Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

of the planning commission. I'd like to call to order the meeting of September 23rd, 2025. Can we have a roll call, please? Uh, Commissioner Zizer, here. Commissioner Majuski, here. Commissioner Alan, here. Commissioner Buckbinder present. Commissioner Aqualina here. Uh, Vice Chair Fields and Chair Camcar present. Thank you very much. Okay, minutes. Has everyone had a chance to review the minutes? And are there any corrections or suggestions?

Uh, I'll move to approve the minutes for August 26th, 2025. Second. Okay. Uh, we have a motion and a second. Uh, if we can have a roll call, please. Commissioner Zisser. Hi. Commissioner Majuski. Hi. Commissioner Alan. Hi. Uh, Commissioner Buckbinder. Hi. Commissioner Alina. Hi. Vice Chair Fields. Hi. And Chair Camcar. Hi. All right. Thank you for that. So now we go to communications or agenda modifications or postponements.

Uh chair cam car commissioners Robbie community development director. No communications no agenda modifications.

Okay. Thank you for that. Next is oral communications. This portion of meeting is reserved for individuals wishing to address the planning commission on matters of community concern that are not listed on the agenda. In the interest of time, I may limit speakers to five minutes. Please be aware that state law prohibits the commission from acting on non-aggendaized items. However, I may refer the matter to staff for followup. Are there any one here in the gallery trying to address the commission? Okay, seeing none, how about online? Anyone?

No one online.

No one online. Okay. Thank you very much. So, next we go to public hearing. Okay. The first one is Craig Avenue, 740 Craig Avenue. This is a variance public hearing to consider the application of Adrien Javio. Sorry if I butchered the name. To allow retention, sorry, thank you. That retention of a driveway with a sub substandard sideyard setback constructed in association with a residential addition and remodel project on property located at 740 Craig Avenue. The application under consition is a variance file number PLN205-101. Um staff is recommending this item be deemed categorically exempt from SECO planning commission action is final unless appealed in writing to the city clerk within 10 calendar days. Um project planner Daniel Fo.

Excuse me, Mr. Chair. Could you ask for disclosures first? I did not. Thank you for my Thank you for the reminder. Um have uh are there any disclosures uh and whether you've visited the project or not? So, I have visited the project. Anyway, anyone on this side? Uh, yeah, I I visited both locations and the Craig Avenue location, I actually uh met the owner who was in his garage and approached me and we had a we had a brief general discussion. I introduced myself. So, Okay. Thank you for that. I actually live around the corner from this property. Um I believe I'm outside of the

500 500 feet but it's quite close. So I drive by by this pretty much every day. Okay. So you see it and so um I actually visited both places too but you know just regarding this one. Okay. So thank you for that. Um so Daniel, thank you.

Thank you. Uh good evening. So this is a public hearing to consider an application for a variance for 740 Craig Avenue. Uh this is a single family residential parcel located on Craig between Hazelwood and Hazel Avenues within the city's R16 single family zoning districts. Uh for a bit of background, the city approved a administrative sign architectural review permit back in 2022 that allowed for a major addition remodel to the residents. And that was actually an illustration from the application package. Uh that work has been nearly completed. Upon staff inspection of the site staff did identify that a driveway was not constructed per code. As the plan was originally approved, a non-conforming driveway that's actually shown on the bottom left from Google Street View was intended to be retained. However, the driveway was reconstructed and it did not comply with the city's requirement that new driveways have a five-foot setback from side property lines. So, upon discussions with the property owner looking at ways could be resolved, uh, staff did indicate that he did have the ability to apply for variance and seek an exception to the setback requirement if there were unusual circumstances that apply to his property. So the variance request in this case is to allow retention of the new driveway as it was constructed basically at a twoft setback as shown here in the middle illustration and on the right as well. So in terms of the sculper review as more detailed in your staff report uh in order to approve a variance the planning commission must make specific findings. These are codified in the city zoning code and the findings are modeled under state law. uh they cover a broad range of aspects but are looking at typically uh challenges associated with the physical site itself that present kind of a difficulty or unnecessary practical hardship if the property had to fully

comply with the standard and also indicating that the approval of the variance wouldn't grant any sort of special privilege to the property owner um and again I won't repeat all this but think the commission is fairly aware of the general concept context of a variance application In terms of just kind of a high level summary stamp analysis, uh what initially instigated the request is excavation around the property perimeter to expol to expose the crawl space and provide a ventilation as recommended by the applicant's contractor. This created a gradient differential with the adjacent property that then needed to be shored up with the retaining wall that was built along that fence line. So the retaining wall effectively took up two feet along the side property line that made it very difficult for a full fivestep back area to be normally utilized. In this case um if you had a typically without that type of encumberance you could actually have a walkway or landscaping along that 5 foot setback. In this particular case the applicant is looking to actually provide physical access to the ADU that's being constructed in the back. That's your conversion of a garage. However, with two feet of the site now encumbered by the retaining wall, the remaining three feet that's offset from the property line is really insufficient to create a dedicated pathway that's suff sufficiently distinct from the driveway as not to really be part of the driveway. So without that area, you would effectively have a walking path that's inside the driveway leading to the rear view and easily by a parked car. And so uh the core premise here is that without the variance uh the property owner would have inhibited access to the ADU and also then because of that would have full access use of an ADU in a manner that's typically allowed

per single family resident or property. Uh so therefore in response to the recommended findings for variance staff does recommend that the plan commission adopt the resolution approving a variance to allow retention of the substandard sideyard setback for the driveway. Thank you. Okay. Thank you for the presentation. Um commission Q&A. Um does anyone have any questions for um the staff? I have a quick question. Okay, let's start with Commissioner Gary Aquina. Um

just as a matter of access to the rear unit in an emergency, uh fire department and other local um emergency response teams have looked at this or do you normally have them look at this? They would look at it as part of the building permit review, but typically the fire department is more concerned about the building placement uh to the property line, not so much the side access. they would be able to access the property through the driveway typically. There's not actually a fire code requirement that speaks to driveways in the sense. Well, I just mean the access from the driveway to the ADU in the event of an emergency that street foot or whatever is would be adequate.

