PC Minutes 1991-05-07284
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission
May 7, 1991
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Vice Chairman Soto
presiding. Present are Commissioners Gallagher. Brandy and Boggess. Absent are Chairman
Carr and Commissioners Moore and Souza. Also in attendance are Planning Director Doreen
Liberto - Blanck, Current Planner Scott Spierling and Planning Consultant Michael Multari.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90 -1, PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT (PD) REZONE /DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 90-220 WILMA PACIFIC,
INC.
Planning Consultant Michael Multari reviewed staff report dated May 7, 1991. He stated
that this is a request for General Plan Amendment to change the designation from Residential
Hillside to Planned Development and rezone the property to PD. The changes would allow up
to 150 single family residences, 38 of which would be affordable housing. He noted that under
the existing zoning 38 units would be permitted.
Vice Chairman Soto opened the hearing for public comment.
Eric Justesen, representative for Wilma Pacific, Inc. spoke in favor of the project and
expressed concerns on the review of the Draft Environmental Impact Report. He briefly reviewed
the history of the project and described the current proposal.
Austin Carlton, Senior Transportation Planner with Caltrans, referred to Caltrans' initial
letter on the DEIR and FEIR documents. In addition to the comments already presented, he
wanted to point out that the Vista Del Mar project would generate an additional 1500 vehicle trips
daily, and it is requested that the project be delayed until the South County Model and
Comprehensive Traffic Study is completed by the San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council.
He stated it is his understanding that the traffic study should be completed somewhere around
the end of June.
Martin Hock, 487 Cobre Place, Arroyo Grande, and Matthew Roberts, 1231 Sidney, San
Luis Obispo, spoke in favor of the project.
Herman Olave, 222 W. Cherry, representing some of the residents on Orchard Street and
Cherry Avenue, stated their main concern is traffic on Orchard Street. Paul Haddock, 487 Valley
Road, commented with regards to the EIR on the project.
Hearing no further comments from the audience, Vice Chairman Soto declared the
hearing closed.
The Commissioners expressed several reasons why they could not support the request,
including their feeling that the area in question is not suitable for 150 Tots and a General Plan
amendment is inappropriate, water availability, drainage, increased traffic, loss of wildlife, etc.
Mr. Multari advised that staff would prepare appropriate resolutions and work with the applicants
about certification of the EIR addressing the comments that came up tonight. After discussion,
the matter was continued to the meeting of May 21, 1991 on motion by Commissioner Gallagher,
seconded by Commissioner Boggess, and unanimously carried.
PUBLIC HEARING - VESTING PARCEL MAP NO. AG 90 -113, CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 90 -479 AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 90 -457, 1524
GRAND AVENUE, CENTRAL COAST BOWL (MERILEE PECK - NEWDOLL)
Current Planner Spierling reviewed the staff report dated May 7, 1991.
Upon being assured by the Commission Clerk that the public hearing for Vesting Parcel
Map Case 90 -113 and Conditional Use Permit Case No. 90 -479 had been duly published and
property owners notified, Vice Chairman Soto declared the hearing open.
David Foote, SEDES, stated his firm is responsible for the preparation of the draft EIR on
this project. He presented a broad perspective on the document, and responded to particular
items relating to some of the applicant's comments that were included in the staff report. He
pointed out that CEQA requires that the document identify an environmentally superior project
in the alternative section, and it is his determination that, with the mitigations proposed in the EIR
and the addition of reducing the scale of the project, the most environmentally superior solution
will be achieved.
Keith Higgins, Traffic Engineer, stated he prepared the traffic study that is included in the
Environmental Impact Report, and addressed three issues related to project traffic impacts: 1)
Impacts of the project on Grand Avenue; 2) Impacts of the project on the backbone traffic
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -7 -91
system; and 3) Impacts on the neighborhood in the immediate project vicinity.
Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Clerk that public hearing for the subject
projects had been duly published and property owners notified, Vice Chairman Soto declared
the hearing open.
Vice Chairman Soto advised that a letter was received from Roberta Porter, a local
resident, stating that she objects to the project. Also, a petition was received containing 44
signatures of local residents opposed to the bowling alley.
Merilee Peck - Newdoll, applicant, reviewed the proposed project and environmental
document, and spoke in favor of the project. She stated it is her feeling that each issue in the
Environmental Impact Report can be successfully mitigated to the point of insignificance.
Mark Vasquez, Architect for the project, reviewed the issues identified in the EIR and the
required mitigation measures. Dave Watson, Planning Consultant for the project, spoke
regarding the EIR and various design changes proposed to mitigate issues, such as drainage,
visual impact, maintenance, public safety and traffic
Les Henderson, 332 No. Oak Park Road, Grover City; John Zimek, 1757 Brighton Avenue;
Howard Ricking, 1180 Pacific Pointe Way, representing the Peace Lutheran Church and pre-
school; and Henry Mancini, 1980 Moss Court, spoke in opposition to the project.
Bob Manning, 106 Equestrian Way; Kimberly Mitchell; Nancy Ferrari, 316 So. Halcyon
Road, and Ed Otto, 311 Sunrise Drive, spoke in favor of the project. Jim McGillis, Surveyor with
San Luis Engineers, Surveyor on this project, spoke regarding drainage and traffic concerns.
Heather Jensen, Manager of the Arroyo Grande Chamber of Commerce, speaking on behalf of
the Board of Directors, stated that the Board endorses this positive commercial business.
Kathy Salazar, 1231 Newport Drive, stated that the Oceanview School is close to the
proposed bowling alley, and there is no mention in the EIR nor in the discussion. She expressed
concern about the number of children that will be walking down Brighton and Newport into the
bowling center, and what the impact of increased traffic will have on the safety of these children.
Hearing no further comments from the audience, Vice Chairman Soto closed the public
hearing portion at this time.
Planning Director Liberto - Blanck suggested that additional comments from the public be
submitted to the Planning Department for a response. After discussion, on motion by
Commissioner Gallagher, seconded by Commissioner Brandy, and unanimously carried, this
matter was continued to the regular Planning Commission meeting of June 4, 1991 at 7:30 P.M.
PLANNING DIRECTOR /PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS
Viewshed Review Case No. 91- 27,1521 Hillcrest Drive, and Viewshed Review
Case No. 91 - 29, 1390 Newport. Current Planner Spierling advised that these items are for
the Commission's information.
County Projects. Planning Director Liberto - Blanck advised that she had received a
memorandum from the County Planning Department notifying the City that they are going to the
Board of Supervisors on May 21 st sponsoring a County general plan amendment to establish
development standards for the Arroyo Grande fringe area.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, on motion by Commissioner
Brandy seconded by Commissioner Boggess, and unanimously carried, the meeting was
adjourned at 9:45 P.M.
ATTEST:
Pearl L. Phinney, Secretary
2
oto, Vice Chairman
2 8'5;