PC Min 05/06/1976PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF CAMPBELL, CA LIFORNIA
THURSDAY, 7:30 P.M.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES
MAY 6, 1976
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 Avenue, Campbell, California.
ROLL CALL Commissioners: Campos, Dickson, Samuelson, Pack;
Secretary Arthur A. Kee; Senior Planner Bruce Powell;
Present City Attorney J. Robert Dempster; Acting Public Works
Director Bill Helms; Recorder Carol Locke
+Absent Commissioners: Hebard, Stewart, Lubeckis
MINUTES Commissioner Pack moved that the minutes of the
April 15, 1976 be approved as received, seconded
by Commissioner Campos and unanimously adopted..
COMMUNICATIONS Vice Chairman Dickson asked P1 r. Kee if there were
any communications. Mr. Kee reported that all
communications received relate to specific items
on the agenda and would be taken up at the appropriate
time.
ARCHITECTURAL APPROVALS
Vice Chairman Dickson asked Commissioner Pack for the report of the Site
and Architectural.Review Committee.
"S" 76-8 Commissioner Pacl< reported that the Architectural
Garrison, Elmer R. Review Committee recommends continuance to the
May 20 meeting on the application of Elmer R. Garrison
for approval of plans to construct a 93 unit apartment
complex on property known as 3495 South Bascom Avenue
in an R-3-S (High Density Residential) Zoning District.
The applicant was present at the meeting and was in
concurrence with the continuance recommendation.
Commissioner Samuelson moved that "S" 76-8 be continued to the May 20, 1976
meeting, seconded by Commissioner Campos and unanimously adopted.
"S" 76-11 Commissioner Pack reported that .the applicant was
Nelson, Oliver H. not present at the Architectural Review Committee
meeting and it was the committee's recommendation
that the continued application of Oliver H. Nelson
for approval of plans to construct a second industrial
building on property known as 520 McGlincey Lane
in a M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District be
continued to the May 20, 1976 meeting.
Mr. Kee advised that the applicant had been in contact with the planning -~
office and requested the two weeks continuance.
I
^ Commissioner Pack moved that "S" 76-11 be continued to May 20, 1976, `-
seconded by Gommissioner Samuelson and unanimously adopted.
"S" 76-12 Commissioner Pack reported that the Architectural
Hamm, Neil Review Committee recommends approval of the appli-
cation of Neil Hamm for approval of plans to construct
an industrial building on property known as
251 East Hacienda Avenue in a CM:B-20 (Controlled
Manufacturing)Zoning District subject to the
conditions recommended by staff. It should be noted
that the revised elevations a~ill come back for final
approval by the Planning Director.
Commissioner Pack moved that "S" 76-12 be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1.' Property to be fenced and landscaped as indicated and as added in red on
plans.
2. Landscaping shall be maintained in accordance. with the approved landscape
plan. ~ .
3. Faithful performance bond in the amount of $3,000 to be posted to insure
landscaping, fencing and striping of parking area within three (3) months
of completion of construction, or applicant may file written agreement
to complete landscaping, fencing and striping of parking area prior to
final building department clearance.
4. All mechanical equipment located on roofs shall be screened as approved by
the Planning Uirector.
5. Revised elevations to be approved by the Planning Director.
The applicant is notified as part of this application that he is required to
meet the following conditions in accordance with Ordinances of the City of
Campbell.
A. A11 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.
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.
"2- ~ '__~
... R
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.
E. Ordinance No. 782 of the Campbell Municipal Code stipulates that any
contract for the collection aid 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, manufacturing 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 surroun-
ded 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 meet all state requirements for the handicapped.
Bll I LD I NG DEPARTMENT
H. Roof covering shall be fire retardant. Section 1603.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
I. Payment of storm drainage area fee ($468).
J. Agreement, bonding, and fees for construction of street improvements.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
K. Provide "2ABC" fire extinguishers.
The applicant is notified that he shall comply with all applicable Codes
or Ordinances of the City of Campbe 11 which pertain to this development and.
are not herein specified.