Yes. Because again, their code requirement really is pertaining to the building itself. I see. uh with driveways um they typically if the vehicles need to be moved or otherwise get in the route they can do that. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Yes. Um yeah just just just to make sure I understand. Um so this the the driveway reconstruction wasn't on the plans and that's how it was over. So it wasn't noticed, right, by by the planning department or building or whoever looks at at it. And so um so it just showed like the original whatever the driveway was going to be there was going to be there.

Correct. It showed an existing pave surface with a notation that existing driveway. Okay. Did did it show the um the the retaining wall coming all the way out to the street? It did not because that was something that came up during construction. Uh, I see. Okay. All right. Good. Thank you. Okay. Question.

Um, not about this property, but about the city requirement. Um, I live in a neighborhood where like every house is on this like a zero lot line. So like the driveways and the house is at zero feet. And like the way and now I'm reading this and I'm like, "Okay, if I ever want to replace my driveway, do I need a variance?" Well, if you wanted to replace it where it is, then yes, you would need a variance. Um, because otherwise all new driveways absent driveways that are shared amongst two property owners, do you need to be separated by five? Wouldn't it be 10 feet though because each property would have to do five feet?

Well, yes. driveway to driveway 10 feet but from the property line what was the justification what was the ration behind adding problem you know I did look at the 2004 file and didn't really speak to the reasoning why I mean our assumption is that it largely was an aesthetic standard just for more landscaping there did not appear to be any other reason why we've been in like we seem to have made most people's driveways is legal and think about that later. So, so I'll weigh in, but try not to color the merits of this project. Sure. Sure. This is my own curiosity.

I would say as an observation, uh, given the multitude of housing laws that push for up to 10 units on a single family property, we'll be taking a reook at a driveway standard that's 5. Not aware of many jurisdictions that enforce a five foot setback standard even prior to the current housing laws. Mhm. And again, when the housing laws push cities to release standards that would impede you putting ADUs or lot splits or up to 10 years on the property, it's something we'll have to think about.

Yeah. And I'd like to thank you for that comment, too, because my comment on on this scenario was the original sin to me was not the reconstruction of the house and the pulling out of the driveway. It was the passage of a law that made over 90% of the property owners in the city non-conforming. And with a wave of a hand, they're all living in sin now. As soon as they want to do something too much to the driveway, they got to come ask permission, do things. And I want to weigh that in this scenario that, you know, they went through how many approvals to get the house reconstructed, all these other things already that I can only imagine what it's like to then have to come back for this. And I can I can sympathize with with that,

you know. Thank you for that comment. Um, Commissioner, um, I think my only thought Well, I guess there's nothing the ball doesn't really do anything for this, but no, I never mind. It's a I think um and and also one thing I got to mention for our new commissioners our decorum are our uh way of operating is after presentation we can only we should only ask questions afterwards once everything's finished then we can give our comments and our thing but reserve this this one for questions you know basically so there's not a discussion period

there is there Just Yeah, we're not quite there yet. Sorry, I was led astray. No, it's my fault. I should have been more explanative. Um, now I do have a question. I always thought that setback refers to a overgrown structure, not a driveway or an underground structure. So um I'm I'm really surprised that uh setback refers I mean pertains to a driveway as well. Technically it's a different standard and there are setbacks that apply to buildings and ironically under state law the setback that applies to buildings actually now it's actually 4 feet.

Uh this is just a separate standard. I mean, I'm using the word setback because that's the typical way we describe the separation requirement, but technically I don't think it's actually literally described as a setback. It's a separation distance between the driveway and the property line. So, ideally, you would want um the driveway and then like a little landscaping on the side of it or Yes. I mean, as I I think provided a an image in staff report. So typically it either could be landscaped but on occasion it can also serve as a pathway that's physically distinct from the driving surface of a driveway. Yeah.

So those are really the two options for most people. Okay. So I will keep my um comments for the you know for the next one uh for the next time coming up. Um okay. So is the applicant here? Uh would you like to address the commission? Okay. Please. Yes. Yes. Please come to the podium. I'm going to open the public hearing. And so you have five minutes to address us or address whatever you heard.

Yeah. Uh good evening. Uh my name is Adrian Bellow. This is my wife Lulu Tang. We're the owners of the house at 740 Craig Avenue. and we're here to apply for the variance for uh for the house. Uh thank you Daniel for the presentation and everything in there is correct. Uh when we um during construction uh we found that our house is lower than the house uh to our neighbor and we didn't we we preserved the foundation of the original part of the house and we did not want to raise the floor because our sitting plans did not do so. So in order to properly expose the uh ventilation for the crawl space, we had to unearth about six uh 10 inches uh in the back of the house. And then in the front of the house, it came out to about six inches for proper um for a proper gradient for when our our contractor explained to us that we need a proper gradient for drainage in in event of rain. So um so we had to unearth that uh land and then uh that necessitated the reason for why we had to erect the retaining wall to properly brace um the fence between ours and our neighbors. So um so with that retaining wall we went all the way to the front of the property and then um uh during construction uh our driveway was mangled with a lot of the construction vehicles. So, we um repaved um the the driveway and paved up to the retaining wall and uh we also want that retaining wall to be accessible for our elderly parents who are um occupying the ADU as of right now.

Got it. Okay. Um so, I know I have a question. I'm sorry. And uh thank you for reminding me. Uh we also uh I forgot to u submit this to to Daniel, but we do have a signed petition of all of our neighbors uh saying that they they acknowledge uh the frontage of our house and they are okay with it. So it's all the surrounding neighbors in in our home. Um they all received a postcard. They said they could not be here today, but you know, they support um the front stage of our house. So we we'd like to submit this to to the city. Fantastic. Thank you. Okay. So I know I have a question, but I'm going to start from this end. Do you have any questions for our applicants? No. Uh, no questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. No questions. It's my only probably a question, but how how are we making sure that access is maintained with like the driveway and the path? You have a visual marker or anything like I mean your it's your parents. Oh, no. Yeah. There's not a visual like a there's not like a border bound that it really is just an extension of the driveway. I mean we we our pavers does have a border like a darker border around it but it doesn't separate like that walkway from the rest of the driveway. Right.

