asked, since money is not a problem the need to increase to 12 people should be questioned. • Reminded that there were 11 there before. Traffic on the street was bad. • Pointed out that traffic is already bad with six residents. • Stated that he does not believe that these residents are homeless as they come by this house with wives and kids. Evidently they have a home elsewhere. • Expressed doubt about how much of a "home environment" this residence offers where there are 12 men living on top of each other. This is not a good home environment. • Questioned why the residents do not stay home with their families. • Reported that he has been inside 889 Scott Court. There are small bedrooms with built-in cabinetry that run wall to wall in each one. The only bedroom without such a cabinet is the master bedroom. • Added that there is no air conditioning and no heat source upstairs. • Said that to him, this is cruel having this many people in a small house. • Stated that there is the problem with outdoor smoking. The smoke comes over the fence into his yard. There are discarded cigarettes. There is stench. • Agreed that these people have problems -hard habits to break. • Suggested that the City may want to put a police officer there on the Court. • Reminded that the neighbors on Scott Court are tax-paying citizens. He added that he has been here for 40 years. • Stated that this is a good neighborhood and said that he envies Sheila Court's quietness. • Asked that the City consider the needs of the people living on this street. Chair Ebner closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 5. Chair Ebner called fora 10 minute recess at this point. *** Chair Ebner resumed the meeting. Commissioner Roseberry: • Said that he has a couple of comments to make. • Stated that when deliberating the question of a Reasonable Accommodation Request, one must identify who is reasonably being accommodated. All disabilities need to be taken into consideration. It is necessary to provide equal access to any and all that might have disabilities. There are ADA laws in place. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 25 • Said that he is not questioning anyone having to live next door to this facility. Rather he is questioning whether this is the best that can be done to accommodate these people. • Questioned whether Mr. Janoff's hypothetical "Mr. John Smith" would want to live there. These people need decent living space but also an environment that provides self-respect and fosters their own development. They want to fit in. They don't want to be seen as a pariah in the neighborhood, to stick out. • Added that part of the problem with an overcrowded situation like this is that you lose that and are not giving these guys what they need. • Said that it is kind of cynical to think that this can be set up as an unassailable paragon - "it's disabilities thereby all sins are forgiven." • Said that they need to take a look at the environment that is being provided for these guys. • Stated that he had to think that having 12 men living in a 1,800 square foot house is bordering on a prison-like condition. It is very overcrowded. • Said that he feels that if this were to go forward, he would expect complete adherence to all ADA requirements, including second story access. Chair Ebner: • Said that if he were a recovering addict, he would choose this over jail. • Pointed out that it has got to be extremely stressful since they are no longer taking their drug of choice and they miss their families and the life they've had. • Suggested that having two to three people sharing an 8 x 10 room is more like a prison. • Stated that this is a tremendously difficult situation and almost cruel. Commissioner Gairaud: • Said that he would focus on the application for the Reasonable Accommodation. It is being pursued on the basis of economic disadvantages. • Added that he hasn't seen that issue supported and does not feel like the actual request has been given sufficient support so that this Commission can actually decipher through the economics of it. Commissioner Gibbons: • Said that if we focus -the biggest challenge is what exactly are we talking about and what can we actually address. • Stated that for her, the issue is what is the Reasonable Accommodation required to allow this to be a Large rather than Small Residential Living Facility. • Extended her compliments to all parties who have spoken this evening. There is no one saying "not in my backyard" here. Although neighbors have problems with this use, they all understand what is legally and appropriately possible. • Added that what we are talking about is the Reasonable Accommodation for more than six residents. • Said that leads to two considerations. One is whether there is anywhere else in Campbell where a Large facility can be accommodated. The answer to that question is yes as evidenced by the fact that this applicant has other Large facilities Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 26 located in Campbell. Therefore, there is no reason to say that this is a unique situation and that this is the only place that it could occur. • Continued to say that the applicant has written on a need for affordability. However, all of his comments this evening contradicted that. Therefore, they are relying solely on Reasonable Accommodation or falling back on the law. • Opined that the law is already applicable in Campbell. They are already doing this in Campbell. Therefore, there is no reason for this particular