956 San Tomas Aquino Rd. (TR6707)
--.---- .- .---- ---. ..--
~.4u_
...\
I
( ~1r.~RT?F C~~R~P~V~~U~
CAMP BEL L, C A L I FOR Nt-A 95008
(408) 378-8141
~... /
'-....
Department: CITY MANAGER
January 15, 1982
ff'/ED
Honorable Susanne Wilson
Chairperson
Santa Clara County Board
of Supervisors
70 West Hedding Street
San Jose, CA 95110
h~:;_, J
[}~,;, ~ 1: .
, -, t t.,.- J I .._~. .
RE: EXTENSION OF TENTATIVE MAP 6707
Honorable Board Members:
I have just learned that the extension and modification of Tentative Map 6707
will be before the Board of Supervisors for adoption on January 18, 1982. As
you will recall, the property in question is located in the Campbell Urban
Service Area, and has been approved for annexation through MORGA island
annexation proceedings. Actual annexation of the area (Lovell 79-16) was
delayed due to the filing of a suit by Mr. and Mrs. Kanawyer.
Campbell's General Plan provides for low density residential development
(less than 6 units per gross acre) in the area of the Kanawyer property.
This policy was adopted in June, 1978, after an extensive review of land uses
in the San Tomas area. The City Council has consistently expressed its
objections to the proposed project because it is not compatible with the
General Plan.
Your Board has a longstanding policy of not approving projects in a city's
urban service area when the projects are inconsistent with that city's General
Plan. That policy has served us well. We therefore respectfully request that
the Board uphold that policy and deny the requested tentative map extension.
Thank: y.oufo~ your. consideration or this matter.
Respectfully,
.tt) .
f~G. SChilli~
City Manager
(.
EGS:bso
HARRISON and KONe. INC.
Consulting Engineers
12Trt'~~mnr.-'8rrit~ 1 'to; -sa" -Jos~ -eattfofl'tts-95426 (408) 286-6106
1033 Willow St. - Suite 200 - San Jose, Ca. 95125
July 15, 1981
Mr. Joe Elliott, City Manager
City of Campbell
75 N. Central AVe.
Campbell, Ca. 95000
Re: Storm Drain Connection for
Kanawyer 9 Unit Condominium
Project
956 San Tomas Aquino Rd.
(#79628)
Dear Mr. Elliott:
As a condition of the referenced project'being permitted to
connect to the existing San Tomas Aquino Rd. storm drainage
system, I agree to the following:
1. The new storm drain line proposed for San Tomas Aquino
Rd. improvement will be constructed as determined by
your office to convey the project storm water either
to the north or to the south. Said lines are to
connect to the existing storm drain system. Further,
that if the new lines are constructed to the south,
that new drain inlets will be installed at the inter-
section of Love1 Ave. and San Tomas Aquino Rd.
2. In addition to the construction of the storm lines
in San Tomas Aquino Rd., I also agree to contribute
$15,000 to the San Tomas Aquino Rd. Storm Drainage
Fund.
your{1;;e ~_"I_h')
Mrs. Carol Kanawyer, ~
Property at 956 San Tomas Aquino Rd.
JRH:gh
cc:John Norman, Attorney
Jim Sirr, County Engineer
HARRISON and KONG,h...C.
Consulting Engineers T21t"Par1\A'VeTme:-gmre"11O',-sarr-.:tos~,-em+fO'rnta-95'1-2& (408) 286-6106
1033 Willow St. Suite 200, San Jose, Ca 95125
July 8, 1981
RECEIVED
/1/1 9 1
u L L 981
my MANAr,FR'.~ OFFlr.F
Mr. Robert Stephens, City Manager
City of Campbell
75 N. Central Ave.
Canpbell, Ca. 95000
Re: Storm Drain Connection for
Kanawyer's 9 Unit Condominium
Project Tr. 6707
956 San Tomas Aquino Rd.
(#79628)
Dear Mr. Stephens:
We applied for an excavation permit (no. 81-244) on June 23, 1981.
The purpose of this application was to connect the storm drain
for referenced project to the existing storm drain at San Tomas
Aquino Rd. and Smith Ave.
The city engineer denied the permit without explanation. We
hereby appeal the denial to your office for consideration and
request that you direct the city engineer to issue the permit.
All conditions established by the county have been met by the
developer except the permit from your city. We hope to obtain
approval of the Board of Supervisors this month and record the
tract map. We would appreciate your cooporation in this matter.