So my question I'm not sure who should answer but the retaining wall ends at the end of your property line or does it continue on to the the city you know where you have an easement where sidewalks would normally be? Uh, no. It uh Daniel, if you could um put up the slide again. It it right up to the property line. It doesn't go into the east. And then there's no sidewalk on your street. Is that what I was noticing? Correct. Yeah. So, our our our zone is uh sands the sidewalk in.

And so, if there was going to be a a sidewalk added later, the retaining wall like there's not an elevation or split right between your two lots. out down at that. It's just going to be a a slope, I guess, if you add correct. Yeah, the slope goes from 752. So, when it rains, the slope goes from 752 right down the down the street down that way. Yeah, Phil, you can you can see this you can you can see that it ends at the at the end of the driveway there in the in the middle picture. Oh, yeah. Behind the behind the And and and they actually the house next to them has has the one sidewalk because it's on the corner. I saw, right? So it ends there and that I believe it's pretty level. Yeah. At that point. So

if they ever extend that sidewalk, it looks fine to me. Yep. Thank you for that.

Thank you for that. Um so you know I also visited the property and I'm a civil engineer so actually I do this type of thing for a living. Um, and I noticed you had used pavers, you know, for the driveway, you know, I mean, you could have used like dirt, asphalt, concrete, stamp concrete, or pavers, and we chose pavers, which are probably the best, you know, or the, you know, most expensive way to go. But my question is um you had the choice of between um so-called interlocking papers where it's pvious and when the rain comes instead of having it sheet over it would just go in. Mhm.

Versus what you have which then would sheet over you know with what did the contractor ever give you that choice? No I I I actually I'm not aware of the different types of pavers when we move. So we went and purchased our pavers directly from and I don't I actually sorry so there are two types you know and so one type would let the water the porous between the joints not not through the paper but between the joints of the paper. I see. I see. Is that a tiny gap you know so water goes down and so you actually don't have would not have a drainage problem you know unless it drains cats and dogs. That's yeah, we were we were very uh cognizant about how the drainage happens because we don't want uh the water pulling up the foundation. So,

um during construction of the papers, I had my leveler out and making sure everything's blowing away from the house and also that the driveway has a proper gradient um leading out the street. Okay, very good. Thank you for that. Um I don't have any other questions. If not, then thank you for your testimony. You know, you can have a seat. Um um I'm going to uh Is there anybody online or No one online to speak on this item? No one online. Okay. So I'm going to close public hearing and then we're going to have our discussion. So anybody has any discussion regarding

Yes. So saying that for having largely the reason for the variance is that they desire access to the if they didn't have a gradient differential you would have the five foot area and then you could arguably just do a standard walking path back there but because the grading wall is effectively eating up two feet. The remainder three feet is really too narrow to create a distinct walking path that's physically separate, materially different than the driveway. And so, so because yeah, so because of the gradient, because of the wall, it's difficult to get a path to view, which is a reasonable request the homeowner to have. And therefore his solution is to physically just extend the driveway all the way up to the the wall so that you can have a level surface to walk back to the I just wanted to make sure I understood the reason why.

Okay, thank you. Um any other comments, questions? Yes, please go ahead.

Okay. Um yeah, I I I I just, you know, I'm I I support this uh variant. Um you know, after I went and read this and looked, it's like for the next I I saw it yesterday. And so for the next day or two, I'm looking at I'm looking at the houses I'm driving through to see where there's the five- foot setbacks. And I actually this afternoon was at my son's house in Santa Teresa, and they have the two five foot setbacks. and there's a there's a Oleander, you know, in the middle. Okay. So, it's it's it's pretty typical in a lot of single family homes, I think it that were built in certain period of time in in this area. So, uh yeah, I so I I get the who knows why other than aesthetics that they did that, but it's like this makes sense with regards to the fact that they had to put the retaining wall in. It looks very nice. There's the the the the fact is is that, you know, the if they didn't uh if they had if they did something where they had it had to put in some actually use the extra three feet, then you're you're walking next there's a really narrow way to walk next to the car to get to the the side gate. And so here you got a clear path and it's very clean that there is no obviously there's no landscaping there but but the the neighborhood is such that it's it's all over the place in that neighborhood anyway. And this is a neighborhood that has the rural non-sidewalk area and and and the the what's in front in the non-idewalk area is all over the place as well. So it's it it seems to me it fits fine with the neighborhood. It's very clean looking. The paving is beautiful. Um and and it

totally makes sense to me. So, I'm I'm in favor of it.

Okay. Any other comments? Um I'd like to make a comment is that I I'm also in support of the variance for all the reasons stated. Plus, the other reason is that when we have an ADU, it would be nice to allow parking space for that ADU. Otherwise, we're encouraging people to park in the street. That's against our uh our general desire. We rather that each unit takes care of their own parking and not burden the streets with extra cars, you know. So, so to me, um they did a good thing. And also what our director said are we should probably be looking at our um that are um uh you know I guess rules and um you know city ordinances to see maybe maybe it needs to be adjusted. Maybe this should have been something that would even take care of over the counter rather than a full-fledged you know variance meeting. So that's that's my comment. Yeah, I agree. And I mean it's very sweet they went and got all their neighbors to do it, but I wish they didn't have to do it. It just feels like

I would also note that variances are not free. Exactly. Exactly. So that's the other thing, not just the time commitment, but the money and the resource, you know. So, okay, great. Uh, so if there's no other comments, then um I'm open to a um motion. 21. I make a motion to approve the variance. Okay. Uh we have a motion. Is there a second? Second. Second. Perfect. You have a motion and a second. Commissioner Bookpindo. Um we can do a roll call, please. Uh Commissioner Zisser. I. Commissioner Majuski.