facility to be Large. Acting City Attorney Celestial Cassman: • Advised that it might be helpful to look at and determine whether the City has to provide a Reasonable Accommodation and, if so, what it is and how to condition it. • Said that the first step really is to determine if there is a necessity. • Added that if the Commission is finding evidence of necessity for the accommodation, then it is more useful to talk about what is reasonable. For example, is there a fundamental alteration of a program? • Reiterated that the first step is finding if there is necessity of accommodation at all. Commissioner Gibbons said that this is what she had been trying to say. She added that they have not demonstrated a necessity for it being in the City or in this specific location. Acting City Attorney Celestial Cassman said that this is a call for the Commission to make. Commissioner Gibbons said that this is what she thinks she is saying. Acting City Attorney Celestial Cassman clarified that the standard is not necessarily that it is possible somewhere in the City. The law is that it's an equal opportunity, given a disability, to live in asingle-family zone. So it is inconsistent with the law to say it all needs to be in one zone or the other. That isn't the criteria. Chair Ebner: • Reminded that they are already being allowed to live there, which he has no problem with (with the number of people there now). • Added that he thinks the current six residents is a reasonable situation. Besides the fact that it's the law, it's something that is needed in the community and we are providing that. • Said that what we're really talking about, the main argument, is that they need more bodies as they are losing money. • Reiterated that the City is not saying that they can't be there because they are there and the City is allowing them that. Acting City Attorney Celestial Cassman agreed. She added that what they (applicant) are seeking is this: Code allows six residents and they are seeking an accommodation from that number. She continued that the one legal standard in the cases is whether, Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 27 based on the evidence, there is incentive for an operator to have a facility like this. That is an economic question. Chair Ebner said that he can't see where the applicant has proven that it is an economic question yet. Acting City Attorney Celestial Gassman said she is not arguing that point one way or the other. Commissioner Roseberry: • Stated that this Reasonable Accommodation Request is to exempt just a class of disabled and not all disabled. • Questioned the need to comply (or not) with ADA requirements. Acting City Attorney Celestial Cassman clarified that cases that talk about accommodating group homes for various purposes don't require that every group home accept and accommodate every disability. There are senior homes, sober living homes, etc. Commissioner Roseberry asked if that means that the City might have to use Reasonable Accommodation if there was no other way for them to have a property that would work for their needs. Acting City Attorney Celestial Cassman said that she would rephrase that to say that the showing that this use has to make to this Commission is that an accommodation from the zoning, as it is, is a necessity in order for them to have an opportunity to live in asingle-family situation. Commissioner Roseberry said that Commissioner Gibbons has already made the point that this operator already has places within the City of Campbell that are working so the need is suspect. Commissioner Alderete: • Said that his thoughts have been well stated by the comments of other Commissioners. • Stated that he does support this kind of environment for recovering addicts. • Agreed with the comment of Mr. Norton that we all know people in that situation. • Pointed out that these neighbors have really not said, "Not in my backyard." • Added that that speaks to the heart that Campbell has, the types of neighborhoods that Campbell has, the way that people do accommodate each other, tolerate each other and live with each other very well. No one is saying "not at that location." • Said that what is being talked about by the neighbors is that doubling the number of people already living there becomes a huge burden on the neighborhood. • Stated that perhaps the law, as presented to the Commission, does not allow us to take that into consideration in making this decision but that he can't, as a citizen of Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 28 Campbell and a neighbor of all of these folks, in good conscience just throw those things to the side. • Said that he thinks it is important to talk about it. It's important to take these things into consideration. • Reminded that when he asked the applicant why these people are in the program, part of the information/feedback was that that these folks were court ordered to be in this kind of program. In many cases, their options are either to go to jail or to go to a sober living environment. • Cautioned that when you double the number of people there, you have to remember that you are putting people, who might have gone to jail for what they have done, next door to children. • Stated that the City provides for these businesses and there are locations for these businesses and this is one of them with the right number of people. • Added that it is also important to consider that managing this kind of business is probably a very difficult thing. • Pointed out that a neighborhood has to live with existing problems for a long time before anything gets resolved through the long process of Code Enforcement. It is not always so clean and nice. • Said that it is interesting to note that the applicant claims that there have been no changes in revenues and/or expenses for this use in the last three years. Questioned why have the prices not been raised in three years. Everything goes up in price. Raising their price is one tool this applicant has at their disposal. Chair Ebner said that with the economy the way it is right now, perhaps this applicant could negotiate the lease with their landlord. That is a reasonable solution as well. He agreed that the $625 charged per month sounds like a bargain. