PC Min 08/21/1979PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA
TUESDAY, 7:30 P. M. MINUTES AUGUST 21, 1979
The Planning Commission of the City of Campbell convened this day in regular
session at the regular meeting place, the Council Chambers of the City Hall,
75 North Central, Campbell, California.
ROLL CALL
Present Commissioners: Meyer, Dickson, Vierhus, Kasolas (8:08),
- Acting Chairman Pack; Planning Director Arthur A. Kee,
Principal Planner Philip J. Stafford, Engineering
Manager Bill Helms, City Attorney J. Robert Dempster,
Recording Secretary Jeannine Wade.
Absent Commissioner Campos and Chairman Samuelson.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Vierhus noted that in the minutes
for August 7, 1979, page 10, paragraph 4, the name
should have been Rev. Corwin Olds.
Commissioner Vierhus then moved that the minutes
of the regular meeting of August 7, 1979, be
approved as corrected, seconded by Commissioner
Dickson and unanimously adopted.
Commissioner Pack announced that in the Chairman's and Vice=Chairman's absence,
she would be Acting Chairman this evening.
COMMUNICATIONS
Mr. Kee reported that communications received relate to specific items on the
agenda and would be discussed at the time the item is considered.
Acting Chairman Pack noted to persons in the audience at this time that Item
Nos. 7 and 8 (LaValencia Apartments, condominium conversions) were being
recommended for continuance to the September 18, 1979 Planning Commission
meeting should they wish to wait until that time to make any comments.
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVALS
S 78-21 Continued application of Mr. Willis H. Corbett for
Corbett, W. a reinstatement of previously approved plans to allow
the expansion of an existing auto service center onto
property known as 3293 S. Winchester Boulevard in an
Interim (Commercial) Zonino District.
-2-
Commissioner Vierhus reported that the applicant had met with the Site and
Architectural Review Committee this morning.; and the applicant has submitted
Phase II of the original plan wh~c~ vri a~ilow for the parking lot to be
paved. The Committee is recommending approval with the added stipulation
that a parking lot and chain link fence be constructed.
Commissioner Pack inquired if there had been any discussion regarding the
rear property line being fenced.
Mr. Kee stated that, as discussed in this morning's meeting, the rear portion
of the lot would not be used, therefore fencing would be across the front
portion of the lot. He reported that there had been three letters received
from Mr. Kenneth B. Coffin, 1426 Walnut Drive, Campbell (property owner to
the rear of the subject application) requesting fencing the rear property
line of the subject lot. Copies of these letters are attached hereto and
made a part of these minutes. Mr. Kee noted that if the Commission desired,
the fencing of the rear property line could be added as a condition of
approval.
Much discussion ensued regarding the repair of the rear property line fence.
The applicant, Mr. Corbett, appeared before the Commission to state that he
would be in agreement to a condition stipulating that the rear property line
fence be repaired.
Commissioner Kasolas entered the Council Chambers at 8:08 p.m.
Commissioner Vierhus then moved that S 78-21 be approved for reinstatement
of previously approved plans subject to the following conditions, seconded
by Commissioner Dickson and unanimously adopted:
1. That the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending
that the City Council reinstate the plans for this develop-
ment for a period of one year, subject to the previous con-
ditions of approval;
2. Applicant to construct a chain link fence, 6 feet in height,
parallel to and approximately 52 feet from the property line
along Winchester Boulevard.
3. If the Planning Commission approves a temporary use of the front
portion of the lot, that the area between the proposed chain link
fence and Winchester Boulevard be paved with asphaltic concrete.
4. That the rear portion of the lot (from the proposed chain link
fence to rear property line) shall not be used for temporary
parking, storage of vehicles, or any other use until all conditions
of S 78-21 .have been met.
5. That the fence along the rear property line be repaired immediately.
***
-3-
S 79-29 Application of Mr. Thomas C. Siffermann and the
Siffermann, T. Woodgate Development Company, Inc., for approval
of plans to construct 24 condominium units on
property known as 386 Union Avenue in an R-3-S
(Multiple Family/High Density Residential} Zoning
District.
Commissioner Kasolas reported that the applicant had met with the Site and
Architectural Review Committee this morning and the Committee, after reviewing
the plans in detail, is recommending approval.
Commissioner Pack inquired about the ultimate street plan for Union Avenue.
Engineering Manager Helms responded that it will be a standard two-way
residential street with a 60' right of way, 40' from curb to curb; within
a continuous two-way left-turn lane, eliminating parking lanes on both
sides of the street. He further stated that hopefully these improvements
would be made sometime in the spring of 1980.
Commissioner Dickson then moved that S 79-29 be approved subject to the
following conditions, seconded by Commissioner Meyer and unanimously
adopted:
1. Property to be fenced and landscaped as indicated and/or
added in red on plans.
2. Landscaping plan indicating type and size of plant material,
and location of hose bibs or sprinkler system to be submitted
i'or approval of the Planning Director prior to application for
building permit.
3. Fencing plan indicating location and design details of fencing
to be submitted for approval of Planning Director prior to
application for building permit.
4. Landscaping and fencing shall be maintained in accordance with
the approved plan.
5. Applicant to either (1) post a faithful performance bond in the
amount of $5,000 to insure landscaping, fencing, and striping of
parking areas within three months of completion of construction,
or (2) file written agreement to complete landscaping, fencing,
and striping of parking areas prior to final Building Department
clearance.