I. Uh Commissioner Alan. Hi. Uh Commissioner Buckbinder. Hi. Commissioner Opalina. Hi. Uh, Vice Chair Fields. Hi. And Chair Camcar. Hi. Okay. Wonderful. So, this motion passes seven to zero. Congratulations. All right. M Mr. Commissioner, before you go to the next thing, uh, M Mr. Chair, um, I made a mistake on on the minutes approval. I had the wrong agenda up and I I used the wrong date. I used the August 26th date. Did you catch it? So, but then I said no. So it should have been the 9th of September. I don't know. We need to revote it.

September 9th agenda rather than the August 26. Yeah. Okay. Well, thank you for correcting that. Yeah, there wasn't another. Okay. All right.

Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Next item. Um, this is 1300 DE Avenue conditional use permit. Public hearing to consider the application of Felicia Draw to allow the continued operation of an existing large studio fitness training doing business as Sedusa Studios on property located at 1300 D Avenue. The application under consideration is a conditional use permit file number PLN2025-10. Staff is recommending that this item be deemed categorically exempt from SQA. Planning commission action is final unless appealed in writing to the city clerk within 10 calendar days. Uh project planner uh Mr. Steven Rose.

Thank you and good evening uh Chair Cam Carr and members of the planning commission. So the particular project site is located at 1300 Dell Avenue. It's in the research and development zoning district located southeast of the intersection of East Hosianda and Dell Avenue. Uh the particular tenant space is 3200 square feet. It's located in a three tenant 7200 foot uh commercial building and the applicant's proposal is for a large fitness studio which requires a conditional use permit in the research and development zoning district. Uh this particular site has been used for studios since 2006, so nearly 19 years now. And there have been no complaints about its operations, noise or otherwise. And nor have there been any particular police concerns with the operation of this particular tenant. Uh as a special use in our code, uh it is limited to five years in the research and development zoning district. Uh this is a limitation which was put into the code in 2008 and it was intended to safeguard industrial areas for industrial uses. Uh in addition to uh providing like a term limit for studio uses in the research and develop research and development zoning district uh the code also does provide consideration uh for over concentration of these types of activities. So idea being we don't want to have every single tenant space turned into a studio. we look at those uses within 300 ft of its uh vicinity and in this particular case there are none so that's not really a consideration we need to make in this particular permit was but I felt it was it was worth noting uh just in terms of the operations of the particular tenants seduca um they will they do operate a ver various classes and activities which will permit up to 20 occupants at one time that's also now inclusive of staff uh they also conduct up to four special events per year this entitlement will formally recognize that activity. It's been occurring, I think, off and on for

several years now without incident. And this would be more specific to limiting those activities, which also invites really guests like we could watch uh performances and that type of thing up to 40 occupants at one time. Uh the hours of operation would range from 6:00 a.m. to 11 p.m. This is providing the the broadest breath of hours that our code allows for without being considered a late night activity. uh that really the intent of that is provide maximum operational flexibility uh for this business and fitness activities in general to operate and make the best and highest use of spot. Uh typically fitness facilities, they need to operate before work hours or sometimes after. That's why early morning helps out. And then in terms of uh where the activities will occur, they're all occurring indoors with no outdoor sound or music association with the use. Uh, in conclusion, staff is recommending the planning commission adopt a resolution approving the conditional use permit allowing for the continued operation of the existing large fitness studio. With that, that concludes staff's presentation. I'm available for any questions.

Okay. Thank you very much. Does is there any questions for staff? Yeah, I just thought I would. Go ahead.

Um, so um I I I went to the website and read about it. Um I'm unfamiliar with this operation, but but the events the events that um would occur, they're apparently there like bachelorette parties or all girls night out kind of thing. Um I'm I'm assuming that might involved having food and drink and including alcohol that I don't know that. But if if that were the case, do we have any restrictions on that? I do know that the project applicant is available online. So she can speak a little bit more to the specifics of the operation the events in addition to bachelor at parties or otherwise. I think the general characterization in a lot of the materials that were provided is this is like friends and family of those who have been practicing and kind of it's like a showcase almost like if you imagine if you have a different type of fitness facility use like karate and there's a point in time during the year where they do a showcase and their friends and family invited to watch the activity. Uh I do know the use does have ancillary retail sales on site which is like minor fitness equipment that they'll sell on site. as far as uh special events having alcohol use that this particular permit would not grant that. If they were to pursue such an activity, they'd need to obtain a one-day liquor license minimally and we need to evaluate how that would um be permissible at this particular location. As far as food or snacks goes, I I could I would have to defer to Felicia who I know is online.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions for staff? Go ahead. question. Um, the permit expired in 2022. Um, we didn't notice. Do we audit these in any way? Like, and I I I feel like we've had these don't happen constantly, but from time to time. So, I have a question about like what happened.

Uh, it's a fair question. Um, I will candidly say the city has maintained various different ways of tracking permit expirations over the years. Um, most notably we maintain a system called a tickler. I don't know why it was called that, but that's what it was called where uh we would be sent like an email notification to alert us of a permit expiration.

Uh, in this particular case, it was either missed or not, you know, tracked or logged. In that particular case, it actually came to the city's attention when I believe another tenant was interested in operating a fitness studio in the area. We're going through that kind of that check kind of at the counter. Are there other businesses within 300 feet of where they'd like to operate? They kind of came to our attention, oh yeah, Seducus has been here, you know, obviously for 19 years and and their permit had expired and that we probably should do a little bit more due diligence. I'd say that since this permit has expired, the city's adopted a new has established a new permitting software called My Government Online, which does allow us to set up a um like a an alert uh to to let staff know and even send u notifications to applicants directly so that they are also made aware that they'll need to come back in and apply for a new permit hopefully prior to that expiration occurring.

