PC Minutes 1989-02-07Arroyo Grande Planning Commission
February 7, 1989
The Arroyo Grande Planning Connission niet in regular session with Chairman Soto presiding. The
Chairman introduced new Planning Commissioner, Paulette McCann, and welcomed her to the
Conmission. ITe noted that the second new Commissioner, Pete Gallagher, was unable to attend the
meeting tonight. Also present are Ccirrrussionexs Gerrish, Moore, Scott, and McCann. Commissioners
Flores and Gallagher are absent. Planning Director I,iberto- Blanek, Current Planner Spier•ling, and
Long Range Planner Bierdzinski are also in attendance.
MINUTE APPROVAL
Convnissioner• Gerrish corrected the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of December 6, 1988,
Page 2, Paragraph 6, to read "Commissioner" instead of "Commission ". There being no further
corrections or additions, the miunute`s of December 6, 1988 were approved as corrected on motion by
Commissioner Gerrish, seconded by Commissioner Scott, and unanimously carried.
CONTINUED PUBLIC IIEARING - PARCEL MAP CASE NO. 88 -461 (AG 88 -087), DIVISION OF
ONE PARCEL INTO TWO PAR I USING OPTIONAL DESIGN STANDARDS, 230 W. BRANCH
STREET. (EDWIN NELSON/CERTIFIED FREIGHT LINES)
Current Planner Spierling reviewed that the Planning Commission, at its meeting of January 17, 1989
reviewed the above referenced lot split and instructed staff to prepare an initial environmental study, a
negative declaration, findings of fact, and conditions of approval so the Planning Commission could
consider approval of the project. He commented that staff has complied with the request and the
information has been included in the agenda packets. Mr. Spierling reiterated sc of staff's concerns
and reasons for recommending denial of the project, as listed in the staff report, dated February 7,
1989.
Chairman Soto reopened the public hearing on Parcel Map Case No. 88 -461.
Jim McGillis, Surveyor with San Luis Engineering, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He stated that at
the last meeting Mr. Nelson mentioned a petition he had passed around to the neighborhood in favor of
his lot split. Mr. PileGillis stated he would like to submit that petition for the record. With regard to
the question as to whether optional design standards is an appropriate use for this particular project,
Mr. McGillis stated they based their application on the fact that with the optional design standards, the
property would have a backyard facing on Larchmont. I -ie pointed out that, based on his past
experience on subdivisions, particularly Tony Marsalek's property on Cherry Avenue, that particular
project was opposed because they didn't want the backyards on Cherry Avenue facing the other
properties. He further stated that with the condition included for curb and gutter, that would reduce
the danger of erosion.
•
lJpon hearing no further comments for or against the proposed parcel map, Chairman Soto declared the
hearing closed.
Commissioner McCann stated it is her feeling that the proposal is not consistent with the general plan
density so she is definitely not in favor of it. Chairman Soto referred to the Land Use E1enent of the
General Plan, pointing out one of the statements made was when the land use element was first
developed, it took into consideration the existing neighborhoods. He stated he doesn't understand
why this area was considered low density residential when right next to it up the hill was designated
medium density residential. It was his feeling that the 4.5 dwelling units per acre is a moc't point
because when the general plan was first written, as they had already exceeded that density. Planning
Director Liberto- Blanck stated that sometimes local governments designate areas of existing high
density with lower general plan densities so lots are not further subdivided. Chairman Soto pointed out
that this is the only lot left in that area that could be subdivided.
Commissioner Gerrish stated his opinion that this proposal does conform, to the general plan because a
lot with 6,000 square feet is allowable anywhere in the City. IIe stated, however, he does have a
problem with using Optional Design Standards because he feels it is used too much and he personally
would prefer to see the variance application used.
After further discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -1222
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP
CASE NO. 88 -461, 230 WEST BRANCH STREET, UNDER OPTIONAL
DESIGN STANDARDS AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE•
DECLARATION (EDWIN NELSON /CERTIFIED FREIGHT LINES)
On motion by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Moore, and by the following roll call
vote, to wit:
l3
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 2 -7 -89 2
AYES: Commissioners Cerrish, 1l1oore, Scott, and Chairman Soto
NOES: Commissioner McCann
ABSENT: Commissioners Flores and Gallagher
the foregoing Resolution Was adopted this 7th day of February 1989.
PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE CASE NO. 89 -133, VARIANCE TO EXCEED SIGN ORDINANCE
REGULATIONS, 525 TRAFFIC WAY. (UNOCAL CORP./YOUNG E D IC SIGN CO„).
Long Range Planner Bierdzinski stated that the Planning Concussion denied th crigintd application on
December 6, 1988 because it could not find that the proposal was in conformance with the Maimed Sign
Program. She noted that neither the applicant or their representative were present at that r-. et ng.
On January 10, 1988, the City Council heard an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision and the
Council directed the Planning Con Imission to re-examine the application at a new public hearing with the
applicant and station owner present. She stated, in the meantime, Planning staff reviewed the proposal
with the City Attorney and it was suggested that the application be processed as a variance rather t] nn
a planned sign program, since the applicant is requesting an exception to provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance. The aplicant has agreed to process the project as a variance.