The applicant is notified as part of this application that he/she is
required to meet the following conditions in accordance with Ordinances
of the City of Campbell and Laws of the State of California.
A. All parking and driveway areas to be developed in compliance with
Section 21.50 of the Campbell Municipal Code. All parking spaces
to be provided with appropriate concrete curbs or bumper guards.
B. Underground utilities to be provided as required by Section
20.16.070 of the Campbell Municipal Code.
-4-
C. Plans submitted to the Building bepartment for plan check shall
indicate clearly the location of all connections for underground
utilities including water, sewer, electric, telephone, end tele-
vision cables, etc.
D. Sign application to be submitted in accordance with provisions
of the sign ordinance for all signs. No sign to be installed
until application is approved and permit issued by the Building
Department. (Section 21.68.070 of the Campbell Municipal Code.)
E. Ordinance No. 782 of the Campbell Municipal Code stipulates that
any contract for the collection and disposal of refuse, aarbage,
wet garbage and rubbish produced within the limits of the City
of Campbell shall be made with Green Valley Disposal Company.
This requirement applies to all single-family dwellings, multiple
apartment units, to all commercial, business, industrial, manu-
facturing, and construction establishments.
F. Trash container(s) of a size and quantity necessary to serve the
development shall be located in area(s) approved by the Fire
Department. Unless otherwise noted, enclosure(s) shall consist
of a concrete floor surrounded by a solid wall or fence and
have self-closing doors of a size specified by the Fire Department.
All enclosures to be constructed at grade level.
G. Noise levels for the interior of residential units shall comply
with minimum State (Title 25) and local standards as indicated
in the Noise Element of the Campbell General Plan.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
H. Provide one private street style fire hydrant, approximately 305'
east of the center line of Union Avenue, on the south property line.
I. Provide "2A-IOBC" fire extinguishers.
J. Provide an approved trash enclosure.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
K. Process and file a tract map.
L. Provide a copy of the preliminary title report.
M. Pay the storm drainage area fee based on $765 per net acre.
N. Dedicate right of way to 30 feet from centerline on Union Avenue.
0. Enter into an agreement and post surety to insure construction of
street improvements and agree to participate in a local improvement
district in the future.
P. Obtain an excavation permit for any work in the public right of way.
Q. Provide a grading and drainage plan for the review and approval of
the City Engineer.
-5-
R. Eliminate the driveway island and install one 25' wide driveway
5' away from the property line.
The applicant is notified that he/she shall comply with all applicable
Codes or Ordinances of the City of Campbell which pertain to this
development and are not herein specified.
***
S 79-32 Application of Frank H. and Marilyn T. Clawson
Clawson, F. for approval of plans to construct a warehouse
building on property known as 165 Cristich Lane
in an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District.
Commissioner Kasolas reported that the applicant had met with the Site and
Architectural Review Committee this morning, and the Committee is recommending
approval.
Mr. Kee reported that staff is also recommending approval subject to the
conditions listed in the Staff Comment Sheet.
Commissioner Vierhus then moved that S 79-32 be approved subject to the
following conditions, seconded by Commissioner Meyer and unanimou"sly adopted:
1. Property to be fenced and landscaped as~indicated and/or added
in red on plans.
2. Landscaping plan indicating type and size of plant material, and
location of hose bibs or sprinkler system to be submitted for
approval of the Planning Director prior to application for building
permit.
3. Landscaping and fencing shall be maintained in accordance with the
approved plan.
4. Applicant to either (1) post a faithful performance bond in the
amount of $3,000 to insure landscaping, fencing, and striping of
parking areas within three months of completion of construction,
or (2) file written agreement to complete landscaping, fencing and
striping of parking areas prior to final Building Department clearance.
5. Applicant to submit a letter, satisfactory to the City Attorney
limiting the use of the property to 1,155 square feet of office
use, no square feet of speculative industrial use, and 12,045 square
feet of warehouse use.
6. All mechanical equipment located on roofs to be screened as approved
by the Planning Director.
The applicant is notified as part of this application that he/she is
required to meet the following conditions in accordance with Ordinances
of the City of Campbell and Laws of the State of California.
A. All parking and driveway areas to be developed in compliance with
Section 21.50 of the Campbell Municipal Code. All parking spaces
to be provided with appropriate concrete curbs or bumper guards.
-6-
B. Underground utilities to be provided as required by Section
20.16.070 of the Campbell Municipal Code.
C. Plans submitted to the Building Department for plan check shall
indicate clearly the location of all connections for underground
utilities including water, sewer, electric, telephone, and
television cables, etc.
D. Sign application to be submitted in accordance with provisions
of the sign ordinance for all signs. No sign to be installed
until application is approved and permit issued by the Building
Department. (Section 21.68.070 of the Campbell Municipal Code.)
E. Ordinance No. 782 of the Campbell Municipal Code stipulates that
any contract for the collection and disposal of refuse, garbage,
wet garbage and rubbish produced within the limits of the City of
Campbell shall be made with Green Valley Disposal Company. This
requirement applies to all single-family dwellings, multiple
apartment units, to all commercial, business, industrial, manu-
facturing, and construction establishments.
