Loading...
PC Minutes 2004-08-17MINUTES CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 17, 2004 - 6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER - The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chair Guthrie presiding; also present were Commissioners Arnold, Brown, Fowler and. Keen. Staff members in attendance were Community Development Director, Rob Strong, Associate Planners, Kelly Heffernon and Teresa McClish, Assistant Planners, Ryan Foster and Jim Bergman, Planning Intern, Andrea Koch and Public Works Engineer, Victor Devens. AGENDA REVIEW: Staff requested continuation of item IV, Agricultural Buffers, to enable noticing as a public hearing on September 7, 2004. Chair Guthrie requested item IV.A. (Time Extension) to the heard first. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of July 20, 2004 were approved by a 4/0 voice vote on a motion by Commissioner Arnold, seconded by Commissioner Fowler; Commissioner Brown abstaining. I.A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None B. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 1. Negative Declaration for DCA 03 -008 - Item III.C. 2. Letter dated August 16, 2004 from Vard Ikeda re Ag Buffers, Item IV.B. II.A. MINOR USE PERMITS APPROVED SINCE AUGUST 3, 2004 - SUBJECT TO 10- DAY APPEAL: ase w', Applicant dress )escriptton Planner 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. PPR 04 -010 VSR 04 -012 MEX 04 -006 ASP 04 -022 TUP 04 -003 Central Coast Pet ER Clinic Patrick Kennedy Gary Thompson A Sweet Shoppe Named Desire Sensation Spas, Inc. 1400 E. Grand Ave. 121 Le Point St. 1440 Sierra Dr. 124 E. Branch St. Albertson's Park- ing lot. New business in existing building. 3 -story residence at rear and addition of a deck to existing residence at front property. To allow current sub - grade area to be converted to living space. Sign size interpretation (discussion requested by Commissioner Keen) Parking lot sale. J. Bergman A. Koch J. Bergman A. Koch J. Bergman The Commissioners asked for clarification on three of the MUP's. Commissioner Keen requested discussion /interpretation for accessory decorations (re item #4) for signs. Mr. Strong explained that this sign had been approved by the ARC and that when the final stages of Development Code Update take place a MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 17, 2004 PAGE 2 comprehensive review of the sign ordinance for the Village and new districts will take place. Robin McDonald, Avila Signs, described the sign in detail explaining that the borders on the windows are not part of the sign, but are to enhance the building and are quite narrow. Commissioner Keen stated the Village Centre sign program is very restrictive compared to the Village. The Commission had no further concerns. Mr. Strong stated the Minor Use Permits would be approved after a ten -day appeal period. NON - PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: A. TIME EXTENSION 04 -007 (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99 -013 & VARIANCE 01 -001); APPLICANT — RANCHO ARROYO PROFESSIONAL CENTER LLC; LOCATION — CAMINO MERCADO AND WEST BRANCH Mr. Strong presented the staff report to consider a request for a one (1) year time extension for a conditional use permit and variance for an office complex and make a recommendation to the City Council. Commissioner Keen and Commissioner Brown had questions regarding the Conditions of Approval for the CUP with respect to the signalization. Chair Guthrie opened the hearing to the public. Steve Cool, representative, explained that the request for clarification of Conditions of Approval had been withdrawn and that signalization would be installed before occupancy of the building. Chair Guthrie closed the hearing to the public. Commissioner Keen made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Arnold, recommending that the City Council approve Time Extension 04 -007 for Conditional Use Permit 99 -013 and Variance 01 -001, and adopt: RESOLUTION 04 -1931 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE TIME EXTENSION 04 -007 FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99 -013 & VARIANCE 01 -001, LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF CAMINO MERCADO AND WEST BRANCH STREET 1 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 17, 2004 The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Keen, Arnold, Brown, Fowler and Chair Guthrie. NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 17 day of August 2004. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: PAGE 3 A. VIEWSHED REVIEW CASE NO. 04 -013; APPLICANT — MICHAEL AND CINDY RUDGE; LOCATION — 424 LEANNA DRIVE Mr. Strong announced that the following project would be Planning Intern, Andrea Koch's last one as she had accepted a job in Soquel. The Commission thanked her for her contribution and hard work. Assistant Planner, Ms. Koch presented the staff report for consideration of a 433 square -foot second -story addition and 435 square -foot first -story addition and explained that the Department had received one written comment of the proposal. In conclusion, Ms. Koch stated that due to the project's inconsistency with Finding #2 (that the proposed structure is consistent with the established scale and character of the neighborhood and will not unreasonably affect views of surrounding properties) staff was recommending that the Commission review the project and adopt a Resolution denying the Viewshed Review application. The Commission had questions regarding setbacks, the power lines and the agricultural buffer. Staff answered their questions. Commissioner Keen commented that he thought new construction must abide by new code. Ms. Koch replied that the Development Code states that new construction on the original non - conforming building does not have to abide by the new code. Mr. Strong said this would be reviewed when update of the Development Code takes place. Chair Guthrie opened the hearing to the public Michael Rudge, applicant, explained the setbacks showed pictures of the poles erected to compare the height of the proposed addition and letters of support from his neighbors. Cindy Rudge, applicant, explained why they needed to increase the size of their property — they had a 900 square foot home and four family members. Lance Nix, 801 Opal Circle, neighbor, stated he had a problem with the fact that only single story houses are allowed in the area and that due to the increase in the value of land this is an outdated idea. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 17, 2004 Chair Guthrie closed the hearing to the public. Commission Comments: Keen: • Has problem with setbacks and closeness of the power lines. • He could not approve the project because it cannot meet the findings. Arnold: • Concern with setting of precedence because this is a one -story neighborhood. • The power lines are a problem. • The Ag Buffer would not be sufficient. • Could not make findings to approve. Fowler: • It is not consistent with the neighborhood. • It may be good to do some precedent setting. • A 900 square feet house for four people is quite small. • The buffer does not meet the requirement. Brown: • Said he was sympathetic to the applicant's dilemma. • Suggested the applicant try to obtain CC &R's for the neighborhood to allow a change in the character of the neighborhood and to allow two -story homes. • Ag buffer needs to be resolved. Guthrie: • Agreed with the rest of the Commissioner's comments. • This would be the largest house on the smallest lot in the neighborhood. • There should be neighborhood approval for this proposal. Commissioner Arnold made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Keen denying approval of the Viewshed Review application and adopt: RESOLUTION 04 -1932 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING APPROVAL OF VIEWSHED REVIEW CASE NO. 04 -013, LOCATED AT 424 LEANNE DRIVE, APPLIED FOR BY MICHAEL AND CINDY RUDGE The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Arnold, Keen, Brown, Fowler and Chair Guthrie NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 17 day of August 2004. PAGE 4 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 17, 2004 PAGE 5 B. HOUSING ELEMENT; APPLICANT — CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE; LOCATION — CITYWIDE Associate Planner, Ms. Heffernon presented the staff report for review of proposed amendments to the adopted 2003 Housing Element; the amendments had been made in response to comments from the State Housing and Community Development Department (HCD). Ms. Heffernon then gave a summary of the changes made that would be submitted to HCD. In conclusion, Ms. Heffernon recommended that the Commission continue the hearing to the meeting of September 7, review the proposed amendments to the adopted 2003 Housing Element and direct staff to return with a Resolution recommending approval of said amendments to the City Council. The Commission had questions and comments for staff: Arnold: • Would the revised Regional Housing Needs Assessment figures effect projected allowances? Mr. Strong said not until 2008. • Would secondary units be counted as 'low' or 'very-low' income housing? Ms. Heffernon replied that she was not sure, but would check this out. Mr. Strong said the State is considering new legislation again for secondary units. • Stated a concern with the rezoning for higher densities and if there is a water deficiency determined. Mr. Strong said if a water deficiency is declared then there could BE a moratorium declared or conservation efforts required. Fowler: • Table 15: Questioned whether some projects that were listed in the Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory would actually happen. Ms. Heffernon stated that this will be addressed in more detail with narrative comment in the future. Guthrie: • Asked for clarification on the required 10% inclusionary housing without a density bonus. Mr. Strong said they would review the Housing Task Force recommendations, but the City does want to create an increased incentive for moderate, low and very low density beyond the required inclusionary. • He was very surprised at the 99% water usage for the City last year. Chair Guthrie opened the hearing to the public and hearing no comments closed it. The Commission had no further concerns. Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner to Fowler, to continue the hearing to the meeting of September 7, 2004, review the proposed amendments to the adopted 2003 Housing Element and direct staff to return with a Resolution recommending approval of said amendments to the City Council. The motion was approved by a 5/0 voice vote. The Commission took a five- minute break. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 17, 2004 PAGE 6 C. (Continued Item) DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 03 -008 — DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR THE FOMU, GMU AND HMU ZONES; APPLICANT — CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE; LOCATION — CITYWIDE Associate Planner, Ms. McClish presented the staff report to consider adoption of a Resolution for Development Code Amendment 03 -008 for the IMU, OMU, FOMU, GMU and HMU zones including the Design Guidelines and Standards, consistent with the 2001 General Plan Update. In conclusion, Ms. McClish recommended that the Commission approve the Resolution recommending that the City Council 1) adopt a Resolution approving Design Guidelines and Standards for Mixed -Use districts and 2) introduce an Ordinance amending the Zoning Map and portions of Title 16 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code revising commercial and mixed -use districts. Re the Design Guidelines and Standards in the Gateway Mixed -Use (GMU), Ms. McClish explained that after consulting with some architects they had modified the fenestration from 70% down to 40 -60% with a ceiling height more in the range of 10- 15%. In addition, Ms. McClish said there may be some clean -up amendments coming forward in the next couple Planning Commission meetings and also some clean -up of definitions as discussed at previous Planning Commission meetings during the update process. The Commission commented on the Development Standards: Fowler: • No comment. Brown: • Re the HMU district, asked for clarification on the minimum lot size for office mixed -use. After discussion the Commission agreed to a minimum of 20,000 square feet. • Exhibit C, (OMU) No. 3, re minimum density required, asked for clarification. Ms. McClish explained that minimum density would only be counted on the residential portion of the project or half of the area whichever is less. Arnold: • How would airspace condominiums work on a multi mixed -use project? Some exemptions may be required for the "for sale" housing. Ms. McClish explained that the allowable use in these mixed -use districts as proposed is strictly for multi - family and that condominiums will be allowed. 