 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Planning Home | Services Overview | Hearings | General Plan | Zoning Ordinance | Development Review Environmental Review Links | SJ Home Page | Contact Us |
Planning Home | Services Overview | Hearings | General Plan | Zoning Ordinance | Development Review Environmental Review Links | SJ Home Page | Contact Us |
Public Hearings: 2004 Hearing Agendas
Planning Commission Agenda
Synopsis
Wednesday, June 9, 2004
6:00 p.m. Meeting
1. ROLL CALL
ALL WERE PRESENT.
2. DEFERRALS
Any item scheduled for hearing this evening for which deferral is being requested
will be taken out of order to be heard first on the matter of deferral. A list of
Staff-recommended deferrals is available on the Press Table. If you want to change any of
the deferral dates recommended, or speak to the question of deferring these or any other
items, you should say so at this time.
DEFERRED
TO 6-23-04. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR Notice to Public: The consent calendar items are considered
to be routine and will be adopted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of
these items unless a request is made by a member of the Planning Commission, staff or the
public to have an item removed from the consent calendar and considered separately. If
anyone in the audience wishes to speak on one of these items, please come to the podium at
this time.
APPROVED
(7-0). PULLED FROM CONSENT BY COMMISSIONER ZITO FOR
CLARIFICATION ON RECOMMENDATION TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF LEGAL NON-CONFORMING
USE. STAFF CLARIFIED NEW
MASONRY WALL AND REMOVAL OF PAY PHONE WILL IMPROVE COMPATIBILITY OF USE WITH
PROXIMATE RESIDENTIAL AND THAT USE ON SITE WILL BE APPROPRIATELY PERMITTED
THROUGH THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. APPROVED
(7-0). APPROVED
(7-0). RECOMMEND
APPROVAL (7-0). RECOMMEND APPROVAL
(7-0). DROPPED. The following items
are considered individually. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS CONTINUATION OF PLANNING
COMMISSION HEARINGS ON THE 2004 SPRING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
DEFER TO 7-26-04
aa. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE 2004 SPRING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
RECOMMEND APPROVAL (7-0). COMMISSIONER ZITO COMMENDED STAFF FOR STREAMLINING EFFORTS.
APPROVED (7-0). DEFERRED TO 6-23-04 FOR PREPARATION OF THE RESOLUTION. IN RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONER PLATTEN, STAFF CLARIFIED THIS IS NEW ALCOHOL LICENSE APPROVAL. IN RESPONSE TO COMMISSION QUESTIONS, THE APPLICANT CLARIFIED APPROXIMATELY 10% OF TOTAL SALES ARE IN ALCOHOL DEPARTMENT. STORE EMPLOYEES CLARIFIED TRAINING RECEIVED TO DEAL EFFECTIVELY WITH CUSTOMERS WANTING TO PURCHASE ALCOHOL, SITH NO "SINGLES" SOLD, AND EFFECTIVE PROTOCOL FOR RESTRICTING SALES TO MINORS. STORE MANAGEMENT INDICATED NEED TO PROVIDE "ONE-STOP" SHOPPING TO STAY COMPETITIVE.
COMMISSIONER LEVY INQUIRED ABOUT NEED FOR HARD LIQUOR SALES, IN ADDITION TO BEER AND WINE. STORE OWNER EXPLAINED THAT SALE OF BEER/WINE VERSUS HARD LIQUOR WAS GENERALLY IN THE 60/40 PROPORTION. PUBLIC TESTIMONY COMMENTED THAT THIS PARTICULAR MARKET PROVIDES A NEEDED SERVICE TO THIS INNER CITY NEIGHBOR-HOOD, INCLUDING ABILITY TO SELL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES.
STAFF COMMENTED THAT IF COMMISSION WERE TO SUPPORT THE CUP, A CONDITION BE ADDED THAT OFF-SALE OF LIQUOR BE A SECONDARY USE TO A FULL-SERVICE GROCERY STORE. COMMISSIONERS CAMPOS, LEVY AND ZAMORA COMMENDED STORE OWNERS FOR RESPONSIBILITY TO THE COMMUNITY.
RECOMMEND APPROVAL (7-0). COMMISSIONERS ZITO AND LEVY REQUESTED CLARIFICATION REGARDING AMOUNT OF COMMON OPEN SPACE TO BE PROVIDED ON-SITE. STAFF CLARIFIED THAT ALTHOUGH ON-SITE SQUARE-FOOTAGE COULD BE LESS THAN RECOMMENDED IN THE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES, IMMEDIATELY ACROSS THE STREET IS A 5-ACRE PUBLIC PARK AND ON-SITE OPEN SPACE IS ADEQUATE. IN RESPONSE TO COMMISSION COMMENT, STAFF CLARIFIED DENSITY IN JACKSON-TAYLOR AREA WAS INCREASED THROUGH SEVERAL GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS, AND THAT STAFF CONCERN FOCUSED ON PRESSURE TO DEVELOP OTHER VACANT SITES IN AREA AT DENSITY OF 40+ DU/AC IF THIS SITE DEVELOPS AT JUST 26 UNITS PER ACRE. STAFF NOTED SITE COULD ACCOMMODATE PODIUM PROJECT GIVEN INTERFACE WITH RAILROAD LINE, AND NO IMMEDIATE ADJACENT SINGLE-FAMILY.
