Fence Exception-Sound Wall - 1993MEMORANDUM
Gary Kruger
To: Traffic Engineer
From: Tim J. Haley J'PT
Associate Planner
January 18, 1993
Date:
CITY OF CAMPBELL
subject: Fencing Exception -- North side of W. Campbell Avenue between Victor and
San Tomas Expressway
----------------------------------------------------------
This memorandum shall serve as a follow-up of the Planning Commission's
action taken on January 12, 1993, wherein the Planning Commission
conditionally approved a fencing exception along West Campbell Avenue to
allow an extension in the sound wall height from six (6) feet to eight (8) feet.
The Planning Commission's approval is effective ten days following its
action, and is subject to the following conditions:
1. The maximum height of the proposed fence exception shall not
exceed eight (8) feet to the nearest adjacent grade.
2. The proposed fence extension shall be compatible in design to the
slumpstone pattern of the existing sound wall, and the stretches
between Victor Avenue to Jim Elder Drive and Jim Elder Drive to
San Tomas Expressway shall provide a consistent style and design;
and,
3. The Planning Commission's approval requires that the stretch
between Victor Avenue to Jim Elder Drive or Jim Elder Drive to
San Tomas Expressway be implemented at one time.
The Planning Commission's approval does not preclude individual property
owners from seeking and receiving approval of a fence exception on a
property by property basis. However, the Planning Commission's action did
require a coordinated effort between the property owner to ensure a
continuous fencing modification along this portion of West Campbell
Avenue.
If you should have any questions regarding the Planning Commission's
action, please do not hesitate to give me a call.
tjh:lb
a:memo
cc: Joan Bollier, City Engineer
Steve Piasecki, Planning Director
Chairperson Alne read the application into the record.
n ~~
7.Fence Request Consider the Ciry-Initiated application to permit soundwalls along the
north side of West Campbell Avenue between Vctor Avenue and San
Tomas Expressway (1 1-33 Del Prado Drive; 16-15 Darryl Drive; 10 Jim
Elder Drive; 1 1 Jim Elder Drive, 18-25 Shereen Placed in excess of the
maximum height limitation of six (6) feet.
Mr. Gary Kruger, Traffic Engineer, Public Works, presented the staff report, noting the
following:
* The Engineering Division of the Public Works Department was petitioned by i 80
citizens requesting mitigation of traffic noise along San Tomas Expressway, as noted
above. The sound study indicated that raising the height of the soundwall from 6
Planning Commis~te„ Minutes of January 12, igQ3 ~
u
•
feet to 8 feet would decrease sound levels.
The City Council directed staff to bring this issue to the Commission.
He provided an alternative which is to reconstruct the existing soundwalls. The cost
would be extreme. He explained that expansion of the existing fences
soundwalls), was not possible. He provided supports for the extension was another
alternative; however, no cost analysis is available.
Chairperson Alne asked the Commission if there were any questions of Staff.
Commissioner ~fkinson asked who would fund the project, and what design is being
proposed.
Mr. Kruger stated that the Ciry would allow the residents to add to their fences, and that
that staff recommends uniform appearance, suggesting concrete block with a stucco finish.
Further, staff is recommending that the soundwalls be implemented by contiguous
property owners all at the same time.
Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy asked if the residents were aware of the cost, and Mr.
Kruger responded that the petitioners are aware.
Commissioner Fox initiated discussion of design-types for the soundwalls, and the
syncronisiry issue.
Ms. Joan Bollier, City Engineer, added that the City Council intended to allow applicants to
increase the size of their fences without going through the Planning Process.
Chairperson Alne asked if staff is suggesting that the Commission modify the ordinance or
simply make an exception to it. Mr. Haley explained that currently fence exceptions can be
approved by the Planning Department Director and the Public Works Engineer, if there are
no objections from adjoining neighbors. The recommeneded action is to provide those
specified property owners along West Campbell Avenue with a "blanket fence exception."
Commissioner ~Ikinson would support the recommendation presented by staff if
clarification for the word "uniform" and for the expression "all at the same time," were
clearly defined. Commissioners Meyer-Kennedy and Higgins agreed.
Commissioner Fox asked Mr. Haley about the spirit intended by the Ciry Council for this
request. Mr. Haley indicated that the Ciry Council would expect the Commission to
consider the design and the conformity of the fences at this location.
Pia»»ing Commission Mtntttes of Ja»aary i2, 1993 8
•
•
Mr. ~Iliam Seligmann, City Attorney, interjected that it would be appropriate for the
Commission to consider the design and the conformity at this time, for this project.
Mr. Piasecki, Director, suggested that the project could be divided into two components,
east or west of Jim Elder Drive.
Chairperson Alne asked if anyone from the public would like to address the Commisison.
