PC Minutes 1997-07-15ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMIVIISSION
JULY 15, 1997
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met with . Chair Lubin presiding. Present were
Commissioners Greene, Haney, Lubin and O'Donnell present; Commissioner Rondeau absent.
Associates Planner Bruce Buckingham and Helen Elder were in attendance.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - Howard Mann. AGRA. Inc. - clarified a question with the
Chair regarding comments which would be allowed to be made during the "Oral
Communications" portion of the agenda; noted that a letter of concern had been sent to the City
Manager and Community Development Director (a copy was provided to the Planning
Commission for information) stating AGRA's interpretation of the City Council motion which
returned the project to the Planning Commission for two (2) public hearings; expressed his
disagreement with the action and his concern with the economic hardship further delay would
afford him; stated that his understanding was that the project was to be returned to the City
Council prior to the August 12, 1997 meeting; and requested Planning Commission set the two
hearings on August 5 and 6 to accommodate that timeline.
Otis Page. 606 Myrtle St - City of Arroyo Grande representative to San Luis Obispo Council
of Governments (SLOCOG) Citizen Traffic Advisory Committee (CTAC), reported on recent
events at SLOCOG regarding the Brisco Road /Halcyon Road interchange and requested a point
of contact with the Planning Commission for further progress reports.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASES NO. 92 -502
AND 94-527; REVIEW OF PROJECTS FOR NOISE, LOITERING, TRASH AND OTHER
NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS. THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS ARE FOR
OPERATION OF LOPEZ HIGH SCHOOL INCLUDING A TEENAGE ACADEMIC AND
PARENTING PROGRAM (TAP) AT 227 BRIDGE STREET; APPLICANT, LUCIA MAR
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
Associate Planner Bruce Buckingham presented the staff report; stated that this item had been
continued from the June 3, 1997 meeting to allow noticing to occupants within 300' of the
subject property, he noted that no comments had been received; recommended that the project
be found in compliance with their Conditions; and noted that the project would return to the
Commission in January of 1998 for their last annual review prior to the expiration of the CUP.
Chair Lubin opened the public hearing.
Perry Judd. Interim Director for Lucia Mar Unified School District - stated that the School
District had received no complaints; informed the Commission that they were in the process of
advertising for bids for construction of the Lopez High School permanent campus and felt that
there would be no need to request an extension of the permits; and requested PC determination
of compliance with conditions of approval.
There being no further comments from the audience, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Greene noted that he was prepared to find that the CUP was in compliance with
the conditions of approval based upon the school district presentation. Commissioners Haney
and O'Donnell concurred.
1
1
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 2
July 15, 1997
Chair Lubin expressed concern with the lessening of the monitoring of students that seemed to
occur when the principal had changed. He discussed the need for the monitoring. Mr. Judd
agreed that he would emphasize this fact to the school faculty.
On a motion by Commissioner Greene; seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell; and by
unanimous consent with Commissioner Rondeau absent; it was determined that CUPs 92 -502 and
94 -527 are in compliance with the conditions of approval.
PUBLIC HEARING - DEVELOPMENT CODE CASE NO. 97-006; VILLAGE PARKING
ORDINANCE TO DELETE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR OFF - STREET PARKING FOR
NEW USES LOCATING IN EXISTING BUILDINGS IN THE VILLAGE COMMERCIAL
AREA; APPLICANT, CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
Associate Planner Helen Elder presented the staff report; stated that the amendment had been
requested by the City Council because of the high vacancy rate in the Village area; summarized
the proposed revisions to the Ordinance; stated that the changes had been discussed with the
Village Improvement Association and reviewed by the Parking Advisory Board; stated that one
phone call and one letter had been received from the same person regarding the matter; advised
the Commission that new construction or intensified use would still require a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) and the Commission would have the ability to require additional parking as
needed; and read into the record a recommend change to No. 3 of Attachment A:
3. Existing buildings that are remodeled or enlarged shall not be required to provide
parking if the increase in the square footage is less than 25 % of the, floor area before the
addition. If the addition is greater than this amount, or if it is the construction of a new
building, offstreet parking shall be required consistent with the following:
Commissioner O'Donnell questioned the. deletion of "500 sq. ft." in the language and suggested
maintaining that language. Ms. Elder addressed the issue of building size in the Village and
noted that the Commission will retain discretionary review through the CUP process, she stated
that the changed language will provide more flexibility for potential applicants.