Commissioner Sameulson seconded the motion and unanimously adopted.
Commissioner Stewart arrived and was seated at 7:42 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
E.I.R. 76-1 This is the time and place for public hearing to
Garrison, E. consider the Environmental Impact Report for "S" 76-8,
a proposed apartment complex to be located at
3495 South Bascom Avenue, Campbell.
-3-
Vice Chairman Dickson reported that this item is related to Item #1 on the
agenda and the Commission may wish to either continue this item or open
the public hearing so that initial comments may be made.
Commissioner Pack stated that she had some comments that she would like
to make at this time and requested that the public hearing be opened in
order that the applicant could respond.
Mr. Kee advised that after discussion at the Architectural Review Comm'sttee,
this item as well as Item #5 on the agenda relates to item #1 on the agenda,
and it is the recommendation of staff and the committee that the public hearing
be opened and that it be continued to the next regular meeting.
Vice Chairman Dickson declared the public hearing open~on E.I.R. 76-1.
Commissioner Pack stated that after reading the E.I.R. she did not believe
that it was very complete and could not accept.it in its present form. She
stated that several things were missing from the report.
i
1. There was no quantitative noise data submitted.
2. If the traffic is more than 10,000 cars average daily traffic, then the
noise will be 60 C.N.E.L. (Community Noise Equivalent Level), which is
above the state standard.
If the noise level is above state standard as established by State Title 25,
then a noise report must be submitted. According to their E.I.R. they
said that the daily average traffic is 10,000 cars now and it will reach
18,000 cars in some time in the future. The road wil 1 carry a maximum
of 36, 000 cars .
3. If the traffic measures 36,000 Average Daily Traffic in the future, then
what will the noise impact be on the project in the future?
The E.I.R. did not show that any measurements had been taken.
Commissioner Stewart questioned the parking requirements. This particular
project will have a population of 195 persons, all adults, and there are
only 14G stalls shown. Is it logical to assume that 50 individuals will
not have automobiles in an all adult community.
Mr. Kee stated that the zoning code requires l~ spaces per living unit
and the plans submitted meet the requirement. The Commission may, and the
code provides that the Commission may require more or less than the code
specifies. The Commission does have the authority to adjust the parking.
Commissioner Stewart stated that he realized the project met the code
requirements, but he questioned whether it is sufficient.
Mr. Kee advised that the staff can check with the people who developed the
E.I.R. and also with other cities to determine what their experience has been
4-
with th is type of deve lopment.
Commissioner Stewart stated that parking seems to be a real problem
at apartment developments. There is no criteria for the Commission to
accept or reject the parking provided, if it meets the code requirements.
However, he did have some questions as to the parking meeting the needs
of the project.
Commissioner Stewart thought it would be beneficial to open the public
hearing for questions from the audience and the developer would have a
change to respond.
Vice Chairman Dickson asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak
for or against the E.I.R.
There being no one present wishing to be heard, Commissioner Pack moved
that the public hearing be continued to the May 20, 1976 meeting, seconded
by Commissioner Stewart and unanimously adopted.
Vi76-1 This is the time and .place for public hearing
Garrison, Elmer R. to consider the application of Elmer R. Garrison
fora variance from 9'-0" to 0'-0" in side
yard setback to allow the construction of a tennis
court fence for an apartment complex to be located
on property known as 3495 South Bascom Avenue in a
R-3-S (High Density Residential) Zoning District.
Mr. Kee advised that this item relates to Items 1 and 4 on the agenda and
it is the staff recommendation that the variance application be continued
to the next meeting of the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Pack was of the opinion that there should be discussion on this
application at this time as this is the first time that a tennis court project
has been brought into Campbell and the present guidelines in the code are
very specific as to the findings the Commission must make before a variance
can be granted. She was of the opinion that this application did not meet
any of the requirements outlined in the code for granting a variance.
However, a tennis court is open space and would be a nice addition to an
apartment complex. Perhaps a change in the code might be considered so the
Commission could comply with this application.
