PC Minutes 2004-03-261
1
1
CALL TO ORDER - The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in a special meeting
with Chair Guthrie presiding; also present were Commissioners Arnold, Brown, Fowler
and Keen. Staff members in attendance were Associate Planner, Teresa McClish and
Assistant Planners, Ryan Foster and Jim Bergman.
AGENDA REVIEW: No changes to the agenda.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: No Minutes.
A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 26, 2004 - 8:00 A.M.
B. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: Memo from Ms. McClish re the Places3S
Workshop, to be held at 6:00 p.m. on April 7, 2004 sponsored by SLOCOG. A
computer - modeling program will be used to compare long -range development
scenarios based on different inputs and constraints (as determined by participants).
Ms. McClish recommended the Planning Commission attend the workshop and give
their input.
II. NON - PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 03 -008; APPLICANT — CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE; LOCATION - CITYWIDE. Staff report prepared and presented
by Associate Planner, Teresa McClish.
Ms. McClish explained that this was a preview of proposed revisions to Commercial
Mixed Use District regulations for East Grand Avenue and other General Commercial,
Office and Industrial zoning districts. During a powerpoint presentation she described
the proposed zoning changes to portions of the commercial areas of East Grand
Avenue and the El Camino Real corridor, stating that considering the City is nearing
buiidout and there are some major changes proposed to allow higher density for
allowed residential uses. Some of the proposed changes to zoning include:
• General Commercial to Mixed Use District (MU -1): to include Gateway and Midway
sections of East Grand Ave
• A second Mixed Use District (MU -2): to include the Highway portion of East Grand
Ave El Camino.
• Office Mixed Use (OMU): to include S. Halcyon, and commercial areas of Oak Park,
Camino Mercado and Valley Road..
Staff is intending to bring forward one ordinance for the rest of the regional commercial
areas for recommendation to City Council.
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 26, 2004
PAGE 2
Ms. McClish then described the proposed changes and detailed areas upon which staff
would like direction on.
Commission Comments
Fowler:
• Mixed Use infill is being encouraged, but the "Not Permitted in pedestrian
oriented storefront locations" (PED) proposals which discourage businesses
such as doctor's offices, Office Accessory and Catering Services, may not be
business friendly (property owners may not be able to rent their buildings).
Brown:
• Suggested that the PED be changed to some higher level of review to allow
these businesses in some cases.
• Had a concern for the parking in the higher density areas, and asked if the
Places3S program would be addressing this as he would not like to see parking
pushed into the residential areas. Ms. McClish said parking would be addressed
in the Paces3S program and staff would be bringing forward some specific
alternatives to accommodate higher density.
• Asked for clarification on the height limits and where these would be in effect.
Ms. McClish explained the proposed heights for the Gateway and Midway
sections is 40 feet or three four stories, with up to a maximum of 48 feet or four
stories potentially through the PUD process and 35 feet or three stories for the
Highway portion of E. Grand and El Camino area.
Keen:
• Strongly opposes the only Industrial zoned area in the City (on El Camino) being
tied in with the MU -2 district; this is not appropriate and this zoned area should
have been addressed separately (as indicated during the General Plan Update
process).
• Automotive and Vehicle Services Not Permitted (NP) is acceptable if it is
referring to the store front locations.
• NP for Drive -thru services in the MU -1 area is not suitable.
• Mortuary home NP, may not be suitable as in some cases living above a
mortuary may be suitable.
• Gas Stations NP, in the MU -1 area; this would render all the existing gas stations
in this area as non - conforming; they should not just be in the highway area,
people in town need places to fuel.
• Restaurant drive -thru NP, in the MU -1 area; this would render all the existing
drive - thru's in these areas as non - conforming.
• Theater, auditorium with a CUP; this should be 'P' (permitted) as there is already
an existing one in this area and it's pedestrian oriented.
• Single Family use in Mixed Use project NP; this could work in some cases.
• Height: over three stories is not preserving small town character; in addition the
Fire Chief has stated that any project over 48 feet would be required to
contribute toward a new fire truck.
1
1
1
1
1
1
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 26, 2004
PAGE 3
• Lot coverage: he questioned whether this should include the structures and the
paved areas. Ms. McClish said the code does include the pavement.