Commissioner Haney questioned the Village area vacancy rate. Ms. Elder replied that it varies
according to the source but it has been quoted as approximately 20 %. Commissioner Haney
inquired if the two recent cases that the Commission had reviewed in the Village area would be
affected by the change in the ordinance. Associate Planner Buckingham noted that if the
Development Code were to be changed the conditions would be null and void. Commissioner
Haney inquired about the in -lieu fee and how it was determined. Ms. Elder replied that if the
City had to acquire land the cost would be about $6,000 per space but the true cost of
construction for a parking space was closer to the proposed $3,500. Commissioner Haney noted
that he was not in favor of automatic increases and proposed removing item #4 from the
Resolution.
Commissioner Greene discussed the necessity of maintaining item #4 as a discretionary tool.
Ms. Elder discussed the potential fee increase and how it would be accomplished.
There was further discussion regarding how the amount of the fee would be determined and by
whom; the perceived as opposed to the actual parking problem in the Village; the concept of
bringing life back to the Village and how to accomplish this goal; and the need to support
business.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 3
July 15, 1997
Chair Lubin opened the public hearing.
John Gutierrez. 492 Printz Road - stated that he was the applicant for the new deli in the Village
and strongly supported the ordinance; stated that the buildings were constructed long ago and
parking was not considered at that time; stated that there are many parking spaces available
during the week; noted if people have to walk from their car it will encourage them to visit other
businesses within the area; and stated if there were a severe problem in the future, the ordinance
could again be changed.
There being no further comments from the audience, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner O'Donnell noted for clarification that if an existing retail area was changed to a
restaurant, a CUP would be required with Planning Commission review. Staff agreed that this
was correct.
The Commission discussed the parking problem that exists in the Village on certain weekends
and the City Council intention to support business in the Village.
The following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 97 -1627
A RESOLUTION OF 1 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF A REVISION TO THE IN-LIEU FEE FOR OFFSTREET
PARKING FOR THE COMMERCIAL AREAS
Adopted the Resolution with the following amendments:
delete Item No. 4
4. The fcc may be increased on an annual basis consistent with the increases
On a motion by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Commissioner Haney, and by the following
roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Greene, Haney, O'Donnell and Lubin
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Rondeau
The following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 97 -1628
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMNIISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL:
ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND INSTRUCT THE CITY
CLERK TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION; APPROVE THE
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING VILLAGE AREA
PARKING STANDARDS
1
1
1
1
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 4
July 15, 1997
Adopted the Resolution with the following amendments:
Amend No. 3 of Attachment A as follows:
On a motion
following roll
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3. Existing buildings that are remodeled or enlarged shall not be required to provide
parking if the increase in the square footage is less than 25 % of the floor area
before the addition. If the addition is greater than this amount, or if it is the
construction of a new building, offstreet parking shall be required consistent with
the following:
by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, and by the
call vote, to wit:
Commissioners Greene, O'Donnell, Haney and Lubin
None
Commissioner Rondeau
NON - PUBLIC HEARING - PLANNING COMMISSION INTERPRETATION TO
DETERMINE IF EXPOSED LIGHT BULB SIGN IS PERMITTED
Associate Planner Bruce Buckingham presented the staff report; stated that the Easy 8 Motel is
requesting the ability to change a portion of their existing sign; noted that the Development Code
(DC) does not address "exposed light bulb signs; and staff is requesting Planning Commission
interpretation if this type of sign is allowed.
Commissioner O'Donnell inquired if this could be considered a "reader board sign" which is
expressly prohibited per the Development Code. Staff replied that reader board signs are not
defined in the Development Code, but was commonly defined as a sign with a constantly
changing message.