Mr. Kee stated that this is a possibility. It would require action by the
Commission to direct staff to prepare a draft text amendment to the zoning
code and to prepare the necessary public hearing notices.
Vice Chairman Dickson stated that there is a checklist for findings that
must be made before a variance can be granted and he did not feel that this
application fits the checklist for consideration of a variance.
Commissioner Campos asked if it would require a change in the code or a
waiver of the code.
Mr. I~ee advised there is a legal decision provided by a former city attorney
and a checklist has been established to guide the Commission. The staff
would have no objection to noticing a text amendment for public hearing.
-5-
The text amendment would be to Section 21,48, Open Space, of the Zoning
Code. A text amendment to the code takes approximately 90 days, and it might
be advisable to leave this item on the agenda and have it come back to the
Commission when the other related items for the project are on the agenda.
Commissioner Pack advised that in discussing this with the applicant at the
committee meeting, he indicated that the 90 days would not hinder him with
the progress of the project as the tennis court would most likely be the
last thing to be built. '
Commissioner Stewart moved that V 76-1 be continued to the June 3 meeting
of :the Planning Commission and that the staff prepare an amendment to
Chapter 21.48, Open Space, of the Campbell Municipal Code and notice the
text amendment for public hearing.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Campos and unanimously adopted.-
UP 76-5 This is the time and place for public hearing
Grabau, H, B. on the application of Herbert B. Grabau, on behalf
St. Andrews of the. Saint 'Andrews Residence for Boys, for a use
Residence for Boys permit to allow a correctional institution on property
known as 189 North Second Street in a R-1 Zone (Single
Family Residential).
Vice .Chairman Dickson asked Mr. Kee for his comments.
Mr. Kee advised that the applicant is proposing to use an existing residence
as a live-in rehabilitation center for approximately six boys. It is intended
that the existing facility, a single family home, be used and .only those
changes, if any required by appropriate agencies would be made. St. Andrews
Residence for Boys is a non-profit corporation. Philanthropic or correctional
institutions may be permitted in any zone upon securing a use permit. Certain
findings are required to be made by the Planning Commission: that the
operation of the use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace,
morals, comfort or general welfare of persons residing or working in the
neighborhood of the proposed use, and that the use will not b~ detrimental
or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general
welfare of the City.
The staff is of the opinion that a use such as the one .proposed is more closely
related to a boarding home operation, which, according to the zoning code
may be permitted in a R-3 zone or in a R-2 zone with a use permit.
The Planning Department has received a letter signed by approximately 76
residents of the area expressing their disapproval of this use at this
location.
Vice Chairman Dickson asked that the Recorder read the petition. (Petition on file
in the office of the Planning Department). -.
Commissioner Campos asked if there were any similar half-way houses of this
nature in the City of Campbell.
Mr. Kee stated that he was not aware of any. There are some convalescent
hospitals in the city in the R-3 and R-2 zones. The code does, hovrever,
-6-
provide that an application can be made for such a use in the R-1 zoning
district and approved if the Commission makes the findings that the use
will be compatible and not deleterious to the persons residing or working
in the neighborhood. The findings that the Commission must make are spelled
out in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Kee further advised that a boarding house
would require the R-2 or R-3 zoning.
Vice Chairman Dickson declared the public hearing open and asked if anyone
wished to be heard. He suggested that those wishing to speak limit their
comments to a few minutes in order to give everyone an opportunity to express
their opinion.
Mr. John Theamster, Vice President St. Andrews Residence for Boys, 20089
Pierce Road, Saratoga, stated that he wished to speak on behalf of the
Board and requested a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission
for the project. He stated that members of the Board have tried to meet with
the residents in the area and explain the project. This is a non-profit
corporation composed of ten professional men who reside in the Los Gatos,
Saratoga and Monte Sereno area. They have worked on this particular project
for two years and have spent considerable time and effort in locating a
suitable home and establishing plans. They have worked with the County-and
State agencies in meeting their requirements. The children who would reside
in the home are interviewed and are not accepted unless they feel they will
be compatible. The children are wards of the courts, but not because they
have committed crimes. They are children who do not have parents. The
children who are in the home will be fully supervised and disciplined.
