Loading...
PC Minutes 2002-07-02MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 2, 2002 CALL TO ORDER The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chair Costello Presiding. Present were Commissioner's Brown, Fowler, Guthrie and Keen. Also in attendance were staff members Associate Planner Kelly Heffernon, Community Development Director, Rob Strong and Public Works Assistant Engineer, Mike Linn. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - The minutes of May 21, 2002 were unanimously approved as written by a 5/0 voice vote. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 1. Supplemental letter and Exhibit 'A', 'B' and 'C' for Public Hearing Item II.A. 2. Housing Element Review worksheet for Non - Public Hearing Item III.B. AGENDA REVIEW The Planning Commission agreed to take Non - Public Hearing Item III.A out of sequence due to special circumstances. NON - PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 02 -006; APPLICANT - VISTA HOSPITAL SYSTEMS INC. /RICHARD SANDOVAL; LOCATION - 345 SOUTH HALCYON ROAD Rob Strong presented the staff report prepared by Teresa McClish, Associate Planner, explaining the applicant's request to remove the Condition of Approval requiring the inclusion of a bus turn -out for the hospital parking lot expansion. Mr. Strong gave an update, confirming that there is a bus stop on Fair Oaks (just east of the intersection of Fair Oaks and Halcyon Road) and that the transit authority had informed the City that a stop located on the Halcyon Road frontage was not important enough to be considered at this time. In addition, a suggestion had been made for a voluntary donation from the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital to a transit fund for bus stop improvements. Commissioner Brown asked if there were any other sources of funding to make this happen? Rob Strong said additional ideas for transit improvements had not been explored, but could be considered by the City in the future. Commissioner Guthrie stated that the Halcyon bus was discontinued a year and a half ago, although the bench is still there. Rob Strong said he would arrange for the bench to be relocated to the bus stop. Mike Linn, Public Works, stated that Jason Gillespie, of the transit authority, had informed him that they were only in the beginning stages of coordinating efforts MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 2, 2002 PAGE 2 with all the bus agencies and they would have to redirect their whole schedule in order to accommodate the requested bus stop and bus turnout. In answer to a question from Commissioner Guthrie, Mike Linn confirmed that the range for a bus turnout had been quoted as between $15,000 - $50,000. Dale Ramey, representative RRM, explained that he had submitted a cost estimate to the City for an 80 -foot stall and a larger stall, but a smaller transit bus could be used and would lower the price. Commissioner Guthrie stated that he thought the estimate was extremely high and suggested in -lieu fees might be collected in the future to provide funding for transit requirements. Commissioner Keen stated he was in favor of removing the condition since the bus no longer goes to the location and that he would also like to see the bus bench moved. Commissioner Guthrie stated that the bench belonged to both the Grover Beach and Arroyo Grande Chambers of Commerce and suggested they be contacted to move it. Commissioner Fowler concurred with Commissioner Keen to remove the condition for the bus turnout. Commissioner Brown said he also concurred with Commissioner Keen to remove the condition for the bus turnout. He expressed concern with respect to the wide range of the cost estimate range, stating he would like to see a more specific cost estimate justified for any future projects. Rob Strong informed the Commission that the City would be pursuing a bid for a bus turnout location on East Grand Avenue (part of the East Grand Avenue Enhancement Plan) to replace a curb stop that exists in Grover Beach between Courtland and Oak Park. A more accurate estimate should be received from an actual bid. Chair Costello said he also concurred with the other Commissioners on waiving the condition for the requirement for the bus turnout. He stated he had a concern that the issue of public transportation was not being dealt with, but in his opinion it would have to be during the next decade or more. Commissioner Keen made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Guthrie to remove Condition of Approval No. 32 from Exhibit'A', of Conditional Use Permit Case No. 02 -006 and adopt: 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 2, 2002 RESOLUTION NO. 02 -1841 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, REMOVING CONDITION OF APPROVAL NO. 32 FROM EXHIBIT 'A' OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 02- 006, LOCATED AT 345 SOUTH HALCYON ROAD, APPLIED FOR BY ARROYO GRANDE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL The motion was approved with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioner's Brown, Fowler, Guthrie, Keen