Commissioner Greene discussed the Commission's authority to direct staff to draft Development
Code amendments. Staff replied that only the City Council had the authority to do so.
Commissioner Greene discussed his preference to have the Development Code amended rather
than to provide an interpretation via Resolution.
Although not a public hearing, Chair Lubin invited the audience to address the Commission.
Tim Schmidt. sign manufacturer - described how the proposed sign will operate; discussed
maintenance and operation of existing sign; explained that rates change seasonally; emphasized
that the sign is not an electronic reader board, but a state -of -the -art sign; and discussed the safety
concerns caused by the existing sign.
The Commission discussed the following items with the applicant: if there were examples of the
proposed sign in the county; how often the rates change; if alternatives were considered by the
company; and if a cover could be installed over the bulbs so that they were not exposed.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 5
July 15, 1997
There being no further comments from the audience, the Chair returned the item to the
Commission for discussion.
Associate Planner Buckingham suggested a fifth alternative to those listed in the staff report:
Direct staff to find that this display is numerical and therefore similar to "time and temperature"
signs which are allowed by the Development Code and can be approved.
Commissioner Greene stated that he is in agreement with the applicant that the proposed sign
is not a reader board; however, he questions whether the sign is consistent with the purpose and
intent of the Development Code.
Commissioner Haney can understand the applicant's issues; however, he feels that the new sign
is not consistent with the intent and purpose of the Code as it is not of a similar style as the
existing sign. He noted that he is additionally concerned with the aesthetics of the sign.
Commissioner O'Donnell expressed his concern with the overall appearance of the sign and
agrees that option #4 is appropriate.
Chair Lubin expressed his concern with making an interpretation regarding exposed light bulb
signs which would then allow other signs which might not be appropriate.
The following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 97 -1629
A RESOLUTION OF THEE PLANNING COMNIISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE INTERPRETING THAT EXPOSED LIGHT BULB
SIGNS ARE PROHIBITED
On a motion by Commissioner O'Donnell, seconded by Commissioner Haney, and by the
following roll call vote, to wit:
The Commission discussed adding direction to staff to amend the Development Code, they
concurred that it was not necessary at this time but the interpretation would be included in a
Development Code update.
AYES: Commissioners O'Donnell, Haney, Greene and Lubin
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Rondeau
The Commission took a ten (10) minute recess.
1
1
1
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 6
July 15, 1997
NON - PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE. PERMIT CASE NO. 96 -541;
REFERENCE TRACT 2220 LANDSCAPING AND PARKING PLANS AT WEST
BRANCH STREET, CAMINO MERCADO AND RANCHO PARKWAY (RANCHO
GRANDE); APPLICANT, AGRA, INC. (CENTRAL COAST TOWN CENTER);
REPRESENTATIVE, HOWARD MANN
Associate Planner Helen Elder presented the staff report; noted that the staff report in the
Planning Commission packet had been prepared prior to the City Council meeting of July 8
where the City Council voted to return the project to the Planning Commission for a minimum
of two public hearings on the issues noted in the memorandum dated July 15, 1997 and attached
to the staff report; the City Attorney has recommended that the Commission move forward with
the project landscaping and parking plans; noted that the applicant is working on the Water
Conservation Plan for the project. The City Engineer will review the plan and has discretionary
approval over the plan; the applicant has requested the opportunity to address the Commission
regarding scheduling the hearings .referred by the City Council; reviewed additional
correspondence received on the item; clarified Page 17 of staff report: Reference under
"statement of consistency" should read: site plan location which states that the total square
footage of landscaping is 11% of parking lot and add additional notation to site plan consistent
with the architect's memo stating that the total amount of landscaping shown for the entire site
represents approximately 30% of the project area.
Chair Lubin initiated a discussion with the Commission and staff as to whether to pursue the
item at this meeting or continue based on staff report and memo from City Attorney.
