Loading...
PC Minutes 2001-06-051 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 5, 2001 Page 1 CALL TO ORDER Chair Costello called the regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Commissioner Brown X Commission Fowler X Commissioner Guthrie Absent Vice Chair Keen X Chair Costello APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the May 3, and May 15, 2001 were approved as submitted. ITEM I. A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None B. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 1. A letter from George and Patricia Haugen dated June 4, 2001, concerning Conditional Use Permit 00 -017, Nextel Communications. 2. Staff Report of May 22, 2001 on the Voter Approval of General Plan Amendments and Major Land Use Changes. 3. A correction of the resolution for Alpine PCS Conditional Use Permit 00-021. ITEM II. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 01 -001; LOCATION — 861 EAST CHERRYAVENUE; APPLICANT — DISA THORENSEN Kelly Heffernon, Associate Planner, said the project site is located at the end of East Cherry Avenue, is approximately 1 -acre in size, and is zoned Agriculture. The proposed project is to convert and expand an existing garage into an attached second residential unit, and construct a new detached two -car garage and carport. The second residence would be 638 square feet in size, and would be attached to the main residence by a covered breezeway. The proposed second unit meets Development Code requirements for setbacks, height, maximum floor area and parking. The Architectural Review Committee evaluated the exterior building materials and colors of the proposed second residence and determined that the architectural style is consistent with the primary residence, as required. The Planning Commission said they had concerns with: • The hours of operation that the contractor intended to work. • The agricultural buffer. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 5, 2001 Page 2 James Buckingham, Contractor, said distance from the property line to the structure is approximately 100 -feet with 12 -foot high, very thick bushes that separate the property from the field and then 16 -18 feet before the field starts. Disa Thorensen, the applicant had a letter from her neighbors at 861 East Cherry stating they had no objection to the project. She also talked to her other neighbor, whose house sits quite a ways from her house, and they also had no objection. The Planning Commission requested maintenance of trees and shrubs along the property line, the applicant be required to record a "right to farm" notice, and that the hours of construction be from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Commissioner Brown moved that the Planning Commission adopt: RESOLUTION NO. 1793 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 00 -011, LOCATED AT 861 EAST CHERRY AVENUE, APPLIED FOR BY DISA THORENSEN Commissioner Guthrie seconded the motion. The motion was approved by the following roll call vote: ROLL CALL VOTE X Commissioner Brown X Commission Fowler X Commissioner Guthrie Absent Vice Chair Keen X Chair Costello B. CONDITIONAL USE. PERMIT CASE NO. 00 -017; LOCATION - 200 HILLCREST DRIVE; APPLICANT - NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS Kelly Heffernon, Associate Planner, said Nextel is proposing to locate a telecommunications facility at City Reservoir No. 2 located near the top of Hillcrest Drive. The installation of this new facility will include replacing the existing City -owned lattice structure with an 80 -foot tall monopole, relocating all operating antennas from the lattice tower and water tank to the new monopole, and extending the existing pump house to include an additional 140 square foot equipment shelter. The proposed pole would be camouflaged as a pine tree to blend in with the existing grove of mature pine trees surrounding the water tank. The monopole facility will consist of 12 panel antennas configured in 3 sectors of 4 panels each. The height of the monopole is necessary to receive and send signals at 1 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 5, 2001 Page 3 the proper radio frequency without interference from the existing pine trees. The site is highly visible from the Highway 101 corridor, from the surrounding residential development, and adjacent Elementary School. When this project was first submitted last September, the plans were for a 75 -foot tall monopole. At that time, staff requested that the height of the monopole be increased to 80 feet to allow for future communication carriers at this location without having to construct additional tower structures. Last month, Sprint submitted an application to co- locate on Nextel's monopole, and after performing a radio frequency study, they determined that a 90 -foot tall pole is necessary to avoid interference with or substantial trimming of the existing trees. Nextel is prepared to install a 90 -foot tall monopole, but is not willing to jeopardize their project approval to do so. In considering the proposed height of the Nextel tower facility, staff requests that the Planning Commission consider the added height for purposes of cost efficiency and aesthetics. Staff recommends that a condition be added requiring the applicant to