He requested a favorable decision- from the Commission and stated that he would
be happy to answerrquestions. He did add that they had tried to develop
this project in other cities, but this was the first property that they had
found that looked feasible to develop. They cannot buy the property. They
will rent the home and use it if they can get the use permit.
Mr. Theamster stated that the staff comment sheet states that this will be
a correctional institution and this is not the case. This will be a rehabilitation
center and will provide a home for these boys with a father-mother relationship.
He did not believe that the use is inconsistent with the R-1 zoning.
They would be operating as a family - not as a boarding house. They would
expect to have the boys for several years as most of them do not have parents.
The ten men on the board of directors intend to devote their personal time
in working with the boys. He stated that institutions are not the place
for these boys and they intend to provide a family type life.
He stated that the petition cites the size of the lot as a reason for
denying the application. He stated that they have found it to be quite
adequate and in fact it exceeds the state and county requirements. The
petition also states that they are in violation of current zoning. However,
the staff has indicated that it would not be a violation of the code require-
ments. They are not asking fora variance to the code.
No. 4 in the petition states that the
on the neighborhood. ~He advised that
iorate. They want something good for
proposed use would have a deteriorating effec
they would not allow the house to deter-
the neighborhood.
-7-
No. 5 in the petition states that the residential property values in the
vicinity would be depressed by the proposed use. However, he stated they
could find no justification for that statement. The property will not
be allowed to become run down.
No. 6 of the petition states that the use of this valuable property by a non-
profit organization would withdraw it from the tax rolls at a cost to the
city. He stated that they do not own the property. However, if they did ,
own it they would be pleased to pay a commensurate rate of tax to the city.
He stated that all the members of the board would welcome any of the
area residents to work with them in this project. He stated that the
home would not seta dangerous precedent, as claimed in the petition.
The boys will have 24 hour surveillance and if a boy did not fit. in with
the program, he would be returned to the proper authority.
Mr. .Theamster stated that they hope to establish a place which will become
a' model for the community and a credit to the neighborhood. They are looking
for a chance to prove themselves.
i
Mr. Kee stated that he would like to clarify the wording in the notice
of hearing. In reviewing -the zoning ordinance,Section 21.64.070 (lq) allows
a philanthropic or correctional institution with a use permit. He stated
that the first part of the justification for the use permit states that the
purpose is to provide a complete residential, therapeutic program planned to
encourage behaviorial changes which would enable the boys to return to their
homes or a foster home and this is where the wording used in the staff comment
sheet was taken from.
Mrs. Carla Wirth, northwest corner of lst and Grant Streets, stated that
the boys have been referred to as wards. of the court and then later on referred
to as children with problem's. Children with problems with their parents and
not with the law. She spoke in opposition to the project as, in her opinion,
it would change the character of the neighborhood and the request, if granted,
would not be in keeping with the current zoning. The Commission would be
accepting a responsibility for any misfortunes that might occur. She also
expressed concern over the real property values in the area.
Rev.Corwin Olds, 21.0 North Second Street, stated that he was speaking on
behalf of some of his neighbors. He stated that they have a compact neighborhood
and some of the residents have owned their homes fora long time and many are
retired people. He stated that although senior citizens have received quite
a bit of attention lately, he felt that they have some rights as well as the
`~ young people - the right to live in peace and with a feeling of security
in their neighborhood. He stated that it is something that the people in the
neighborhood do not want.
Mrs. Velma Olds, 210 North Second Street, also spoke in opposition to the
project. She cited the high taxes they now pay and every time a house is sold
in the area the taxes go up. This is what she had been told by the tax assessor
- $-
Mr. Dubois Rhine, 235 North 2nd Street, stated he would like to know
how two persons can take youngsters ages 12 to 15 and guarantee that
they are going to be model children.