Yours truly,
JRH:gh /
cc: John Norman, Attorney
Carol Kanawyer, Owner
Jim Sirr, County Engineer
HARRISON and KONG, INC
a;7J~
John R. Harrison, President
Civil Engineer
.
.
CITY OF CAMPBELL
.
I
Department of Public Works
CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION
PROJECT INSPECTOR'S
DAILY REPORT
Project or
Permit No.
Name or
Location
;)P Cc /(') 7
,
~f 4.
,5') h&" So ~c. /J .4Z--c.
Page
of
Date
c;? 7?- J:' _-:5 ,
/'J-
::'2-C" e
v
(~J~d~ c ./~ ;'7'-' I
.eruk.?7\.4. 't:Z=.
~ __'\__-2-'_
v'/
/ ") //// /
---""t~ ./ /c';;~I' C. Y-r" c:? c?
/4..t~~.rt-~'U'...---...
CITY ENGINEER
r
PROJE ENGINEER
/v
PROJECT INSPECTOR
--,--
--I- --.h .j.
)
,-I"
I'
I
F>~ c-' c
'y'jY -(
?
'--'
/7
l.--
,
t:J
y:.
~
;5
)~/I
~/fl
i',
I.
F/
<.
1
'-
-c-
;;
r- :;.;' ~,.
~
/1
"
/i
j/
___~ -/J ".{";.::'
A)J
~~) / ,-,~<.>
/
~
, ,
/:-
./ /",,~' )
/
I
d-/-
,,' " t
/
C7
C'. I).
/''-7 ,'.'
.' ,'.- / ........
~" i
.,", '
',/ ../)
./ ;
u <"~",,
;2 1/
/' -
c. ,-6
(/
.-
c.
"'--- /,,,,
"
-
7/ /
,5
~,.
/:
) l
,,-G'/,/
.~</
/
I I}
J
'_/: /(/,
) !/
/_.
{,.-.. '.
"1,<' .' I
( "
I'
/
; r~ "':,."
.ld.,. x'
!' ';:J
.-//..."
/'
t'" ,.- "l, I .
.....A::-("J..
)
/
~I/ "
)
/
.c:/.'
, ,
.-
-,
......N....
.
~"I/
..~?.,.
'-~,,~ c.J.7 , .
, if"
I
~/
--- ~. ..::
-::" -:,'''', . ,,,~
. ~.
~ I -;/ j,;'/
-< :' \o-~) /
<~-:'" '- I
, - P / ~
jr"/ /?
.. ~ " d '" I" ,. ;,/ /.,:. ;+
P \. '" - i , ,
I .
/
') /~
,,_ ~::'.t';) t...!,___../..'.-
(-
j.~
i-:'~
J
/. ~ 7'" . (, ,
~',':~,
'" ,/
?-
)16:
~-,,' ..."-V',.Jo
/
//
/.~..
,/ . "-
.<'4' \ ,/
..?/ ~.
/
'\ f:" ---.I >;~
,.
I !
/' ---'-
./ ",.
(f \-...
"
-
County of Santa Clara
California
. D /' !
Z J~ o/. /. f tc/', ///.~>.
.R" -- /7{. ( ~' y, '...,/ Office of the County Coun~~-'/
\ ~ 7, .: (~/l':::. County Government cente, r, East Wing
-- J rt2; ~c' . ~ 70 West Hedding Street
, 0.:) San Jose, California 95110
299-2111 Area Code 408
Mr/ '.. 1981 Selby BroJ..n, Jr, County Counsel
1
Rtc,. t
, ,
>,./ +.
MI. Ruhetl Oemp~ter
[\ t "=o.::npy at Law
:;03::5 S tl'vens Cr l-'("k
Cu~ertino. CA 95014
Blvd.
, [); '.
i" j:,
. E,', "'.
:; '](<4
~ccc.
M4r IVca
19/;,
tlfy ~81
414111
wr,fll'r
, Dfflf.r
P.e: K8nrtwvE'r v. ..fyun tJ.', et r 11 .