replace any trees and submit a landscape plan subject to review and approval by the Parks and Recreation Director. Public comment period opened: Carver Chui, Representative gave a description of the project and explained what coverage they would achieve through the proposed facility. He said Nextel's initial proposal was for a 75 -foot Larsen pine monopole, which is comparable in height to the existing trees. At a Staff Advisory Committee meeting they had been asked to consider raising the height to 80 -feet to accommodate a second carrier. Scott Adams, 1222 Montego Street: He had concerns with: • The close proximity to his house • The athestics • The high intensity radio frequencies that would be emitted • The elementary school down the street. Wendy Beckham, 220 Hillcrest Drive: Basically she had the same concerns as Scott Adams, but added: • The Fire Department in Camarillo has a lawsuit against Nextel • Any disturbance of the trees on the site may upset the wildlife. Tom Parsons, 1219 Montego Street: The same concerns as Mr. Scott, but stated that height of the monopole seems to be continuously being increased. Carie Randolfh, 1310 Sierra Drive: The same concerns as Mr. Scott Carver Chui stated that the proposed facility is in full compliance with federal standards. Nextel is prepared to maintain the site to be in compliance with federal MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 5, 2001 Page 4 standards. A maintenance person would be available to go out to the site monthly and a person available for emergency a response. Howard Mankins, 200 Hillcrest Drive: The issue of the applicant passing over his property to get to the site has been resolved, but he was not aware that the pole was going to be 80 -90 feet high. He understood his neighbors concerns. Scott Adams: He said the concern was not just the amount of emissions but the exposure over a long period of time to these emissions. Public comment closed. Kerry McCants told the Planning Commission that in making a decision Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 should be taken into consideration, specifically regulation #5 which states you cannot regulate personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emission to the extent that such facilities comply with the FCC Guidelines for such emissions. After further discussion the Planning commission decided that: • A monopole higher than 75 feet would not be desirable • They would like to see a true representation of where the pole would sit in relation to the existing trees, tank, and the height of the hill. • They would like to see a proposed agreement between the City and the provider dealing with contingencies that we should be in place if the trees need to be replaced. Commissioner Guthrie moved that the Planning Commission: continue the project to the June 19, 2001 meeting and directed staff to prepare an agreement between the City and the applicant regarding tree planting for additional screening purposes, and directed the applicant to visually demonstrate on the project site, the height of the proposed monopole in relation to the existing trees. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. The motion was approved by the following roll call vote: ROLL CALL VOTE X Commissioner Brown X Commission Fowler X Commissioner Guthrie Absent Vice Chair Keen X Chair Costello C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 00 -021; LOCATION — 937 RANCHO PARKWAY; APPLICANT — ALPINE Teresa McClish, Associate Planner said the project site is located at the Trader Joe's building in the Five Cities Center. The proposed project is for modular cellular 1 1 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 5, 2001 Page 5 equipment that includes installation of 6 panel telecommunication antennas, 6' in height, flush mounted in pairs on three sides of the existing Trader Joe's building. Two 4' panels are proposed on one of the roof cupolas on the store front. Dummy arrays matching the flush mounted cupola antennas are proposed to match the other cupola. All proposed antennas and the panel enclosures will be painted to match the existing building. Three cabinets, 6 feet in height and related equipment, are proposed on a 50 square foot lease area on the roof and screened from adjacent areas by the roof parapet. Issues to consider for this application include consistency with existing federal regulations, consistency with existing local land use regulations, and aesthetics. The General Plan and zoning designations for the site is Planned Development (PD 1.2). Telecommunication facilities are not specifically listed as an allowable use in the PD 1 .2 zoning district. However, commercial uses and accessory uses that are compatible with the total development plan are conditionally allowed pursuant to approval by the City Council. Regarding aesthetics, since the proposed panels are flush mounted to the sides of the building and painted to match, and the equipment cabinets are proposed to be located below the top of the roof parapet, the facility will not be obvious from roads, the shopping center or surrounding neighborhoods. The applicant and members of their staff spoke giving a detailed explanation of the project. Public comment period opened: Tom Parsons, 1219 Montego