• "Dwelling units per acre" should be included in the MU -1 chart.
• He had a concern re shared parking.
Arnold:
• Concern re density equivalents for Mixed Use projects: some of these may not
be workable where there is a really dense commercial project and this should be
addressed.
• Changing the whole dynamics of Grand Avenue while not addressing changing
the size of parcels may not be viable; subterraian parking may become the
requirement.
• Could not see how the rural charm could be kept for these areas if there are no
design guidelines.
• He really liked the idea of the "pedestrian friendly ", but could not see how this
would work with this busy main road and not a lot of parking; Grand Avenue is
not the Village.
• Height issue: allowing greater heights in areas where there are not so deep lots
which back up to residential areas may impact the neighbors.
• Suggest having a Restricted Use Permit (RUP) to give a business a "window of
opportunity" instead of CUP.
• Would rather be overparked than underparked in these proposals.
Ms. McClish said additional ideas to consider in the goal of achieving some pedestrian
orientation on East Grande include:
• Focus on distinct activity notes on one side of Grand Avenue.
• Encourage some more mid -block alleys /large courtyard areas.
Guthrie:
• If we are to commit to a change from Commercial to Mixed -Use zoning we do
need to start restricting some uses (gas stations are non - compatible in a Mixed -
Use zone).
• He agreed with Commissioner Keen on the designation of the El Camino area
inclusion in the rezone and said a reconfiguration should be considered.
• He believed some uses should be restricted in what is a natural retail section to
protect the retail potential; we are giving up a significant amount of retail by
permitting residential in these areas; a doctor's office is permitted, but not on the
street front (and this does not need a street front).
• Height issue: if this mixed use is going to work we are going to have to go to
larger scale, have less traffic /parking and concentrate on developing more
housing; a 48 foot building standing alone may be difficult, but in certain areas
you could build into a slope or hill.
• He will have more specifics after the Place3S workshop.
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 26, 2004
9:35 a.m: Commissioner Fowler excused herself to go to work.
PAGE 4
In answer to Commissioner Guthrie's question Ms. McClish clarified where adult
businesses are allowed.
Commissioner Keen asked again about not having an Industrial zone and stated from
Brisco Road down MU -2 would seem appropriate, except for some of the uses which
should be in an Industrial zone. We are trying to promote business on Grand Ave, but
there seems to be more talk about the housing which he believed should be secondary.
Commissioner Guthrie suggested that it might be a good idea to have a second set of
standards to permit changes in use in non - conforming buildings where there is a
change in use, but not a significant change in the building (where the area has not yet
changed).
Commissioner Fowler stated if the philosphy of Mixed -Use is to be followed, then
services need to be included and closer and the PED designation on the Table of
allowed uses should be struck; we need to be business friendly.
Commissioner Guthrie stated that maximum floor areas have been addressed but
asked if minimum floor areas should be addressed.
In reply, .Ms. McClish stated given the current status and how close to build -out we are,
over time we will have to find a way to squeeze in the density on Grand Avenue. In
answer to the question of minimum floor areas, a minimum floor area ratio (of one for
example) could help ensure that parcels are built out and the area is intensified to meet
the goals of the General Plan. However, the minimum requirement could only be
implemented for discretionary actions.
Commissioner Keen restated he would not like the City to discourage businesses for
the sake of housing as he believed the City could not meet the water needs for the
houses being proposed.
Commissioner Arnold restated if we are trying to create a pedestrian area we need to
keep a cozy feel and this could be difficult on the two lane East Grand Avenue (a heavy
access to the beach), and he was concerned with creating traffic problems.
The Commission had no further comments and Ms. McClish said this item would be
discussed again at the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission, April 20,
2004.
III. ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 a.m. on a motion by Commissioner Keen,
seconded by Commissioner Arnold.
1
1
1
1
1
1
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 26, 2004
ATTEST:
LY'N REARDON- SMITH,
SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION
AS TO CONTENT:
ROB STRONG,
COMMUNITY DEV LOPMENT DIRECTOR
(Approved at PC meeting of April 6, 2004)
PAGE 5
AMES GUTHRIE, CHAIR
1
1