and Chair Costello NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 2nd day of July 2002. PAGE 3 PUBLIC HEARING — VARIANCE CASE NO. 02 -002; APPLICANT — MARY E. MYERS; LOCATION — PASEO STREET — CONTINUED FROM JUNE 18, 2002 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Kelly Heffernon, Associate Planner, presented the staff report explaining that the variance was being requested to allow deviation from Development Code requirements for side yard setback and installation of a sidewalk along Paseo Street to construct a 2,200 square foot house on a legal, non - conforming, small lot with steeply sloped topography and the private access road encroaching along the property frontage. At the June 18, 2002 meeting the Planning Commission discussion focused mainly on lot coverage requirements, the possibility of merging non - conforming Tots that are under the same ownership, and the pending sidewalk requirements. The open deck areas are excluded from the lot coverage calculation in the Development Code and the lot coverage is less than the maximum allowed in either the Residential Suburban district or the previous Residential Agriculture zoning and is therefore not an issue. Commissioner Brown questioned the difference in lot coverage standard percentages as quoted in the last staff report and the new staff report. Ms. Heffernon stated that the Development Code standards had been revised a number of times, but the correct figure is 50 %. Commissioner Brown then asked if the City installs sidewalk does it then become City property? Mike Linn, stated that if the sidewalk were in the City right -of -way it would be the property of the City. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 2, 2002 PAGE 4 Commissioner Keen advised that after the sidewalk is installed to City specifications then the City has to maintain it and connecting the sidewalk to a public right -of -way does make it part of the City's system. Mike Linn agreed with Commissioner Keen's comments and after further questions from Chair Costello clarified that the City would maintain the sidewalk, but the ownership would still be that of the property owner unless dedicated. David Brown, Agent for the owner, commented that if the sidewalk is put in it would be deemed "a permanent non - permeable surface ", which means the property owner pays taxes on it and if it is for public use this does not seem fair; he then presented a detailed description of the sidewalk and side yard setbacks and if they were required how the property would be affected. He stated that Lot 1, directly behind the property, has a rear yard setback that is also not in conformance. Commissioner Guthrie questions: • Re Exhibit 'A', where is the transition between the proposed curb and gutter and is an a/c curb on the building side of the drive proposed also? • If the sidewalk is not required how will the slope be dealt with, will you put in a retaining wall? Mr. Brown replied: • At the Staff Advisory Committee meeting it was indicated that a concrete curb and gutter in the public right -of -way would be required and that it would tie into an a/c curb on the property. • Re the slope — it was proposed to use landscape to maintain it and to absorb some of the water and not build a retaining wall. Commissioner Keen comments: 1. Re Exhibit 'A', the previous elevations did not show the short retaining wall that goes to the property line. 2. How far will the chimney project into the setback? Mr. Brown replied: • The previous elevation submitted was for the building itself and did not show the retaining wall. • The chimney projection would be no more than 18" per Development Code requirements. OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT Commissioner Brown stated he believed that finding No. 3 could not be made for the variance (re setbacks), and that the design of the house had dictated the requirement for the variance. In addition, he was not convinced that the sidewalk was unnecessary. Mr. Brown, the representative, replied that all the neighboring 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 2, 2002 PAGE 5 lots are 50 feet in width with 5 -foot setback requirements on each side. The applicant's lot is 50 foot wide, but because it is a corner lot a 10 -foot setback is required which reduces the building envelope. In addition, this lot is the smallest lot in the area and the topography quite steep. Chair Costello asked whether a house could be built on this lot with the same square footage, but with the required setbacks? Mr. Brown replied that nothing is impossible, but one of the main concerns with this project is the issue of the traffic flow coming off Paseo Road. They have tried to maintain the building back far enough, placing the garage on the side, so a safe approach to the road could be met. There was further discussion on the setback requirements and neighboring lots, with Rob Strong closing the discussion stating that staff believes there are physical difficulties and hardships associated with this property and if the findings can be made staff recommends approval. Heather Jenson, 569 May Street, owner of the property, stated that to make this lot buildable it needs a variance. She and her husband owned a total of six lots and this was the most difficult to build on and it was better to try to make these Tots work and use infill in the City rather than look for other boundaries. Also, when a sidewalk such as this goes to a private road it really is only a driveway for the residents. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Commissioner Guthrie recommended approval stating: • The topography had created special conditions; • It seems reasonable to allow a house comparable to the rest of the neighborhood to be built; • The sidewalk condition should be waived, as it does not go anywhere. Commissioner Keen recommended approval stating: • Sidewalks on the private road should not go further than the existing retaining wall; • The 5 -foot setback is acceptable because the amount of private road given up for this lot makes the house even more difficult to build; • There are houses close by that have already been built with front setbacks so small that there is no room to park a car in front of the garages, so special provisions have already been allowed on these neighboring Tots. Commissioner Fowler said she could make the findings and stated: • It is unlikely that a sidewalk would get heavy use as the road is too narrow; MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 2, 2002 • The Housing Element promotes allowing the use of small and irregular size lot development, increasing floor area ratios, and this property fits these elements. Commissioner Brown stated he agreed with Commissioner Guthrie's comments on the sidewalk, but he could not make finding No. 3 of the variance with respect to the setbacks. Chair Costello stated most of his concerns had been satisfactorily addressed and he could support the variance and could make all the findings for the setbacks and sidewalks, but he would like to see the private road kept "private ", for safety reasons, and the sidewalk end where the retaining wall is. Commissioner Fowler made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Guthrie, approving Variance Case No. 02 -002, excluding Condition of Approval No. 12 of Exhibit 'A' and adopt: RESOLUTION NO. 02 -1840 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING VARIANCE CASE NO. 02 -002 TO DEVIATE FROM THE SIDE YARD SETBACK AND SIDEWALK REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, LOCATED ON PASEO STREET, APPLIED FOR BY MARY MYERS The motion was approved with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioner's Fowler, Guthrie, Keen and Chair Costello NOES: Commissioner Brown ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 2 day of July 2002. PAGE 6 NON - PUBLIC HEARING - HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE PRESENTATION - PROCESS AND SCHEDULING OF WORKSHOPS Kelly Heffernon, Program Manager, presented the process of the Housing Element Update and scheduling of workshops. The consensus of the Planning Commission was to advise City Council: • A Local Housing Task Force should be formed, composed of between 10 and 20 members having a variety of expertise, to hold regular meetings for technical review of the Housing Element Update. • Quarterly public workshops should also be scheduled for update and review during the next year. 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 2, 2002 DISCUSSION ITEMS Rob Strong presented the correspondence from The Highlands at Rancho Grande Homeowner's Association (HOA), requesting approval to remove existing lawn size restrictions. The Planning Commission unanimously denied the request stating that lawn restrictions should not be removed nor relaxed, but more carefully monitored and enforced. The Commission suggested that the HOA and the City compare per capita water consumption for the Highlands with other single - family residential developments in the area to determine if the intent of the water conservation is being achieved. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS Commissioner Keen had a concern that the lots on Paseo Street only have a 5 -foot setback in front of the garages and he would like to see some action taken to prevent similar development in the future. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW -UP Rob Strong said the Long's project has closed escrow, building plans are being developed, the City is in ownership of the expansion of the ponding basin lot and grading and site preparation is commencing soon. The Courtland and Grand project with the 108 senior housing units is also progressing; they are reapplying for the tax credits and restudying the possibility to reduce the number of elevators by reducing the number of buildings. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. on a motion by Commissioner Keen, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, and unanimously carried. ATTEST: LY'N REARDON- SMITH, COMMISSION CLERK A - TO ON NT: ROB STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR PAGE 7 PH M. COSTELLO, CHAIR 1 1 1