Street: He asked the applicant to explain what the coverage area for the atenna was. The engineer for the applicant displayed a large map highlighting the total coverage areas for their specific site. Public comment closed. After further discussion the Planning Commission said they had not been able to detect the "mock -up" of the antennas on the roof of Trader Joes and it was a sound proposal and a sound design. Commissioner Fowler moved that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt: MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 5, 2001 Page 6 RESOLUTION NO. 01 -1794 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, INSTRUCTING THE SECRETARY TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 00 -021, APPLIED FOR BY ALPINE PCS Commissioner Guthrie seconded the motion. The motion was approved by the following roll call vote: ROLL CALL VOTE X Commissioner Brown X Commission Fowler X Commissioner Guthrie Absent Vice Chair Keen X Chair Costello D. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 01 -001; CREEK SETBACKS; CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Teresa McClish, Associate Planner said this Development Code Amendment is to expand the City's creek dedication requirement for new discretionary projects to include the area 25 feet from the top of the stream bank for all creeks in Arroyo Grande" On March 27, 2001, by consensus, the City Council directed staff to amend the Development Code to revise portions of Chapter 14 which establishes a 25 foot creek dedication from the top of the stream bank for projects abutting Arroyo Grande creek and its tributaries. The proposed ordinance expands the requirement to new projects abutting other creeks in Arroyo Grande for stream bank areas designated as environmentally sensitive or beneficial for the purposes of open space or flood control. Figure 2 from the City's "Drainage Master Plan ", shows the creeks affected by the proposed Ordinance. Projects that abut Meadow Creek are not currently required to dedicate a portion of the stream and bank area. The area to be protected by the creek dedication easement includes the steam bed and twenty -five feet (25') back from the existing top of the stream bank, or the future top of bank resulting from an approved creek alteration project. Restrictions included in a public creek easement dedications for riparian protection purposes are based on a report by qualified biologist. The Planning Commission disucussed the changes to the ordinance and had comments and questions for staff. 1 1 1 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 5, 2001 Page 7 Staff explained that: • The language regarding the biologist's report was not changed from the existing language and the process is the same in effect for Arroyo Grande Creek and the tributaries. The biological review is triggered in environmental review and then staff requests particular reports from the applicant. • The Flood zone for Meadow Creek is contained within the banks of the creek and most of the creek is located in an open space area on the referenced portion. Problems of flooding on specific new projects that come before us are directed to Public Works and conditioned. ■ With regard to clearing of the creeks for flood control this requires a permit from the Fish and Game Public comment period opened: Ella Honeycutt, 560 Oak Hill Road handed out booklets referencing flooding and erosian. Ms. Honeycutt stated that for flooding protection it would be wise to include this information in the plans. Public comment closed. The Planning Commission stated that they supported the idea of including the protection of other major creek areas also. Commissioner Brown moved that the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt: RESOLUTION NO. 01 -1792 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND TITLE 9 , CHAPTER 14 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE BY EXPANDING THE CITY'S CREEK DEDICATION REQUIREMENT FOR NEW DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS TO INCLUDE ALL CREEKS IN ARROYO GRANDE Commissioner Guthrie seconded the motion. The motion was approved by the following roll call vote: ROLL CALL VOTE X Commissioner Brown X Commission Fowler X Commissioner Guthrie Absent Vice Chair Keen X Chair Costello MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 5, 2001 Page 8 ITEM III. NON- PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS None ITEM IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS None ITEM V. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS None ITEM VI. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW UP REPORTS A. Kerry McCants discussed item #2, under Written Communications. He said City Council requested this be brought to them for consideration with respect to the kinds of land use projects that should be subject to this 4/5 vote requirement. B. The joint meeting of the Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Committee is scheduled for Wednesday, June 20, 2001, at 6:00 p.m. ITEM VII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 P.M. to the next scheduled meeting on June 1 9, 2001. ATTEST: Lyc(Reardon Smith, Acting Commission Clerk •seph M. Costello, Chair AS TO CONTENT: Kerry c is Community Development Director 1 1 1