Mr. Bob Welch, Star House, 12524 Paseo Flores, speaking on behalf of the
project, described the staffing of the home which would consist of a
married couple plus outside consultants as needed. He stated that he
has six children as many families do. He introduced the people who would
be in charge of the home and also advised that the Board members would
be on call and would serve as emergency backup.
Mrs. Yerkovich, 120 North 2nd Street, asked the applicants if they
would vote for such a project if it were going in next door to them.
Mrs.. Arlene Conway, 125 North 2nd Street, stated she was also concerned
about property values. She stated that she has a 16 year old daughter
. and she has worked with culturally deprived children and is aware of the
problems. She stated that these children would be from 12 to 17 and she
did not want them in her neighborhood.
Mr. Dan Bloomfield, 149 North 1st Street, asked the applicants how long
they had been looking for a residence in which to house the boys.
Mr. Theamster stated that they had been looking for a suitable location
for two years.
Mr. Bloomfield stated he was opposed to the project in this neighborhood
and questioned why they wanted to locate in Campbell. He stated that it
would seem to him that in two years they could have found a location in
their own neighborhood.
Mrs. Cheryl Hartley, 175 North 2nd Street, stated that she did not want
this home next door to her. The yard is too small and it would be awful
if it were there.
Vice Chairman Dickson asked Mr. Theamster about the size of the lot.
Mr. Theamster stated that it was 60' x 150' and has five bedrooms.
Mr. Boyd Butkins, 6052 Prince Drive, San Jose, stated there is no way
that the Planning Commission and City Council can guarantee the future of
a neighborhood. A family with six or eight children could move into the
house.
Vice Chairman Dickson asked Mr. Butkins if they have any similar homes
any place else. Mr. Butkins stated that this is-their first venture.
Mrs. Wanda Harms, 2nd and Latimer, stated that the applicants should look
further for a more suitable site - one with a larger yard.
Mr. Theamster requested that the Conunission grant a test trial period of
possibly a year in which to prove themselves. He was of the opinion that
they could establish and hold the respect of the community if given an
opportunity.
-9-
Vice Chairman Dickson asked Mr. Theamster if he would consider the
proposed operation philanthropic or correctional.
Mr. Theamster stated that he would think it would be philanthropic - most
of the interested people in the project are donating their time and they
are trying to back it themselves. !t is not their purpose to be a correctional
institution - it will not be a maximum security facility and will have
adequate direction.
Mr. Oliver Jenson, ]56 North 2nd Street, spoke in opposition to the project.
Vice Chairman Dickson stated that all the evidence will be considered before
a decision is r~;ade. Sometimes this involves looking at the property, as
well as considering testimony from the proponents and opponents.
Vice Chairman Dickson asked if anyone else wished to speak.There being no
one;wishing to be heard further, Commissioner Samuelson moved that the
pub lic hearing be closed, seconded by Commissioner Pack and unanimously adopted.
Commissioner Stewart stated that it is not clear that this project would
meet the criteria necessary-for justification for location in the R-1
.zone.
Mr. Kee stated, that in his opinion, this is an appropriate application.
It is within the authority of the Commission to either approve or deny
the application. This type of use is allowed in any zone with a use permit.
Commissioner Stewart stated that it is obvious that the neighborhood is
not right for this project. He did not feel that it would be fair to the
project to place it in this area. Before any project of this type can be
successful the compatibility with the area should be established.
Commissioner Pack stated that as a Planning Commissioner she felt the
primary concern should be for the residents of Campbell. She stated that
it is a worthwhile cause and she was in sympathy with the people trying to
get the project started. If the people in the area think that they do not
want the project in their neighborhood, then the Commission should take
their concerns very seriously.
Commissioner Campos stated that it is an admitted fact that institutions
do not do the job of rehabilitating youthful offenders. This is not a
new concept, but one that has been tried in San Jose. Halfway houses try
to solve the problem and there is a question as to whether or not this is
really a workable solution to the problem. He stated he was not entirely
in agreement with the rationale pointed out in the petition - some reasons
are very valid, and others may not be. He stated that he was not convinced
that this is the area for the project.