And we're putting all the old stuff in it, too. It's challenging because again it's two totally different non- congruent systems. Yeah. And we we these sometimes do rise to our attention when they come up. Okay. Uh and then my other question was it looks like they submitted this in January and then we like approved it in June and now it's late September. So like that does seem long but I don't know what all happened as part of it. But yeah. So this permit was when it originally came in it was processed. We had a contract planner at the time. His name is Nishant Cion

and you know all permits they go through a process by which they're reviewed and made sure that they are providing adequate materials and information about the continued nature of the use and activity. Uh presumptively there have been rounds of uh completeness comments which were issued to try to figure out exactly how this operation works. I know in particular um some there were some building code concern concerns which were raised with most this most recent submitt um that had not been raised in the the preceding 19 years of its operation. So there's going to be an inspection of the property following tonight following any action on the permit tonight

uh where if they were to continue operating we're going to make sure that that's being done in an accessible capacity and has appropriate signs limiting maximum occupancy and that type of stuff. I believe some of that was resulting in some delay in the review of the process but then also just obviously handoff between the project and other timelines and commitments does result in delay in these nine months is unusually long. Okay. Uh candidly these permits don't typically take more than four to five months to get to a decision. This was an unusual circumstance just given the handoff. Got it. Okay. Thank you.

So a question. I actually have a disclosure and a question, but um I' I've taken many classes at this studio, I will say. Um but my question was, is there are there going to be classes starting at 6 and ending at 11 or is that more for um instructors and admin type of things?

The idea is that that the applicant's not requesting that. So, I think that they're not proposing to change their operational hours. Again, Felicia could speak to it. in the applicant's written statement, uh, their product description. I think it says what times. I I could flip to that particular attachment. I don't think anything starts prior to 9:00 a.m., but understand this might when we're approving uses, we're not looking at the particular tenant or their operation. Historically, P planners do have this tendency of approving it just for exactly the hours that this particular applicant is requesting without a lot of flexibility for future operators. If there were to be some other fitness indoor gym or weightlifting activity which we wanted to subsume this operational this conditional use permit, it provides that flexibility so they could come in at an earlier morning hour and do those activities without yet yet again needing to get a modification or a new conditional use permit to make that happen. That's the idea.

And but being in the industrial zone, it's presumptively not near residential, which would mean the normal people that would be aggravated by extended operating hours are just not present. So why don't we do us all a favor and be as permissive as possible? I I will add that that was like that was a consideration and expanding the hours that you don't have those lower low density residential or sensitive receptors nearby. It's pretty much a budding like a perk bond on one side and comparable industrial and commercial buildings on all other sides.

Okay. Um so I have two questions. So you said these permits have five year total. Then how how are they able to be there for 19 years? You know I I think I missed something. Yeah, great question. So the code provides that there's a maximum period of time which the city may grant in any given single conditional use permit approval of five years. They can come back and get another use permit for five more years and then five more years and every five years rins and repeat.

Uh in two in two cases we've approved less than five years when this business originally operated. It operated without the benefit of the permit. So we discounted the total number five to to some lesser amount. this particular case again recognizing that that the conditional use permit has already expired this permit would be staff has recommended a slightly limited time period as well but could is it permissible to make it for a full five from this day forward

it is so that's actually if you read at the end of the report there is an alternative the very first alternatives I speak to rather than taking the staff approach which staff is recommending that we do limit it as to kind of not reward the behavior of not getting a conditional use permit in a timely manner. Uh it is ultimately the applicant's responsibility, the property owner's responsibility to ensure that they are maintaining a valid land use entitlement at all times. The city does do everything it can to try to provide notifications and alerts. They reach out in the event that there is we drop the ball so to speak. Um it's ultimately on them to make sure that that's happening. This particular case that did not happen. So that the the permit did expire and rather than rewarding that expiration by giving a full five years, we pretty much discounted that time in which they were operating without the benefit of a permit. But that absolutely is something that the planning commission consider doing is granting that fiveyear um and the full five years allowed by code at this at tonight uh by just taking the first alternative that's uh presented in the staff report. And and and how many year how long has it been since the expiration of the Exactly. It's over two years, right?

About two years. Yeah. So I mean I think this current permit would then run through January 20th of 2027.

Okay. So I have a second question. The second question is uh I I I visited this you know establishment yesterday. You know the doors were locked you know it you know. So it wasn't open but from a parking requirement when I visited I think it was around 11:00 a.m. maybe 11:30 parking lot was full, you know, and if you have uh, you know, 20 people, you know, in your class or even 10 people, you know, what's what's the parking situation like?

Also, a great question. Um, it's a little bit complicated. Uh, this particular site and use does not technically require any parking per AB2097. There's a discussion in the report that talks about parking obligations. Uh what's interesting the site is it does have an approved site approval which did I believe established I think 29 parking spaces on the property for the whole building

for the whole building all three tenant spaces the 7200 foot building. Uh what's happened in recent years is one of the other tenants uh at the rear of the building has kind of expanded their operation into those designated parking areas blocking off access and creating kind of an outdoor storage area which is not permissible by code. So as a separate code enforcement activity, city has reached out to the landlord and that tenant uh to try to get corrective action. The idea is that there's meant to be a a looped driveway that kind of surrounds the building and restoring back all of those prior parking spaces that were per the 1960s something site approval I believe.

Okay. So, uh just since you mentioned it, so I drove down and I had to turn around drive back. So, in theory that's not really what it was supposed to do. I was looking for an out around the building.

That's correct. It's the site's served by two driveways. one on the northerly property line northerly property line and one on the southerntherly just actually shared with the other neighbor to the south. The idea is you're meant to kind of enter theoretically on the north and kind of do a loop and then come out because that's completely closed off to create an outdoor storage area. It's not even a permissible activity. It's not something the city could even allow that other tenant to do. They'll have to restore it back. It might take time to unwind that operation because I do think that they've done improvements outdoors, but that's a separate action. We're not we're not penalizing this tenant for another tenant,

but that the idea is that we are working to restore back those parking spaces that are meant to be here, which will hopefully resolve uh the occupancy number and yeah, there's also street side parking, I should in addition to the on-site. Okay. Okay. If there's no other question for staff, then we like to hear from the applicant. Is the I'm going to open the public hearing. If anyone online would like to speak, raise your hand. I recognize uh Felicia Drake and you have been allowed to speak.

