Loading...
PC Min - 04/26/2011CITY OF CAMPBELL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7:30 P.M. The Planning Commission meeting of April 26, 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: APRIL 26, 2011 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY ROLL CALL Commissioners Present Chair: Vice Chair: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Commissioner: Bob Roseberry Theresa Alster Brian Brennan Mark Ebner Elizabeth Gibbons Paul Resnikoff Commissioners Absent Staff Present: APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner: Community Development Director: Planning Manager: Associate Planner: Assistant Planner: City Attorney: Recording Secretary: Philip C. Reynolds, Jr. Kirk Heinrichs Paul Kermoyan Steve Prosser Daniel Fama William Seligmann Corinne Shinn Motion: Upon motion by Commissioner Alster, seconded by Commissioner Resnikoff, the Planning Commission minutes of the meeting of April 12, 2011, were approved. (6-0-1; Commissioner Reynolds was absent) Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 2 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 Chair Roseberry read Agenda Item No. 1 into the record as follows: 1. PLN2011-32 Public Hearing to consider the application of Pacific Catch, Inc., PLN2011-84 for Modifications to apreviously-approved Site and Architectural Pacific Catch, Review Permit (PLN2011-32) and Master Sign Plan (PLN2011- Inc. 84) to allow the exterior remodel of an existing commercial tenant space and a total of three signs for a proposed restaurant at the Pruneyard Shopping Center on property located at 1875 S. Bascom Avenue, Unit 550, 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 is seeking approval of a Modification to a previously approved Site and Architectural Review Permit and Master Sign Plan to allow exterior modifications and new signage for a new restaurant to be located in the tenant space previously occupied by Left at Albuquerque. • Said that the project site is within the Pruneyard Shopping Center on Bascom Avenue between Campisi and E. Campbell Avenue. It is surrounded by commercial uses to the east, west and south and residential and commercial to the north. • Added that the tenant space is on the northeast corner of the shopping center. • Explained that in 1996, a restaurant use with outdoor seating, late night hours and general sale of alcohol was established. • Said that there is no proposed change in the number of indoor or outdoor seating with this new restaurant. The Modification of the previous Site and Architectural Review Permit will allow changes to the exterior facade to incorporate contemporary design elements with an Asian influence, a new tower element, Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 3 repainting of the front and side elevations and remodel the outdoor seating area. Additionally, the applicant seeks approval for two wall signs and one arcade sign. The patio will have a solid roof to replace the existing open roof. • Said that the proposed sign area is 44 square feet. Eleven square feet at the entry and 33.1 square feet located on the new tower element. The blade sign is five square feet and will be located in the walkway. This square footage exceeds that allowed. • Reported that staff is supportive of the applicant's sign request in that it complies with the spirit of the Master Sign Plan. • Recommended the adoption of a resolution approving the Modification to a previously approved Site and Architectural Review Permit and a second resolution approving a Modification to an existing Master Sign Plan. • Advised that the applicant and a Pruneyard representative are present. Commissioner Alster presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: • Reported that SARC reviewed this proposal on April 12, 2011. • Said that it was the consensus of SARC that this project was well designed and compliments the center. • Added that the requested signs are consisted with a Sign Exception from 1997. Chair Roseberry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Keith Cox, Applicant: • Reported that he is the founder of Pacific Catch. • Said that he is excited to come into Campbell. • Explained that his restaurant's concept is an upscale but casual fish restaurant serving a range from sushi bowls to specialty entrees including fresh fish items at reasonable prices. • Said that their proposed building modifications will help to "pop" the space and help it to have a presence. • Reiterated that he is really excited to join the community. Chair Roseberry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 1. Commissioner Gibbons: • Said that this is an interesting project to review. • Reminded that Pruneyard has come to the Commission several times over the years. When they subdivided the center, their request was to provide identities for tenants providing some individuality. Later, Pruneyard came back with concerns that they were losing the identity of the shopping center and a policy to not individualize the exterior of buildings. • Stated that this is a great application here. • Suggested that the Commission consider what this means for the Pruneyard as a whole and to question whether this modification is setting a precedent. • Added that there is no clear understanding from the Pruneyard. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 4 • Cautioned that there is a bigger issue to consider. Commissioner Ebner: • Said that he too was here for some of those previous projects. • Agreed that Pruneyard management had wanted consistency. • Added that he too is concerned about precedent. • Stated that the architecture proposed is great but may open Pandora 's Box for future applications and may be against what management previously wanted, which was consistency. Commissioner Alster: • Said that she disagreed. • Reminded that this is an end unit in a rather non-descript corner. It was hard to tell that the previous tenant was a restaurant. • Added that the changes are being done in very good taste. • Suggested that perhaps Pruneyard management has changed its mind over the years. • Said that this modification adds quite a bit. • Stated that the Pruneyard Center as a whole doesn't have a strong architectural identity to protect. • Reiterated that this upgrade is an improvement. Commissioner Ebner said that the desire for consistency does not represent his own wishes but rather was previously expressed as the goal by the center's management. Commissioner Resnikoff: • Stated that he liked the design of the cafe seating and the tower. • Pointed out that the design incorporates concepts used on corner buildings in the Downtown. • Said that he cannot speak for the Pruneyard's management but he likes the proposed design and will support this request. Commissioner Brennan asked about the concern raised in perhaps setting precedent. Commissioner Gibbons: • Said that dialog is what she was hoping to have. • Added that she likes the design and corner element. • Said that it was important to treat this as an individual approval and not carte blanche and to give specific reasons why this modification is appropriate. It has to be thoughtful and put in caution. • Stated that although fine with that, she is still a little bit nervous. • Pointed out that Pruneyard has a very old style. At one time they had proposed taking the overhangs out to create a more modern style center but backed away from that idea. • Said that the Commission needs to be thoughtful with conditions in order to not set precedent. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 5 Chair Roseberry: • Said that Pruneyard management's support of this request has been addressed or this application would not have even been allowed to come forward. • Stated that this is a unique corner unit. The proposed exterior design is relatively subdued and still includes the clay the roof. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Gibbons, seconded by Commissioner Alster, the Planning Commission took the following actions: • Adopted Resolution No. 4020 approving Modifications to a previously-approved Site and Architectural Review Permit (PLN2011-32) to allow the exterior remodel of an existing commercial tenant space, subject to the conditions of approval and modified findings; and • Adopted Resolution No. 4021 approving a Modification to a previously approved Master Sign Plan (PLN2011-84) to allow a total of three signs (two wall and one arcade) for a proposed restaurant at the Pruneyard Shopping Center on property located at 1875 S. Bascom Avenue, Unit 550, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alster, Brennan, Ebner, Gibbons, Resnikoff and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: Reynolds ABSTAIN: None 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. PLN2010-255 Public Hearing to consider the application of Corporate Sign Corporate Systems for a Master Sign Plan and Sign Permit (PLN2010-255) Sign Systems for the Pruneyard Office Towers on properties located at 1901, 1919 & 1999 S. Bascom Avenue in a C-2-O (General Commercial/Overlay) 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 applicant is seeking approval of a Master Sign Plan and Sign Permit for the Pruneyard Office Towers. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 6 • Explained that the Pruneyard Office Towers project site includes the three towers and garage structure and is located between Highway 17 and the Pruneyard Shopping Center. • Reported that the Master Sign Plan is intended to establish uniformity for signage. • Stated that there are six existing cabinet signs ranging from 28 to 45 square feet. There are four different cabinet designs and approximately 206 total square feet in sign area. • Stated that the Sign Ordinance allows for a maximum of 80 square feet of sign area for an office site unless the Planning Commission approves a Sign Exception. It is based on the premise that additional sign area is necessary to allow visibility to the public. The maximum sign area will increase from the existing 206 square feet to 231 in total. • Said that the Sign request includes a new 25 square foot monument sign. The new monument sign, located at Tower I (the tallest of the three towers) will have a black concrete base with lettering reading "Equity Office", stainless steel letters reading "Pruneyard Towers" at the top and three panels. This new sign will replace an existing sign. • Stated that an arborist's report was secured by the Office Towers to provide tree protection measures for two large trees to ensure that it is not compromised or damaged during the construction of the sign. • Recommended