Super;or C,- Il:t No. ,~6,)'~ T
(Suit challenging valid~.ty of annexa._ion
of T o,'ell 79..16 to City of Campbell)
Deal' Bob:
To my surprise and dismay, Judge Allen overruled our
d(>murrer to the above complaint. His ruling is contrary
to the statutes imposing a 60-day statute of limitations
from the completion date of annexations, and is also in-
consistent with an earlier ruling made by him in the City
of San Jose island annexation suit.
plaintiff's attorney has indicated that the action
was filed and is being pursued only in order to secure
county approval of a pending subdivision map application.
It thus appears that a voluntary dismissal may be forth-
coming wi.thout the necessity of litigating the validity of
the 8ub;ect annexation. We therefore have accepted plain-
tiff's offer of an open extension of time to plead,for the
tiTTle btoing.in the hope that a voluntary dismissal of the
above action may occur in the near future. If this does
not occur within a reasonable period of time, we may both
cle~t tn contest this suit.
Very truly yours,
SELBY BROl-IN) JR.
County Counsel
(Ikwl/~v~
6~ALD i. AL ON
Deputy Co nty Counsel
DJF:raw Il
te.~ ~~4~~~~
~
An Equal Opportunity Employer
,
20325 STEVENS CREEK BLVD.
CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA 95014
ATTORNEY AT LAW
- ~ \-~
:-'~'J \
pV)~
/ r;f'" T.:::":O:5:0,~"
1
-
J. ROBERT DEMPSTER
,"'JIf:fl 9,1381
RECEIVED
~~ ", R ~ n "
:VlA 1 \j I:::>i:'
PITV MAN6hFR'~ nmr.F
Mr. Donald J. Fallon
Jt::puty County Counsel
County of Santa Clara
Count~y Govel nrllent. Cente.r:, EcUit Wins,
70 West Hedji~s Street
S~n Jose, Calif. 95110
Re: Ka~h1...o{yer v. County Ctf Santa Clara, et :)1
Case No. 465419
(Suite challenging validity of annexation
of Lovell 79-16 to t.he City of Campbell.)
Dear Don:
P ..€clCa find en.;:;losc~ a copy 0 f =1 letter fl",)!'n
IT:Y City Manager, Robert Stephens, of Narch 5, 1981,
agree ins'; \, L t~:- ycur posit~ion stnted jn y,lur February :; Ot.h R
1981 letter. All these lettezs are sElf-e~pl~natary.
If you ha\'e any qUf;stions! plf?2\se do not hes i tate to
call me.
Very truly yours,
J' € l;~C BE ?:r D ....~1-11J ~-? 1 r; 'R
JRD: lsc
e!lcl.
cc: City cf Ca~pLell
Cl ty Mana~1€:r, Robext Stephens
..)/15
f< c.:_
/
I
i
75 NORTH CENTRAL
C AMP BEL L, C A L I FOR N I A
(408) 378-8141
AVENUE
95008
1
}/1-'
~\~}
CITY OF CAMPBELL
Department:
CITY ~~AGER'S OFFICE
March 5, 1981
J. Robert Dempster
Attorney-at-Law
20325 Stevens Creek Blvd.
Cupertino, CA 95014
Dear Bob:
After reading the two letters which you received from Mr. Fallon
of the County Counsel's Office and your opinion that you are in
agreement with Mr. Fallon's opinion, I would agree that we should
treat the area as subject to Section 35004, until the anticipated
Judgement of Dismissal becomes final.
I would request that you keep this office informed as to the progress
which you and Mr. Fallon are making on getting this court case dismissed.
We will treat the territory as if it were subject to Section 35004 until
the anticipated Judgement of Dismissal becomes final. To the best of
my knowledge, the staff has been following this course and will continue
to do so until we are so notified by your office.
Sincerely,
~
Robert C. Stephens
City Manager
RCS:lbp
cc: Art Kee, Planning Director
Don Burr, Police Chief
Jim McMullen, Fire Chief
Joe Elliott, Public Works Director
Wally Byron, Building Official
Russell J. Hammer, Mayor
Attachments
J. ROBERT DEMPSTER
ATTORNEY AT LAW
20325 STEVENS CREEK BLVD.
CUPERTINO, CALU'ORNIA 95014
February 27, 1981
AREA CODE 408
TELEPHONE 252-1111
Ron. Robert Stephens
Ca~pbell City Manager
75 North Central Avenue
Campbell, Calif. 95008
Dear Mr. Stephens:
Please find enclosed two letters I received, while
away from my office, in regards to Kanawyer v. County of
Santa Clara.
