 |
|
|
|
|
Council members delay approval of General Plan
By Steven Raphael
The process of approving Campbell's new General Plan came to a screeching halt last week when city officials pulled the item off of the city council's Nov. 6 meeting agenda, citing concerns about the plan's possible impact on businesses and traffic.
"We took an additional look," City Manager Bernie Strojny said. "We need to spend more time examining it. It made no sense to proceed with the hearing because the data might change."
After the city conducts more studies, the General Plan is expected to return to the council sometime in January and to the planning commission in February.
Property owners affected by the changes will be notified of the new hearings once they are scheduled.
"We have heard concerns over localized traffic and the effect on business opportunities due to proposed changes in land use designation," Mayor Jane Kennedy said at the Nov. 6 council meeting that was packed with concerned business owners. Kennedy said that, in light of the issues that have come up, the city "will revisit and reanalyze" the changes proposed for the plan.
The issue came to a head at an emotionally charged planning commission meeting on Oct. 24, when more than two dozen speakers addressed commissioners with concerns about some changes included in the draft version of the General Plan.
The most controversial issue is a recommendation to include a rezoning of a "light industrial" area of McGlincey Lane to "research and development."
The commission recommended that the city council remove the item from the General Plan before approving it.
City staff had proposed the change because McGlincey Lane (off of Union Avenue) borders residential neighborhoods to the south. City staff say the residential neighborhoods are negatively affected by the industrial use.
Residents in the area complain of noise, odors, night-time lighting and ground vibrations and say large trucks often cause traffic delays in the area. Changing the General Plan designation for the area to R&D would encourage less intense uses, like office space.
Existing industrial companies would be given a legal nonconforming status that would allow them to continue operating in their current locations indefinitely, even if they changed ownership.
However, for existing industrial companies, this would mean that they could not expand and that if their building were to be destroyed for any reason, including a natural disaster such as a fire, they could not rebuild it.
Business owners said they objected to the change because it would prevent them from expanding and staying competitive.
Councilman Matthew Dean told The Reporter that he hopes the city can find a solution that pleases everyone. "I think there's a good compromise that can be worked out where we essentially let the economics of the situation take control," he said. "The only thing, from a city perspective, is to make sure the area is clean and attractive in appearance, so that everyone benefits."
In other action, the council decided to give Paul Del Grande, the owner of Del Grande Auto, two weeks to decide if he will be able to comply with conditions of approval for the storage of cars on lots adjacent to his Campbell Avenue auto repair shop. Del Grande's appeal was continued to the next council meeting by a vote of 4-1, with Mayor Jane Kennedy dissenting.
Del Grande has run an automobile dismantling operation at this location for approximately 15 years. His business is currently considered legal nonconforming, since it is a heavy industrial use in a commercially zoned area. As legal nonconforming, Del Grande is able to continue operating his business indefinitely.
However, he has also been illegally storing cars on the property.
Del Grande told city staff he is often forced to assume possession of a car when the owner cannot pay for the repairs. As many as 150 cars have been stored on his lot at any one time.
Since 1988, this has been the source of an ongoing code enforcement battle. Del Grande has repeatedly agreed to remove cars from his property and has repeatedly failed to do so.
At the Nov. 6 meeting, Del Grande said he has been removing five cars each month in an attempt to meet the city's demands. However, he said some of their demands, such as only storing 10 cars in front of the shop, may be impossible to meet.
"I've tried to live like that and it's not possible," he said. "This is all you're going to get."
City staff prepared a list of improvements that would be necessary if the council were to allow Del Grande to store cars on his adjacent lots. These included an environmental analysis to check for contamination from leaking automobiles, providing a paved surface for the auto storage, and limiting the number of vehicles to 20.
Del Grande expressed concern about the cost of meeting these conditions, and asked for some time to consider them. If Del Grande cannot meet these conditions, the council said, he cannot store cars on his lots.
Del Grande's attorney John Harwood said if the council does not allow Del Grande to store cars on his lots, they will take legal action.
"If we can't get the use permit granted, we can't park the cars there," he said. "If we can't park the cars there, we're going to be back in court. Mr. Del Grande can't operate his business without that."
The council agreed to give Del Grande until the next meeting to consider the issue. However, several council members expressed impatience with Del Grande.
"This has been going on for too long," said Councilwoman Jeanette Watson. "It's time those cars were gone."
|
|
|
|
Campbell, California