Mr. Robert Cushman, 10 Darryl Drive, noted that his application had already been
approved- He expressed concerns contained in the Engineer's Report, page three, item fbj,
referring to a three foot differential for noise mitigation. He stated that properties identified
do not have the exact elevations; that to specify an 8 foot height limitation would not
provide the intended mitigation measures.
Additionally, he pointed out that some of the residents are elderly and could not afford or
build the fence, and some of the properties are rentals, suggesting that the property
owners would not want to pay for the fencing. Therefore, the rest of the property owners
could not extend their fences. He was also concerned that Staff intended to have him
provide a soundwalf for the entire street section.
Chairperson Alne assured Mr. Cushman that this application does not apply to him, since
he was granted approval previous to this application.
Mr. Cushman offered an alternative for residents: building another fence on one's own
properrty as close as possible would eliminate costs associated with demolishing the
existing soundwalf, and the costs associated with repairing torn up sidewalks.
Mr. Cushman also asked what happened to the street trees removed by the Ciry along his
property frontage.
Discussion ensued between Commissioners and Staff relating to the potential that some
property owners may not be allowed to increase their fence height because another
neighbor can or will not.
Chairperson Alne suggested a motion worded so that the uniformity and height could be
approved by staff and that would not preclude an individual property owner from
extending his fence if others decide not to.
Commissioner Fox asked that a three foot differential be considered, measuring from the
highest grade level up to 8 feet, and suggested that the material and design could be
Pla»»i»~ Commfssio» Mi»wtss o~ Ja»yary s2, igg3 9
determined by staff.
Discussion of an assessment district was initiated by Commissioner Wilkinson, and Ms.
Bollier explained why such a district was not feasible at this time.
MOT~ON.• On motion of Commissioner Fo,~ seconded by Commissioner Perrino the exraeption to
tl~e Fence Ordinance yeas unanimously approves seg~r~enting the a~z into tree portio~u
for fencing styles and implementation, those segments to be identified as properties
loazted to the asst and t{pose properties located to the rapst of Jim Elder Drive
additionally, that the fencing be a maximum of 8 feet measured from the highest
adjacent gr~ad~ and that the design shall be approved by sta, f,~ anc~ that individual
property ora»zers be allore~ad to extend their properties. (6-0-D).
~*~
Commissioner Meyer-Kennedy asked about the street trees that were removed as pointed
out by Mr. Cushmann, .and Ms. Bollier indicated that she would investigate and get back to
the Commission and Mr. Cushmann with a response.
ITEM NO. 7
STAFF REPORT -- PLANNING COMMISSION OF
JANUARY 12, 1993
Fence Request To consider the City-initiated application to
Engineering Div. permit sound walls along the north side of W.
Public Works Campbell Avenue between Victor Avenue and San
Staff Tomas Expressway (11-33 Del Prado Drive; 16-15
Darryl Drive; 10 Jim elder Drive; 11 Jim Elder
Drive; 18-25 Shereen Place) in excess of the
maximum height of six (6) feet.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission take the following action:
1. Grant an exception to the six foot height limit for sound
walls presently in place on the north side of W. Campbell
Avenue from the San Tomas Expressway to 450 feet west of
Jim Elder to allow the walls to be reconstructed to eight
feet in height.
2. Stipulate, that although the wall height standards in the
Campbell Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 21.59 C are modified
for the sound walls in the locations cited, all other
provisions of the Campbell Zoning Ordinance regulating
walls and fences remain in effect.
3. Further stipulate that the increased wall height must be
implemented by at least five contiguous property owners
at the same time rather than one property at a time, and
that the sound walls so reconstructed have a uniform
appearance.
BACRGROUND
On August 4, 1992 Carlos A. Negrete and 180 others petitioned the
City Council to take actions to provide relief from the impacts of
traffic on W. Campbell Avenue. City staff met with the petitioners
at two public meetings in September and October, 1992 to further
clarify the specific actions desired of the city. One major issue
noted was the excessive noise generated both by the high traffic
volumes as well as truck traffic, and the petitioners asked that
the city allow an increase in the height of the sound walls from
six (6) to at least eight (8) feet. They supported this request
with a consultant study of the potential of higher sound walls in
mitigating the traffic noise. Staff included this as a proposal in
an October 20, 1992 City Council report.
ZONING CONSISTENCY
Chapter 21.59 C of the Campbell Zoning Ordinance allows the
planning director, with the recommendation of the director of
public works, to approve "heights greater than six feet for fences,
walls, lattice work, screens and hedges when it is determined that
1
Staff Report, Item 7
Planning Commission Meeting of January 12, 1993
the change would not impair pedestrian or vehicular safety and that
it ... would not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace,
morals, comfort or general welfare of persons residing or working
in the neighborhood of such change or be detrimental or injurious
to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general
welfare of the city." If fact, the increased wall height will
lessen the existing detriments to health from excessive traffic
noise.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The change in the regulation will allow the property owners to
reconstruct the sound walls two feet higher. The recommended action
requires at least five contiguous property owners to make the
modifications at the same time, and that the modifications be of a
uniform appearance. The existing sound walls are uniform in
appearance; the modifications should either look the same or
complement the existing design.