As you will note, the February 20th letter indi-
cates that the County feels we should handle the territory
covered in said law suit as if Section 35004 of the Govern-
ment Code applies.
I personally am in agreement with Donald Fallon
and would recommend that the City handle the matter in
that style.
You will, of course, have the final say on this
matter and I am forwarding these letters for your action.
Would you either contact me or Mr. Fallon so that
we can work with the County on this particular matter?
If you have any questions do not hesitate to call
my office.
Very tpu!Y yours,
../!~
!-.
J. ROBERT DEMPSTER
JRD:lsc
encls.2
RECEIVED
{,fAR 0 2 19S J
my M4NAI:FP'S Dmu
......
-
-f
Office of the County COUftMI
County Government Center. Eut Wing
.70 Weet Hedding Street
San Joee. California 95110
299-2111 Area COde 408
~
"
----..~'.._,._--_.,~...
Selby Brown. Jr.. County Counael
County of Santa Clara
. .... + - '-,-,
California
February 20, 1981
FEB .? 3 198'1
Mr. Robert Dempster
Attorney at Law
20325 Stevens Creek Blvd.
Cupertino, CA 95014
Re:
Kanawter v. County of Santa Clara, et. a1.
Case o. 465419
(Suit challenging validity of annexation of
Lovell 79-16 to the City of Campbell)
Dear Bob:
(
Subsequent to my letter of February 18, 1981, re-
garding the possible coverage of Government Code I 35004
to the subject territory as a result of the above suit, I
discussed the matter at some length with Selby Brown and it
was concluded that the prudent course to follow would be to
treat the territory as subject to Section 35004 until the
anticipated judgment of dismissal becomes final.
In reaching the conclusions set forth in my letter
of February 18, I reasoned that the court lacked subject
matter jurisdiction under the statute creating a citizen'.
right to file suit to challenge an annexation where it
patently appeared from the complaint that the 8uit wal not
timely brought. However, I am persuaded that the prudent
course to follow would be the conservative one outlined
above.
Please call me after you have had a chance to re-
view the matter.
Very truly yours,
DJF:mw
(.
cc: Selby Brown
Chief Frank Mosunic
...
---..
O"lca of the County Counael
County Government Center, East Wing
, 70 Welt Hedding Street
San JOle, California es1 10
299-2111 Area COde 408
County of Santa Clara
-_._---.~--,---
California
February 18, 1981
S~lbY Brown, Jr.. County Counsel
Mr. Robert Dempster
Attorney at Law
20325 Stevens Creek
Cupertino, CA 95014
fE.a 1 91981
Blvd.
,
Kanaw~er v. County of Santa Clara, eta ala
Case o. 465419
(Suit challenging validity of annexation of
Lovell 79-16 to the City of Campbell)
Dear Bob:
Re:
As I indicated to you some-time ago, the above action
was not timely filed within the 60-day Statute of Limitations
allowed for the challenging of completed annexations (Govern-
ment Code S 35004; C.C.P. SS 860 and 863).
(
An annexation is completed when the Certificate of
Completion is executed by the LAFCO secretary, regardless
of the effective date (Gov. Code I 1~1~3). The Certificate
of Completion for Lovell 79-16 was signed on 'October 21, 1980,
(copy attached) and the complaint was not filed until Dec-
ember 29, 1980. Apparently the plaintiff's attorney assumed
that the 60-day period ran from the effective date rather
than the completion date of the annexation.
I also indicated that our office would file a demurrer
anrl seek a judgment of diBmissal. The facts do not appear to
be in dispute, and a dismissal should be readily obtained.
Judge Allen made a similar, ruling recently in another cas.
involving the San Jose island annexations.
Inasmuch as this action was not timely filed, we do
nol feel that Government Code., 35004 is applicable.There-
fore, we feel that the t~J;'ritory should be subj.ect to the ex-
elcsive jurisdiction of the City of Campbell. .
I understand that the Campbell City Council assumed that.
Government Code I 35004 applied, and that therefore the
Campbell City Police Department was directed not to provide
police protection services to the territory.
It would be appreciated if you would. review thi. matter
and contact me so that the rendering of municipal lervlce.
can be coordinated. It is our view that Lovell 79-16 ahould
(
-
...
-.,
Mr. Robert Dempster
-2-
February 18, 1981
be treated for all purposes (tax assessments, municipal
services, land use regulations, etc.) as an annexation com-
pleted in 1980 which is not subject to Government Code
I 35004.
