Loading...
PC Min 10/07/1982PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA THURSDAY, 7:30 P.M. October 7, 1982 AREA I-V MINUTES The Planning Commission of the City of Campbell convened this day for a Special Public Hearing at the Council Chambers, City Hall, 75 N. Central Avenue, Campbell California. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners: Kasolas, Dickson, Howard, Kotowski, Campos, Fairbanks, Meyer; Planning Director Arthur A. Kee, Principal Planner Philip J. Stafford, Planner II Tim Haley, Planner II Marty Woodworth, Engineering Manager Bill Helms, Recording Secretary Louise Pena. Absent: Commissioners: None ~~''"RO~UCTION Chairman hteyer introduced members of the Planning Commission and Staff, then briefly stated that this is the sixth meeting in a series of special public hearings to review information that Staff has compiled for recommendations and comments. STAFF PRESENTATION Mr. Kee stated that the public hearing was being held in order that the Planning Commission could review the information that Staff has compiled and to make recommen- uu ~i. i vri~ on suiiie. Mr. Kee asked that Exhibit "C" listing a summary of comments from each of the previous meetings be read into the minutes, a copy is attached. It was presented to the Commission that the predominate factor was the desire of these residents to maintain low density with lot sizes and streets to be kept as they exist. At this point Mr. Kee referred the Planning Commission to Exhibit "A" and asked that Marty Woodworth describe in detail the proposed amendments to the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Mr. Woodworth advised that staff is recommending amendments to the Land Use Element of the General Plan to restrict certain areas of the San Tomas Neighborhood to a - <imum residential density of less than 3.5 units per gross acre, less than 4.5, less than 6 units per gross acre and that these designations would be in addition the existing land use categories specified in the General Plan. Mr. Woodworth also referred the Planning Commission to Exhibits "B" and "D", in which Staff is recommending that the R-1 district be expanded to include R1-F, R1-8, R1-10. -2- Reference was also made by Staff to the different lot sizes in the San Tomas Area as well as the potential for new development at the current land use designation and zoning. Mr. Kee pointed out that 52~° of the loin remainsintthe R-oOminQmume6f000 sgaareafeet that Staff is proposing that these wo category. Commissioner Fairbanks asked Staff to give their recommendations on a proposed area plan. Mr. Kee stated that two things need to be considered: (1) circulation and (2) density. Mr. Kee advised the Commission that Staff has attempted to present information compiled from previous meetings along with their recommendations, as interpreted by Staff. He suggested that StlatebedateOWeAttthismpobntkMr~ Kee referred Commission with a more in--depth report at a the question concerning circulation to Mr. Bill Helms. Mr. Nelms discussed the CirculatioWaslmadettofathLeveleoflServicendmapsfortthemCity on the San Tomas Area. Reference of Campbell, a copy of which is attached and made a part of these minutes. Commission Kotowski asked Staff to Prls1aretrroposed unMr.fHelmsedsscus~edstheearterial which extensions to the mayor arter~a P systems versus the use of residential streets and indicated the purpose of extending these arterials was to reroute traffic away from residential streets. Chairman Meyer at this point declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the audience to speak. Mr. John Kelly, 809 Old Orchard Road, questioned the percentage of the San Tomas Area that is zoned R-1. Mr. Kee stated that 80-90% of the San Tomas Area is to remain R-l. ~a~ Ino Do±nrSpn, 1156 Audrey, stated that he approved Staff's recommendations and felt that the City has taken a step in the right direction. He also suggested that an area plan be adopted for the San Tomas Area so that the unique aspects of that area could be considered. Pis. Maggie Desmond, 1491 HacecommendationshtoktheaPlanninghCommWSSionn cShe1recommended information and developing r that an area plan beofdoPgnnedodevelopmentsain theoSansTomasdArea importance o maintaining control p P1r. Rollins Cushman, 1274 Walnut Avenue, advised the Commission that he was speaking in favor of development in the Walnut Avenue area. He indicated that he bought his property with the intent to develop it as some future date. Mr. Cushman distributed a a copy of a parcel map indicating his property, for the Commission's review regarding a possible lot split. (Attached hereto) -3- Mr. Milton Brown, 1181 Steinway, expressed his dismay regarding the development of property and streets in his area, and stated that he is in total disagreement with any developments and prior City actions regarding street development. Mr, Kee at this time pointed out to the Planning Commission and audience that the area Mr. Brown is referring to was at one time zoned for multi-family and that the Planning Commission and City Council reduced the density for this particular piece of property. At this point Commissioner Kotowski reaffirmed Staff's position in that his under- standing of Staff's recommendation was in fact in favor of the public's desire to maintain low density in the San Tomas Area. Mr. Al Romero, 1001 Hazelwood, stated that he supports the recommendations made at tonight's meeting and asked that if further deliberations were made that the San Tomas Community be notified. Ms. June Fox, 1156 N. Peggy, stated that she did not want street improvements in her area (she is presently located in a county pocket). At this point Mr. Bill Helms asked to address the Commission and stated that about three weeks ago, five or six of the people who live in the section of Peggy Avenue just north of Hacienda, asked that he meet with them to explain the bond program for street improvements. He further pointed out that the City was not attempting to impose street improvements in reluctant neighborhoods; however, he wanted to explain the possibility of obtaining street improvement bond fund assistance. Ms. Fox stated that she did not want to install any street improvements and felt that her property was exactly the way she wanted to maintain it. Mr. Helms explained that the people in the City of Campbell have had an opportunity to participate in this neighborhood improvement program for quite a few years. He stated that in 1913, state legislation was passed creating local improvement districts. A neighborhood