PC Min 06/03/1980PLANNING COPIMISSION
CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA
TUESDAY, 7:30 P.M. P1INUTES JUNE 3, 1980
The Planning Commission of the City of Campbell convened this day in regular
session in the regular meeting place, the Council Chambers of the City Hall,
75 North Central Avenue, Campbell, California.
ROLL CALL
Present Commissioners: Pack, Dickson, Meyer, Kasolas,
Kotowski, Fairbanks, Chairman Campos; Planning
Director Arthur A. Kee, Principal Planner
Philip J. Stafford, Engineering Manager Bill
Helms, City Attorney J. Robert Dempster,
Recording Secretary Jeannine 4Jade.
Absent None
APPROVAL OF
MINUTES
May 20, 1980 Commissioner Meyer moved that the minutes of the
May 20,-.1980 Planning Commission meeting be
approved as submitted, seconded by Commissioner
Pack and unanimously adopted.
CUM~1UN I CAT I ONS
Mr. Kee explained that Item 5A, UP 79-17 & PM 79-6, application of Ms.
Nellie Carvalho, has been added to this evening's agenda since it was
inadvertently left off.
He then noted that other communications received relate to specific items
on the agenda and would be discussed at that time.-
It was the consensus of the Commission at this time to consider items 3
through 9 and then come back to items 1 and 2 in order to move the meeting
along.
*~*
PUBLIC HEARINGS
UP 80-10 This is the time and place for a continued public
Pen Land & Cattle hearing to consider the application of pen Land &
Company Cattle Company, Inc. for approval of plans to
construct 6 townhouses on property known as 1201
l~J. Parr Avenue in an Interim (Low-Medium Density
Residential) Zoning District.
-2-
Mr. Kee reported that this item had been continued from the last Planning
Commission meeting in order that the Historic Preservation Board could have
an opportunity to review the possible historic significance of the existing
structure since the existing building is listed in the Campbell Historic
Survey. The following comments were made by the Board at its meeting of
~1ay 27, 1980:
1. Based on the information presently available in the Historic
Survey, and after a field inspection of the property, the
Historic Preservation Board feels that it is daubtful that the
subject building would meet the criteria for designation as
an historic landmark.
2. New information could be forthcoming from the Civic Improvemen t
Commission or others interested in historic preservation that
may relate to the historic significance of the subject building.
However, it is the opinion that any additional information would
have to be substantial for this building to be considered a
landmark.
3. The Historic Preservation Board, nevertheless, would encourage
the applicant to explore the history of this property and
possible benefits to restoring the building. To this end,
staff and/or the Board would be willing to assist the applicant.
4. The Board's comments have also been forwarded to the Civic
Improvement Commission in order that their comments, if any,
could be forwarded to the City Council.
Commissioner Kasolas reported that the Site and Architectural Review Committee
is recommending approval of this application.
Chairman Campos opened the public hearing .and invited anyone in the audience
to speak for or against this item.
Mr. Ken Pastroff, applicant, appeared before the Commission to answer any
questions.
No one else wishing to speak, Commissioner Meyer moved that the public hearing
be closed, seconded by Commissioner Kotowski and unanimously adopted.
Commissioner Dickson inquired what the maximum density for this development
would be.
h1r. Kee responded that up to 13 units per acre would be allowed; this
development is proposing 12.5 units per acre.
Commissioner Pack inquired if the Civic Improvement Commission had submitted
any comments regarding this item.
Mr. Stafford reported that the Civic Improvement Commission would be considering
this application at its meeting of June 12.
Commissioner Dickson felt comments should be received from other Commissions
before forwarding a recommendation to the City Council.
-3-
RESOLUTION N0. 1903 Commissioner Pack moved that the Planning Commission
adopt Resolution No. 1903 recommending approval of
UP 80-10 subject to the conditions listed in the
Staff Comment Sheet and noting that this item has
been reviewed by the Historic Preservation Board,
which has made comments, and referred to the Civic
Improvement Commission for comments which are to be
forwarded to the City Council. This motion was
.seconded by Commissioner Fairbanks and adopted by
the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Pack, Meyer, Kasolas, Kotowski, Fairbanks,
Campos
NOES: Commissioners: Dickson
ABSENT: Commissioners: None
***
UP 80-12 This is the time and place fora public hearing
Anderson/Lark to consider the application of Mr. Lloyd Anderson
Avenue Car Wash on behalf of the Lark Avenue Car Wash Corporation
for a use permit and approval of plans to convert
an existing open-air gazebo to an enclosed snack
bar on property known as 981 E. Hamilton Avenue
in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District.
Commissioner Kasolas reported that the applicant met with the Site and
Architectural Review Committee this morning, and-the Committee is recommending
approval of this use permit.
Chairman Campos opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience
to speak for or against this item..
Mr. Lloyd Anderson, applicant, appeared before the Commission to explain the
operation of this facility in conjunction with the car wash facility.
No one else wishing to speak, Commissioner Pack moved that the public hearing
be closed, seconded by Commissioner P1eyer and unanimously adopted.