The Sheriff's Office is anxious to have the rendering
of police services coordinated, so please call me as soon as
you can. ,
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
SELBY BROWN, JR.
~unty counst:
\ /yJ i ~. 2a
,.-.-- t. ~
DONALD J:'~AL ON
Deputy County Counsel
(
DJF:mw
Attach.
cc: Chief Frank Mosunic
P.s. - A Motion to Quash Summons would also lie for failure
to specify a date' in the Summons by which interested
parties may appear and an8Wer the complaint (c.e.p.
I 861.1).
(
\, .
iif
11
J. ROBER'!' DEMPSTER
ATTORNEY AT LAW
\
203215 STEVENS CREEK BLVD.
CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA 011014
February 4, 1981
AR.A COD. 40.
T'IlL.KPHONK a15a.1I11
,
~~~
Ff'a ~y.
I.Y~ 0 6' _ ~I)
~~ <,
~~,
;r /)
'1&
0,('
Honorable Mayor and City Council
CITY OF CAMPBELL
75 North Central Avenue
Campbell, CA 95008
Gentlemen:
I appeared at the Board of Supervisors' meeting of
January 19, 1981 on the Gary Kanawyer property involving
a nine~unit condominium. It was Number 35 on the
afternoon agenda.
After spending considerable time at the meeting, it was
then announced that the matter was to be continued
for sixty days.
Subsequent to that time, I discussed the matter with the
County Counsel's office and a motion will be made to
dismiss John Norman's action on the grounds that he
filed after the sixty day period had run.
I feel we will be successful in the Superior Court, but
no doubt the Superior Court decision will be appealed.
I will keep you informed.
Sincerely,
.._.... t.">
') .'/ 1,,-
~-..", C L
J. ROBERT DEMPSTER
-,
JRD/pjd
(
CITY OF (~j\MI)JjELL
( ! ".^J
,\p
A~ij
.I P \}l"
75 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE
C AMP BEL L, C A L I FOR N I A 9 5 0 0 8
(408) 378-8141
"j \
RECEIVED
.J ANI 2 19b i
Department: Fi re
my MAMAr.FR'~ OFFlr.F
January 9, 1981
Doug Sporleder, Acting Fire Chief
Central Fire Protection District
3071 Driftwood Drive
San Jose, CA 95128
Dea r Doug,
The annexation known as Lovell 1979-16, as shown on the attached map
has been reverted to unincorporated county area pending litigation
between the City of Campbell and a private property owner in that area.
Pursuant to that action, as well as, verbal agreements between your-
self and this officer, we will treat the area as we did prior to the
Morga annexation for fire suppression purposes. From the standpoint of
Emergency Medical Services, we will respond into the area as if it were
part of the incorporated area of the City of Campbell. This is a re-
sult of the Emergency Medical Service agreement between the county and
the City.
The Fire Prevention inspection activities will be the responsibil ity of
your department and or the Santa Clara County Pire Marsha]ls Office,
especially 1315 Elam Avenue is a facil ity that is reverted to your
authority and the City will disengage all initiated enforcement pro-
ceedings.
If you have any questions on any of the above, please contact this
officer.
(~!ui:ardS'
/' // Fire Ch{ef
L/
JFM:mm
/
cc: Robert Stephens, City Manager
Sal Leonardi, Safety Control Division
Art Kee, Planning Division
Wally Byron, Building Offfclal
COl'/lfllunicati:ons Divisron
Cliff Jobnson, SCCPM
Milt Silb~rberg, Co. EMS Coord,
.5.anta C fa}'a CO. Hea lth Dept,
Attachment
C~ttZ(L11S (\g(AA-Ml1or-ce.d Att1:\J0xo1WtL
G'tOOtJ #z) ~11:\;f)bdt A.~
OJ (jJt~f\#t
tfI?t 'I(JJ N;4INS7 ILLfJiAL. r4A1NCXATIQ'( INTO THt COY ?
""l iJC1J !'ILlJ~ TO M1aff TNt NrJVc TI7LtO
(pt't11ITltl TO IJA/IttI THIS lrruc TO C{JJ!(f ?