Hello. Um good evening to you all. Thank you so much for your time and uh yeah, efforts into all this. So I took a couple notes throughout that um first with the um events. So the events that we outlined in the believe it was it was the project description or project plan um specifically refer to when we have showcases which pretty much is like our students, you know, who have been working really hard and want to show their friends and family, you know, the skills that they've uh acquired um you know, and put on a a performance for them. Um and so that's when like you know we have like a larger crowd. Um the bachelorette parties um and you know girls night out parties those are we've always kind of considered them falling more into like our class type of structure. You know it's like a um facilitated lesson where you know everyone learns something. Um, we definitely do not allow alcohol or food on the premise. Uh, mainly because we don't want to clean up food and because, you know, alcohol and dancing would be very very dangerous and huge liability. So, we absolutely don't um have that uh in the facility. Um, and then the other thing that came up was ours. Um, and yeah, we uh typically have classes um pretty much from 5:00 p.m. to about 9:00 p.m. right now. That's our like solid schedule. Five days a week we have that. Um, and then sometimes we have daytime classes on Saturday and Sundays. Um, we don't have any early morning classes right now. um we have in the past, but it's not a thing that tends to be very

popular um with our clients, so we don't have that. Um and yeah, most of our classes are in the evening, you know, after people get off work. It is, you know, an adult uh only studio since it's pole dance. Um and um so we don't typically have many problems with uh you know, parking with the nearby businesses luckily because they don't really overlap. Um, yeah. Is there any other questions for me? Uh, thank you for the presentation. Um, are there any questions?

Yeah. Yeah, I've got a question. Felicia, you know, we the the the issue about the uh expiration of this. It's it seems to me you've had you've gotten uh new certificates since this has been going on for 19 years. you've gotten uh due certificates at least two two or three times kind of it fell by the wayside. So I was wondering uh what happened there.

Yeah, that's a great question. Um so I actually bought the studio um or so I was you know uh doing owner finance to buy the studio beginning in 2017. So, um, like I started as a student there and just fell in love with it and began teaching and then eventually bought this studio. Um, and so when I bought it, um, you know, I I'll take responsibility. I should have done more due diligence. Um, but I didn't even know that we were not zoned correctly and that we had a conditional use permit. This wasn't something that the previous owner told me. And so, you know, uh continued to pay the uh business license every year, you know, and I thought that that was um sufficient. And so, it was quite a surprise when I got the notice in November that our conditional use permit uh had expired. And um yeah, so I reached out right away and was, you know, like, let's resolve this. But, um, I definitely, um, yeah, I I should have done more due diligence around that when I bought the studio. And, uh, yeah.

Okay. Thanks. Yeah. Okay. Um, any other questions for Felicia? Hearing none. Thank you very much. Thank you. Closed. Uh, are there anyone uh online that would like to comment? Anyone else online would like to speak? Please raise your hand. Uh, seeing no hands raised, no one online would like to speak. Okay, so I'm going to close public hearing. Back to staff. Any um any additional reports?

No, nothing to add. Okay. So, we're uh now we're going to get our discussions if any regarding this issue. Okay. I I'll go if nobody else's. Um so, uh you know, I I I I support, you know, giving them a a new conditional permit. And um you know I I think you know sometimes stuff slips through the uh cracks here and with with um with uh businesses as well. So So um it seems to me if we give them a shortterm one, it's only going to be two years and change here before they have to come back for another one. So it's it seems like a necessary I I would support giving him five years from this point. Um, and you know, uh, that the business has been around for a long time. Uh, she bought the business, uh, 2017, so she's even had the business for quite some time. So, so it seems to me it's a good business. We don't have any complaints. Um, and so I would I would support five years from this point on if other commissioners are agreeable to that.

Okay. Any other comments? Uh, go ahead, Adam. Um, I'm just like I'm aware that a conditional use permit is a non-trivial thing to go through and like nothing on their end is going to change every five years. I feel like if we're doing streamlining this year, this is something we should look at. Maybe bump this kind of repeating thing down to an administrative permit if we want to have it be looked at every so often. I know this are a lot faster and cheaper. Um because we're not going to suddenly look at this and say, "Ah, something that a business that there's no complaints about that we approved five years ago, we're suddenly not going to approve." Um I I don't think this I think we could streamline this. Um and as for this particular use, I agree with Commissioner Zisser that if we're going to reoff this in the same fashion five years from now is is obviously the right thing to do.

So I have a clarifying question before I go to the next speaker. Um, we could go anywhere from two and a half to five. It could be four. It could be four and a half. Right. That's correct. Anything less than five. Anything less than five. Okay. Uh, next. So, I think my only concern is are we going down a slippery slope? Taking Adam's concerns into account that yeah, it's an expensive process. It takes time. But what's to stop another business from saying, "Oh, I forgot." Yeah. and coming back and saying, "Can you just, you know, grant me now I'm four years late. I want five years."

I mean, it's the city's responsibility to handle that, right? I mean, this would not have happened if the city hadn't lost track or the previous owner didn't tell Felicia that, you know, it's expired or it's expiring at a certain date. If the city had remembered, and like I understand the boss is not the city is bad, but like I don't think um no matter how much not honor wants to pretend that they forgot it like the city will show up and and say hey we got to react except when you don't I think we should be able to rely on the city to to do this.