F. Trash container(s) of a size and quantity necessary to serve the
development shall be located in area(s) approved by the Fire
Department. Unless otherwise noted, enclosure(s) shall consist
of a concrete floor surrounded by a solid wall or fence and have
self-closing doors of a size specified by the Fire Department.
All enclosures to be constructed at grade level.
G. Applicant shall comply with all appropriate State and City require-
ments for the handicapped.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
H. Provide an automatic fire extinguishing system.
I. Provide "2A-IOBC" fire extinguishers.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
J. Pay storm drainage area fee of $646.
The .applicant is notified that he/she shall comply with all applicable
Codes or Ordinances of the City of Campbell which pertain to this
development and are not herein specified.
***
Request for Side Request of Mr. and Mrs. Reginald Haggett for an
Yard Setback adjustment of the side yard setback requirement
Haggett, R. of 9'-0" to 5'-O" to allow construction of a second
story addition to an existing single-family residence
located on property known as 1156 Monica Lane in an
R-1 (Single-Family Residential/Low Density Residential)
Zoning District.
-7-
Mr. Kee reported that the applicant is requesting an adjustment in the side
yard setback requirement to allow expansion of the second story of an existing
two-story structure. He noted the Commission has the authority to reduce the
setback requirement on existing single-family residences to a minimum of five
feet, and this request (in staff's opinion) would be in keeping with past
policy. In addition, the applicant has submitted a letter signed by the
closest neighbor which states that he has no objection to the addition.
Commissioner Vierhus moved that the request of Mr. and Mrs. Haggett be approved,
seconded by Commissioner Meyer and unanimously adopted.
Since the presentations on Items 5 and 6 were expected to be quite lengthy,
Commissioner Kasolas moved that Items 7, 8, 9 and 10 be considered prior to
Items 5 and 6. This motion was seconded by Commissioner Vierhus and unanimously
adopted.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
V 79-1 This is the time and place fora continued public hearing
Landberg, D. to consider the application of Mr. Donald C. Landberg and
Ruth & Going, Inc., fora variance from Section 21.48.020,
21.48.030, and 21.48.040 of the Campbell Municipal Code to
allow construction of a parking structure on property
known as 350 Budd Avenue in an R-3-S (Multiple Family/
High Density Residential) Zoning District.
Mr. Kee noted that this variance is in relation to the conversion of the La
Valencia Apartments to condominiums. Staff is recommending a continuance of
this application to the September 18, 1979 meeting since an EIR has been requested
for this project, and one has not yet been received.
Acting Chairman Pack, noting this is a continued public hearing, invited anyone
in the audience to speak on this item.
Ms. Carol Peterson of 350 Budd Avenue, G3, noted that the tenants would like
further information on this item before any action is taken.
Mr. Kee explained that this item is being recommended for continuance at this
time, however before approved it must have the approval of the Commission. He
noted that since the applicant has not had sufficient time to prepare an EIR,
many questions cannot be answered at this time. He noted that the tenants could
come into the Planning Office to review the site plans submitted by the applicant.
Mr, Herman Adler of 350 Budd Avenue expressed concern about the Commission
g"anting a variance and allowing a developer to not have as many parking spaces
as the ordinance calls for. He then asked if Campbell had a Condominium Conversion
Ordinance.
Mr. Kee noted that an applicant can request many kinds of variances from the
Commission, but it doesn't mean that they will necessarily be approved. He
further reported that the City Council, at its August 13, 1979 meeting, adopted
a resolution for a moratorium on condominium conversions in order that an
-8-
ordinance could be drafted; however, this application had been made prior to the
moratorium and this moratorium would relate to new applications. He stated that
the applicant i s aware of the pr~:.~:'° ~„~~. _; ~ r~; the present application as submitted ;
however the EIR would address some of these problems showing mitigating measures.
Ms. Patricia Duncan of 350 Budd Avenue then inquired if a traffic study would be
made.
Mr. Kee responded that traffic problems would be covered in the EIR to be
submitted.
No one else wishing to speak, Commissioner Vierhus moved that V 79-1 be
continued to the September 18, 1979 Planning Commission meeting, seconded
by Commissioner Meyer and unanimously adopted.
***
S 79-25 Continued application of Mr. Donald C. Landberg and
Landberg, D. Ruth & Going, Inc., for approval of plans to construct
a parking structure and convert an apartment complex
into condominiums on property known as 350 Budd Avenue
in an R-3-S (Multiple Family/High Density Residential)
Zoning District.
Mr. Kee reported that since this application is directly related to V 79-1,
staff is recommending a continuance to the Planning Commission meeting of
September 18, 1979.
Commissioner Kasolas then moved that S 79-25 be continued to the September 18,
1979 meeting, seconded by Commissioner Meyer and unanimously adopted.
***
PD 79-8 This is the time and place fora continued public
Crowley, P. hearing to consider the application of Mr. Paul E.
Crowley for approval of plans, elevations and develop-
ment schedule to allow construction of 8 condominium
units on property known as 49 Dot Avenue in a P-D
(Planned Development/Medium Density Residential)
Zoning District.
Commissioner Kasolas reported that the applicant met with the Site and
Architectural Review Committee this morning, and since there seems to be a
high percentage of paving and a low percentage of landscaping, the Committee
is recommending a continuance of this application to the October 2 meeting
at the request of the applicant.
Mr. Kee noted that staff is in agreement with this continuance.