It sq fJLlIlSC CQW~ IM"fPItff[l.Y
/fMJ 1T1-2855 at
~~ 177-I'1J9 (M
HCMNm-8'Sl8
BffOl/C ')MJMY 10, 1981
711ft IS SIKJIff 1// IDJII HCLfJ /S NffPcO III
C.A.t.A. , 2
lu
MEMORANDUM
From Robert C. Stephens, City Manager
~~. J --/-*,
"'---.-
CITY OF CAMPBEll
December 31, 1980
Subject: ANNEXATION LOVELL 1979-16 (Property Owner--Kanawer; At torney--John Norman)
This will confirm the meeting scheduled for Honday, January 5, 1981, at
10:00 a.m. in the Administrative Wing Conference Room, to discuss the
above referenced matter. If you are unable to attend, please send a
representative from your department.
aj r
Distribution: Building Official
Public Works Director
Planning Director
Police Chief
Fire Chief
cc: Assistant to the City Manager
1\/' f
,d ~1 ei
f1 c~f f)'
AtJ ~R~~1
)Jl .~( 1
~~~i ~\
tJi 1 V{~ '
t '~
idJ
, .
'v.~t'"
~~
~
'fG~J
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF CAMPBEll
To
Jim McMullen, Fire Chief
Wally Byron, Building Official
Art Kee, Planning Director
Date:
December 18, 1980
From
'i.0
~ Robert C. Stephens, City Manager
(.
1;: '
I /". ,
J .
"'-..
Subject:
COMPLAINT--1315 ELAM AVENUE
/
--------------------------!--~
j
!
Attached is a copy of a memorandum from Fire Division Chief Sal Leonardi,
detailing violations at the above address which have been brought to the
city's attention by the Santa Clara County Health Department. Apparently
this is a parcel of land which has recently been incorporated into the
city.
I concur with Sal that a joint inspection should be made by those departments
having jurisdiction. Would you arrange to have someone from your department
meet with Sal and conduct a joint inspection.
RCS:ajr
Attachment
cc: City Attorney
CITY OF CAMPBELL.
MEMORANDUM
To.
Robert C. Stephens, City Manager
Date:
December 4, 1980
~t.GEIVtO
DEG 1 0 198U
From"
Sal Leonardi, Fire Division Chief
rln MAN'~fR'~ lIfF1r.F
Subject: 1315 ELAM AVENUE COMPLAINT
Appro,,!.~ _@_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~~t~~ _ /;3 -=~::_ f[Q_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.__
On Thursday, December 4, 1980, I received a phone call from a Gary Bianconi
of the Santa Clara County Health Department. He had visited the house at
1315 Elam Avenue and found some conditions that are in violation of the
health regulations. He also told the owner that he must initiate garbage
service, knowing although, that this should be handled by the City of
Campbe 11 now.
He was inquiring also to see if there was going to be a joint inspection
by the various departments that have jurisdiction. I explained that no such
inspection had been arranged yet, but I was hoping that it would occur shortly.
I am now asking that each department head, who may have enforcement re-
sponsibility in this matter, assign a member of his staff to participate in a
joint inspection. After this inspection, we will be able to report to the
City Attorney and seek di rection in enforcement of the City Ordinances.
Th i s
sent to you at your request.
SAL: mm
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF CAMPBELL
Honorable City Council
From Planning Staff
Date:
December 4, 1980
Subject: Ci ty Council Referral
956 S. San Tomas Aquino Road
- -- - -~ - _0- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ u_ __
DISCUSSION
At its meeting of November 24, 1980, the City Council considered the request
of Mr. John Norman for approval of plans to construct a 9-unit condominium
project on the subject property. The application for approval of plans had
been initiated with the County since the property was not annexed to the
City until November 1, 1980.
The information provided below was obtained from the County files for this project
and from discussions with the County Planning staff. The following chronology of
e~ents h~s been prepared by staff in an effort to help clarify the status of this
appllcatlOn.
10-11-77 Application filed to change zoning from Rl-8 to R-3-2.4
to allow construction of 9-unit residential development
on the .75 gross acre parcel (resulting density is 12
units per gross acre).
County Planning Department refers application to the
City of Campbell.
10-13-77
10-14-77
r:- 9-7~--)
! .
1-13-78
2-16-78
6-26-78
Campbell Planning Department notifies applicant that
staff would like to meet with applicant to discuss
plans.
Campbell Planning Department notifies County that:
1. Property shown on the Campbell General Plan for
residential (6-13 units per gross acre).