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Gairaud, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3953 upholding an Appeal and overturning the Community Development Director's action to grant a Reasonable Accommodate Request permitting a Residential Service Facility, Large (12 residents) in an existing residence located at 889 Scott Court, based on the findings on Attachment 3 with the following modifications: • Modify the square footage on Finding 3 to read 1,798 square feet rather than the 2,225 square feet indicated. • Add Finding 16 to read: "Residential Service Facilities, Large and Small, are currently available in Campbell residential zones." • Add Conclusionary Finding 4 to read, "There would be a high potential for increased costs to the City should this facility be increased from the Small to the Large facility. by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Ebner, Gairaud, Gibbons and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: Alster and Rocha Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 29 ABSTAIN: None Chair Ebner advised that this action is final. He thanked all who attended for their input. *** Director Kirk Heinrichs advised the Chair that the applicant for Item No. 4 has asked to be heard next as she has young children at home. Chair Ebner read Agenda Item No. 4 into the record as follows: 4. PLN2009-91 Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Eric Midiere, Midiere, E. MMA Architects, on behalf of South Bay Vascular Center and Vein Institute, for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2009-91) to allow a medical use in an existing office building on property owned by Michael and Polyxene Kokinos located at 2255 S. Bascom Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission action final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Daniel Fama, Assistant Planner Mr. Daniel Fama, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking Conditional Use Permit approval to establish a medical office within an existing office building located on Bascom Avenue, south of Apricot Avenue. • Described the surrounding uses as residential to the west and south and retail to the north. • Explained that the General Commercial land use designation allows this use with a Conditional Use Permit. • Said that the office building consists of 6,272 square feet and houses an architectural office, real estate office and mortgage office. The tenant space for this medical use consists of 2,220 square feet on the upper floor. • Added that the medical use is a surgical practice that has five staff and serves between 50 and 60 patients per week. • Said that the proposed hours of operation are from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. weekdays. Staff is recommending that for flexibility the allowable hours of operation be between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. daily. • Said that the provided parking on site is 46 spaces, which represents 1 space per 232 square feet of space. That is less than the one space per 200 square foot standard required for medical uses. While the pro rated parking for this use is 12 spaces, only 10 spaces are allotted for this amount of square footage. • Advised that due to this specific use and the low patient volume of this office, a minor adjustment in parking can be justified. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 30 • Recommended approval. Commissioner Alderete advised that he visited this site after hours and found that the gate closing off the parking area was locked. He added that he noticed the trash dumpster out front against the building and it is also evident in the photographs provided. He asked if that is the normal location for this dumpster or is there an enclosure required under the conditions of approval. Planner Daniel Fama said that an enclosure is indicated on the site plan. Commissioner Alderete asked if the enclosure is just for trash or also recyclables. Planner Daniel Fama said he was not sure. Chair Ebner opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4. Dr. Polyxene Kokinos, Applicant, said that she understands that there is a different location for the dumpster rather than at the front of the site. Commissioner Alderete asked if the enclosure would accommodate recycling in addition to trash. Dr. Polyexene Kokinos said yes. Chair Ebner closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 4. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alderete, seconded by Commissioner Roseberry, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3954 approving a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2009- 91) to allow a medical use in an existing office building on property owned by Michael and Polyxene Kokinos located at 2255 S. Bascom Avenue, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Ebner, Gairaud, Gibbons and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: Alster and Rocha ABSTAIN: None Chair Ebner advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** Chair Ebner read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record as follows: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 31 1. PLN2009-60 Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Jeffrey Eaton, J. Eaton, JE Architects, on behalf of Starbucks Coffee Company, for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2009-60) to allow late night operations for an existing Starbucks cafe on property owned by Hamilton Plaza Investors, LLC, located at 1696 S. Bascom Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission action final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Daniel Fama, Assistant Planner Mr. Daniel Fama, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow late night and early morning hours at an existing Starbucks Cafe located within Hamilton Plaza Shopping Center adjacent to Whole Foods Market. • Said that it is a 1,650 square foot standard cafe serving coffee products and baked goods. It was established in 1992 and has 25 seats, 19 inside and 6 outside. • Said that the requested hours of operation are from 4 a.m. to midnight, with business hours being from 5 a.m. to 11:30 p.m., seven days a week. • Added that there are no physical changes to the location proposed. • Reported that Starbucks has five cafes in Campbell. • Recommended that the Commission adopt a resolution approving this Conditional Use Permit. Chair Ebner opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Jeffrey Eaton, Applicant. Commissioner Gibbons cautioned Mr. Eaton that this is a commercial property that shares a property line with residences. There are a couple of conditions about noise that this Commission takes very seriously. That includes not putting trash out after hours, use of loud radios, leaving doors open, etc. Mr. Jeffrey Eaton said that he has been processing these types of applications for Starbucks for the last 2.5 years. They are pro-active about being a good neighbor and are aware of the conditions. Commissioner Alderete thanked Mr. Jeffrey Eaton for accommodating the change of order of this evening's agenda. He pointed out that this use could include up to 12 outdoor seats without need for a Use Permit. Is this location within that number? Mr. Jeffrey Eaton replied yes. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 32 Commissioner Alderete asked Mr. Jeffrey Eaton to advise Starbuck employees who are smokers to put their cigarette butts into ashtrays as he has seen some flick them into the street/lot. Chair Ebner closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Gairaud, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3955 approving a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2009- 60) to allow late night operations for an existing Starbucks cafe on property owned by Hamilton Plaza Investors, LLC, located at 1696 S. Bascom Avenue, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Ebner, Gairaud, Gibbons and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: Alster and Rocha ABSTAIN: None Chair Ebner advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *~~ Chair Ebner read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record as follows: 2. PLN2009-61 Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Jeffrey Eaton, Eaton, J. JE Architects, on behalf of Starbucks Coffee Company, for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2009-61) to allow late night operations for an existing Starbucks cafe on property owned by 267 East Campbell, LLC, located at 267 E. Campbell Avenue in the C-3-S (Central Commercial) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission action final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Daniel Fama, Assistant Planner Mr. Daniel Fama, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow late night and early morning hours at an existing Starbucks Cafe located in Downtown Campbell at Campbell Avenue and First Street. • Stated that the site is zoned C-3 (Central Commercial) and allows extended hours with issuance of a Use Permit. • Said that it is a 1,580 square foot standard cafe serving coffee products and baked goods. It was established in 1999 and has 32 seats, 20 inside and 12 outside. • Said that the requested hours of operation are from 4 a.m. to midnight, with business hours being from 5 a.m. to 11:30 p.m., seven days a week. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 33 Added that there are no physical changes to the location proposed. Reported that Starbucks has five cafes in Campbell. Recommended that the Commission adopt a resolution approving this Conditional Use Permit. Chair Ebner opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Chair Ebner closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Commissioner Alderete said he just realized that he misspoke during the discussion on the previous Starbucks location. The cigarette butt issue was actually relative to this Downtown location rather than at the Hamilton Plaza location. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alderete, seconded by Commissioner Roseberry, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3956 approving a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2009- 61) to allow late night operations for an existing Starbucks cafe on property owned by 267 East Campbell, LLC, located at 267 E. Campbell Avenue, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Ebner, Gairaud, Gibbons and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: Alster and Rocha ABSTAIN: None Chair Ebner advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. *** Chair Ebner read Agenda Item No. 3 into the record as follows: 3. PLN2009-89 Public Hearing to consider the City-initiated Text Amendment Staff (PLN2009-89) to amend the Campbell Zoning Ordinance Sections 21.10.070 (Controlled Manufacturing Zoning District) and 21.72.020 (Definitions) to allow a specialty hospital use as a conditional use. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: September 1, 2009. Project Planner: Steve Prosser, Associate Planner Mr. Steve Prosser, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that in May 2009 the Bay Area Surgical Group contacted the City regarding the proposed location on Dell Avenue for a specialty hospital. • Added that currently hospital uses are not permitted in C-M (Controlled Manufacturing) zoning. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 34 • Recommended changes to Zoning Ordinance Sections 21.10.070 to include specialty hospitals and 21.72.020 to include a definition of a specialty hospital. • Said that the proposed text amendments are bolded on attachments 2 and 3 of the staff report. • Said that the proposed change would allow the consideration of specialty hospitals in a C-M Zone through a Conditional Use Permit process. • Recommended the adoption of a resolution that recommends that Council adopt this Text Amendment. Commissioner Gibbons asked if the location map (attachment 4) depicts the only area in the City with the C-M Zoning. Planner Steve Prosser replied yes. Chair Ebner opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Chair Ebner closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Commissioner Gibbons said that there are only one or two properties in this area that are conducive to this type of use. She asked how Kaiser was able to establish there. Planner Steve Prosser clarified that Kaiser is a medical clinic that offers outpatient services only. There are no overnight services. Kaiser was properly established with a Use Permit. Commissioner Gibbons said that a lot of the uses in this area are industrial. She said that there might be difficulties with the juxtaposition of uses and said she would rather see a Use Permit process. Planner Steve Prosser clarified that this is what staff is recommending. This use would added under the conditional use category and be considered on a case-by-case basis before the Planning Commission. Commissioner Alderete offered a comment on this area in general. This change might offer the opportunity to improve access and interface with the park that is located across Dell Avenue. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alderete, seconded by Commissioner Roseberry, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3957 recommending that the City Council approve a Text Amendment (PLN2009-89) to amend Campbell Zoning Ordinance Sections 21.10.070 (Controlled Manufacturing Zoning District) and 21.72.020 (Definitions) to allow a specialty hospital use as a conditional use, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alderete, Ebner, Gairaud, Gibbons and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: Alster and Rocha Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 35 ABSTAIN: None Chair Ebner advised that this item would be considered by Council for final action at its meeting of September 1, 2009. *** Chair Ebner read Agenda Item No. 6 into the record as follows: 6. PLN2009-78 Public Hearing to the consider the application of Mr. Anthony Ho, Anthony Ho, on behalf of LPMD, Architects for afive-year Extension of Approval (PLN 2009-78) for the previously approved Planned Development Permit (PLN 2006-128); Tentative Subdivision Map (PLN2006-127) and Tree Removal Permit (PLN2006- 129) to allow the construction of a mixed-use development consisting of 123 condominium units, 14,045 square feet of retail space and related parking/landscaping facilities on property owned by Bascom Financial, LLC., located at 1677 S. Bascom Avenue in a C-PD (Condominium-Planned Development) Zoning District. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was previously granted for this project. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: September 15, 2009. Project Planner: Tim J. Haley, Senior Planner Mr. Tim J. Haley, Senior Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking approval of an Extension of prior approvals for a 4.5-acre project site near Campisi Way. • Reminded that this mixed-use development includes condominiums at a density of 26 units per gross acre. The zoning is C-PD (Condominium-Planned Development) and the General Plan land use is Commercial/Professional Office/Residential. • Said that there would be 123 condominiums and 14,045 square feet of retail space. The building is four stories ranging in maximum height from 66 to 75 feet. • Said that the Extension would encompass the Planned Development Permit, Tentative Subdivision Map and Tree Removal Permit. The project elevations are included in the staff report. • Reported that the parking required is 430 space or 3.5 per unit. Parking provided is 330 spaces or 2.6 per unit. • Said that the applicant is requesting afive-year extension and that their project be subject to the previous conditions of approval. • Added that the staff report describes staff's recommendation for atwo-year extension, consistent with the local Zoning Ordinance as well as previous Council actions, and that this project be subject to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance that went into effect after this project. • Recommended the adoption of a resolution recommending that Council grant a two-year extension for this Planned Development Permit, Tentative Subdivision Map and Tree Removal Permit subject to the amended conditions. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 36 Chair Ebner opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 6. Chair Ebner closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 6. Commissioner Gairaud said that staff has summed this up well and that atwo-year extension seems appropriate here. Commissioner Gibbons: • Stated that she was not here when this project was originally approved. • Said that she wanted to take this opportunity to say that this project has extensively benefited from the perspective of the parking ratio. • Said that she would like to suggest aone-year rather than two-year extension. The City might then have a legitimate opportunity to reconsider the parking requirements. • Added that this is a keynote project in a keynote area. There is the potential to have significant impact in parking and development of the entire area. • Said that she would recommend no more than one year at best. Commissioner Alderete asked staff to explain what would happen if this extension is not granted. Director Kirk Heinrichs advised that the Commission is forwarding a recommendation on to Council for final action. Commissioner Alderete asked if the practical outcome is that they would have to re- apply. Director Kirk Heinrichs said that the applicant would have until October to pull their building permits to vest their approval. If not, they would have to re-apply. Commissioner Alderete asked if that would include all new fees, plans, etc. Director Kirk Heinrichs said that it would be like a new project. Commissioner Roseberry: • Reminded that the Commission talked about the parking when this project originally came through. • Said that there are 336 bedrooms in this project or one parking place per bedroom. • Added that since this site is as close to Light Rail as possible and given the current economic climate, he would hate to see them have to go back to the drawing board. • Stated that he thought that atwo-year extension was appropriate. Commissioner Alderete: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 37 • Said that he voted in favor of this project originally although there were issues with parking reduction, which he felt were overdone. • Agreed that this project is as close as it can get to a Light Rail station but that people really still tend to drive huge SUV's and he predicts that all of these spaces will be full. • Reminded that there are 26 tandem spaces. Commissioner Roseberry clarified that there are 12 tandem spaces for a total of 24 car spaces. Commissioner Alderete said that he is never in favor of tandem parking. Commissioner Roseberry said that he does not disagree but the argument was that parking problems tend to occur when overflow parking goes into a residential area. That is not the case here as this is an urbanized part of town. That was a mitigating factor to him and atwo-year extension seems right to him here. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roseberry, seconded by Commissioner Gairaud, the Planning Commission recommended that Council grant atwo-year Extension of Approval (PLN2009-78) for the previously approved Planned Development Permit (PLN 2006-128); Tentative Subdivision Map (PLN2006-127) and Tree Removal Permit (PLN2006-129) to allow the construction of a mixed- use development consisting of 123 condominium units, 14,045 square feet of retail space and related parking/landscaping facilities on property owned by Bascom Financial, LLC., located at 1677 S. Bascom Avenue, with the modified conditions of approval, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Gairaud and Roseberry NOES: Alderete, Ebner and Gibbons ABSENT: Alster and Rocha ABSTAIN: None This motion failed. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roseberry, seconded by Commissioner Gairaud, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3958 recommending that Council grant aone-year Extension of Approval (PLN2009-78) for the previously approved Planned Development Permit (PLN 2006-128); Tentative Subdivision Map (PLN2006-127) and Tree Removal Permit (PLN2006-129) to allow the construction of a mixed-use development consisting of 123 condominium units, 14,045 square feet of retail space and related parking/landscaping facilities on property owned by Bascom Financial, LLC., located at 1677 S. Bascom Avenue, with the modified conditions of approval, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Ebner, Gairaud and Roseberry Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for August 11, 2009 Page 38 NOES: Alderete and Gibbons ABSENT: Alster and Rocha ABSTAIN: None Chair Ebner advised that this item would be considered by Council for final action at its meeting of September 15, 2009. *** REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR The report was accepted as provided. *** ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting of August 25, 2009. SUBMITTED BY: Corinne A. Shinn, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: ATTEST: