PC Min - 01/11/2011CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
7:30 P.M.
JANUARY 11, 2011
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY
The Planning Commission meeting of January 11, 2011, was called to order at 7:30
p.m., in the Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California by Chair
Roseberry and the following proceedings were had, to wit:
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present
Commissioners Absent
Staff Present:
Chair:
Vice Chair:
Commissioner:
Commissioner:
Commissioner:
Commissioner:
Bob Roseberry
Theresa Alster
Mark Ebner
Elizabeth Gibbons
Paul Resnikoff
Philip C. Reynolds, Jr.
None
Community Development
Director:
Planning Manager:
Associate Planner:
City Attorney:
Recording Secretary:
Kirk Heinrichs
Paul Kermoyan
Steve Prosser
William Seligmann
Corinne Shinn
SPECIAL PRESENTATION TO 2010 PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR
Chair Roseberry:
• Presented a plaque to 2010 Planning Commission Chair Gibbons commemorating
her year of service as Chair.
• Said that she was a great Chair and is an important part of this Commission.
• Added that while he does not always agree with her, she always looks into the
details and gives a lot of thought to her positions.
• Stated that he has respect that she knows what she is doing and is glad she is here
on the Commission.
Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for January 11, 2011 Page 2
Commissioner Gibbons:
• Said that she enjoys being on the Planning Commission.
• Added that she loves the time spent debating issues, sometimes disagreeing but
always with respect, and pointed out that that people don't always have to agree.
• Thanked the Commissioner and staff for all of their support.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion: Upon motion by Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by `
Commissioner Reynolds, the Planning Commission minutes of
the meeting of December 14, 2010, were approved. (6-0)
COMMUNICATIONS
There were no communications items.
AGENDA MODIFICATIONS OR POSTPONEMENTS
There were no agenda modifications or postponements.
ORAL REQUESTS
There were no oral requests.
***
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Commissioner Reynolds advised that he would need to recuse from Items 1 and 2 due
to a professional conflict of interest. He left the dais and chambers.
Chair Roseberry read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record as follows:
PLN2010-121 Public Hearing to consider the application of Ms. Charnel
James, C. James, on behalf of NSA Wireless, Inc., for a Conditional Use
Permit (PLN2010-121) to allow the installation of aroof-mounted
wireless telecommunications facility on property located at 2959
Winchester Boulevard in a C-2-S (General Commercial)
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 a Conditional Use Permit to allow new rooftop
antennas and related equipment on a two-story commercial building located at
2959 Winchester Boulevard.
Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for January 11, 2011 Page 3
• Said that the site is located on the west side of Winchester between W. Sunnyoaks
and Bedal.
• Stated that the Zoning designation is C-2 (General Commercial) and the General
Plan land use designation is General Commercial, which allows this use with
issuance of a Conditional Use Permit.
• Reported that the new equipment would be located on the northeast and southern
elevations of the building with the rooftop equipment cabinet located at the center
of the roof. The maximum height is 75 feet, which complies with the height
restrictions.
• Pointed out that the Ordinance encourages placement on existing structures.
Stealth mounting of technology is encouraged. While this proposal does not qualify
as stealth, use of RF-friendly roof screening will obscure the equipment.
• Advised that a required engineer's report states that the RF exposure levels comply
with allowable standards.
• Recommended approval and advised that the applicant is present this evening.
Commissioner Ebner asked how many existing wireless installations are located on
this property.
Planner Steve Prosser advised that there are none currently. This is a new installation
at a new location.
Commissioner Alster presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as
follows:
• Said that SARC reviewed this proposal on December 14, 2010, and recommended
expanding the equipment screening to all four sides.
• Added that the applicant has revised their plans accordingly.
Chair Roseberry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1.
Chair Roseberry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1.
Commissioner Gibbons:
• Said that this proposal has been challenging for staff to deal with as it involves
direct line-of-sight technology used by Clearwire.
• Said that previously the Commission asks to see a carrier's master plan.
• Cautioned that she does not want to see Campbell take on an unfair burden of
such installations within its jurisdiction.
• Reported that staff has done an excellent job in reviewing this project as has
SARC.
• Pointed out that the equipment stands six feet above the existing parapet.
• Added that this building has an existing parapet and could support a stealth
installation. What is proposed has no relation to the design of the building.