2. The City would require the applicatn to dedicate
additional right-of-way to widen San Tomas Aquino
Road to 30 feet from centerline.
3. Install standard street improvements across the
frontage of the property.
County prepares Negative Declaration for project.
Santa Clara County Planning Commission recommends
approval of zone change and plans.
City of Campbell amends th~d Use Element of._the
General Plan from Low-Medium Density Residential
to Low Density Residential.
City Council Refer,
956 S. San Tomas Aquino Rd.
-2-
December 4, 1980
7-24-78
Applicant files application for Architectural and Site
approval for 9-unit, single story, development.
8-21-78
County staff advises applicant that application is not
complete and that specified additional information must
be submitted in order for application processing to
proceed. If material not submitted within 90 days, a
new application is required.
1-3-79
Applicant resubmits application for Architectural and
Site approval.
County staff advises applicant that application, as
resubmitted, is complete.
12-7-78
1-25-79
Architectural approval granted by the County.
(Application good for one year, may be extended if
request is made). No extension inaicated.
2-15-79
11-26-79
County Planning Commission approves tract map.
City of Campbell adopts Ordinance 1251, prezoning subject
property R-l.
9-16-80
Applicant submits application for extension of time for
subdivision map.
Memorandum to County Planning Commission from County
staff indicates that referral was made to City of
Campbell. The city staff can find no record of receipt
of this referral.
8-4-80
11-1-80
Subject property is annexed into the City of Campbell
under MORGA proceedings known as Lovell 79-16.
Santa Clara County Planning Commission approves 12-month
extension of the tentative map.
11-6-80
PJS:ld
""+''''"
-:.. _ .,.,- ~ ~J<-_
J
~"';"";;"'r .~ _...~~~...........,;.~......:':"...._-.",~._~~"... 4'
I ,-.
-,
B.
COtNJNICATIONS AND PETITIONS
*2. Letter--J. N. Norman re proposed deve1opment--956 South San Tomas
Aquino Road
DISCUSSION:
As indicated in Mr. Norman's letter, a meeting was held at his request,
with the City Attorney, Principal Planner and myself to discuss the
recent annexation of Lovell 79-16, which has created a hardship on his
clients. We informed Mr. Norman and his clients that the staff had no
authority to authorize his clients to proceed with the processing of a
building permit through the County of Santa Clara. The county has
notified ~tt. Norman that they would have to have our approval since
this property was annexed effective November 1, 1980.
Mr. Norman will be present to make
requesting permission to continu
the County of Santa Clara. Mr.
to respond to any questi
AGENDA: .-November 24, 1980
ITEM B- 2
11/24/80
JOHX N. 1':oRHAX
R r. ,~ E ' i / '- .
--I....: .. 5 to;' I)
ATTORNEY AT LAW
660 COMMuNITY BANK BUILDING
III WES:- ST. .JOHN STREET
SAX JOSE, CALIFOR~IA 95113
November 17, 1980
NOV 17 1980
em CLERK'S OffiCi
"'E_E~HONE 408 295-9230
z..:.:"
Mr. Robert C. Stephens, City Manger
City of Canpbell
75 North Central Avenue
Campbell, California 95008
Re: 9-Unit Condominum Project
956 S. San Tomas-Aquino Road
Campbell, California 95008
Gary Kanawyer, Owner
APN 405-1l-00l
Dear Mr. Stephens:
Confirming our conference of November 12, 1980, we
submit the following information to bring to your attention
that the recent annexation of Lovell 79-16 has created a
hardship on my clients, Gary Kanawyer and his wife Carol
Kanawyer. Basically the problem is that immediately prior
to the completion of the annexation, my clients had
processed an application for a building permit on property
at 956 South San Tomas-Aquino Road through the County of
Santa Clara, and I understand that final approval would have
been forthcoming from the County but for the annexation.
A short background is in order:
The referenced development project was initiated by Mr.
Fred Santacroce in 1978. The property was located in an
unincorporated area of Santa Clara County. Therefore,
applications and approvals by the County and various
agencies were processed through the County offices.
Architectural and site approval conditions from the
County Planning Department are dated January 29, 1979. The
tentative map was approved June.25, 1979.
Site grading and street improvement plans along with
the building plans were completed and accepted by the County
in December, 1979. Approvals include Health Department,
Sanitary District 4, Transportation Agency, Campbell Fire
Department, P.G.& E., telephone company and San Jose Water
Works. The final subdivision map is ready to record and the
building plans have been checked and the permits are ready.