Commissioner Vierhus moved that PD 79-8 be continued to the Planning Commission
-meeting of October 2, 1979, seconded by Commissioner Dickson and unanimously
adopted.
***
-9-
UP 79-15 This is the .time and place fora continued public
Haigh, J. hearing to consider the application of Mr. Jack
Haigh and Syufy Enterprises for a use permit and
approval of plans to allow the addition of a screen
and projection booth to an existing drive-in theater
located on property known as 535 Westchester Drive in
an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District.
Mr. Kee reported that the applicant has requested a continuance of this
item to the September 1$, 1979 meeting in order to allow time for the
completion of a traffic analysis update. He noted that an item of corres-
pondence had been received from the Burton Construction Company bringing to
to the attention of the Planning Department problems in the area. A copy of
this letter is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes.
Acting Chairman Pack requested that Mr. Haigh be apprised of this letter,
and that it be brought to the attention of the Police Department requesting
that some of these questions be answered before it comes before the Commission
On September 18.
Acting Chairman Pack invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against
this item.
No one wishing to be heard, Commissioner Meyer moved that UP 79-15 be continued
to the Planning Commission meeting of September 18, 1979, seconded by Commissioner
Dickson and unanimously adopted.
The Commission took a break at 8:55 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 9:10 p.m.
EIR 79-1 This is the time and place for a public hearing to
Housing Authority consider the Draft EIR prepared by the firm of Creegan
& D'Angelo for a 200-unit Senior Housing Project at
400 W. Rincon Avenue, as proposed by the Housing
Authority of Santa Clara County in a P-D (Planned
Development/Medium Density Residential) Zoning District.
Mr. Kee introduced Principal Planner Philip Stafford, who would be making the
presentation on this Draft EIR.
Mr. Stafford reported that the Housing Authority of Santa Clara County is
proposing to construct 200 units of housing for the elderly at the subject
location. This proposal is being made in accord with a favorable measure by
the Campbell electorate in 1976, to the effect that the Housing Authority shall
be authorized to construct up to 200 units of senior citizen housing in the
City of Campbell and after the application was filed in the Planning Office
for this development, staff indicated to the applicant that an EIR would be
required.
-10-
The Draft EIR was submitted to the Planning Commission with the agenda of
August 7, 1979, in order to allow additional time for review. In addition,
the draft was filed with the State of California Resources Agency, the
Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Association of Bay Area
Governments, the project architects, and the Housing Authority. To date,
staff has received only comments from the Housing Authority. A copy of their
letter dated August 14, 1979, is attached hereto and made a part of these
minutes.
In requiring the EIR, staff indicated to the consulting firm that the main
area of concern included public utilities, land use, design, traffic, noise,
and energy utilization. The draft, indicates that the impacts of the proposed
development on the environment and immediate neighborhood will be minimal.
Specific suggestions for mitigating the effects of this development include
the following:
1. Project architects coordinate with both the School District
and Parks and Recreation Department (Commission) for proper
handling of the property line treatment with both fencing
or landscaping as needed.
2. When any new park facilities or school facilities (i.e. tennis
court lighting) are designed, they should take into account
the adjacent properties and land uses.
3. Consideration should be given to requesting a route change from
Campbell Avenue to Rincon Avenue for Routes 60 & 94. A bus
shelter and/or benches should be provided at the nearest bus
stop on each route.
Mr. Stafford further reported that staff is recommending that these mitigating
fineasures be included in the conditions of approval, if the Commission takes
action to recommend approval of this project.
He noted that he would be happy to answer any questions of the Commission, and
that Mr. Burns from the Housing Authority; Mr. Ken Abler, Architect; and Mr.
Stan Kulakow, representing the firm of Creegan & D'Angelo (EIR Consultant),
were also in the audience and would be happy to address any concerns of the
Commission.
Commissioner Vierhus inquired of Mr. Kee if he felt this EIR meets with
staff's approval.
Mr. Kee noted that staff is recommending that the Commission consider public
Input, and after considering that input make any amendments necessary then
certify the Draft EIR as complete with the specific suggestions made herein
for mitigating the effects of this development.
Acting Chairman Pack inquired of Engineering Manager Helms if he had anything
to add at this time.
Engineering Manager Helms responded that he had reviewed the EIR and did not
disagree with anything that had been brought out.
-11-
Acting Chairman Pack opened the rublic nea-°ing and invited anyone in the
audience to speak for or against this project.
Mr. Don Hebard of 205 Calado Drive stated he had looked over the EIR, but
had not had a chance to read it in depth; however, he felt that the assess-
ment of the impact of the development on the use of the park had been glossed
over, it did not fully address what effect the use of the park would have on
the project as well as the project being a hindrance to the use of the park.
He questioned whether the EIR recognized the difference between the various
uses of the park; this is an active park, not a passive park.- He felt a park
as intense as this being placed next to a senior development which would probably
desire quietness, was in complete conflict. He felt the EIR failed to recognize
this confliction of each project on the other, and it is a very serious concern.
He felt the most important aspect of this project is how it relates to the park
and its uses. He noted that no examples were made in the EIR, and wondered if
there were similar projects such as the one proposed located adjacent to active
parks. He also noted that both the Park and Recreation Commission and Civic
Improvement Commission had raised concerns-about this project and those concerns
should also be addressed. He concluded by stating that he felt this project
needs to be readdressed and re-examined before a decision could be made.
