Loading...
PC Minutes 1991-03-052 6 6 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission March 5, 1991 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman Carr presiding. Present are Commissioners Gallagher, Souza, Moore and Soto. Commissioners Boggess and Brandy are absent. Also in attendance are Planning Director Doreen Liberto- Blanck, Current Planner Scott Spierling, City Attorney Judy Skousen, and Contract Planner Mike Multari. MINUTE APPROVAL Hearing no additions or corrections, the minutes of the Planning Commission Meetings of October 30, 1990; November 20, 1990; December 4, 1990; December 18, 1990; December 18, 1990 and January 10, 1991 were approved as prepared on motion by Commissioner Soto, seconded by Commissioner Souza, and unanimously carried. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 90 -01 AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 1834; PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) REZONE, GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 90-03 AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 1997; PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) REZONE, GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 90 -04 AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 1997 (RANCHO GRANDE PROJECT /OTTSE, INC.) Chairman Carr advised that these Rancho Grande applications were initially before the Planning Commission on January 29, 1991 and the public hearing was continued to this date. The action tonight is to review the staff report, ask for public testimony, and continue any action on all of the items to another date. He stated it is his understanding that the final Environmental Impact Report will not be complete by the next regular meeting of March 18, 1991. Michael Multari, with the firm of Crawford, Multari & Starr, reviewed the staff report, dated March 5, 1991. He stated that tonight's meeting is intended to allow continued discussion of the project, including the possible conditions of approval and mitigations. Also, a discussion would be held on some of the key issues raised at the last meeting. In answer to Commissioner Souza's question relative to what type of activity would be allowed by the homeowner in the 20 foot open space easement, Mr. Multari advised that structures such as houses, gazebos, etc. would be prohibited. Also irrigated landscaping may also be prohibited in order to keep the land in as natural a state as possible. Commissioner Soto expressed concern regarding the loss of the wildlife corridors. With regard to water conservation and water saving devices, Commissioner Soto noted that one of the developers is proposing to put in a dual sewer system which allows gray water usage, and he suggested adding something like that as a condition. Commissioner Moore suggested installing signs along the roadway for people to look out for wildlife. Commissioner Gallagher commented that the concept of acorn /seedling development may not be very realistic, and he suggested that replacement on a 3 to 1 ratio might be more appropriate. Mr. Multari stated that the answer may be a combination of both. Regarding tree removal, Mr. Multari stated that the intent is that every tree that is going to be taken out, the first attempt is going to be to try and transplant it. Chairman Carr questioned the formula for parking. Mr. Multari advised that on one side of the street full on street parking will be provided, and other parking will be provided at 1/2 space per lot on the other side where there are no trees. Chairman Carr opened the hearing for public input. Mike Durkee, of McCuetchon, Doyle, Brown & Enersen, Attorney for the applicant, stated that everyone has been trying to do what is collectively right for the City and for the site. The developer's concern is, after all of these things are put into place, there is a good buildable site remaining, and the bottom line is the best balance between providing housing and protecting the environment. Judy Jarrett, 555 Windermere Lane, stated she would like to see some thought given to restricting hours of construction. Phil Ashley, 1586 Lasitas Court, San Luis Obispo, stated he is a Biologist at Cal Poly. Mr. Ashley spoke regarding the Draft EIR, stating it overlooks some 1 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 3/5/91 biological impacts, and it needs to look at commutative impacts. He pointed out that the Draft EIR has no wildlife study and, in his opinion, it glosses over the cluster alternative, which could reduce erosion and flooding due to less disturbance of the land. Mr. Ashley discussed his alternative plan with biological alternatives. Carolyn Johnson, City of Pismo Beach, stated she enjoyed reading through the Draft EIR. She wanted to point out that the City of Pismo Beach and Caltrans have indicated their preference that no actual development occur in the immediate future. She referred to her letter submitted on behalf of the City of Pismo Beach, dated February 25, 1991, which outlined their concerns relative to potential traffic and circulation impacts. She further stated that the City of Pismo Beach suggests that perhaps the Commission look toward some kind of ordinance or policy by the City that would prohibit further development until such time as the improvements at Oak Park Boulevard are completed which, according to Caltrans, hopefully will be in May 1993. Mike Caffarcia, 241 James Way, stated his concerns regarding excess traffic. and stating he trusts the City is doing an adequate job in this respect and have a master plan regarding traffic. Hearing no further comments from the audience, Chairman Carr brought the matter back to the Commission for further discussion. Commissioner Moore stated that the soils report in the Environmental Impact Report is incomplete; you need to have the number of the soil and the name. However the information is available in the SCS soils survey. With regard to drainage, Commissioner Moore commented regarding the statement that ... "when the water was running over Highway 101, in case the pool got flooded, the water would still be 6" below the floors of the houses in Oak Park Leisure Gardens." Commissioner Moore stated that 6" is not very much, and it needs to be checked very carefully. He further stated that the proposed pond is going to have to have a lot of maintenance, such as cleaning out the mud and silt. He referred to the pond that sits by the Catholic Cemetery, stating that the last time it rained it cost $160,000 to clean the mud out of it. It is not a part of this project, but it drains part of this project. He also stated he would like to see a better wildlife study done. Commissioner Gallagher