These permits include recent County requirements for solar
equipment.
November 17, 1980
Page T~JO
The Santa Clara County Planning Commission approved a
l2-month extension of the tentative map on November 6, 1980.
To date, Mr. Kanawyer has expended the following fees:
Santa Clara County
San Jose Hater ~'lorks
Architectural Design
Engineering Design
Donald Banta & Associates
San Jose Blue Print
Insurance
Total
$ 3,308.66
175.00
3,000.00
8,800.00
1,246.46
185.44
22l.00
$16,936.56
Great hunan and financial resources have been expended
on this project to date. He ask that all legal efforts be
made which will allow this project to proceed. In that
connection we would submit that the most expeditious
resolution of my client's particular problem would be to
per~it the fJatter to be processed through the County of
Santa Clara. This is the result that would obtain by the
commencement of litigation under Government Code Section
35004 in any case. It would seem to us that the equitable
thing to do would be to permit the County to continue the
process and approval procedures.
Thank you for
JNN/nm
'I
cc: Bob Dempster
client
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF CAMPBELL
To:
Robert C. Stephens, City Manager
Dne: November 20, 1980
RECEIVED
NQV 2 1 l~ol.J
From:
James F. McMullen, Fire Chief
CITY MANAGfR'~ Offlr.f
Su~ect: 1315 ELAM AVENUE
----------------------------------------------------------
In the way of an update on the above facility on which we received a citizen's com-
plaint, we have been informed by the Santa Clara County Fire Marshal IS Office that
the County Counsel IS Office has rendered a legal opinion that the responsibility
for gaining compl iance with regulations and abating the hazards at this facility
now rest with the City of Campbell, since it has been officially annexed.
I have asked Division Chief Leonardi to obtain the background material from the
County Fire Marshal's Office, and he has performed an inspection of the premises
(see attached Exhibit IIA"). I am in agreement with Division Chief Leonardi's re-
quest that we should pursue total compl iance of all violations on this property.
Therefore, by copy of this letter I am requesting him to make contact with the
other appropriate departments and set up a joint inspection program.
Attachment: Exhibit "N1
cc: Wally Byron, Building Official
Arthur Kee, Planning Director
Sal Leonardi, Division Chief
Robert Dempster, City Attorney
Santa Clara County Health Department, EHS
2220 Moorpark Avenue, San Jose 95128
CITY OF CAMPBEll
MEMORANDUM
To.
James F.McMullen, Fire Chief
Date: November 18, 1980
From: Sa 1 Leona rdi, Di vi s ion Ch i ef
Subject: 1315 ELAM AVENUE
I have reviewed the letter from the anonymous citizen and have inspected
the property. As a result of that inspection, I have found the following:
1. There is an accumulation of lumber in the rear yard, as a result of
the building fire and demolition of the bui Iding afterwards. There are
also pi les of stacked lumber there
2. There are two portable toi lets in various states of disrepai r, also
part of the fi re damage.
3. The lot is full of other debris such as metal pipe, 55 gallon drums,
an old propane tank and other metals.
4. There is a small travel trai ler a1qng the easterly property line.
5. The main bui Iding is secure.
6. There is no fence along the northerly property line. .
.
I think you wi:11 agree with me when I say that elimination of the lumber
wi 11 not solve the problem addressed in the citizen's complaint. There
wi 11 still be all the rest of the items to be taken care of by other depart-
ments.
In addition, I have contacted the following agencies:
1. Green Valley Disposal Co. - No garbag~ service.
2. Pacific Gas & Electric - No gas or electric service.
3. San Jose Water Works - Water service is on.
If there are people residing at this address with no gas or electric service,
the Building Department should be made aware of that fact. If the trailer is
being used as a living unit, the Building Department should be made aware of
that fact. If raw sewerage is coming out of the trailer, the Health Department
shou I d be made awa re of that fa ct. The po in t that I am mak i ng is that a j 0 in t
effort by'al1 affected agencies should be made to avoid duplication. If you
wish, I wi II continue to attempt to abate the lumber storage problem, but I
EXHIBIT "A"
think the City Attorney would appreciate having the Sui lding, Zoning,
Health, Fi re and Garbage problems incorporated in one Show Cause hearing
rather:~th n five or more separate hearings with the same property owner..
SAL: mm