RESOLUTION N0. 1904 Commissioner Meyer moved that the Planning Commission
adopt Resolution No. 1904 approving a use permit and
.approval of plans to convert an existing open-air
gazebo to an enclosed snack bar on property known as
981 E. Hamilton Avenue in a C-2-S (General Commercial)
Zoning District, seconded by Commissioner Pack and
unanimously adopted by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Pack, Dickson, Meyer, Kasolas, Kotowski, Fairbanks,
Campo s
NOES: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: None
***
-4-
ZC 80-5 This is the time and place fora public hearing to
Lampe, J. consider the application of Mr. James Lampe for:
(1) a ci~a~rge o ~~ ~~,zii ng from R-3-S ( P ) ( Prezoned
Multiple ~amly/High Density Residential) to P-D
(P) (Prezoned Planned Development/High Density
Residential); (2) approval of plans, elevations
and development schedule to allow construction of
41 condominium units on property known as 860, 876,
890, and 906 Apricot Avenue; and (3) conversion of
45 existing apartment units on property known as
300 Union Avenue to condominium units.
Mr. Kee reported that a letter had been received from the applicant requesting
a continuance of this application to the July 1, 1980 Planning Commission
meeting, since a study session is proposed to be held on June 12 regarding
condominium conversions.
Chairman Campos opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience
to speak for or against this item.
No one wishing to speak, Commissioner Kasolas moved that ZC 80-5 be continued
to July 1, 1980, seconded by Commissioner. Meyer and unanimously adopted.
***
UP 79-17 This is the time and place fora continued public
PP1 79-6 hearing to consider the application of Ms. Nellie
Carvalho, N. Carvalho for approval of a minor subdivision and
a use permit to allow future development of the
resulting single family lot located on property
known as 430 Budd Avenue in an Interim (Low Density
Residential) Zoning District.
Mr. Kee reported that this item was continued from the meeting of February 5,
1980 in order that (1) the applicant could formalize ingress/egress agreements
with the County and the Santa Clara Valley Water District; and (2) the City
could vacate a portion of Budd Avenue. Because of the fact that the City has
not yet completed the proceedings to abandon the street right-of-way, staff
inadvertently neglected to place this item on the agenda.
Since this is a continued public hearing, it would be appropriate to continue
the hearing to the second meeting in July 1980. It is staff's understanding
that at that time it will be possible to take action on these items.
Chairman Campos opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience
to speak on this item.
No one wishing to be heard, Commissioner P~leyer moved that UP 79-17 and PM 79-6
be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of July 15, 1980, seconded by
Commissioner Pack and unanimously adopted.
***
-5-
MISCELLANEOUS
S 79-6 Application of Mr. William F. Jury and Dell Associates
Jury, W. II for a reinstatement of previously approved plans
for property known as 511 Division Street in a CM:B-80
(Controlled Manufacturing) Zoning District.
Mr. Kee reported that on March 20, 1979 the Planning Commission approved the
applicant's plans to construct a 17,300 square foot office-warehouse building
on a 41,300 square foot lot. The approval of these plans expired in March
1980. At this time the applicant is requesting that the approval be reinstated.
There has been no change in the Zoning or General Plan for this site since
the original approval. In addition, the applicant is proposing no changes
in the approved plans. For this reason, staff is recommending that the applicant's
plans be reinstated for one year subject to the previous conditions of approval.
Commissioner Dickson they moved, in accord with past policy, that the Planning
Commission reinstate the plans subject to the previous conditions of approval.
This motion-was seconded by Commissioner Pack and unanimously adopted.
***
TS 79-24 ~ Tentative Subdivision Map: Lands of Carl Franklin .
Lands of Carl APN 279-45-7
Franklin
Mr. Kee reported that at its regular meeting of May 20, 1980 the Planning
Commission recommended approval of the applicant's request fora change
of zoning from R-1 (Single Family/Low Density Residential) to P-D (Planned
Development/Low Density Residential). and plans to save the existing residential
structure and construct 7 new single-family homes on the site.
The applicant is now .requesting approval of a map which would allow these units
to be sold individually.
The General Plan indicates Low Density Residential (less than 6 units per gross
acre) for this area. The approved plans would be developed at a density of
5.59 units per grass acre.
Commissioner hleyer then-moved that the Planning Commission find that the proposed
tract map is in conformance with the General Plan and recommend that the City
Council approve this map subject to. the attached conditions.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kasolas and adopted with Commissioner
Dickson voting "No" since he felt the alignment of the street or Unit No. 1
should be moved.
***
TS 80-7 Tentative Subdivision ~4ap: Lands of SESCO
Lands of SESCO APN 305-21-14
d~-
Mr. Kee reported that at its regular meeti~+g of May b, 1980 the Planning
Commission approved the applicant's 11a;~i15 i:c convert this office building
into a condominium office.. As ~.~ne c; t?•~~ c:; :-:ditions of approval, the
Commission stated that the landscaping lie ir~stallEd as indicated on the
new plans, prior to approval of the ter:tative subdivision map. Staff has
found the landscaping to be installed as indi%ated.