approval. Commissioner Alster presented the Site and Architectural Review Committee report as follows: • Reported that SARC reviewed this project on March 22, 2011. • Advised that SARC was supportive but expressed concern about the inconsistency between the existing brass addressing numbers on the sides of the buildings with the proposed use of stainless in the new design. SARC recommended replacing the brass numerals with stainless ones. • Added that another issue raised was the potential for pre-wiring electricity for future illumination of the monument. However, the applicant says that lighting is not necessary now or later. Chair Roseberry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Mr. Randall McClune, Applicant, Corporate Sign Systems: • Said that this proposal seeks to upgrade the site image and to make the signage more current and of a specific image. • Agreed that the existing brass address numbers should be changed to stainless and the Tower management agrees as well. Commissioner Gibbons asked if the number of tenant names on the panels totals six on each side. Mr. Randall McClune said correct. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 7 Ms. Olga Ellis, Representative from Pruneyard Office Towers: • Said that currently there is no clear definition of addresses to identify the three towers for visitors. • Added that with this monument, the public will clearly see the addresses. Key (anchor) tenants will be named to make it easier for their customers to find them. Chair Roseberry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 2. Commissioner Ebner pointed out that the Pruneyard Office Towers signage already exceeds what is allowed under the Sign Ordinance and this approval would make it exceed even further. Commissioner Gibbons asked staff to clarify how it calculates sign square footage. Planner Daniel Fama explained that per the Sign Ordinance only one side of a monument sign is counted as long as the two sides are identical. Commissioner Ebner questioned that practice given the request of the Church located on Campbell Avenue for which both sides of sign area were counted. Why was it treated differently? Chair Roseberry explained that the design of the sign was in a "V" shape that had to be viewed as two separate signs rather than as a traditional monument sign. When they went back to an original monument sign configuration, only one side of the signage was counted. Director Kirk Heinrichs reiterated that a traditional freestanding monument sign, even though two sided, is counted as one sign. The issue is at what point, when that sign design is spread, it becomes two signs versus one. Chair Roseberry: • Said that the fact that this request exceeds the threshold allowed under the Sign Ordinance is the reason it is before the Planning Commission. • Reminded that the Sign Ordinance offers the flexibility for the Commission to look at specific requests on a case-by-case basis to consider whether the specific needs of a site support more signage being appropriate. Commissioner Gibbons: • Said that this is a great site to evaluate as a unique situation. She asked about transition from squared versus rounded signs. Planner Daniel Fama explained that the round versus rounded signs is part of the Sign Plan for the Shopping Center rather than the Office Towers. Chair Roseberry said that the existing Tower signs are being incorporated into a new Master Sign Plan. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 8 Commissioner Brennan pointed to page 3 of the staff report regarding retention of existing signs. He asked when existing signs might change. Chair Roseberry said that there are a certain number of sign types now on site. Planner Daniel Fama explained that if a frame is in place and a change to a sign just requires removing the plate and replacing it, that sign change does not require a new sign approval. Chair Roseberry clarified that if a panel within an existing approved sign frame is changed, that will remain consistent with the Master Sign Plan. However, if the frame must be changed, that request would be brought back to the Planning Commission as a change to the approved Master Sign Plan. Planner Daniel Fama replied correct. Commissioner Brennan said that he would like to see the issue of compatibility of the new monument sign with the existing signs addressed at this time. Commissioner Gibbons: • Suggested setting one type of sign for any new ones going forward. • Asked what triggers the need to comply with the new Master Sign Plan. Does replacing Lucite panels? If the shape changes, does it come before the Planning Commission again? • Said that she prefers consistency with radius edge signs. Chair Roseberry clarified that changes to the approved Master Sign Plan in the future would bring it back to the Commission for review. Director Kirk Heinrichs clarified that the purpose of a Master Sign Plan is to create uniform signage. Generally, signs for a site do not come back to the Commission if they are consistent with the approved Master Sign Plan. They do come back to the Planning Commission if there is a change to the approved program. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Resnikoff, seconded by Commissioner Alster, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4022 approving a Master Sign Plan and Sign Permit (PLN2010-255) for the Pruneyard Office Towers on properties located at 1901, 1919 8~ 1999 S. Bascom Avenue, subject to the conditions of approval, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alster, Brennan, Ebner, Gibbons, Resnikoff and Roseberry NOES: None ABSENT: Reynolds ABSTAIN: None Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 9 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. 3 into the record as follows: 3. PLN2009-35 Public Hearing to consider the City-initiated application for a Staff Text Amendment (PLN2009-35) to amend the Campbell Zoning Code (Chapter 21.02 -Interpretation of Provisions; Chapter 21.10 -Commercial and Industrial Districts; Chapter 21.28 - Parking and Loading; Chapter 21.36 -Provisions Applying to Special Uses; Chapter 21.62 -Appeals; Chapter 21.71 - Administrative Decision Process; Chapter 21.72 -Definitions) to revise City parking requirements and related standards. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. Tentative City Council Meeting Date: May 17, 2011. Project Planner: Daniel Fama, Assistant Planner Mr. Daniel Fama, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report as follows: • Explained that the City's review of parking standards has been underway since May 2009, when staff received direction from Council during a study session on how to proceed. At that time, Council directed staff to have the Planning Commission hold several study sessions. Those study sessions were held beginning in early 2009 until early 2011. • Added that two joint study sessions were conducted with Council and the Planning Commission in 2010 and 2011 and the staff recommendations being reviewed this evening reflects the direction from Council. • Said that the proposed Text Amendments include: o New land definitions and operational definitions that include permitted and conditional classifications. o New parking standards for 10 commercial uses and several residential uses. o These new standards include 2.5 to 3 spaces per unit for mixed-use developments depending upon size of units and 2 to 2.5 spaces per unit for transit-oriented developments. Additionally, a half space per unit for guest parking is required. o For mixed-use developments, 50% of the guest parking provided for the residential uses can be also be shared by the commercial uses with the development of a Parking Management Plan. o Changes have been made to the process for Parking Modification Permits. o The same body that reviews a development application also reviews the parking modification, except for the C-3 (Central Business District) Zoning District, for which parking adjustments are reviewed by Council. o Requirements for provision of bicycle parking, as appropriate, for residential projects near Light Rail. o Provision of motorcycle parking that allows the transition of one vehicle parking space into motorcycle parking for four. This standard would allow the reduction Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 10 of up to five vehicle spaces (serving 20 motorcycles) or 10 percent of provided parking, whichever is less. o Parking would consist completely of uni-stall spaces with the elimination of standard and compact spaces. • Said that a Text Amendment is treated like a project in regards to CEQA review. An Initial Study was done and found no impacts and a Draft Negative Declaration was prepared. The comment period ran from April 6, 2011, through April 26, 2011, at 5 p.m. No comments were received. • Said that in order for Council to adopt a Text Amendment the findings must be made that the amendment is consistent with the General Plan, that it is not detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community and that it is internally consistent with the Zoning Code. The Initial Study looked at a number of factors and the finding could be made that this amendment was not detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community. Most of the changes pertain to parking, including six definitions, and also five other Chapters. • Recommended the adoption of a Negative Declaration, and an Ordinance to modify the parking requirements and related standards. Chair Roseberry said that this review of parking standards was quite an undertaking with lots of study sessions. It has evolved. Commissioner Alster said that she does not remember the addition of motorcycle parking. Planner Daniel Fama said that it was loosely discussed. Commissioner Alster questioned if there are enough motorcycles in use to support the number of spaces being reserved for it. Director Kirk Heinrichs said that the issue was raised at one of the Planning Commission study sessions. He added that the ratios for motorcycle spaces to be provided could be considered. Commissioner Ebner said he doesn't remember discussion of parking for motorcycles and he attended all of the study sessions. Commissioner Gibbons: • Said that she was also foggy on the topic of motorcycles and is concerned with the ratios mentioned as 10 percent sounded way high. • Suggested a maximum of five percent on a site and a threshold trigger of 20 vehicle stalls. Chair Roseberry cautioned that it might take more than one parking spot to create parking for four motorcycles. Planner Daniel Fama advised that provision of motorcycle parking is an inducement to the provision of parking and not a limited substitution. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 11 Chair Roseberry agreed and said that small awkward spaces can be used for providing motorcycle parking spaces. Commissioner Gibbons: • Said that with that concept, motorcycle parking can be scattered throughout a site. • Said that placement should be thoughtful and should be considered only for sites providing 20 or more parking spaces with a ratio up to four. Chair Roseberry suggested minimum dimension requirements for what constitutes a motorcycle parking space. Commissioner Gibbons: • Said that some things included in the report caught her by surprise including the mention of CalGreen Standards, which she didn't recall. • Added that long-term bicycle storage doesn't get used as much in commercial areas because there are no showers and/or changing rooms available. Therefore, she is concerned about requiring long-term bicycle parking. • Pointed to page 6 of the report regarding restriping of existing parking lots. • Asked staff if a permit is required to restripe a parking lot. • Suggested that restriping be at the discretion of the Community Development Director. When a lot is being restriped the use of uniform (uni-stalls) spaces is preferred. Director Kirk Heinrichs said that as long as the restriping change does not result in a decrease in the overall number of spaces provided. Commissioner Gibbons said that allowing shared use of guest spaces for mixed-use developments must consist of shared spaces that are external and accessible. Chair Roseberry agreed those spaces must be accessible and convenient. Planner Daniel Fama said that the use of secured parking spaces would be precluded as being counted toward parking available as mixed-use shared spaces. Commissioner Gibbons asked about the use of tandem parking. Is it acceptable or not? Under what terms? Chair Roseberry said that tandem parking is a specialized parking that only rarely works and specifically it only works when one housing unit shares a tandem space. Planner Daniel Fama said that on Page 15, Section B-1, it is written that access to parking spaces cannot be blocked, except for single family units, unless specifically approved. Commissioner Gibbons: Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 12 • Asked about the previously prepared chart and how the small lot FAR fits in with the charts findings. Planner Daniel Fama explained that small lot single-family is folded in with multi-family. It is a distinct type of housing project. Commissioner Gibbons: • Said that as is shown with projects such as flag lot developments on Kennedy, the Commission always struggles with the loss of street parking. • Added that the current requirement is for two covered and two uncovered spaces per unit. What is proposed now is 2.5 spaces plus half space for guest parking. Planner Daniel Fama: • Said that the distinction is that a flag lot is in an R-1 Zoning District and consists of a minimum of 6,000 square feet. It is subject to single-family residential standards. • Added that the Commission sees Planned Developments. Director Kirk Heinrichs reiterated that small lot single-family developments are reviewed as moderate-density development projects rather than at asingle-family residential level. Commissioner Gibbons: • Stated that good work has been done here. It improves the document very much but that she is looking to understand the material. • Said that the City Council looks to the Planning Commission to help manage what an applicant comes in for and demands. • Reminded that the Planning Commission has the ultimate ability of negotiating some of the tradeoffs and she is trying to see how it changes the Commission's ability to negotiate with applicants. Planner Daniel Fama said that multi-family equals condos, townhomes and apartments. Commissioner Gibbons clarified that this is changing the definition of multi-family dwellings, which will supersede townhomes and condos. Planner Daniel Fama said that is correct. There will be a single standard for all three types of multi-family housing. Commissioner Gibbons asked about the number of spaces using current versus revised parking scenarios. She is trying to understand if that's still the case. If so, it cuts the Planning Commission's ability to negotiate. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 13 Chair Roseberry: • Said that very point was discussed at the last study session. • Reminded that Mayor Baker made it clear that multi-family residential parking standards were to be reduced. • Asked if there is not a way to move forward as a group. Commissioner Gibbons said she objected to having the floor taken away and felt it was a violation of procedure. Chair Roseberry: • Said that he is simply trying to move this forward. • Reminded that there have been six Planning Commission study sessions and several joint sessions with Council. • Suggested that compromises are necessary. • Added that Commissioner Gibbons has brought up several good points. Commissioner Gibbons said she needs to understand what is being voted on. Chair Roseberry: • Agreed that understanding is important. • Added that he hopes that everyone has already looked at this material and thought about it in advance of tonight's meeting. • Asked if there are specific items to