Loading...
PC Minutes 2002-10-151 1 1 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2002 CALL TO ORDER - The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chair Costello presiding. Also present were Commissioners Brown, Fowler, Guthrie, and Keen. Staff member in attendance was Community Development Director, Rob Strong. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - The minutes of October 1, 2002 were unanimously approved as written. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS — 1. The Downtown Advisory Board meeting Agenda for October 16, 2002 and a copy of the Arroyo Grande Village Area Concept Plan and Parking Study. 2. An except from a Farm Conservation brochure regarding property tax incentive programs (relating to the Williamson Act and Farm Security zones) which relates to item II C on the Planning Commission agenda. AGENDA REVIEW — No changes in the Agenda. PUBLIC HEARING - LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT CASE NO. 02 -002; APPLICANT — TED MOORE; LOCATION — 1405 EAST GRAND AVENUE. Staff report prepared by Kelly Heffernon. Rob Strong, Community Development Director presented the staff report stating that the applicant was requesting the lot lines between two of the parcels be adjusted to accommodate a building design revision. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED Jeff Lee, applicant representative from eda, was present to answer any questions from the Commission, but the Commission had no comments or questions. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Commissioner Guthrie made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Brown approving Lot Line Adjustment 02 -002 to reconfigure two lots and adopting: MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2002 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT CASE NO. 02- 002 TO RECONFIGURE TWO (2) LOTS, LOCATED AT 1405 EAST GRAND AVENUE, APPLIED FOR BY TED MOORE, E.F. MOORE AND COMPANY AYES: Commissioners Guthrie, Brown, Fowler, Keen and Chair Costello NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted on this 15 day of October 2002 PUBLIC HEARING - TEMPORARY USE PERMIT CASE NO. 02 -025; APPLICANT — SOUTH COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY; LOCATION — 128 BRIDGE STREET. Staff report prepared and presented by Rob Strong. Mr. Strong presented the staff report stating that the Temporary Use Permit was being requested to allow the placement of two 8' x 8' x 40' storage containers. The containers were to be located at the rear of the I.O.O.F. hall for a maximum period of two years. Commissioner Fowler asked how would this be handled if the retrofit were not completed in the two -year period? Mr. Strong said he had informed the South County Historical Society that two years would be the maximum term allowed. In reply to a question from Commissioner Guthrie, Mr. Strong stated that there is currently no provision in the Development Code for storage containers as a temporary use so the language is basically a policy interpretation that we are asking the Commission to approve. PUBLIC COMMENT OPENED Larry Turner, representative for the Historical Society, stated that the intent is to get the interior of the museum completed, the artifacts out of storage and installed into the museum within two years. PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED RESOLUTION 02 1852 PAGE 2 Commissioner Keen asked if the "Preserve the Village" Committee had been noticed regarding this request? 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2002 Mr. Strong said only property owners within 300 feet of the project had been noticed as required by the Development Code. Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, approving Temporary Use Permit 02 -025 and adopting: RESOLUTION 02 -1853 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING TEMPORARY USE PERMIT 02 -025; PLACEMENT OF TWO (2) STORAGE CONTAINERS AT 128 BRIDGE STREET; APPLIED FOR BY THE SOUTH COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY AYES: Commissioners Brown, Fowler, Guthrie, Keen and Chair Costello NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted on this 15 day of October 2002 Mr. Strong replied that is what staff is recommending at this time. PAGE 3 PUBLIC HEARING - DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 02 -003; APPLICANT — MARIANNA McCLANAHAN /GORDEN F. DIXSON TRUST; LOCATION — 817 EAST CHERRY AVE. Staff report prepared by Ryan Foster, Assistant Planner. Mr. Strong presented the staff report stating that the applicant wished to rezone the parcel located at 871 East Cherry Ave from General Agriculture (AG) to Agricultural Preserve (AP). This 4 -acre parcel is not currently under the Williamson Act; however the applicant proposes to place this parcel and the adjoining parcel (38- acres) located at 769 Branch Mill Road, which is currently zoned AP and is under the Williamson Act, into the Farmland Security Zone Program through an amended contract. The larger parcel under the Williamson Act is unique in the City. Whether the City is empowered by the State to create Farmland Security Zone contracts within the City limits is not clear and further clarification is being sought from the Department of Conservation. Designation of the smaller property is complicated because the parcel size under Williamson Act is a 10 -acre minimum. A lot line adjustment or merger with the larger parcel may be required to obtain a contract accepted by the State. Commissioner Brown asked if the smaller parcel could be rezoned to Ag Preserve and if the Williamson Act or Farmland Security Zone contract could be dealt with later? Commissioner Fowler asked for clarification regarding the Williamson Act Farmland Security zones because she had read conflicting information. Mr. Strong replied that the Williamson Act does require that the City /County indicate a contiguous area that is 100 -acres in size in which properties of 10 acres or larger can seek individual contracts. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2002 PAGE 4 Commissioner Fowler then asked if the City could clarify the zoning before charging the applicant fees to go forward. Mr. Strong said he would return to the Commission and Council and request refund of fees to the applicant if the City finds it cannot legally utilize the Farmland Security Zone contracts. Commissioner Keen asked if once the contract is ended could the property owner return and request rezone? Mr. Strong said they could, but it would be a Development Code Amendment rezone. Commissioner Guthrie asked for clarification on AG and AP. Mr. Strong gave clarification and explained that the Dixson Trust had entered into a perpetual agricultural conservation agreement with the American Farmland Trust, but also requested City approval of contracts pursuant to State law. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED Marianne McClannahan, 617 Melbourne, Fullerton, representative, stated that the farm was purchased by her grandfather in 1909 and that it had been under the Williamson Act since the mid 1960's. The family wanted to preserve the farmland and she would like the Commission to recommend the change in zone from AG to AP for the 4 -acre parcel and that Condition No. 4 be deleted pending verification of the parcel size under the Williamson Act and /or Farmland Security Zone. Dennis Fuller, neighbor, stated that he was in support of this application, but has reservations and questions on easement issues and would like some clarification. He also has concern regarding drainage, noise and dust that could become a nuisance. Commissioner Guthrie asked if the change in zone would cause an increase or decrease in activity? Mr. Strong said the Ag Preserve would not restrict the operations of the Dixson Trust on either of the parcels or increase the operations. Commissioner Guthrie then suggested that the zoning conversion be approved (striking Condition No. 4) and not set a precedence to require a certain size of agricultural land at this time in case the tax incentives do not work out. Commission Keen agreed with Commissioner Guthrie. Commissioner Fowler said farmland conservation should be encouraged in any way that it can be by the City. Commissioner Brown agreed with striking Condition No. 4 and said he believed the Dixson Trust was showing great vision and he hoped these actions would provide a guide to others in the City. Chair Costello said he concurred with the other Commissioners and said that it is a goal of the City to preserve as much agricultural land as possible. 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2002 Mr. Strong then clarified the allowed uses and differences between AG and AP zones. Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, approving Development Code Amendment 02 -003, deleting Special Condition No. 4, and adopting: PUBLIC COMMENT OPENED RESOLUTION 02 -1854 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 02 -003 AND ENTER INTO A FARMLAND SECURITY ZONE CONTRACT WITH THE GORDEN F. DIXSON TRUST COVERING APN 007 - 711 -003 AND APN 007 - 711 -007 AYES: Commissioners Brown, Fowler, Guthrie, Keen and Chair Costello NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted on this 15 day of October 2002 PAGE 5 PUBLIC HEARING - VIEWSHED REVIEW CASE NO. 02 -013; APPLICANT — ERIK & LEONA WAHL; LOCATION — 135 TALLY HO ROAD. Staff report prepared by Ryan Foster. Mr. Strong presented the staff report giving the background and staff concerns, stating that this request is unusual because it is an interior second floor remodel of an existing RV garage with mezzanine; no exterior changes will be taking place. Further, two story homes are allowed in this area for new developments. Two letters of complaint from neighbors had initiated the necessity for the hearing. Mr. Strong stated he would like the Commission to give staff some guidance on Viewshed Reviews to assist staff in Development Code Update. Mark Vasquez, representative, described the project stating that it meets Building Department requirements, but a firewall will be required. Commissioner Brown asked if it was sprinkled and if this had not already been built would the Viewshed Review process help this site? Mr. Vasquez replied that sprinklers are not required and the Viewshed Review would not have helped because the RV garage originally had a loft and this was just an interior alteration of that. Commissioner Guthrie asked if there were CC &R's for the shared driveway. Mr. Vasquez replied that only common maintenance is required. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2002 Alicia Garcia, neighbor (two doors down), said the applicants were the best neighbors and they had no problem with this viewshed. PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED PAGE 6 Commissioner Brown stated that he thought the bamboo fence was an eyesore, but this could be modified. He was aware that some of the neighbors were not getting along and some of this was because of unresolved issues. He would like to see a break up of the mass of building; however but he could approve this Viewshed Review despite the fence. In reply to a question from Commissioner Fowler, Mr. Strong said staff had not been comfortable in approving this viewshed because of the complaints. Commissioner Fowler said she did not consider the Viewshed Review process necessary nor consistent. Commissioner Keen stated he was an advocate of the Viewshed Review process, but this application has nothing to do with losing a view. Commission Guthrie agreed with Commissioner Keen and this building was more of an obstruction of esthetics and not view. The Development Code definition of a one -story building should be reviewed and should be based on height similar to the Commercial zone. Commissioner Keen stated that in vacant or undeveloped lots, where all or most houses are single story and a two story is proposed, it makes sense to require a Viewshed Review. In addition, a building which "looks" two -story should be reviewed. He stated he was not proposing viewsheds on tracts, but a limit on infill lots; for 4 or less houses a viewshed may be appropriate. Commissioner Brown said he had no problem with the Viewshed Review process if the focus was on height impacts on views not aesthetics. Chair Costello said Viewshed Review should be triggered by height, one -story versus two -story and he wondered if there was a State case or law to uphold such a process. Mr. Strong said when staff recommends Development Code Amendment for the residential zones some sort of Architectural Review referral at the discretion of the Community Development Director, will be proposed and property owners noticed for infill type of situations that are out of character. However, the decision of the Director could be appealed. Design overlay zoning should be established where there is concern with compatibility. Mr. Strong said he still has concerns with the current Viewshed Review process, but that these can be brought to the Commission when Development Code Amendment if proposed. 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2002 The Planning Commission agreed that the three findings for approval of this Viewshed Review could be made. Commissioner Keen made a motion seconded by Commissioner Guthrie approving Viewshed Review 02 -013, and adopting, RESOLUTION 02 -1855 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING VIEWSHED REVIEW 02 -013 FOR A SECOND STORY RECREATION ROOM LOCATED AT 135 TALLY HO ROAD; APPLIED FOR BY ERIC AND LEONA WAHL AYES: Commissioners Keen, Guthrie, Brown, Fowler, and Chair Costello NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted on this 15 day of October 2002 • Plan A — 2172 sq ft 4 bed 2'/2 bath. • Plan B 1927 sq ft 3 bed 2 bath. • Plan C 2100 sq ft 3 -4 bed 2 bath. • Private driveway broken up with scoured colored concrete. • Average lot slope 18% and average lot size of 3960 sq. ft. PAGE 7 NON - PUBLIC HEARING - PRE - APPLICATION CASE NO. 02 -010; APPLICANT — RICK WHEELER; LOCATION 185 BRISCO ROAD. Staff report by Ryan Foster, Assistant Planner Mr. Strong presented the staff report explaining the proposal was for an 11 -Unit Single Family (SF), detached, Planned Unit Development (PUD) in the Multi Family Apartment (MFA) zone which does not currently allow SF detached dwellings. Staff considers this an inappropriate distinction as MFA does allow twin homes, triplexes and fourplexes. Staff would like the Commission to review the site plan and architectural design, give their input on the Pre - application and consider an amendment to code to allow SF detached dwelling PUD to be allowed in a MFA. Commission Guthrie asked if approval of a PUD in a MFA zone could mean fewer apartments. Mr. Strong said the MFA zone allows PUD, but not detached residences. Staff considers the proposed density appropriate for the site. Lenny Grant, project architect, gave a presentation, described the project and said he was seeking comments and support from the Commission. The following were highlights of the project description: MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2002 PAGE 8 • Inspired by Early Spanish architecture, smooth earth toned stucco colored clay tile roof and wrought iron detailing. • Landscaping — Mediterranean. • Homes designed around parking court. • 1 guest parking space for each 2 units. He further stated that the City has indicated that an amendment to the Development Code would allow this to move forward with the project. Practically speaking, this project meets the intent of the MFA zone (high density housing) and is am ownership alternative. This project would house 11 families in high quality housing. Commissioner Brown had a concern with circulation off Brisco Road. He asked if there would be enough space for people to turn around inside the project and what the price range was? Mr. Grant replied that the design should allow a conventional turnaround inside the area without backing onto Brisco Road. He further stated that there is a 5% transition off Brisco Road for the first 20 -feet and a short increase