or commercial area could cause public improvements to be installed if ±ho~~ ~ho~sA to do so. Typically in a neighborhood all of the cost for such improve- ments (installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, etc.) would be borne by the property owners. In 1969, the City participated in a General Obligation Bond Fund whereby funds were provided to supplement funds of citizens to put these types of improvements in. The property owner would supply 1/3 of the cost and the City would contribute 2/3 of the money. This was an opportunity to acquire street improvements in the older under-developed portions of the City, primarily at 1/3 of the cost. He pointed out that this procedure requires at least 60% of the land owners to be in favor of the project. A petition must be presented to the City Council indicating at least 60% of the land owner's in favor before Staff would present such a project for consideration. The Commission took a break at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened at 9:25 p.m. Mrs. Norman McCoy, 1482 Abbott Avenue, expressed concern regarding the extension of Harriet and Abbott, and how it would impact the recreation area in that vicinity. She stated that this extension could create safety problems if added traffic were allowed. - 4- Ms. Bea Kruger, 1190 Steinway was concerned about a parcel that is zoned fora planned development. Mr. Kee explained that this parcel has been approved fora planned development; however, is planned for low density and would not include the construction of an apartment complex. Ms. Kruger stated that she was under the impression that there would be no more planned developments in this area. Pir. Kee explained that a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission and City Council. This parcel was approved for planned development/low density. Commissioner Dickson requested that a report from Staff be submitted regarding this particular parcel. Mr. Earl Fargo, 1394 Monroe, inquired about the funding sources for the Harriet Avenue Extension. Mr. Helms stated that the bulk of funds will come from City sources, such as special gasoline taxes, revenue sharing, federal urban type funds, rather than property owner contributions. Mr. Helms added that this particular roadway construction would not be done for probably another four to five years, providing that funding sources remain available. Mr. Dave Perry, 756 Old Orchard Road, stated that he would like to see some type of ordinance that provides strict limitations on development in the San Tomas Area. Mr. Don Meadow, 1180 Abbott Avenue, objected to any multi-lane street construction in his area. Ms. Pat Woodstock, 970 Old Orchard Road, development on Sunnyoaks and Winchester, are for this particular area. stated that she did not want any further and asked what the future considerations Mr. Kee informed her that on the south side of Sunnyoaks no plans to change the General Plan or Zoning have been made; the north side of the parcel adjacent to ~~~c Suu~~l side of San Tomas Expressway, has been indicated for commercial zoning/ planned development, which would be essentially office or commercial. He further stated that the Walnut Avenue condos on the north side adjacent to the expressway are shown for medium denisty/residential. Lots fronting Sunnyoaks would be indicated for medium density/residential. Existing lots do not change and those in the area that are zoned R-1 lot sizes (between 80-90%) are to remain as is, because they back up to commercial traffic. Mr. Bruce Reed, X509 Walnut prive, wished to stated that he is in disagreement with the proposed recommendations for his particular area and stated that he felt that this area would show an increase of 50% rather than a decrease in development and traffic. Mr. Richard McCullough, 771 Old Orchard Road, made reference to Sunnyoaks and Winchester, near the San Tomas Expressway off ramp. He stated that his area is still zoned for a Planned Development ,use and asked for specific information on the exact development planned for this area. -5- Mr. Kee gave a definition of planned development and stated that this particular parcel is indicated for office/commercial land use and that the State law requires that the zoning be consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Mr. Stockton, 970 Old Orchard Road, was concerned that the recommendations made by Staff did not apply to how density sin4le family areas. Mr. Kee explained that approximately 80-90% of the entire area is shown Low Density/ and R-1 Commercial. Mr. Milton Brown, 1181 Steinway, stated that he felt that he was not properly notified of the public hearings and that steps should be taken to improve the noticing of residents for future public hearings. Mr. Kee pointed out that proper procedure has been followed for noticing residents of public hearings and that proper procedure will be followed for all future public hearings as well. At this point Chairman Meyer thanked the residents for attending the Public Hearing and asked for Commission and Staff input. Commissioner Campos expressed his concerns about an area plan and asked for a definition and an analysis as to how this would impact the General Plan. Commissioner Fairbanks stated she felt Staff had addressed a major portion of the citizens' concerns but would like Staff to come back at the next meeting with information on the Steinway property; information regarding the area on the corner of More and Pollard; and would like a more detailed report on the R-1 zoning, so that citizens can see how this would impact their properties, and also suggested that Staff report back to the Commission with a report on an "area plan" and how this would impact the General Plan. Commissioner Dickson expressed his concerns regarding second story buildings within the R-1 areas and how perhaps the Planning Commission could require a variance or use permit, if such a second story is requested. He also stated that Staff should provide a little more clarification on the R-1-10 areas. He asked that an area plan be considered not for any one particular area in Campbell but should be considered for the City as a whole. Commissioner Campos moved, and Commissioner Howard seconded, that the public hearing be continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of November 9, 1982, at 7.:30 p.m., in the City Hall Council Chambers. The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m. ATTEST: RECORDED: Arthur A. Kee Secretary Louise Pena Recording Secretary APPROVED: Jane P Meyer Chairman