Commissioner Greene noted that Chair Lubin has had the opportunity to be involved in the
planning process on this project; noted that he had only been appointed recently; stated that
documents he had reviewed have not been comprehensive but only included landscaping and
parking; noted that the Council has returned the matter to the Commission and he had not had
benefit of comprehensive review of project; expressed need to study project and become more
familiar with project and Council concerns; noted Mr. Mann's financial concerns; noted minor
concerns with landscaping plans he received on Friday; expressed need to become more familiar
with a project which affects the community to such a degree; and stated that the landscaping is
one of the most visible aspects of the project.
Commissioner O'Donnell expressed his reservations with proceeding at this meeting; noted that
he had not had sufficient opportunity to review entire project; stated that more time is necessary
to review landscaping and parking plans; requested more background information from staff
regarding the project which they have agreed to provide; and will go forward with landscaping
if the rest of the Commission feels it is appropriate.
Commissioner Haney noted that he agreed with many of the concerns expressed by
Commissioner Greene; noted that he had reviewed only a portion of the landscaping plan but
liked what he had seen to date; expressed reservations that some of the issues referred by the
City Council could dictate major revisions to the project site thus it would be unwise to approve
any plans which might change.
Chair Lubin noted that he too was surprised that the Council had returned the project to the
Commission; felt it would not be appropriate to move forward on landscaping plans without
clear direction from the Council; noted that he received Council Resolution and City Attorney
opinion recommending that the Commission move forward; expressed his belief that all of the
issues are inter- related and should be reviewed concurrently, so that a comprehensive
recommendation may be made to the Council for their final decision; noted that he had received
much input favoring both sides of the decision; suggested that the landscaping and parking plans
be continued to the second evening of public hearings; and asked staff for proposed dates for
public hearings.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 7
July 15, 1997
Associate Planner Elder noted that holding the two hearings on August 5 and 6 as suggested by
the applicant would not allow the project to be heard at the City Council meetings of August
12th, since that agenda is a full agenda with mobilehome rent ordinance which will have a full
audience in attendance; stated that the Planning Commission meeting dates in August were the
5th and 19th and that any recommendation formulated at those meetings could go to the Council
at the earliest on August 26th.
Chair Lubin asked for input from the audience prior to the Commission making a decision;
invited the applicant to address the Commission; and set ground rules for comments to the
Commission.
Howard Mann. applicant representative - noted his appreciation of the candid Commission
comments; asked Commission to separate landscaping and parking issues from those referred
by the City Council; asked that the Council be the body to decide when they wished to hear the
issues; requested Commission set the hearings as soon as possible preferably August 5 and 6 and
then the matter could be returned to the Council within 30 days; noted that the applicant has
attempted to follow all City regulations; stated that since the last Commission meeting the
concerns expressed had been addressed and they were prepared, with all consultants present, to
request Commission approval; noted need to move forward so that construction of the project
could proceed; noted that they are not requesting any changes to the approved plan; and
requested that the Commission expedite the hearing process.
Tony Ferrara. Citizens Committee for Responsible Development. representing Tom Talbert -
thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Commission; noted that he was unaware of
30 day time limit for matter to be returned to the Council; stated that the staff report says the
Commission has a minimum of two (2) public hearings to conduct, there could be additional
hearings required; requested that the Commission follow the proposed staff timelines to allow
everyone time to address the Council concerns; and stated that he felt considerable changes to
the site plan would occur and therefore it would be unproductive to review the landscaping and
parking plans presented at this time.
Otis Page. 606 Myrtle - stated that there should be a thorough review of the proposed project
but that the applicant should receive a reasonable time table to fully study the project, especially
the adequacy of the traffic issues.
Howard Mann. - noted that regarding scheduling, in his opinion on the four (4) City Council
issues, that the record will show they were to be returned, by the Planning Commission, to the
Council within 30 days; he also noted that the City Attorney had cleared the way for Planning
Commission review of the Landscaping and Parking plans as presented; and requested that the
Planning Commission set the hearings in a manner to expedite review of the project.
Chair Lubin inquired if staff was aware of a 30 day time limit for the Commission to return the
matter to the Council. Staff indicated that they were unaware of such a limitation.
