Loading...
PC Min - 12/14/2010CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY DECEMBER 14, 2010 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS The Planning Commission meeting of Decembe p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Gibbons and the following proceedings were had r 14, 2010, was called to order at 7:30 Street, Campbell, California by Chair to wit: ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chair: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioners Absent: None Staff Present: Planning Manager: Associate Planner: Assistant Planner: City Attorney: Recording Secretary Elizabeth Gibbons Bob Roseberry Theresa Alster Mark Ebner Paul Resnikoff Philip C. Reynolds, Jr. Paul Kermoyan Steve Prosser Daniel Fama William Seligmann Corinne Shinn APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Upon motion by Commissioner Alster, seconded by Commissioner Reynolds, the Planning Commission minutes of the meeting of November 9, 2010, were approved. (4-0-0-2; Chair Gibbons and Commissioner Ebner abstained) COMMUNICATIONS There were no communications items. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for December 14, 2010 Page 2 AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS There were no agenda modifications or postponements. ORAL REQUESTS Councilmember Jeffrey Cristina: • Said he stopped by this evening to thank the members of the Planning Commission for the opportunity to serve with them on the Commission during the last year. • Added that it has been a privilege to serve. The opportunity offered an excellent learning experience. PUBLIC HEARINGS *** Commissioner Resnikoff advised that he would need to recuse from Item 1 as he lives within the noticing distance. He left the dais and chambers. Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record as follows: PLN2010-203 Continued Public Hearing (from the meeting of November 9, Aced, B. 2010) to consider the application of Mr. Brian Aced for a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2010-203) to allow a Modification to a Side Yard Setback to allow a second story addition on property located at 175 N. Second Street in an R-1- 6 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission action final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Steve Prosser, Associate Planner Mr. Steve Prosser, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking Site and Architectural Review Permit approval to allow the modification to a side yard setback to allow a second story addition. • Described the project site as being on the west side of Second Street between Grant and Latimer Avenues. It is surrounded on all sides by single-family residences and is zoned R-1-6 (Single Family Residential). • Explained that the addition includes extending along existing setbacks and use of matching lap siding and wood shingle roofing. Anew bay window is proposed for the front elevation. • Reported that the five required findings to support this setback can be made in favor. • Recommended that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA to reflect an addition to an existing structure and that the Commission adopt a resolution approving this Site and Architectural Review Permit. • Said that the applicant is present this evening. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for December 14, 2010 Page 3 Commissioner Alster presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: • Said that SARC reviewed this project at its meeting of October 12, 2010. • Added that SARC was supportive of the second story addition; found that the bay window resulted in minimal impacts on the style of the home; and that the proposed addition respected the existing home's design. • Added that some corrections to the site plan were requested. Chair Gibbons asked staff if those changes SARC requested have been addressed. Planner Steve Prosser said that they had been addressed with the revised drawings. Chair Gibbons asked why a Variance is not required here. Planner Steve Prosser explained that with the Zoning Code Update in 2004, two areas of the R-1 Zoning were changed to establish policy exceptions to setbacks and FAR to allow decisions via the Site and Architectural Review Permit rather than requiring the Variance process. Chair Gibbons explained that a Variance is generally very difficult to obtain. She pointed out that the R-1 Zoning District discourages second floor balconies and should incorporate solid rather than open railings. She asked if this issue had been discussed with this project. Planner Steve Prosser said no. He added that staff had discouraged inclusion of a balcony along the side elevation and limit use of balconies to one at the back. Planning Manager Paul Kermoyan added that this balcony was discussed at staff level. An open-railed balcony could be supported as proposed for several reasons including that it is recessed at the back; shielded by a structure and is on a parcel with a deep backyard. Chair Gibbons said that there have been consistent discussions on previous projects on open rail balconies. Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Commissioner Alster said that she and Commission Roseberry conducted a site visit and spoke with the adjacent next-door neighbor, who would be most impacted. She said that no concerns exist. Chair Gibbons said that it is very important to have consistency in the review of balconies. She said it would be helpful to have the meeting minutes reflect this discussion to indicate that an open-rail balcony has been duly analyzed and Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for December 14, 2010 Page 4 determined that existing conditions; the distance to adjoining properties; and a lack of objections supports this request and it could be found to be acceptable. Planning Manager Paul Kermoyan said those facts are so noted. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alster, seconded by Commissioner Roseberry, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4002 approving a Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2010-203) to allow a Modification to a Side Yard Setback to allow a second story addition on property located at 175 N. Second Street, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alster, Ebner, Gibbons, Reynolds and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Resnikoff Chair Gibbons advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Commissioner Resnikoff returned to the chambers and dais at the conclusion of Agenda Item No. 1. *** Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record as follows: 2. PLN2010-245 Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. Daniel Sisto for Sisto, D. a two-year Extension of Approval (PLN2010-245) of a previously-approved Planned Development Permit (PLN2007- 66) to construct four single-family residences in conjunction with a Zone Change to P-D (Planned Development); Tentative Parcel Map to create four private lots and one common lot and a Tree Removal Permit to remove one protected tree on property located at 1161 Virginia Avenue in a P-D (Planned Development) Zoning District. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was approved for this project. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: January 18. 2011. Project Planner: Steve Prosser, Associate Planner Mr. Steve Prosser, Associate Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the applicant is seeking atwo-year Extension of Approval for a previously-approved Planned Development Permit for four small lot single-family residences. • Explained that the original project was reviewed by the Planning Commission on September 25, 2007. The project included a Zone Change to P-D (Planned Development); a Planned Development Permit; a Parcel Map and a Tree Removal Permit. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the Zone Change. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for December 14, 2010 Page 5 • Added that on November 7, 2007, the City Council voted 3 to 1 to approve said Zone Change as well as the PD Permit, Parcel Map and Tree Removal Permit to allow four residential lots with one common lot and construction of four detached single-family residences. • Reported that by legislation California law automatically extended map approvals, this extended this approval through November 7, 2012. • Described the project site as being on the west Side of Virginia, north of Bucknall. The original project included the demolition of the existing residence, removal of an Oak tree; and construction of four small lot detached single-family residences. • Explained that the applicant had the burden of proof that sufficient effort to begin construction of the project had been undertaken. It was found that the current economic condition provides that proof. • Recommended that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to Council to extend this approval. • Reported that aone-year extension can be issued by the Director. • Recommended that the Commission adopt a resolution recommending Council grant atwo-year Extension of Approval. Chair Gibbons: • Advised that since this request is for an Extension of Approval, it did not return to SARC. • Explained that this project had been challenging for the Commission when originally considered. • Pointed out that this property falls within the San Tomas Area Neighborhood Plan (STANP) jurisdiction and has an Overlay Zoning of R-2. Additionally, there is the presence of a very large oak tree. • Reported that the discussion of this project at the original Planning Commission hearing was a lively one. The vote at the time was 3 to 2 against the project as proposed. Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Ms. Joanna Mazeur, Resident on Torero Plaza: • Reported that she moved into the neighborhood in 2009 so she was not a participant in the original hearing. • Advised that she had been told by neighbors that the tree was staying and that the four homes were not approved. • Added that none of the neighbors were aware that this project was ever actually approved. • Expressed concern over privacy impacts with this project and said she shares many of the concerns initially raised by the neighborhood at the original public hearing. • Said that they all are concerned about lost privacy in having two-story homes looking onto their yards. Chair Gibbons asked staff to explain the notification process. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for December 14, 2010 Page 6 Planner Steve Prosser: • Reported that there were multiple notifications with the original project in 2007. • The Notice of Intent for the Mitigated Negative Declaration was published in the Campbell Express newspaper as well as posted at City Hall and on the website. • Added that the original project public hearing date was published in the Campbell Express and 300-foot notices were mailed and posted at City Hall and on the website. • Continued that for this evening's Extension of Approval request, a hearing notice was published in the Campbell Express and a new 300-foot notice was mailed and posted at City Hall and on the website. Commissioner Roseberry asked staff to elaborate on other alternatives that existed for this property as the subject lot is larger than its adjacent properties. Planner Steve Prosser: • Explained that the subject parcel is twice the size of the standard lots in the area. • Reported that the applicant had the option to split this parcel into two lots with the original R-D (Residential-Duplex) Zoning designation. That lot split would have allowed two duplex buildings with a total of four residential units. • While the setbacks would be smaller than what is proposed here, the FAR would have also been reduced. Chair Gibbons: • Clarified that the R-D Zoning allows two units per standard parcel. • Added that the Planning Commission has the ability to review this request for an Extension of Approval in terms of context. • Said that a very complex analysis was performed originally. Planner Steve Prosser advised that the established setback standards are a minimum and greater setbacks can be required. He pointed out that the lot split from one parcel into two would have been a Director level decision with construction of the duplexes handled via building permits. Mr. Safe Metanovic, Resident on Torero Plaza: • Reported that he thought the project was never approved. • Added that the new buildings would be located just five feet from the fence. • Pointed out that he has a pool in his yard and fears the loss of privacy his family has enjoyed all of their lives. • Stated that the removal of the large tree is of concern. • Said that this project is not consistent with the rest of the houses in this neighborhood. • Suggested that the Commissioners come by the property in person to check out how this project would affect the neighbors. • Stressed his belief that the impact would be great. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for December 14, 2010 Page 7 • Said that while there is a big fence in place, it will not help against atwo-story structure. Chair Gibbons clarified that the setback is actually 15 feet. It could have been just a five-foot setback as allowed by the Zoning but the developer agreed to incorporate a 15-foot setback. Mr. Safe Metanovic added that the previous owner had the oak tree evaluated prior to sale and no problem was found with its condition at that time. Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Commissioner Ebner asked if the City Attorney would clarify whether this review for an Extension of Approval allows the Commission to delve into specifics and make changes to the original project. City Attorney William Seligmann: • Clarified that the Subdivision Map was automatically extended per State law while the Planned Development Permit is controlled by the City's Zoning Ordinance. • Explained that the standard for an Extension of Approval is to find that good faith efforts were undertaken by the applicant to move forward with their project in the time allowed. That is what is to be looked at here and not a change in substance. Chair Gibbons said that limitation comes as a surprise to her. She added that it has always been her understanding that anything that comes back to the Commission represents a new entitlement and re-opens the whole project to possible change. Commissioner Ebner reminded that the project as originally considered was quite contentious. He added that he didn't recall any mention that the oak tree was diseased. If it was not deemed to be diseased, does that change the dynamics here? Commissioner Roseberry asked if the original permit has already expired. Planner Steve Prosser: • Said that since the applicant properly filed for an Extension of Approval 30 days prior to the original expiration date, it is not considered to be expired. • Added that the PD Permit is on hold at this time until this Extension is reviewed and a decision made. • Stated that the Tree Removal Permit is tied to the PD Permit. Commissioner Roseberry asked if the Tree Removal Permit is invalidated. Planner Steve Prosser said that it too is on hold until the decision on the PD Permit Extension of Approval is complete. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for December 14, 2010 Page 8 Planning Manager Paul Kermoyan clarified that the PD Permit is now expired but the request for Extension was properly submitted prior to the expiration date. He asked staff if the Tree Removal Permit is contingent on the map being recorded. Planner Steve Prosser replied no. The Tree Removal Permit is tied to the PD Permit. Commissioner Resnikoff said it appears that the Tree Removal was approved because its location prevents construction of the residences due to its placement and not because it was diseased. Commissioner Ebner asked if an independent arborist was utilized to evaluate this tree. Planner Steve Prosser said that athird-party evaluation of the tree was prepared that was independent of the applicant's. The results were provided to Council. That arborist recommended removal due to structural defects due to poor maintenance. Commissioner Roseberry: • Said that he remembers a contentious hearing on this project and that he was in the minority that night. • Expressed appreciation for those neighbors in attendance this evening to speak to this project. • Reminded that the tree to be removed is on this owner's property. • Reported that the subject property is close to his house and he drives by it often. • Pointed out that there are duplexes further up the street so he didn't see this project as being that far out of the mix of what is nearby. • Concluded that his original opinion is still valid on that point. Chair Gibbons said she saw a smaller single-family home on this property when she originally visited the site. Commissioner Reynolds: • Stated that he echoes the comments of Commissioner Roseberry. • Pointed out that he was not yet on the Planning Commission at the time of the original hearing. • Advised that he would be supporting this Extension of Approval request. • Said that he looks forward to input from the community as this project moves forward. • Added that he would like to go on the record in asking the City Council to evaluate the potential of expanding the public noticing distance. Commissioner Alster: • Said that she also was not on the Commission at the time of the original approval. • Stated that it appears the applicant has been focused and has shown a good faith effort to move this project forward. • Added that the guidelines to support an Extension of Approval have been met. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for December 14, 2010 Page 9 • Announced that she would be supporting this Extension. Chair Gibbons pointed out that the Ordinance hasn't changed since the original approval. She asked staff to follow up with the required third-party survey of the oak tree when this Extension moves on to Council for final action. Commissioner Roseberry asked if the end date for the two-year Extension of Approval is in line with the original expiration date. Planner Steve Prosser said not as currently written. The two-year Extension would be in effect for two years from the anticipated January 18, 2011, Council action date. Commissioner Roseberry suggested a condition to align the expiration date for this Extension of Approval to November 7, 2012, to extend it from the original approval date. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roseberry, seconded by Commissioner Reynolds, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4003 recommending City Council approval of a two-year Extension of Approval (PLN2010-245) of a previously- approved Planned Development Permit (PLN2007-66) to construct four single-family residences in conjunction with a Zone Change to P-D (Planned Development); Tentative Parcel Map to create four private lots and one common lot and a Tree Removal Permit to remove one protected tree on property located at 1161 Virginia Avenue, with the following change: • The Extension of Approval date will be changed to November 7, 2012, to match the original project approval date; by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alster, Ebner, Resnikoff, Reynolds and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Gibbons Chair Gibbons advised that item would be considered by City Council at its meeting of January 18, 2011. *** Commissioner Reynolds advised that he would have to recuse from Item No. 3 due to a professional conflict of interest. He left the dais and chambers. Chair Gibbons read Agenda Item No. 3 into the record as follows: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for December 14, 2010 Page 10 3. PLN2010-43 Public Hearing to consider the application of Ms. Michelle Weller, M. Weller, on behalf of Clearwire, LLC, for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2010-43) to allow the installation of a wireless telecommunications facility on an electrical transmission tower on property located at 765 McGlincy Lane in an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District. Staff is recommending that this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA. Planning Commission action final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Project Planner: Daniel Fama, Assistant Planner Mr. Daniel Fama, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Advised that the project site is on McGlincy Lane, east of Union Avenue and north of the McGlincy Industrial Condos. It is a single-story industrial building and the site has a public utility easement with a PG&E tower on it. • Added that the property is zoned M-1-S (Light Industrial) and the General Plan Land Use designation is Light Industrial. • Said that the applicant seeks a Conditional Use Permit to allow the installation of new wireless equipment that includes three panel antennas, three microwave dishes; a GPS Antenna and an equipment cabinet. • Explained that the Code limits the maximum height to 45 feet unless an Exception is processed. The Zoning Code stipulates the requirement for a technical report that substantiates any height in excess of the allowed 45-foot maximum. This report was then reviewed by a consultant, who made the evaluation that the 95-foot requested height was not justified by said report. • Added that following the consultant's overview, Clearwire re-reviewed their proposal and reduced their maximum height to 45 feet. • Said that based on a maximum height limit to 45 feet, staff is recommending approval. Chair Gibbons asked if the conditions of approval for this application limit the height to a 45-foot maximum and therefore the project falls within existing ordinance standards. Planner Daniel Fama replied yes. Commissioner Alster presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: • Advised that SARC reviewed this application on November 9, 2010, and was in support of the use of this PG&E tower. • Added that the requested height was found to be inconsistent. • Required an independent consultant be secured to evaluate the proposed added height above 45 feet to substantiate the necessity for any extra height. Chair Gibbons opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Chair Gibbons closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for December 14, 2010 Page 11 Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Roseberry, seconded by Commissioner Resnikoff, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4004 approving a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2010-43) to allow the installation of a wireless telecommunications facility on an electrical transmission tower on property located at 765 McGlincy Lane at a maximum height of 45 feet, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alster, Ebner, Gibbons, Resnikoff, and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Reynolds Chair Gibbons advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk within 10 calendar days. Commissioner Reynolds returned to the chambers and dais at the conclusion of Item No. 3. *** MISCELLANEOUS 4. Election of 2011 Chair and Vice Chair. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alster, seconded by Commissioner Reynolds, the Planning Commission elected Commissioner Roseberry to serve as Planning Commission Chair for 2011. (6-0) Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Ebner, seconded by Commissioner Roseberry, the Planning Commission elected Commissioner Alster to serve as Planning Commission Vice Chair for 2011. (6-0) *** REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Planning Manager Paul Kermoyan had no additions to the written report. Commissioner Roseberry wanted to remind everyone of the pending project at 700 Gale Avenue. Chair Gibbons advised staff that it had been the practice in the past for staff to provide previous meeting minutes for any items returning to the Commission. She added that Planner Steve Prosser did an excellent job explaining the issues of Item No. 1. Planner Steve Prosser reiterated that the 2004 Code Update liberalized the findings for granting Extensions. Before that time, they had to make their cases. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for December 14, 2010 Page 12 Commissioner Ebner advised that City staff has sent a warning notice to KFC on Winchester Boulevard for enforcement of their illegal signage. They have been asked to remove excessive temporary and landscaping signs. He said they have continuously abused the signing allowances despite the fact they were granted extra signage. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting of January 11, 2011. SUBMITTED BY: Corin inn, Recording Secretary ~~ ~ f C APPROVED BY: ~ ~'L- '"~~ ~~ e Gibbons, Chair -' - ~ ATTEST: ~ '~ Pau ermoya Acting Secretary