in slope until the first drive court. All drive courts will have a 5% slope entering and then a gentle slope. Between drive courts it will ramp up to 13 %. The intent is to build some flat terraces for the homes and provide some reasonable, but minimal outdoor private open space. Rick Wheeler stated that the price range was proposed to be from $350,000 — $400,000. There will be no HOA. It is intended that this project will look like a meditarrean village and will upgrade the whole area. Commission Fowler had a concern about the trees on top of the hill and whether they would remain. Mr. Grant said they may be replaced with other trees; they would like to plant Mediterranean type trees. Commission Fowler questioned the Plan 'C' with only 2100 sq ft and 4- bedrooms? Mr. Grant replied that the minimum bedroom size is 11' x 13' and is efficient - many families need 4 bedrooms. Commissioner Keen had concerns with the lot coverage and stated that the FAR for lots leaves inadequate yard for families. He also had a concern that the proposed parking for the project was not sufficient for residents as garages are often used for storage. In addition, there is no room to park on Brisco Road as it already has cars parked down both sides and is narrow. Mr. Grant replied that this is a MFA zone looking for PUD and there is only so much that can be put on one acre. The City needs housing and we are proposing 600 sq ft of open usable outside yard space. The intent of MFA zone is for high density. We are proposing two car garages with some storage and we have a 35% coverage. Rick Wheeler said there are six extra parking spaces (more than required). Commissioner Keen stated that the requirements do not always work, just look at Brisco Road. 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2002 PAGE 9 Mr. Grant asked if he would like to see less units? Commissioner Keen replied that he would like to see smaller houses and the price lower. Mr. Grant said then the City needs to provide more incentives for developers. Commissioner Guthrie had a concern with the purpose of MFA zone and the fact that this was only eleven units. What if twenty 800 sq. ft. 2- bedroom apartments were proposed leaving plenty of room for parking and for yard. This might be more appropriate for this community than $400,000 homes. He stated that he was not against PUDs and that there is a school close by, but density could take into consideration that there are other amenities for families in the area. This project may threaten the stock of more affordable housing. Mr. Grant replied that realistically apartments on an 18% grade lot would be very expensive and the site would be a tight lot for 20 apts. This is good opportunity to think outside of the box. Rick Wheeler said times have changed since this was zoned and it cannot be developed for less money. Commissioner Keen said he was not against this project, but Brisco Road has tremendous traffic problems and he would not like to see it worse. He had more concern with the parking than the size of the yards. Mr. Grant stated he would like to see less automobiles and more livable space and yard. Chair Costello stated that he would like to see more parking and maybe just 10 units. Mr. Grant said the homes could be reduced in size and one or two more parking spaces included. He said they would consider proposing smaller units to reduce costs and provide more parking and yard space. Commissioner Guthrie stated he thought a total of 11 extra parking spaces (or 5 more) would be enough. Commissioner Fowler suggested the units be smaller and 8 more parking spaces provided. Chair Costello agreed that there should be more space for parking, maybe a total of 11 guest spaces. The Commission had no further concerns and recommended amending the Development Code to allow Single Family Planned Unit Development in a Multi - Family Apartment zone. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 15, 2002 DISCUSSION ITEMS 1 November 19, 2002 Planning Commission will be a Workshop meeting with Local Housing Task Force. Mr. Strong said he was expecting a lively discussion regarding the expectations of state constraints and introduction of the new 17 -18 members, plus a general public discussion regarding housing in Arroyo Grande and the current market. Commission Guthrie said he would be absent for the November 19 meeting, but he would give some written scope. 2. Temporary Use Permits for containers, Residential and Commercial — Will use recommendations from PC for present time. 3. Viewshed Review Process — already discussed earlier in the agenda. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS - Commissioner Brown asked for an update on the sidewalk at 126 Allen Street. Rob said he would investigate. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW -UP - Mr. Strong gave an update of the Community Development Department staffing concerns. ADJOURNMENT — The next special meeting of the Planning Commission was scheduled for Wednesday, November 6, due to elections taking place on November 5th There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m. on a motion by Chair Costello, seconded by Commissioner Brown, and unanimously carried. ATTEST: LY REARDON- SMITH, COMMISSION CLERK TO a TE v RO: STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOP ENT DIRECTOR PAGE 10 EPH M. COSTELLO, CHAIR 1