Vice Chairman Dickson stated that he was in agreement with the intent
of what the applicant wishes to do. He was of the opinion that 'the applicant
had not done the ground work required in the neighborhood to sell the project
to the residents. This should be done before such an application ever gets
before the Commission:
Resolution No. 1510 Commissioner Samuelson moved that the Planning
Commission adopt Resolution No. 1510 denying
UP 76-5 based upon the finding by the Commission
-10-
.that this operation would to some degree be detrimental to the health,
safety, peace, morals, confort or general welfare of persons residing or
working in the neighborhood of the proposed use, .Motion seconded by
Commissioner Pack and adopted by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Campos, Stewart, Samuelson, Pack, Dickson
NOES: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: Hebard and Chairman Lubeckis
Mr. Kee advised the applicants that they have the right of appeal to the
City Council within ten days from the date of this decision.
Vice Chairman Dickson declared a ten minute recess. Meeting reconvened.
Pl) 75-4 This is the time and place for continued public
- Campbell Building hearing on the application of the Campbell Building
and Investment Co. and Investment Company for approval of plans,
'. elevations, and development schedule to allow
construction of an office building to be located
- on property known as 54 North Central Avenue in a
P-D Zoning District.
Mr. Kee advised that the staff recommends a continuance to the first
meeting in August and that Mr. Helms would give a status report.
Mr. Helms, 9cting Director of Public Works, stated that there has been
considerable activity on the part of the consultant and the staf•F in the
plans for the parking district. A series of meetings have been held with the
property owners and he would expect that the matter would be determined
within the next ninety days.
Commissioner Stewart moved that PD 75-4 be continued to the first meeting
in August, seconded by Commissioner Samuelson and unanimously adopted.
PD 76-2 This is the time and place for public hearing
Lounsberry, Gary D. to consider the application of Gary D. Lounsberry for
a permit to operate a game arcade on property known
as 801 West Hamilton Avenue in a neighborhood commercial
district in a P-D Zoning District.
Vice Chairman Dickson asked Mr. Kee for his comments.
Mr. Kee advised that the staff recommends approval subject to two conditions:
1'. Applicant to submit plans of building interior to building department
indicating all exits, etc.
2. Applicant to submit plans of building interior and layout of machines to the
fire department.
This .is an allowed use in a C-l, Neighborhood Commercial, Zoning District
subject to the applicant securing a use permit and this proposal is planned
to be located in a Planned Development Zone, Neighborhood Shopping Center,
known as Hamilton Square. -11-
The staff recommends approval subject to the two conditions.
Vice Chairman Dickson declared the public hearing open and asked if
anyone wished to speak for or against the application.
Mr. Gary Lounsberry, appiicant,~explained the .type of operation and the
games that would be involved. They stress a family participation operation
and have a list of rules which must be followed. The hours of operation
would be 12 noon to g p.m~~, Monday through Thursday, 12 to 10 p.m. on Fridays
and 11 a.m. to 10 p.m. Saturday and Sunday. In ,the summertime they propose
to stay open until 12 p.m. After 10 p.m. children would have to show identi-
fication because of the curfew.
Commissioner Pack asked Mr. Kee that in his opinion would this be a
compatible use with the other merchants adjacent to this store.
Mr. lCee stated that this is proposed to be located in a convenience shopping
center and it would seem to fit in with the other type of uses already
. there. There is a game center in the Prune Yard which has 6 to 8 games.
The land use shown on the General Plan is commercial and just across the
street there is another neighborhood shopping center - The Riverside Shopping
Center.
Mr. Kee further advised that if the .Commission does have a concern they
may wish to put a time limitation on the approval in order that it could
come back for review.
Vice Chairman Dickson asked Mr. Kee if the commercial land use would allow
this type of operation and Mr. Kee stated that it would.
There being no one wishing to speak further, Commissioner Stewart moved
that the public hearing be closed, seconded by Commissioner Pack and
unanimously adopted.