Mr. Stan Kulakow of Creegan & D'Angelo, the consultant who prepared the EIR,
appeared before the Commission to state that he felt there were certain benefits
to the future residents of this development by living adjacent to a park such as
the one in question, and felt that this project would not have a significant im-
pact on the present or future uses of the park. He realized that the City
Commissions had concerns (expansion of park, additional parking area, etc.),
however he felt this had to be approached from a practical standpoint and it
was a matter of when these things can be done.
Acting Chairman Pack inquired if Mr. Kulakow could address the concerns of the
Commissions.
Mr. Kulakow stated that he could not answer them directly, but that he could
come back with more specific answers after considering them.
Commissioner Vierhus queried whether the consultant had taken into consideration
the complaints from residents of a senior development such as the one proposed
regarding the lighting, noise, etc. affecting the overall development and
residents of the development.
Mr. Kulakow addressed Commissioner Vierhus' concerns by stating that he felt
the manager of such a project would duly inform any prospective tenants of the
impact of the surrounding area and this would be taken into consideration before
moving into such a development; on the other hand one might view living adjacent
to a park as a benefit. He did not feel the noise or lighting factors were
detrimental.
Much discussion-ensued regarding direct response to the concerns of the Civic
Improvement and Park and Recreation Commissions.
Commissioner Dickson expressed concern about the density of this project being
okay; further stating that because the Commission has approved a couple of
similar projects in the city in the past did not mean that the density for the
proposed project would be acceptable. He also expressed concern about the
''openness" effect of the park, noting the park would lose that effect once a
-1?_-
project such as the one proposed was cor~s~cructed. He then expressed concern
about the parking ratio., for this development, noting that there is an existing
problem with parking for the park during the summer months without a develop-
ment such as the one proposed adjacent to the park. He then noted that since
the Measure was passed in 1976 there have already,been a number of senior units
approved in Campbell. He was not certain there is a real need for additional
senior units. He did note, however, that there presently exists a housing
shortage for young marrieds as well as other people in the City. He then
expressed concern about the fact that the City would be tied to this project
for a period of 40 years (Page 6, paragraph 3 under "Description of the Proposed
Project"). He also noted that many of the statements made in the EIR were
opinions, not facts. In conclusion, he stated that he would like some of these
concerns addressed in order that this EIR could be reconsidered.
Acting Chairman Pack concurred with Commissioner Dickson's concerns, further
questioning why Title 25 for multi-family housing had not been considered under
the noise study portion. She then inquired why the noise measures were taken
on Sunday afternoon rather than an 8-hour measure which includes day time,
evening, and night time.
Mr. Kulakow responded that the noise consultant used chose the time he thought
would demonstrate some uses relatjng to the park.
Nlr. Ken Abler, architect for the project, appeared before the Commission to
state that he has designed many projects for seniors, and what the seniors
want is a choice of environment in which to live. He felt that people put
seniors in "boxes" thinking that they want quiet; however, he felt that in
the design of the units he has done and through past experience the location
adjacent to a park would actually entice some seniors to want to live at this
location. He noted that he would be happy to take any of the Commissioners
to one of the projects that he has designed for seniors in order to allow
them the opportunity to see for themselves what some of the desires the
seniors have in regard to housing.
Commissioner Kasolas felt that this location would be a more conducive place
to live--next to the park.
Mr. Don Hebard again appeared before the Commission hoping that they would ask
the EIR consultant to deal with specifics rather than opinions as expressed in
the EIR--specifically noting that pages 12-14 are opinions, not facts. He also
felt that if projects similar to the one proposed could be used for comparison
this would further help the Commission in making a determination.
Mr. John Burns, Executive Director of the Housing Authority, appeared before
the Commission to explain the restricted time frame in which they were working.
He then inquired if the Commission decided to continue this, could the con-
tinuance be for as short a time as possible. He then stated that he is in full
support of Mr. Abler's statements about putting seniors in "boxes".
Commissioner Kasolas spoke in favor of the EIR, and stated that he would
recommend certification at this time.
City Attorney Dempster advised that if the Commission desired additional infor-
mation regarding the EIR they should be specific in enumerating such.
-13-
Commissioner Dickson
meeting of September
by the applicant:
moved that EIR 79-1 be continued to the Planning Commission
4, 1979 in order that the following items could be addressed
1. What effect will this density have on the park?
2. What effect will the proposed parking have on the park, and what will
the effect of the parking for the park be on this proposed project?
3. What effect will this project have on the park--the project desires
quiet, the park generates noise.
4. How will this project affect the openness of the park--how will
open space be affected?
5. The housing needs have changed in the City of Campbell since the
measure was passed in 1976 (the number of units for seniors has
been increased by 272 units). What effect will this have in view
of the fact that the housing shortage is critical for all age
groups in the City.
6. Concern was expressed about the fact that no changes would likely
occur for 40 years (Page 6, paragraph 3 under "Description of the
.Proposed Project"). Amplification of this paragraph is desired.
7. It was expressed that some of the findings were not, in fact,
findings but opinions. It was felt conclusions should have been
based on findings.
8. It was requested that other specific projects similar to the one
being proposed (senior development adjacent to an active, not
passive, park) be referenced and reported on.
9. It was requested that the EIR address the recommendations and/or
concerns of the Civic Improvement Commission and the Park and
Recreation Commission.