• Advised that it is difficult to support this application as its design does not meet the
intent of the Ordinance. She said that she is not sure this is the right location.
• Asked staff if they have received a master plan for this provider.
Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for January 11, 2011 Page 4
Planner Steve Prosser said that the master plan for Clearwire was provided as part of
a previous site approval. That plan included this site. He added that this is the last
application from Clearwire. They are now built out for Campbell.
Commissioner Ebner said that he too has difficulty with this and questions why it is not
stealth. What are the hurdles that kept it from being stealth?
Planner Steve Prosser said that staff had also questioned that in its review comments.
Chair Roseberry re-opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1.
Ms. Charnel James, Applicant, Clearwire Representative:
• Said that they had worked hard to have this installation counted as stealth.
• Added that they tried to incorporate as much as possible with the building's
architecture.
• Stated that what they have here is as best as can be done with this technology.
• Pointed out that increasing the parapet of this entire building would be financially
infeasible.
Commissioner Gibbons said that the line-of-sight technology is the problem.
Ms. Charnel James agreed. She said that there are five dishes on this site. It is a hub
site that connects to other sites.
Chair Roseberry re-closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No.1.
Commissioner Resnikoff:
• Said that he agrees with SARC's recommendations.
• Pointed out that when looking at this building on this site, existing trees would help
to block the visibility of this equipment.
• Said that it doesn't stand out as creating an eyesore to him and he doesn't have the
same issues against this request as other Commissioners do.
Chair Roseberry:
• Said that this building is off Winchester and within an industrial area. It is tucked
back in there pretty far so he has no problem with this request.
• Added that they will do a good job of screening.
Commissioner Alster:
• Said she agrees with both Commissioner Resnikoff and Chair Roseberry on this
issue.
• Added that she is impressed with the proposed screening as depicted on the
exhibit. It matches what is there in this industrial area.
• Stated that she thinks this is sufficiently stealth and is fine.
Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for January 11, 2011 Page 5
Commissioner Gibbons cautioned that there is an expectation that the material used to
wrap (screen) will match the existing architecture.
Chair Roseberry said it would probably not be a perfect match but that a reasonable
effort will be made to match colors. He said that the average passer by going 35 miles
per hour will not notice this equipment.
Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Resnikoff, seconded by
Commissioner Alster, the Planning Commission adopted
Resolution No. 4005 approving a Conditional Use Permit
(PLN2010-121) to allow the installation of aroof-mounted wireless
telecommunications facility on property located at 2959
Winchester Boulevard, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Alster, Resnikoff and Roseberry
NOES: Ebner and Gibbons
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Reynolds
Chair Roseberry advised that this action is final unless appealed in writing to the City
Clerk within 10 calendar days.
***
Chair Roseberry read Agenda Item No. 2 into the record as follows:
2. PLN2010-248 Public Hearing to consider the application of Mr. David Yocke,
Yocke, D. on behalf of Trillium, for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN2010-
248) to allow the continued operation and modification of an
existing wireless telecommunications facility on property located
at 700 W. Hamilton Avenue in a C-2 (General Commercial)
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 has requested a continuance to the February 8th meeting
to allow design modifications based on recommendations made by SARC.
• Added that the applicant is attempting to modify the location, placement and
mounting techniques.
Chair Roseberry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2.
Motion: The Planning Commission CONTINUED TO ITS MEETING OF
FEBRUARY 8, 2011, the consideration of a Conditional Use Permit
(PLN2010-248) to allow the continued operation and modification
Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for January 11, 2011 Page 6
of an existing wireless telecommunications facility on property
located at 700 W. Hamilton Avenue. (5-0-0-1; Commissioner
Reynolds abstained)
Commissioner Reynolds returned to the chambers and dais at the conclusion of
Agenda Items 1 and 2.
***
Chair Roseberry read Agenda Item No. 3 into the record as follows:
3. PLN2010-242 Public Hearing to consider the City-Initiated Text Amendment
Staff (PLN2010-242) to amend CMC Chapter 21.62 (Appeals) to
modify the processing of appeals. Staff is recommending that
this project be deemed Categorically Exempt under CEQA.
Tentative City Council Meeting Date: February 1, 2011. Project
Planner: Paul Kermoyan, Planning Manager
Mr. Paul Kermoyan, Planning Manager, presented the staff report as follows:
• Advised that this is aCity-initiated Text Amendment.