The applicant is now requesting approval of a map which would allow these
offices to be sold as condominiums.
The General Plan indicates Commercial for this area. The proposed use is
consistent with the Commercial designatio~~.
Commissioner Kasolas then moved that the Planning Commission find that the
proposed tract map is in conformance with the General Plan, and recommend
that the City Council approve this map subject to the attached conditions.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Kotowski and unanimously adopted.
***
Referral from Referral from the City Council regarding Jobs/
City Council Housing/Transportation imbalance.
Mr. Kee reported that at its meeting of hlay 12, 1980 the City Council referred a
communication from the Inter City Council (ICC) the Jobs/Housing/Transportation
imbalance that exists in Santa Clara County.
Basically, the report recommends the establishment of a procedure whereby
specified General Plan amendments, policies, and projects would be referred:
to other City Councilsin the County. The intent is to improve communication
between the various jurisdictions and to provide an opportunity fora city
that vrould be impacted by action undertaken by another city to suggest
mitigation measures.
It is staff's opinion that such a procedure would be beneficial, provided that
undue hardship and/or delay is not imposed on a project.
The communication from ICC also suggests other actions which, if implemented,
would reduce the effects of the present unbalance. Staff is also supportive
of these suggestions.
The one suggestion that staff is expressing reservation about is listed as
Item 8 in the communication. It suggests that the cities provide staffing
for the ICC Committee. It is staff's opinion that endorsement of this
suggestion should be withheld until further information is provided.
Commissioner Pack felt this i~ a good concept, and would be in support of it.
Commissioner Fairbanks also felt that endorsement would be proper, noting
this would be a starting point.
Commissioner Kasolas stated he would be for this providing it would not add
another level of government which would delay development process.
-7-
After further discussion, Commissioner Fairbanks moved:
1. That the Planning Commis~~~ii ,~cco:rnr3end endorsement of Exhibit I,
attached to these minutes,- which establishes a referral procedure
between the cities for specified General Plan amendments, policies,
or projects, if such a procedure will not cause undue hardship on
an applicant, or delay.
2. Endorsement of Item D on the attached list, requiring cities to
provide staff, should be withheld pending specific details.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Pack and adopted with Commissioner
Dickson voting "No" since he felt government would have even more control by
endorsing this.
Staff Report Resic#ential developments ,with an existing-residence.
Mr. Kee reported that staff had prepared an additional resolution for consideration
(Draft 3), and Commissioner Fairbanks had also prepared an additional resolution
for the Commission's consideration (Draft 4), both of which had been placed at each
Commissioner's station: .
Chairman Campos noted that since this is new material, the Commission would take
a break in order to review these two new resolutions.-
The Commission took a break at 8:40 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 8:55 p.m.
After lengthy discussion regarding the four proposed resolutions, the following
motion was made by .Commissioner Dickson and seconded by Commissioner Fairbanks:
Original ~1otion
That the Planning Commission adopt resolution Draft No. 4 deleting No. (1) and
(1) (a) and adding wording to~paragraph 4, second line "...hereby recommends
that the Gity Council..."
After further discussion, Commissioner Kasolas mQVed and Commissioner Fairbanks
seconded-that the following amendment be made to the original motion:
Amendment No. 1
That the Planning Commission adopt resolution Draft No. 4 deleting No. (2) and
(2) (a). This amendment failed by a 2-5 vote.
Amendment No. 2
Commissioner Pack then moved that the Planning Commission adopt resolution
Draft PJo. 4 deleting No. (1) and (1) (a) and changing the wording of No. (2)
and (2) (a) to read:
~ .~
"In the event an applicant desires to give an existing
unit more than its proportionate share of land, such
allocation shall be 6,000 square feet and shall not
crea~.te a higher density than is allowed in the Zoning
Ordinance when such disproportionate allocation is sub-
tracted, with usual public access, if applicable, from
that portion to be developed; otherwise, the area of
land allocated to each of the residential units, both
existing and new, should be approximately Cqual."
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Dickson and adopted by a 5-2 vote.
Vote on Original Motion
The original motion made by Commissioner Dickson and seconded by Commissioner
Fairbanks was ado ted by a 5-2 vote..
***
S 80-12 Continued application of Mr. James A. Billmaier
Billmaier, J. for approval of plans to construct 4 condominium
units on the rear portion of an existing single-
family development known as 60 Shelley Avenue in
an R-M (Low-Ptedium Density Residential) Zoning
District.
At this time Commissioner Kasolas moved for approval of S 80-12 subject to the
conditions listed in the Staff Comment Sheet (a copy of which is attached hereto
and made a part of these minutes), seconded by Commissioner Pack and adopted
with Commissioner hleyer voting "No".
ADJOURNP•1ENT Commissioner Dickson moved that the meeting be
adjourned, seconded by Commissioner Meyer and
unanimously adopted.
The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
RECORDED:
Arthur A. Kee, .Secretary
Jeannine L~lade, Recording Secretary
Dam e Campos, Chairman