Okay. Um I still I still I understand your point and accept it. I still think it's it could be a slippery slope. So, Phil, how many years do you recommend if we were to anywhere between two and a half to five? Well, part of me would say um you know, make them get a two-year permit. And yes, it's unfortunate, but at least it's it keeps a standard that was adopted by the city. Um, I'd like to go along with five as well, but you know, I don't know, part of me wants to say there's there's two sides on this that both kind of missed something. So, quote unquote, who has to pay them

or does anybody have to pay? Well, your concern is about setting precedents, you know, that too. Yeah. Okay. Thank you for that. Um, uh, my comment a couple is I might suggest that if we're going to do a vote, we try for the the full five and if there's not enough votes for that, then then try for something less. Also try

Yeah, something like that. Then we can kind of know where where we can say yes, where we can. Uh my personal view is as much as I'm sympathetic to the moral hazard, uh I just think living in grace with some mercy has its merits that we all benefit from too. And if we can is it is it permissible to log as a note that we did this special dispensation in the granting of this so that if it were not renewed timely next time, no such further grace would then be likely to occur. It's recorded in the in in the action. Yeah. So, the resolution would reflect the the time that was granted by the planning commission and when if and when this item does return in its fiveyear or whatever particular timeline that's established tonight. Uh that would also be reflected in the background in the staff report saying what had happened and just like tonight's item had been presented.

And the thing that weighs in my mind, thank you for that. And what weighs in my mind about precedents and moral hazard is we got no complaints 19 years of business and there has to be a value to our community of that that is worthy of some of something at this time and and we ourselves are benefited by not reviewing another likely to be approved variance sooner than we have to. So I think I think everybody can win in the hopes that we're not starting a snowball that buries us all. Okay. Thank you for that. Um, Commissioner,

I'm in agreeance of um, sending for five years. I don't think we should be penalizing. I don't really see the the broader purpose of that. Um, this is a, you know, like everyone else has said, it's a very established business. Um, I'd rather Miss Drake spend her time working to help her students than having to go through a permit process um, in two more years personally. And that's my view. Can I make an additional point? I'm sorry. Let me see if there's any other I think he got everybody except you. Well, no, there's two of us. Two of us that haven't talked yet, but but why don't you go first and then Oh, I'm sorry. Oh, it's all right.

Um, I do feel like the onus should be on the city to notify our CUPs, having gone in depth on them. They're different city by city. We've had chains in here that have multiple locations that are confused why Campbell has requirements that other local cities don't. Like I think the onus is on us to talk to the businesses about this and hopefully we can automate this more over time. This seems like a very AI friendly kind of thing to be looking at. Um so I'm very supportive of five years in this instance because I think we should have let them know. Feels very defensible. So

okay, thank you for that. Yeah, I I I just want to I agree with uh um the other I always get your first name, last name. Yeah, Commissioner Davis. Commissioner Davis. I mean, we've been together for four years. I should get

But I'm I'm okay. So So uh so I I agree with your take on that. The other thing is just to assuage intercom commission newer commissioners I uh you know I've been on the commission for five years now and we we haven't seen as far as I know these kinds of problems. So so it's not like we we see a lot of uh like you see if any um businesses who forget you know maybe there's been one or two in five years but where where they forget and it it goes away. So, I I don't think there's much of a risk of it being a snowball effect. I I don't think um in general businesses will will take advantage of of this particular one that we do. So, I just I don't see it as an issue. And I and I do I I do agree with Commissioner Davis that uh we should have a better It's nice to hear that that we have a new system that hopefully would, you know, resolve this issue and and uh notify. It seems to me the city has a obligation to notify, you know, yeah, the businesses should, you know, look on their wall and see whatever you whatever way they find figure out. It's like, you know, I to me it's understandable that these kind of things go by the wayside. But, um, we should have a system in place. It's not that hard, I don't think, to uh, you know, you got a list and then, you know, the dates come up and and you know, it's Silicon Valley. So, so I'm I'm a I think maybe we take a stro a straw poll if you have a no after your you have your comments, right? pick a straw pole on where we

so I so my feeling is um I mean I definitely don't want it to be punitive. We don't want to penalize person but at the same time I think we got to act in a way where who don't let their um condition use permits expire um don't feel like you know I uh I shouldn't have worked so hard because they're just going to overlook it anyway you know and so my feeling would have been not two and a half not five maybe like four years just something so that we're you know we want her to continue going but at the same time there's got to be responsibility there as well you know and so that's what I was um going to suggest but um I feel that you know the majority does does support five years you know and so I'm open for a motion to I'll make a motion that we go with the alternative uh proposal to grant a full five-year conditional use permit Okay,

I second it. Okay, we got a motion and a second. A roll call, please. Commissioner Zisser, I. Commissioner Majuski, I. Commissioner Ali, I. Commissioner Buckbinder, I. Commissioner Aqualina, I. Uh, Vice Chair Fields, hi. And Chair Camar, hi.

Wonderful. Okay, so this passes 7 to zero as well. Congratulations, Felicia, if you're still online. Um now we go a close public hearing. Did I close public hearing? I think I did. Okay. So next um we next item is let's see sorry gota get my um any subcommittee report.

Subcommittee board. That's right. Um are there any subcommittee reports? No. Okay. I'm I'm actually Actually, I need to make an explanation. There are there was one subcommittee that gave its last report before our two new commissioners joined and I believe that subcommittee has now dispanded. There's one ongoing subcommittee which I am the sold member of you know and I would like to um maybe talk to you know commissioners if they're interested in being part of that subcommittee if you want to you know continue going and next one after that let's see so since there's no subcommittee reports the next item I believe is uh director I'll make it. So, a question for the chair. Uh, all your subcommittees have uh business except for the one with you and former commissioner Strauss,

right? And just clarification because we put the agenda out each month. Did you want to keep that as a standing item at this point? It's subcommittee of one as of this. That's correct. You know, I would say yes for now. you know, until I've had a chance to talk to the new commissioner, see if any of them are interested or actually the our existing commissioner or our continuing commissioners, if any of them are interested in, you know, um joining that subcommittee and if not then next time we probably take it off, you know, if if there was no takers. Okay, thank you for that.