SEVERAL COMMISSIONERS COMMENTED PROPOSAL WAS A DIFFERENT HOUSING PRODUCT AND WOULD ADD TO HOUSING DIVERSITY IN AREA, AND NOTED PROPERTY OWNER HAD WORKED WITH PRIOR DEVELOPERS ON HIGHER DENSITY PROJECTS, WHICH HAD NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED. COMMISSIONER LEVY EXPRESSED CONTINUED CONCERN REGARDING HIGH PERCENTAGE OF ON-SITE PARKING PROVIDED IN TANDEM GARAGES AND THAT PROVIDED ON SITE PARKING DOES NOT MEET DESIGN GUIDELINES REQUIREMENTS. STAFF AND APPLICANT CLARIFIED THAT THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION TO BE CREATED FOR THE PROJECT WOULD PROHIBIT USE OF TANDEM GARAGES FOR ANY USE OTHER THAN PARKING.
RECOMMEND APPROVAL (7-0). PUBLIC TESTIMONY FOCUSED ON CONCENTRATION OF AFFORDABLE RENTAL UNITS IN COUNCIL DISTRICT 7 AND POTENTIAL FOR OVERCROWDING OF AREA SCHOOLS. COMMISSIONERS NOTED THAT THE RECENT GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT HAD FACILITATED DEDICATION OF PARKLAND TO THE CITY AND THAT IN RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, THE COMMISSION EXPRESSED THE DESIRE FOR AN AFFORDABILITY COMPONENT. COMMISSIONERS CAMPOS, ZAMORA AND DHILLON COMMENTED THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS AN ASSET TO AN AREA AND TODAY IS OF A LIKE QUALITY TO MARKET RATE HOUSING AND THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD UPGRADE THE SURROUNDING AREA AND IMPROVE LOCAL SCHOOL ACCESS AND DEVELOP A PARK FOR THE COMMUNITY. APPLICANT NOTED THERE ARE ONGOING DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS REGARDING CHANGING STUDENT POPULATION AND SCHOOL DISTRICT SUPPORTS THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
IN RESPONSE TO CONCERN BY COMMISSIONER ZITO REGARDING THE PROPOSED SETBACKS FROM PROJECT BUILDINGS TO EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE TO BE RETAINED, STAFF NOTED RESIDENT WOULD BE INVOLVED IN DETERMING POSSIBLE METHODS, SUCH AS LANDSCAPING, TO SOFTEN INTERFACE AT THE PD PERMIT STAGE
UPHELD APPEAL (4-3-0; ZITO, LEVY, DHILLON OPPOSED). DEFERRED TO 6-23-04 FOR PREPARATION OF THE RESOLUTION. STAFF CLARIFIED MAJOR CONCERN REGARDING PROPOSED HOUSE IS NOT SIZE, BUT MASSING, PARTICULARLY ALONG WESTERN EDGE. APPELLANT WAS NOT PRESENT AT THE HEARING, AND APPLICANT PROVIDED HIS COMMENTS. NEIGHBOR TO THE WEST OF PROPOSED PROJECT INDICATED APPLICANT HAD COMMITTED TO WORK TO IMPROVE INTERFACE WITH UNARTICULATED WALL WITH ROW OF TREES AND INCREASED FENCE HEIGHT.
COMMISSIONERS ZITO AND LEVY INDICATED SIZE AND TWO-STORY ASPECT OF PROPOSED HOUSE WERE NOT MAIN ISSUE WHICH WAS PRIMARILY ALONG WEST FAÇADE, BUT WERE CONCERNED THAT THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE GUIDELINES BE RESPECTED.
FIRST MOTION TO DENY THE APPEAL FAILED, COMMISSIONERS ZAMORA, PLATTEN, DHILLON AND CAMPOS OPPOSED. COUNSEL CLARIFIED NEED FOR COMMISION TO BE ABLE TO MAKE FINDINGS IN ORDER TO APPROVE PROJECT. SECOND MOTION MADE TO UPHOLD APPEAL WITH COMMISSIONER PLATTEN NOTING THE SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE OF PROPOSED HOUSE DESIGN WITH THE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES, WHICH PASSED (4-3; ZITO, LEVY, DHILLON OPPOSED).