10. It was requested that the "Noise" portion address Title 25.
This motion was seconded by Commissioner Meyer.
DISCUSSION OF MOTION
Commissioner Kasolas spoke against
unfair that a project such as this
EIR and other projects similar in
require an EIR. He also felt that
to this project.
VOTE ON MOTION
this motion, stating he felt it was
would have to submit such a detailed
nature (housing for seniors) did not
the Commission's delay could be critical
AYES: Commissioners: Meyer, Dickson, Vierhus, Pack
NOES: Commissioners: Kasolas
ABSENT; Commissioners: Campos, Samuelson
*~*
PD 79-4 This is the time and place for a public hearing to
Housing Authority consider the application of Mr. John Burns and the
Housing Authority of Santa Clara County for approval
of plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow
construction of a senior citizen housing complex on
property known as 260-400 W. Rincon Avenue in a P-D
(Planned Development/Medium Density Residential) Zoning
District.
-14-
Mr. Kee noted that staff's recommendation ~,~ould be to continue this item
to the next meeting in order that the EIR would or would not be certified
prior to consideration of this prt;~L:.:~~:.
Commissioner Kasoias reported that the applicant fad met with the Site and
Architectural Review Committee this morning, and the Committee is unanimously
recommending approval of this project as submitted.
Mr. John Burns appeared before the Commission to state that in his 12 years
with the housing business, he feels that this is one of the most outstanding
designs. He then went over the plans with the Commission, explaining all
areas of the project. He explained that he did not anticipate any problems
in filling these units; first preference would be to those who live in
Campbell. He noted that this will be a very interesting and active place
to live.
Acting Chairman Pack declared the public hearing open and invited anyone
in the audience to speak for or against this project.
No one wishing to be heard, and with the applicant's concurrence, Commissioner
Yierhus moved that PD 79-4 be continued to the September 4 Planning Commission
meeting, seconded by Commissioner Kasoias and unanimously adopted.
The Commission took a break at 10:45 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 11:00 p.m.
UP 79-21 This is the time and place for a continued public
Meyer, G. hearing to consider the application of Mr. Gilbert
M. Meyer and Cypress Development Co. for a use
permit and approval of plans to allow the construction
of 12 townhomes on property known as 849 S. San Tomas
Aquino Road in an Interim (Planned Development/Medium
Density Residential) Zoning District.
Mr. Kee reported that one of the main reasons for a continuance of this item
from the last meeting was in order that the concerns of the Fire Department
could be resolved. He noted that a memo had been received from the Fire
Department approving this application. A copy of this memo is attached hereto
and made a part of these minutes.
Acting Chairman Pack noted that this is a continued public hearing and invited
anyone in the audience to speak for or against this project.
Mr. Mike Meyer, applicant, of 201 San Antonio Circle, Mountain View, appeared
before the Commission to explain the project. He noted that he and his partner,
Mr. Steve Barber, have developed several projects with a number of parameters
and limitations, such as this one. He further explained the limitations of this
property, and gave a slide presentation to the Commission which showed the area.
-15-
He then went-over the plans in detail, explaining that the Fire Department
concern had been resolved by installation of a roof hatch (skylight), noting
there would be a change in the CC&R's in order to allow firemen to fight fires
in any of the units.
Acting Chairman Pack inquired if the applicant had planned to install a
new fence.
Mr. Meyer responded affirmatively.
Fire Chief Jim McMullen explained the previous problem with. the ladders not
being tall enough to effectively fight fires. He noted that it would take
approximately 4 men to Tift a ladder tall enough to fight a fire in a 3-story
structure, and the time lost in using this ladder is very critical. He reported
that new 3-story buildings over 75' in height require automatic sprinkler
systems. In cases similar to this development, each project-must be looked
at individually and the Fire Department will make recommendations accordingly.
He further reported that installation of a skylight roof hatch resolves"the
concerns of the Fire Department and the Department is recommending approval subject
to this change in the plans.
Mr. Kee noted that staff would recommend approval on the basis of the revised
plans, and further noted that the plans are acceptable to the Architectural
Advisor as well as the Site and Architectural Review Committee.
Ms. Mary Myron of Hacienda Avenue inquired about access to the rear of the
property.
Fire Chief McMullen responded that there is a 20' access road for fire purposes
and an on-site fire hydrant.
Ms. Kathy Hale of 1190 Glenblair expressed her concern about the first 3-story
structure being constructed in her neighborhood; she felt this would set a
precedent.
Mr. Kee explained that this height is allowable in this Zoning District; he
further explained that this structure would probably be no taller than the
adjacent complex, San Tomas Gardens.
No one else wishing to be heard, Commissioner Vierhus moved that the public
hearing be closed, seconded by Commissioner Dickson and unanimously adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 1812 Commissioner Dickson moved that the Planning Commission
adopt Resolution No. 1812 recommending that the applica-
tion of Mr. Gilbert M. Meyer and Cypress Development
Co. for a use permit and approval of plans to allow the
construction of 12 townhomes on property known as 849
S, San Tomas Aquino Road in an Interim (Planned
Development/Medium Density Residential) Zoning District
be approved, seconded by Commissioner Meyer and unani-
mously adopted by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Meyer, Dickson, Pack, Vierhus, Kasolas
NOES: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: Campos, Samuelson
***
.. ~--~_-~ .,,•.-,+.r.-ear tam ~~+av:.r..,.+a^- :.,..-±+.... sF a
__~...u._.:.,a..:....~....~,.....~......._,..,...._~~k..~,......~~..._.._.:.,..._._..:~~~....,...._ . _._. _~...., _ _ _ ... _ ..