Uh yeah, just a couple updates. Uh last Tuesday at council meeting, two items of the commission. Uh, one is council extended an urgency ordinance on one of the multitude of state laws uh that we're implementing. This is the starter homes that allow up to 10 units on a vacant single family property. And uh we the city had adopted urgency ordinance, extended that ordinance to the end of the year. Staff, notably senior planner Daniel Obama, continues to work on a omnibus ordinance. You've seen previews of this about six months ago. Uh that will come back and have the city at any point in time catch up to state laws and clean up a lot of miscellaneous. That was item number one last

Yeah. I had a question regarding that. So you mentioned vacant properties. This is in single family zoning, correct? It's not just right. Both those statements are correct. Okay, it is uh yeah to clarify multif family zoning and the addition of the recent state law was and vacancy.

Uh the second one's kind of exciting. Uh the city uh had a ULI tap done which is what is ULI tap? Urban land institute is a coalition of kind of real estate development professionals, economists, planners that look at just urban development in general, what goes into actually making projects work. uh they have um a service called technical advisory panel where they get a panel of real estate development professionals together. They'll come to your jurisdiction for a pretty low fee. They'll come and study an issue uh over a very short period, two three days and come back with a series of recommendations of things you might not have thought about. Uh this was one of the top priorities in the economic development plan and the area focused uh is that area between downtown and the preyard. that corridor of East Campbell uh to which city's done some investments in trying to liven up like the portlets and we have the Cresley housing project coming along. There's always been an intent of the city how to reinvigor that area sort of bridge that gap between these two anchors on one side the prinard and the downtown. Uh they came last week arrived Sunday uh Monday they did a walking tour they interviewed about 40 50 people a lot of speed interviews on their perspectives on it. I think Commissioner Buckfinder was asked about a lot of active transportation perspectives. Uh they came back to the city council and did a presentation on Tuesday and they'll give us a report in about a month or two. So the four big uh recommendations and a lot of this cross is right over in land use. So that's why I wanted to give it to you. One is to have the city focus uh not on replicating the downtown but to do highdensity residential development this corridor as a feeder to the downtown and the preyard. That's how they characterized it. residences to support those commercial cores. Number one. Uh number two, uh consider more multimodal improvements and even perhaps a road diet. I know

that can be contentious with some folks on that corridor going from four lanes either down to three or two. Uh number three, a lot more wayfinding. If you're in downtown, you don't know the yard's there. We've seen these inner downtowns, five minute walk gets you to the prune or the park or something like that. So putting more active way finding in and also helping folks finding our parking garages. They and I think observed a lot of folks know where the second street parking garage but there's a first street parking garage that seems totally underutilized folks there. And then the last one was just better marketing. There's a lot of downtown events and separately there's Bryard events but to do some sort of cross marketing just to bring these two anchors together. Uh so more to come uh but wanted to pass that on. I'm happy to forward PowerPoint to the commission if you'd like to take a look and in the coming months we'll look at how we put those into potential work plan items too. Uh last two things and I'll let you get out of here. Uh still opportunities if you want to participate in citywide multimodal plan. So there's a slick online map where you can identify put a bike lane here or there's traffic issues here or you can go on a bike audit or walk audit with staff if you haven't signed up. And then last but not least, uh those commissioners who've gone plan commissioners academy, they're still asking for session panels if you want to give back. And for our two new plan commissioners, uh I think I pushed this out before and I'll push out again. March 11 to13 in Anaheim is the plan commissioners academy for next year. So it

wonderful. Great. Okay. Thank you very much. One thing I just wanted to show on our radar is that I was hoping we know one way or the other, but uh tomorrow um Jav N will or will not sign SB79. um he has not in his entire tenure let a bill lapse without either signing or explicitly vetoing it. U we're not aware SB79 is the um apartment buildings near transit bill that they've been trying to do for the last eight years and finally to the legislature this year would cover some enormous swath of Campbell and would have like a really significant effect on uh pretty much everything from Hamilton down to Winchester. So um there's nothing to report but there's something's going to happen tomorrow.

He signed it already. No, I thought I thought it got approved. I got something. It went through the legislature. Just check. I know. Yeah, I haven't seen the governor's signature, but it has passed. Question about that. I saw something online about it. I didn't really know about it. Adam, um,

what what does that do that that can't already be done because we been talking about high density near transit stops for years, which I was under the impression with density bonus and everything else. All those things were going to be allowed in terms of highrises. So, I don't understand what this so I know, but it's already highway because we've been tracking way extremely closely. And we actually uh had some suggestions of the bill. They actually accept it. So uh it broadly um ramps zoning and allows up to based on the transit stop 75 to 100 units per acre as the floor. Uh not all of our densities, we have densities at 75 units per acre for some parcels, not all parcels in Campbell. Uh but within these broad rings which Adam mentions staff mile radiuses basically you have to allow at least a minimum of 75 to 100 per acre under densy bones today you could start at say 45 or 50 and use dens however that raises the floor of the minimum density. Uh we do you know we do have a concern I think city have concern that in the downtown area it's you know it doesn't have a character that's high density it's call historic and and we're likely coming to the council there's I guess I'll back up there's an option in the plan to have an alternative plan where rather than just allowing blanket 75 to 100 you can shift densities out of say areas you don't want high density and put it in other areas. So, we do intend uh assuming it passes into law to go to the council and ask for areas like the downtown if perhaps for single family neighborhoods should the city and develop a plan where it reallocates the density of the areas for okay so we're mostly concern I I didn't think about the fact that downtown in theory we could now could have an eight or 10 story or 12 story building so um

where does that fall in because one of the things that I that I learned from the housing element and the general plan is that historical areas are exempted from some of this if I'm not mistaken. Uh is the downtown official historical neighborhood? Nothing that's recognized under state federal, state, or I think even local ordinance structures by themselves. Yes, thank you. as a district itself. True. Yeah, there are historic buildings but not a district. All right. So, so it's not as a district. We have never gotten a historical designation. Okay.

Maybe we should for that. Um uh we are adjourning the plan meeting to uh the date of October 14, 2025 at 700 p.m. at city hall council chambers. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.