DISCUSSION
The requested modifications will result in an 8 decibel (dB)
reduction in noise levels according to the noise study. This would
lower present noise readings of 62 dB to 54 dB, a significant
reduction in perceived noise.
Attachments•
1. October 20, 1992 Council Report
2. Noise Assessment Study of 10 Darryl Drive, Campbell CA by
Edward L. Pack Associates, Inc.
Submitted
Approved by
2
Title:
Report '
City
Council Its: 19
Category: IInfinished Business
Date• October 20 1992
Status Report -- Petition stegardinq vast Campbell Avanua
Traffia ~xinute latioa)
jtECOI~IIC~TD]1TIOM
Approve a minute action accepting the staff plan for responding to
the petition regarding West Campbell Avenue traffic.
DZBC088ION
Backcround. On August 4, 1992 Council received a petition from
Carlos A. Negrete and 180 others expressing concern about traffic
in the W. Campbell Avenue area. Council referred the petition to
staff for a response. Staff conducted an initial meeting with the
petitioners on September 8, 1992 to further understand the
petitioners' issues and concerns. Eleven persons attended that
meeting, and staff informed them that data would be collected and
analyzed, and presented at a second meeting prior to submitting a
response to Council on October 20, 1992. The second meeting was
held on October 7, 1992. Eight persons attended.
s's. Staff has collected sufficient data to help clarify the
situation and establish a plan to pursue it if Council so
approves. The staff's recommended plan approaches the issues in
two parts
1) actions that can be taken immediately or within a few
months; and
2) actions that require further study and review, and that
could take years to implement. The longer-term response is
best accomplished as part of the update of the Transportation
Element during 1993.
The issues identified include:
1) Safety of pedestrians crossing W. Campbell Avenue and
for left and right turns both onto and off of Campbell
Avenue;
2) Excessive truck volumes and high noise levels, and
trucks and busses using La pradera as a shortcut route;
3) High speed cut-through traffic avoiding traffic
congestion and delay on W. Campbell Avenue;
4) Traffic speeds on W. Campbell;
5) Noise generated by traffic;
6) Minor changes to the roadway to improve flow and safety.
Status Report -- October 20, 1992
Petition Regarding West Campbell Avenue Traffic
The petitioners proposed several changes to traffic controls
intended to reduce traffic. Many of the proposed changes are not
consistent with either state law or current city policy in the
existing Circulation Element. Staff informed petitioners of these
considerations at both meetings.
In response to the petitioners' concerns, staff proposes a plan
which takes immediate, remedial actions in the short term and also
defines the policy issues to be addressed in the longer term.
SHORT-TERM ACTIONS:
1) Restricting La Pradera Drive to vehicles under 10,000
pounds by installing signs and using enforcement;
2) Consideration of an all-way stop at Del Prado and
Charmain;
3) Working directly with the City of San Jose to implement
a median with turn lanes on W. Campbell Avenue between
San Tomas Aquino Road and the San Tomas Expressway;
4) Design and installation of a jointly funded traffic
signal at Fulton and W. Campbell Avenue as already
planned with owners of Kirkwood Plaza;
5) Modifying the city ordinance regulating the heights of
sound walls to allow higher, more effective walls; and
6) Moving bus stops, to the extent practical, to locations
where the curb lane is 20 feet wide or greater.
LONGER-TERM ACTIONS:
1) Consider installing a raised median along the length of
W. Campbell Avenue to provide refuge for pedestrians
crossing the street between signals;
2) Consider installation of signals at the "collector"
streets such as Victor, La Vonne, and Milton if funding
for construction and maintenance is available;
3) Consider widening the westbound curb lane on W. Campbell
approaching the San Tomas Expressway;
4) Consider traffic control strategies in the downtown area
and at the San Tomas Expressway-Route 17 Interchange
that will serve to further reduce through traffic
volumes along all of Campbell Avenue (trips that neither
start nor end in Campbell);
5) Review classification of W. Campbell Avenue and
potential for reduction to a minor arterial between
2
Status Report -- October 20, 1992
Petition Regarding West Campbell Avenue Traffic
Winchester and the San Tomas Expressway as a part of the
Transportation Element Update; and
6) Review part time or full time truck restrictions on
arterials in residential areas as a part of the
Transportation Element IIpdate.
A more detailed report summarizing the findings of the data
collection effort is attached. All the petitioners will be kept
informed of relevant Transportation Element Update activities in
1993 so they may participate in the policy review of the status of
W. Campbell Avenue as a major arterial (through route) and truck
route.
?ZBCAL IMPACT
None
Prepared by:
Attachments:
3
Traffic Study Summary