UPHELD DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO APPROVE (7-0). COMMISSIONER ZITO NOTED GOOD LOCATION IN PARK FOR A TREE AND ASKED FOR CLARIFICATION AS TO FUTURE PLANS FOR RAISED PLANTED BED. STAFF CONFIRMED OVERALL SUCCESS OF OAK REPLANTING PROGRAM, EVEN WITH A COUPLE OF TREES NOT SURVIVING.
COMMISSIONER LEVY INQUIRED ABOUT POSSIBILITY OF REPLACEMENT TREE TO BE PLANTED IN RAISED PLANTER. APPLICANT'S ARBORIST CLARIFIED THAT RAISED BED WOULD ACT AS LARGE POT AND WOULD RESULT IN EXCESSIVE HEAT WHICH WOULD POTENTIALLY HARM ROOTS OF NATIVE OAKS. COMMISSIONER PLATTEN CONFIRMED WITH ARBORIST THAT A SYCAMORE OR OTHER DECIDUOUS TREE AS A REPLACEMENT IN RAISED BED COULD BE SUCCESSFUL. APPLICANT INDICATED MAINTENANCE OF STAGE IN PARK WAS IMPORTANT, AND MIGHT HAVE FUTURE ARCHITECTURAL ENHANCEMENT, BUT RELUCTANT TO RISK ANOTHER TREE AT THAT LOCATION.
COMMISSIONERS CAMPOS, PLATTEN AND ZAMORA ADMONISHED APPLICANT TO BE VIGILANT AND PROTECT RELATIONSHIP WITH NEIGHBORHOOD. COMMISSIONER ZITO ENCOURAGED APPLICANT TO WORK WITH STAFF TO CONFIRM PLANTING LOCATIONS FOR REPLACEMENT TREES.
UPHELD APPEAL (7-0). DEFERRED TO 6-23-04 FOR PREPARATION OF THE RESOLUTION. IN RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONER ZITO, COUNSEL CLARIFIED THAT THE LEGAL JUDGEMENTS REGARDING ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY CONFIRMED NO ONGOING ACCESS RIGHTS TO ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS AND THEIR INVITEES, AND THAT THE JUDGEMENT DOES NOT PROVIDE RESOLUTION TO THE POSSIBILITY A PROSCRIPTIVE EASEMENT MAY BE ENJOYED BY THE PUBLIC. COMMISSIONER LEVY ASKED ABOUT POSSIBILITY OF RETAINING PEDESTRIAN ACCESS. THE APPLICANT INDICATED ANY CONTINUED ACCESS WOULD BE A LIABILITY ISSUE FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER. COMMISSIONER LEVY NOTED ACCESS WOULD STILL BE AVAILABLE FROM SECOND PROPERTY WITH DRIVEWAY. APPLICANT CLARIFIED THAT PROPERTY UNDER SAME OWNERSHIP, BUT NOT A SUBJECT TO THIS SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT. NEIGHBORHOOD TESTIMONY FOCUSED ON HISTORIC NATURE OF PEDESTRIAN CROSS ACCESS FOR 80 YEARS. STAFF CONFIRMED INTEGRATED PARKING ARRANGEMENT IS LONGSTANDING AND IS APPROPRIATE TO CHARACTER OF A NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT AND HIGHLIGHTED ONGOING EFFORTS FOR LINCOLN AVENUE NBD TO INTEGRATE PARKING TO HELP VITALITY OF BUSINESS DISTRICT. STAFF EXPLAINED USE OF SIGNAGE OR PARKING ATTENDANT WOULD BE ALTERNATIVE TO FENCE TO PRESERVE PROPERTY OWNER RIGHTS. COMMISSIONERS EXPRESSED CONCERN THAT ALTERNATE METHODS WERE MORE COSTLY OR NOT EFFECTIVE. STAFF EXPRESSED CONCERN REGARDING POSSIBLE PRECEDENT FOR FENCING PARCELS IN OLDER SHOPPING CENTERS WITHOUT LEGAL EASEMENTS. COMMISSIONERS NOTED COURT HAD RULED FOR PROPERTY OWNER RIGHTS AND PERMIT FOR FENCE IS APPROPRIATE, ALTHOUGH NO FENCE WOULD BE BETTER FOR COMMUNITY.
5. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Public comments to the Planning Commission on nonagendized items. Please fill out a speaker's card and give it to the technician. Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes. The commission cannot take any formal action without the item being properly noticed and placed on an agenda. In response to public comment, the Planning Commission is limited to the following options:
1. Responding to statements made or questions posed by members of the public; or
2. Requesting staff to report back on a matter at a subsequent meeting; or
3. Directing staff to place the item on a future agenda.
NO COMMENTS
6. REFERRALS FROM CITY COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS OR OTHER AGENCIES
7. GOOD AND WELFARE
- Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport Curfew Monitoring Committee (Dhillon and James).
- Coyote Valley Specific Plan (Platten)
COYOTE VALLEY MEETING SATURDAY MORNING.
8. ADJOURNMENT