discuss. Commissioner Ebner: • Said that he has listened intently to Commissioner Gibbon's concerns and shares them. • Advised that he would not support this Text Amendment and feels that the Commission is being pushed to proceed. Chair Roseberry said that each member has to do their homework and come forward with specific questions. Commissioner Alster said that at the joint study session with Council, Mayor Baker noted that parking standards in neighboring communities were less than what Campbell was establishing. She reminded that Council input must also be included in this document. Commissioner Gibbons said that she wants to be sure she understands what she is voting on. Commissioner Ebner concurred with Commissioner Gibbons. Chair Roseberry: • Clarified that he is not trying to ram this through. • Stated that there has been ample time for input and review. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 14 • Reminded that the task for the Commission tonight is to forward a recommendation on to Council. • Suggested that if there are any specific changes that they are brought forward but the whole document should not require being reviewed wholesale and rewritten. • Advised that the Director has taken notes on the Planning Commission's recommended changes on the issue of motorcycle parking. Director Kirk Heinrichs: • Explained that at the last Council study session, staff was directed to modify Planning Commission's recommendations on multi-family parking. • Assured that changes discussed this evening will also be forwarded to Council as recommendations. Chair Roseberry: • Said that if there are specific recommendations that the Commission wants to put forward that are quantifiable they should be discussed. • Added that if the majority of the Commission wants to fold those changes into its recommendation the written record of this meeting will show those specific recommendations. • Stated that he doesn't want to take too much time to make modifications that are going to change this document and the intent that Council gave at the last study session. If so, they could just reject the Commission's recommendations. Commissioner Ebner: • Stated that study sessions were just study sessions. • Added that everyone got the opportunity to express, dissect and make comments. • Advised that now is the time for the Commission to make changes. • Informed that he has serious problems with changes/reductions in parking. • Stated that at the last study session, the Mayor's opinion was his. • Said that if this Text Amendment is approved, there are three major high-density projects on the books. • Suggested that there are already serious parking problems in this city. • Said that there is a pipe dream of transit and that parking should be left at status quo until those large projects are done. • Said that parking standards should be kept "as is" and that he would not support the changes and will be vocal against them in the community. Chair Roseberry: • Said that much of what is being changed -definitions, procedures -everyone is okay with. The issue is with the number of parking spaces required. Commissioner Ebner said he is concerned with reductions in parking especially in high density developments. Commissioner Resnikoff said that it may be difficult to reach consensus among seven Planning Commissioners and five Council members. He suggested that it might be Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 15 helpful to grasp how the Commission is leaning on this Text Amendment through an initial vote. This could help determine how to come to a conclusion. Chair Roseberry thanked Commissioner Resnikoff for articulating that point. Director Kirk Heinrichs said that perhaps all but the parking standard for multi-family residential standards could be voted upon and then continue the discussion on the multi-family component. Chair Roseberry said if possible this should be moved forward. He said that his concern tonight is to discuss specifics and not rehash old territory again. Director Kirk Heinrichs said that the Commission can choose to recommend everything except for having the multi-family parking standard stay as it is currently. Chair Roseberry asked if the Commission could agree to pulling out the multi-family component and come to consensus on that issue separately. Commissioner Alster said that she agrees with the staff recommendation on multi- family housing. She said that even without consensus on that issue, the meeting minutes will provide the discussion on that issue. Director Kirk Heinrichs said that a majority decision will represent the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Commissioner Resnikoff suggested two motions including one motion for everything but the multi-family parking standard. Chair Roseberry asked the City Attorney if there is not enough support to move the entire Text Amendment proposal forward, at that point could the multi-family parking standard be treated separately. City Attorney William Seligmann replied yes. He suggested seeing if the votes are there for the whole issue. If not, issues can be separated out. Chair Roseberry said the options include splitting the vote at the start; voting on the main Text Amendment or voting on the multi-family standard. Commissioner Gibbons asked if an up or down vote is taken could the motion be restated afterward. City Attorney William Seligmann explained if the first motion does not pass, a different motion could be made. If the first motion achieves a majority vote, that item could not be restated. Commissioner Ebner said he would like further discussion on multi-family parking. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 16 Commissioner Resnikoff supported conducting a vote on the whole thing first. Commissioner Ebner advised that often comments of his colleagues can influence and/or change his position. He added that he does feel rushed on this. Chair Roseberry: • Told Commissioner Ebner if he has specific recommendations he would love to hear them. • Continued that he hasn't heard a specific recommendation from Commissioner Ebner other than he doesn't support any change. • Added that he feels that the Commission has discussed this Text Amendment extensively over several meetings. • Concluded that not having any new specific recommendations at this point makes this process more time-consuming than it should be. Commissioner Brennan agreed that discussion is merited but also agrees with Commissioner Resnikoff that an overall vote should be taken. The issue can be split if that becomes necessary. Commissioner Alster: • Said that she does not really see the need for long-term bicycle parking as particularly necessary except for limited locations such as Light Rail stations. • Agreed with Mayor Baker's assessment that Campbell is surrounded by communities with lower parking requirements. • Reported that she has resided for the last six years in her multi-family development and knows what the parking situation is in such a development. • Added that a household with four vehicles would not move into this type of community. Commissioner Resnikoff asked about the inclusion of CalGreen standards. Planner Daniel Fama said that technically these standards are already a part of the Green Building Code now in effect. Adding it into the Parking and Loading Ordinance creates consistency. Commissioner Ebner suggested isolating parking for multi-family and tabling that issue for discussion at another time and forwarding the remaining to Council. Commissioner Resnikoff: • Said that he has no issue in discussing things further but questions the need to table any of it. • Suggested taking a vote to see if consensus is possible and, if not, talk about it now. • Added that if it comes out as a tie vote, the item would have to be continued anyway. • Said that it should be discussed as much as possible tonight. Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 17 Commissioner Gibbons: • Clarified that she was not looking to change anything but rather just make clear what is being voted on. • Added that what is being presented doesn't match her understanding of where things were at the previous study session. • Stated that she really doesn't understand the extent of change for multi-family. Chair Roseberry: • Said that at the last joint study session there was a translation of the changing number of parking spaces required for specific uses. • Added that another issue is the fact that definitions are being changed at the same time that standards are being changed. There are now new categories of parking land uses and new definitions. • Said that there is no way to go back and create a spreadsheet with all of those changes. Director Kirk Heinrichs said that a spreadsheet was prepared for a previous study session. Chair Roseberry pointed out that had that same table been brought forward again, it might have been easier to understand. It's harder to go through and get what's changing. Chair Roseberry opened the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Chair Roseberry closed the Public Hearing for Agenda Item No. 3. Motion: Upon motion of Commissioner Alster, seconded by Commissioner Resnikoff, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 4023 recommending that the City Council approve a Negative Declaration and a Text Amendment (PLN2009-35) to amend the Campbell Zoning Code (Chapter 21.02 -Interpretation of Provisions; Chapter 21.10 - Commercial and Industrial Districts; Chapter 21.28 -Parking and Loading; Chapter 21.36 - Provisions Applying to Special Uses; Chapter 21.38 -Application Filing, Processing and Fees; Chapter 21.62 -Appeals; Chapter 21.71 - Administrative Decision Process; Chapter 21.72 - Definitions) to revise City parking requirements and related standards, including the Commission's recommendations for uni- stall parking restriping of existing parking areas; and provisions for motorcycle parking, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Alster, Brennan, Resnikoff and Roseberry NOES: Ebner ABSENT: Reynolds ABSTAIN: Gibbons Campbell Planning Commission Minutes for April 26, 2011 Page 18 Chair Roseberry advised that this item would be considered by the City Council for final action at its meeting of May 17, 2011. *** REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Director Kirk Heinrichs had no additions to the written report. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 9:22 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting of May 10, 2011. r SUBMITTED BY: orinne Shinn, Recording Secretary APPROVED BY: ~~~ ~C~~2 Bob Roseberry, Chair ~ ~-~ ATTEST: / ~ ' Kir s, Secretary