expressed concern about the cumulative impacts on West Branch Street looking at the circulation pattern coming down out of this project. The primary access points are going to be going down James Way to Oak Park, and Tally Ho Road, going on to Highway 227, and then to San Luis Obispo or Noyes Road. Also, on Rancho Parkway traffic is going to come down and impact West Branch Street and Camino Mercado impacts on West Branch Street. He noted the fact that we have all of this additional housing, the parochial school where the children walk under the Brisco Road Interchange, and Ocean View School across the way and, in his opinion, 3500 additional trips is significant, and even today with no additional homes being built in the area, that particular intersection at the Brisco overpass gets bottlenecked at peak hours at 8:00 in the morning and 5:00 in the afternoon. In addition to the schools, the library is up the road and the Seventh Day Adventist School. He pointed out there will be a lot of pedestrian traffic and bicycle traffic on West Branch Street. The area will be more significantly impacted with the development of the commercial area in there. Commissioner Soto agreed with Commissioner Gallagher, stating that mistakes have been made in the past and we should make sure we have the proper right of way width on James Way. Another important fact is because of the traffic safety and the possibility of children walking up into this project and down to the theater, etc., perhaps a stop light should be required in lieu of a "Stop" sign at the intersection where it ties into James Way and also where it ties in to Rancho Parkway; maybe we need to think about signal lights to control pedestrian traffic. Paul Karp, Director of Public Works, commented on the proposed improvements on West Branch Street from traffic mitigation fees. He stated that the mitigation fees that are proposed were to implement the backbone circulation system, which includes a full widening of the Frontage Road; the Frontage Road at its current width is adequate for four lanes, and James Way, at its current width is adequate for four lanes. Regarding the bottleneck that is between Rancho Parkway and Brisco Road, one. has to remember that we considered West Branch Street on the entire frontage of this property, as well as all of Rancho Parkway on the frontage of the commercial property, as temporary alignments only and are subject to be re- routed, so the amount of improvements put on there potentially will be wasted, however if they are put on during the interim to keep things as safe as possible, that would be determined at the Commission's level here. He asked the Commission keep in mind that both Rancho Parkway 2 267 268 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 3/5/91 and West Branch Street will be re- routed during the commercial development. Regarding signal lights at James Way, Mr. Karp pointed out that there are guidelines for establishing signals and those guidelines are looked at regularly to see if intersections meets those guidelines, and if they do, the City has a signalization fee which is used to install the signals. With regard to the Oak Park Interchange, Mr. Karp advised that construction will begin this November and it will take approximately 1-1/2 years to complete. He further advised that there has been an extensive amount of study done on the drainage, and that information will be presented at a future meeting. Chairman Carr expressed concern relative to the safety of the Brisco Road underpass, and suggested that it be looked at perhaps with the possibility of widening the sidewalk on one side and taking it away on the other side, temporary sidewalks, and that type of thing. He suggested giving consideration to the alternative offered by the City of Pismo Beach to condition the commercial development based on the completion of the OaK Park Interchange if the City has the opportunity to do that. Regarding wildlife, Chairman Carr stated he would certainly be interested in a solution to the crossing on James Way if there is something that is reasonably available. As far as fencing the setback, he stated he would like to see setbacks for the fencing included where it is possible and, as a matter fact, he would like fencing to be discouraged if possible. He stated he is concerned about all of the conditions and mitigations, because there has not been much discussion about the language in each one of these, and he would encourage individual Commissioners to contact staff on any of the conditions if there is a concern. After further discussion, on motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Souza, and unanimously carried, the hearing was continued to a special meeting at 6:00 P.M. on Monday, March 18, 1991. PLANNING DIRECTOR /PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS (A) Request for Interpretation of Condition of Approval No. 4 for Planned Sign Program Case No. 89 - 96, Toyo Plaza. Current Planner Spierling read the previously approved condition of approval No. 4 requiring..." that all existing signage, including murals, portable signs, painted and lighted signs shall be removed prior to issuance of building permits for new signage." He stated this is a fairly standard condition that is used on existing buildings with a new planned sign program to make sure that all the signs conform to what has been presented to the Commission. He reviewed the signs that are on the building at this time. Mr. Spierling stated that the applicant has requested that the Planning Commission review Condition of Approval No. 4 and provide an interpretation of what existing signage is included in that condition. It is the applicant's feeling that the existing small signs in the store windows and the painted mural, which is on the side of Manuel's Restaurant, should be excluded from Condition No. 4. After a brief discussion, it was the Commission's determination that all remaining small signs should come down prior to issuance of a building permit with the exception of the "Open" and "Closed" signs, and that the mural may remain as long as the restaurant is there. Also, the EZ -WASH sign should be removed. ADJOURNMENT On motion by Commissioner Gallagher, seconded by Commissioner Moore, and unanimously carried, the regular meeting of March 19, 1991 was canceled and a special meeting scheduled for 6:00 P.M. Monday, March 18, 1991. On motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Souza, and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 10:10 P.M. Peti Pearl L. Phinney, Secretary Robert W. Carr, Chairman Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Arroyo Grande Planning Commission 3