8:40 p.m: Commissioner Keen was not feeling well so he left the meeting. The Commission discussed the Public Art Guidelines within the Design Guidelines and Standards and made suggestions to encourage public art: • A reduction in the number of members required for the arts council (from 12 — 7) would help simplify the process; • Some incentives need to be in place; • When a large project is approved there could be a requirement to provide some public art. 1 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 17, 2004 RESOLUTION 04 -1933 PAGE 7 Mr. Strong said that the Public Art regulation would come back to the Commission for further study. Design Guidelines & Standards Comments from the Commission: Fowler: • Thought the Design Guidelines and Standards looked very nice. • Page 1 — Did not like the suggestion of models, thought it could be costly and asked if this would actually be a requirement? Ms. McClish replied it would not be a requirement. • Concept pictures — questioned the value in comparison to cost that would be incurred to produce this document for the public. • Page 17, Paragraph No. 2, too wordy. • Wanted to be assured that all Commission comments from the previous meetings had been included in the update. Ms. McClish said the document had been carefully reviewed and all their comments included. Brown: • Approved of the document. • Disagreed with Fowler on models; stated it was a great help to see a model. Arnold: • Models should be mandatory for a project over a certain size or value; everyone would be well served to provide models; suggested computer renderings also. • Appreciate the document, great job! Guthrie: • Agreed with Commissioner Arnold's comments on the models. • Concept drawings are very useful. • He would like to see a requirement for public art on larger projects. • More bus stops should be included on the concept plans (he pointed out where they should be included). Commissioner Arnold made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Brown recommending that the City Council adopt Development Code Amendment 03 -008 rezoning the Commercial, Industrial, Office Professional and Commercial portions of the Planned Development 1.1 and 1.2 districts; and adopting Design Guidelines and Standards pertaining to E. Grand Avenue and a portion of El Camino Real as amended and adopt: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 03 -008 REZONING THE COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, OFFICE PROFESSIONAL AND THE COMMERCIAL PORTIONS OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 1.1 AND 1.2 DISTRICTS; AND ADOPTING DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS PERTAINING TO E. GRAND AVENUE AND A PORTION OF EL CAMINO REAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 17, 2004 The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Arnold, Brown, Fowler and Chair Guthrie NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Keen the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 17 day of August 2004. V. DISCUSSION ITEMS: VI. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS: PAGE 8 1. Conditional Use Permit 03 -002, Applicant — Tony Janowitz; Location — 447 Lierly Lane (continued from the Planning Commission meeting of February 17, 2004). . Mr. Strong presented the staff report explaining that to date the applicant had been unable to negotiate a feasible access easement and widening improvement of Lierly Lane, but the Fire Chief had agreed that if the existing residence was reduced in size, not to exceed 1200 square feet of habitable space, and fully sprinkled for improved fire safety, the existing 8 -12 foot wide access driveway is sufficient to allow the structure to remain as a secondary dwelling. (This compromise would only apply to the existing residence until adequate access is resolved by the Lierly Lane and East Cherry Neighborhood Plan and a cooperative improvement project.) Mr. Strong stated that staff will re- advertise a public hearing for CUP 03 -002 for September 7, 2004, including mailed notice to all owners in the planning area. Commissioner Arnold stated that before Commissioner Keen had left the meeting he had asked that a letter be sent thanking Planning Intern, Andre Koch for her work with the City. Commissioner Fowler asked for an update on the pink painting that had taken place on Ruby's house. Mr. Strong stated that the painting had been curtailed and that a committee of the Historical Society will decide on the color of the house. Commissioner Brown asked for an update on Allen Street. Mr. Strong said he would ask Mike Linn, Public Works for to provide a report on the traffic study. Commissioner Brown said he would not be available for any meetings on Thursdays (every other week) as he would be in Oxnard. VII. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW -UP: None VIII. TENTATIVE AGENDA ITEMS FOR SEPTEMBER 7, 2004 MEETING: No discussion. 1 1 1 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 17, 2004 IX. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. on a motion by Chair Guthrie, seconded by Commissioner Brown. ATTEST: LYN REARDON- SMITH, SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION TO CO TENT: RO = STRON , COMMUNITY DEVELOPME T DIRECTOR (Approved at PC meeting of September 7, 2004.) PAGE 9 A ES UTHRIE, CHAIR ���