-16-
UP 79-22 This is the time and place for a public hearing to
Hinson, R. consider the apc,lication of Mr. Roaten E. Hinson,
A.I.R., for a use permit and approval of plans to
construct 11 townhomes located on property known as
1785 and 1801 W. Hacienda Avenue in an Interim
(Low-Medium Density Residential) Zoning District.
Commissioner Kasolas reported that the applicant had met with the Site and
Architectural Review Committee this morning, and the Committee is recommending
approval of the revised plans as submitted.
Commissioner Vierhus reported that the Committee is recommending revised
wording for Condition No. 1 which would read "Revised elevations to be
approved by the Planning Director upon recommendation of the Architectural
Advisor after referral to other City Departments."
Mr. Kee noted that this change is necessary since there was not sufficient
time to reroute the revised plans as submitted, however they are basically
the same as the ones previously approved by the City Departments--only
minor changes were made in the parking areas.
Commissioner Kasolas recollected that the San Tomas Task Force had not wished
to review every project in this area and inquired of Mr. Kee if this project
fell into that category. .
Mr. Kee explained that the density of this project is only 9.3 units per
gross acre and the maximum allowable would be 13 units per gross acre. Tn
the past, the main concern has been density and since the density of this
project is much less than the maximum allowable staff is recommending that
this be referred to the San Tomas Task Force after approval and they could
forward their comments to the City Council.
Acting Chairman Pack. declared the public hearing open and invited anyone in the
audience to speak for or against this item.
Mr. Roaten Hinson, applicant, appeared before the Commission and explained
the project in detail. He noted that he had attended several of the Task
Force meetings in order to see the direction they would like to see this
area developed, and talked with several of the neighbors about their concerns
before proceeding with the plans.
Commissioner Dickson inquired of Mr. Kee what the land use is for the surrounding
area.
Mr. Kee responded that to the north, east and west are single-family developments,
and to the south is an apartment complex.
Ms. Mason of 1291 Freda Court appeared before the Commission to state that the
apartments in the area are only one story high rather than two, and there is
an existing parking problem along Hacienda. She felt this development would
add to the existing parking problem, and objected to the construction of two-
story structures. She requested that this remain a low density area.
-17-
Ms. Mary Meyer of 1765 W. Hacienda Avenue appeared before the Commission
to present a letter of opposition to this project. She read a letter from
Fvjezdana Kombol of 1755 Hacienda Avenue, dated August 21, 1979, a copy of
which is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. She then stated
that she also opposes this project; it is not compatible with the existing
surrounding uses. Ms. Meyer then reported that development of this property
actually initiated the San Tomas Task Force and she felt it should properly
be referred to that Task Force. She further noted that it is a matter of
record that the surrounding property owners object to this higher density
for this property and do not want this type of development. She felt the
present character of the neighborhood is worth saving. She then expressed
concern about the traffic in the area and danger to school children.
Mr. Dale Lewis of 1776 Regina appeared before the Commission to state he
felt this project was intruding on the neighborhood. He personally objected
to this development, stating from his half acre he views the Santa Cruz
Mountains and after development of this lot he will be viewing townhomes.
Mr. Bob James of 1786 Regina Way appeared to object to this high a density
for this parcel, noting the Commission had objected to a high density the
last time this parcel was before them.
Ms. Kathy Hale of 1190 Glenblair spoke to reiterate concerns of the neigh-
borhood and asked that the Commission consider a lesser density for this
parcel (6 or 7 units).
Ms. Pam Nelson of 1775 Hacienda Avenue expressed her concern about the
Value of her property going down because of this proposed development, and
noted parking problems that already exist without the construction of these
tpwnhomes.
Ms. Mary Meyer again appeared before the Commission noting the lateness
of the hour and requested that the Commission postpone action on this
matter in order that everyone would have a fresher perspective.
Acting Chairman Pack noted that the Commission agendas have been very long
lately and felt it would not be fair to postpone action on this item.
Ms. Mason then appeared once again to ask about fire hydrants for the project.
Mr. Hinson, applicant, responded that one of the conditions of approval
required an on-site fire hydrant.
No one else wishing to speak, Commission Meyer moved that the public hearing
he closed, seconded by Commissioner Kasolas and unanimously adopted.
Commissioner Kasolas felt this project meets with the General Plan and Zoning Code
and is a good project; it is a lower density than the previously submitted
project and 53 percent will be landscaping.
Commissioner Dickson expressed his concerns about tandem parking.
Acting Chairman Pack noted her approval of this project was due to the fact
that .there is such a serious housing shortage in Santa Clara County; the job
ratio to housing is a very serious concern. Townhomes in Campbell, for the
most part, have been very attractive and very well maintained.
-18-
MOTION
Commissioner Kasolas moved that UP 79-22 be approved subject to revised
Condition No. 1 as stated herein and referred to the San Tomas Task Force
for information only, seconded by Commissioner Vierhus.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION
Commissioner Dickson then moved that this motion be amended to read that
this be referred to the San Tomas Task Force and their comments be forwarded
to the City Council.