• Reported that Council and staff identified the appeals procedure as something to
be looked at again.
• Said that currently Director-level decisions can be appealed to the Planning
Commission. At that point, there are no more appeal provisions.
• Added that former Code provisions allowed appeals to Council. That changed with
the 2004 Zoning Code Update.
• Said that the issue is a due process issue that would prevent a concerned person
(appellant) from approaching elected officials versus an appointed
board/commission.
• Reported that the majority of similarly-sized communities allow for more than one
level of appeal.
• Listed the categories of Director-level approvals as including Administrative
Planned Developments; Administrative Site and Architectural Review Permits;
Signs; Tree Removal Permits; Fences; and Reasonable Accommodations.
• Said that the question is raised as to whether this change might encourage more
appeals and perhaps frivolous appeals.
• Advised that since 2004, there have only been eight (8) appeals filed on Director's
decisions, which is one per year on average. Staff doesn't anticipate a great
number of added appeals.
• Said that issues considered is the cost to applicants and/or potential delays to their
project.
• Reminded that the City charges a nominal ($200) appeal fee.
• Said that the benefits of allowing more than one level of appeal on Director
decisions is it allows consistent and equitable process to reach Council, the City's
ultimate legislative body.
Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for January 11, 2011 Page 7
• Pointed out that the attached draft amendments have been provided and it shows
that not a lot of changes are necessary.
• Said that the Commission would forward a recommendation on to Council for final
action.
Commissioner Gibbons:
• Said that she supports this amendment as everyone should be able to go before
their elected officials.
• Said that she recalls the reasons behind the change in process with the 2004
Update as being: to expedite the process and reduce or stop frivolous appeals.
There were a lot of good intentions there.
• Cautioned that there have been fewer projects in the last few years, which could be
one reason that there have also been fewer appeals.
• Reiterated her support for this amendment.
Chair Roseberry clarified that this amendment only affects Director's decisions and not
anything else.
Director Kirk Heinrichs said yes.
Chair Roseberry said that comparing the number of appeals filed prior to 2004 to those
filed since should take into consideration the total number of applications filed during
those time frames to best establish an appeals to decisions ratio.
Chair Roseberry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3.
Mr. Tony Andary, Resident on Adrien Drive:
• Reminded that he came before the Planning Commission last year.
• Added that he is encouraged by this change in the appeals regulations.
• Said he wanted to share his experience with the appeals process.
• Reported that he suffered under the previous process.
• Pointed out that process is a part of the rule of law.
• Said that the Planning Commission is an appointed body. When a land owner and
all of his neighbors disagree with a Planning Commission decision, there is
something wrong when they cannot go before the elected officials (Council).
Chair Roseberry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3.
Commissioner Reynolds:
• Said that he would support this Text Amendment.
• Agreed that it is not good government to have an appointed board or commission
make final decisions since they are not elected.
Commissioner Resnikoff:
• Said that the current process is limiting access to elected officials.
• Said that cost should not be an issue to limiting access to public officials.
Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for January 11, 2011 Page 8
Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by
Commissioner Ebner, the Planning Commission adopted
Resolution No. 4006 recommending approval of a Text
Amendment (PLN2010-242) to amend CMC Chapter 21.62
(Appeals) to modify the processing of appeals, by the following
roll call vote:
AYES: Alster, Ebner, Gibbons, Resnikoff, Reynolds and
Roseberry
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Chair Roseberry advised that this item would be considered by Council at its meeting
of February 1, 2011, for final action.
***
REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
Director Kirk Heinrichs provided the following additions to the written Director's Report:
• The joint study session on parking to be held between Council and the Planning
Commission will take place on February 1, 2011, at 6:30 p.m. The report will be
provided to the Planning Commission with the next packet to allow sufficient time in
advance to review it.
• Reported that there are five applicants for the vacant seat on the Planning
Commission. Council will interview these applicants in the next few weeks.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m. to
Planning Commission Meeting of January 25, 2011.
~~
SUBMITTED BY:
o ' Shinn, Recording Secretary
., t1
,, ~ ~ '
APPROVED BY: .~=~h ~4~ ~-
Bob Roseberry, it
~'
ATTEST:
Kirk• ei ichs, Secretary
the next Regular