The Commission discussed the amount of time necessary for public hearing notices; ,how much
time staff required to provide the background documents to the Commission; requested a
summary of information provided; discussed need for clear direction from the Council and
ability to review Council Resolution; discussed segregating the issues to be reviewed; discussed
upcoming items on the Council agenda; discussed sequencing of discussions - all four items of
Council concern to be reviewed on August 5 and then a recommendation to the Council on the
items as well as the review and possible approval of the landscaping and parking plans on
August 19; discussed other items that might be on the upcoming Commission agendas; requested
information from staff regarding traffic concerns, economic studies, lot line issue and store
configurations, relocation of loading ramps, and the Commission requested that this information
be provided as soon as possible.
1
1
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 8
July 15, 1997
A motion was made by Commissioner O'Donnell; seconded by Commissioner Greene; to set two
(2) public hearings: August 5 and August 19 to discuss the four (4) items referred by the City
Council and to continue the landscaping and parking plans to August 19.
There was discussion regarding the motion and it was withdrawn.
On a motion by Commissioner O'Donnell; seconded by Commissioner Haney; and by unanimous
consent with Commissioner Rondeau absent; it was determined to continue the review of the
landscaping and parking plans to August 19.
On a motion by Commissioner O'Donnell; seconded by Commissioner Haney; and by unanimous
consent with Commissioner Rondeau absent; it was determined to set two (2) public hearings:
August 5 and August 19 to discuss the four (4) items referred by the City Council.
NON - PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 97-551 AMENDED
PARKING PLAN AT 238 WEST BRANCH STREET; APPLICANT, L. C. LAVINE
Associate Planner Bruce Buckingham presented the staff report; requested that the Commission
review the revised plan and determine if it is in compliance with Condition of Approval 8a as
imposed on CUP 97 -551.
The Commission discussed the specific safety issues involved with backing out of the long
driveway onto West Branch Street.
Although not a public hearing, the Chair invited the applicant to address the Commission.
L. C. Lavine, applicant - discussed proposed tandem parking and necessity for it due to site
restraints; noted that he was providing parking on site; discussed parking arrangements on
neighboring properties; and how tenants currently park on the site.
The Commission discussed with the applicant: the lack of alternative for parking on the site; the
amount of traffic on West Branch; safety issues; and the setback requirements for the carport.
On a motion by Commissioner Greene; seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell; and by
unanimous consent with Commissioner Rondeau absent; it was determined that the parking plan
as submitted is in compliance with the Conditions of Approval for CUP 97 -551.
NON - PUBLIC HEARING - REVIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RULES AND
REGULATIONS
Associate Planner Helen Elder presented the staff report; and recommended that the Commission
might want to appoint a subcommittee to review their Rules and return with recommended
changes.
The Commission discussed with staff that there appeared to be no specific problems which would
require a change in the manner the Commission was operating; and that the most recent change
had been in the structure of the Commission
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission
July 15, 1997
The Commission concurred that the annual review had been completed an d there -were ono
specific changes recommended.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS -
1. Agenda Item No. III.A.
2. Agenda Item No. IV.B.
Heinrich
3. Agenda Item No. IV.B.
from Howard Mann
ATTEST:
61L
Luc e B s e, Commission Cler
AS TO CONTENT:
l elts1„—
Doreen Libertb- B1anck, AICP, Community Development Director
Page -9
PLANNING COMIVIISSION /COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ITEMS AND
COMMENTS
A. Update of Projects -
Associate Planner Helen Elder noted that:
The City Council had a number of public hearing items on their upcoming agendas; and
Directed the attention of the Commission to the City press release, noted that the
Community Development Director had achieved certification from the American Institute
for Certified Planners. Congratulations were extended by the Commission and
recognition for achieving the designation.
The Commission discussed with staff the timelines for receiving the requested information
regarding the Central Coast Town Center.
- Letter dated July 15, 1997, from Lara Battles, 210 Mason Street
- Memorandum dated July 14th faxed July 15, 1997 from Michael
- Letter with attachments dated July 14th faxed July 15th, 1997
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, on a motion by . Commissioner
O'Donnell, seconded by Commissioner Rondeau, and unanimously carried, the meeting was
adjourned at 11: p.m.
1
1