Resolution PJo. 1511 Commissioner Samuelson moved, that the Planning
Commission adopt Resolution No. 1511 recommending
that the City Council approve PD 76-2, application
of Gary D. Lounsberry subject to the conditions
recommended by staff, and with a review in two years
by the Commission from the date of final approval.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Pack and adopted by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Campos, Stewart, Samuelson, Pack, Dickson
NOES: Commissioners: None
ABSENT: Commissioners: Hebard, Chairman Lubeckis
PD 76-3 This is the time and place for public hearing
Sims. Alan to consider the application of Alan Sims to convert
a residential building into a restaurant and to expan~
the existing building. which is located on property
known as 866 East Campbell Avenue in a PD Zone.
-12-
Mr. Kee advised that the staff has received a request from the applicant
for a continuance to the next regular meeting.
Vice Chairman Dickson declared the public hearing open and asked if
anyone wished to speak for or against the application.
There being no one present wishing to speak, Commissioner Stewart moved
that the public hearing be closed, seconded by Commissioner Campos
and unanimously adopted.
GP 76-Z-C This is the time and place for continued public
West Valley hearing to consider the future use of the West Valley
College Site College Site.
Mr. Kee advised that the staff recommends a continuance until the first
meeting in July. There is a meeting scheduled between the Elementary
`~ School District Board, the City Manager's office, the Planning Commission
and City Council to review possible development of the college site.
Thine might be a need for more than one study session and the continuance
to the first meeting in July would provide time for staff and other
interested parties to meet and work out recommendations for amendment to the
General Plan.
There was some discussion as to the possibility of the college moving
their headquarters back to Campbell. Commissioner Pack reported that she
attended a meeting with the college. board and there was considerable dis-
cussion and the administration indicated a willingness to conduct a'study
into the possibility of converting the portable units on the campus_on
Latimer Avenue into administration type buildings and this study will be
forthcoming. No definite decision has been made.
Commissioner Pack moved that GP 76-2-C be continued to the first meeting
in July, seconded by Commissioner Samuelson and unanimously adopted.
MISCELLANEOUS
Housing Needs Vice Chairman Dickson asked Mr. Kee for his comments.
Assessment Study
Mr. Kee stated that the Housing Needs Assessment
Study was one of the projects approved for funding under
the City's first-year application under the H.C.D.
Program. After soliciting proposals, the firm of
Ruth, Going and Curtis, Inc. was chosen to complete
the study.
It should be noted by the Planning Commission that a very important aspect
of this study is that it provides base information for the preparation by
Staff of the Housing Element of the General Plan and the preparation of
Environmental tmpact Reports related to annexations which are now required.
Mr-. Kee advised the Commission that the consultant was present to answer any
questions that the Conmission may have regarding the study.
Vice Chairman Dickson asked if the consultant wished to make-a presentation.
-13-
Mr. Leo Ruth of the firm Ruth, Going and Curtis, Inc. was introduced.
Mr. Ruth indicated that his staff was prepared to discuss the manner in
which the study was developed and answer questions. He then introduced
Mr. Roger Mobley, the planner in charge of conducting the study.
Mr. Mobley presented a brief description of the nature of the study,
how it was prepared, and some of the main conclusions and asked if there
were any questions.
Vice Chairman Dickson asked if same of the projections for the number
of low income families expected to reside in Campbell was due to natural
increase, immigration, or both. Mr. Jim Gibson,a planner for the
consultant, stated .that the population projections were based solely on
the existing Campbell population.
After some further discussion, the Commission decided that addition a]
time' for revi~ was in order.
5
Commissioner Campos moved that the Housing Needs Assessment Study be
continued to the next regular meeting in order that it could be reviewed by the
full Commission at the next regular meeting and that the study be forwarded
to the Council as an informational item..
Motion seconded by Commissioner Pack and unanimously adopted.
ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Samuelson moved that the meeting
be adjourned, seconded by Commissioner Pack and
unanimously adopted. The meeting was adjourned
at 10:47 p.m. -
APPROVED J. DuWayne Dickson
Vice Chairman
ATTEST: Arthur A. Kee
Secretary
-14-