This amendment of the motion died for lack of a second.
RESOLUTION N0. 1813 Commissioner Kasolas moved that the Planning
Commission adopt Resolution No. 1813 recommending.
approval of the application for Mr. Roaten E.
Hinson, A.I.A., fora use permit and approval of
plans to construct 11 townhomes located on
property known as 1785 and 1801 W. Hacienda
Avenue in an Interim (Low-Medium Density
Residential) Zoning District, with a change of
wording in Condition No. 1 which is to read
"Revised elevations to be approved by the
Planning Director upon recommendation of the
Architectural Advisor after referral to other
City Departments." This motion was seconded
6y Commissioner Vierhus and adopted by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Meyer, Vierhus, Kasolas, Pack
NOES: Commissioners: Dickson
ABSENT: Commissioners: Campos, Samuelson
MISCELLANEOUS
TS 79-13 Tentative Subdivision Map, Lands of Kelly-Gordon
Lands of Kelly-Gordon APN 305-30-8
Commissioner Dickson-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 conditions attached to the Staff Comment
Sheet, seconded by Commissioner Meyer and unanimously adopted.
***
-19-
TS 79-14
Lands of Werthmann
Tentative Subdivision Map, Lands of Werthmann
APN 473-48-36 & 67
Commissioner Dickson moved that the Planning Commission (1) find that the
proposed tract map is in conformance with the General Plan, (2) approve
the conditional exception, as requested, (3) recommend that the City Council
approve this map subject to the conditions attached to the Staff Comment
Sheet, and (4) make the finding that this approval shall not become
effective until annexation proceedings are completed. This motion was
seconded by Commissioner Meyer and adopted with Commissioner Kasolas
abstaining because of a possible conflict of interest.
***
Appeal Appeal from the decision of the Planning Director
Cucuzza, D. which denied the construction of a 6' fence in
the sideyard setback on property known as 1645
Bearden Drive in an Interim (Single-Family
Residential) Zoning District.
David Cucuzza, applicant, appeared before the Commission
Zs requesting approval of the construction of this fence
a play area for expected future children. He noted that
totally taken up by a swimming pool, and they would like
area for children. He then distributed pictures of his
yard to the Commission.
to explain that he
in order to have
his backyard is
to have a play
backyard and side
Much discussion ensued regarding the construction of the fence, and it
was the consensus that this would not be aesthetically pleasing and, in
fact, might be a site hazard.
Commissioner Kasolas then moved that the Planning Commission uphold the
decision of the Planning Director denying this request since this fence
would not be aesthetically pleasing and may be a site hazard, seconded by
Commissioner Dickson and unanimously adopted by the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Meyer, Dickson, Vierhus, Kasolas, Pack
NOES: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: Campos, Samuelson
The Recording Secretary then handed to the applicant a copy of the "Procedure
for Appeal from Decision of Planning Commission."
***
A eal Appeal from a decision of the Planning Director
pSA 79-46 denying a 21'-6" high free-standing sign for
Far West Savings located at 1480 W. Campbell
.Avenue in a C-1-S (Neighborhood Commercial)
Zoning District.
- 20-
Mr. Kee noted that the applicant is requesting a continuance of this matter
to the Planning Commission m'~eeting of September 4, 1979.
Commissioner Kasolas then moved ~~`~-~'- ~;~,~ ~,~}~ea°! on SA 79-46 be continued
to September 4, 1979, seconded by Cor~unissioner Dickson and unanimously
adopted.
*~*
Referral from Planning Commission recommendation for the
City Council Historic Preservation Board (one nomination)
ter. Kee explained that since Mr. Bamburg does not live in the City of
Campbell or its sphere of influence, the Council has requested that the
Commission submit another nomination for the Historic Preservation Board.
Commissioner Kasolas felt that Mr. Bamburg's name should be reaffirmed
as a nomination since he has served well on the Site and Architectural
Review Committee as the Architectural Advisor and has given many of his
Flours to the City; he also handles many projects in Campbell and has been
before the Commission on numerous occasions with these projects.
After considerable discussion, Commissioner Dickson moved that the Planning
Commission reaffirm its nomination of Marvin Bamburg to serve on the Historic
Preservation Board, and if the Council chooses not to select Mr. Bamburg then
Madge Overhouse's name be submitted as an alternate. This motion was seconded
6y Commissioner Meyer and adopted with Commissioner Kasolas voting "No".
***
Referral from Appointment of two Planning Commissioners to serve
City Council as members on the Rent Control Task Force Committee.
Commissioners Kasolas and Meyer volunteered to serve on the Rent Control
Force Committee.
***
City Council Referral from the City Council directing the Planning
Referral Commission to initiate action to develop an ordinance
Condominium regulating Condominium Conversions.
Conversions
Acting Chairman Pack appointed Commissioner Dickson and herself to serve on a
committee to work with staff~in developing a Condominium Conversion Ordinance.
Commissioner Dickson was in agreement with this appointment.
***
ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Dickson and seconded by
Commissioner Meyer that the meeting be adjourned.
The meeting adjourned at 12:55 p.m.
ATTEST: ,APPROVED:
Arthur A. Kee, Secretary Margaret M. Pack, Acting Chairman
RECORDED:
Jeannine Made, Recorder