Ms. Bierdzinski advised the applicant is requesting to remove and replace several signs on their
property on Traffic Way. A variance from the Zoning Ordinance has been requested to allow the
addition of n new sign to an existing non - conforming pole sign and to exceed the maximum sign area
allowed. Ms. Bierdzinski reviewed the signs currently existing on the site and their location:.. She
stated the applicant is requesting the variance in order to adcl additional square footage to an existing
non - conforming pole sign. She noted it is a double faced sign and is 60 foot high. The pole sign was
erected prior to the current sign ordinance taking effect. The sign ordinance restricts pole signs in
the C -3 zone to 15 feet, and under those restrictions, non - conforming signs cannot be expanded or
reconstructed. She further stated that the maximum sign area that would be allowed for this site is
exceeded, and the variance would also cover the request to exceed the sign area.
Upon being assured by the Planning Cvnrnussion Clerk that public hearing for Variance Case No. 89 -133
haci been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Soto opened the public hearing.
Tom Huff, Young Electric Sign Canpany, representing the applicant, spoke in favor of the variance
being granted. He described the proposed signs, stating that UNOCAL Corp. are proposing these
signs for all of their locations. He stated if they lower the sign they would lose the freeway visibility
and the station has a lot to lose if that goes down. He stated it is their intention to go in and remove tr
lot of the extraneous signs to make the site look more attractive.
1` "arie Cattoir, 195 Orchid Lane, spoke in favor of the variance being granted. She stated it would not
only be of benefit to the owner, but also would accommodate the traveling public.
hearing no further comments for or against the proposed variance, Chairman Soto declared the hewing
closed.
After further discussion, the following action was taken
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -1223
Commissioner Gerrish stated he doesn't see anything wrong with the proposal, however, he doesn't see
how the signs can be allowed under the existing ordinance, and he doesn't feel he can make the findings
to grant a variance. Commissioner McCann stated she feels that this particular location is not a very
good one to be seen from the freeway, and she doesn't feel like the owner should be penalized or made to
bring that sign down to a lower level because it has been there for so long.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COI1M1SSION OF THE
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A VARIANCE, CASE
NO. 89 -133, APPLIED FOR BY UNOCAL CORP., 525
TRAFFIC WAY. (YOUNG ELECTRIC SIGN CO.).
On motion by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Clrairtnan Soto, and by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing
Commissioners Cerrish, 1'rloore, Scott,
None
Commissioners Gallagher and Flores
Resolution was adopted this 7th day of
1\lcCarin and Chairman Soto
February 1989.
PUBLIC HEARING - REVIEW CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 80 -295, REVIEW OF
EXISTING CONDITION OF USE PERMIT ALLOWING AGRICULTURAL GREENHOUSE, 100
ORCHID LANE. (ROBERT ASBELL)
Current Planner Spierling briefly reviewed the staff report dated February + He stated it is the
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 2 -7 -89 3
recommendation of staff that the Planning Commission extend this conditional use permit for another
five years, at which time it shall be reviewed again to assure continued compatibility with land uses.
Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Clerk that public hearing for review of Use Permit Case
No. 80 -295 had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Soto declared the hearing
open.
Robert Asbell, applicant for the use permit, spoke in favor of the use permit and gave a brief history of
the property. He stated he agreed with the staff report, with the exception of the requirement for
review in five years. He stated it is a considerable investment and the possibility that he may have to
dismantle it in five years is not appealing at all. He requested that the Commission consider something
other than a five year period.
Marjory Gain, 111 Orchid Lane, and Marie Cattoir, 195 Orchid Lane spoke in favor of the use permit
being extended.
Hearing no further comments for or against the extension of the Conditional Use Permit, Chairman Soto
declared the hearing closed.
In response to the requirement for a five year review, Current Planner Spierling stated that the area has
seen a considerable amount of growth and, in addition, we are going through the general plan update and
it is yet to be determined what the density or land uses of that area will become. As a result of that,
staff feels that five years is an appropriate length of time for the review.
Commissioner Gerrish commented he agrees with Mr. Asbell that five years is too short a period and he
world be more in favor of ten or twenty year review.
After a brief discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO.89 -1224
AYES:
NODS:
AI3SENT:
the foregoing
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING EXTENSION
OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 80 -295,
APPLIED FOR BY ROBERT ASBELL, 200 ORCHID LANE,
FOR AN EXISTING 8,820 SQ. FT. GREENHOUSE.
On motion by Commissioner Gerrish, seconded by Commissioner Moore, and by the following roll call
vote, to wit:
Commissioners Gerrish, Moore, Scott, McCann and Chairman Soto
None
Commissioners Flores and Gallagher
Resolution was adopted this 7th day of February, 1989.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 89 -448, CONSTRUCTION OF
AGRICULTURAL GREENHOUSE IN ADDITION TO EXISTING GREENHOUSES, 200 ORCHID
LANE. (ROBERT ASBELL). •
Current Planner Spierling reviewed the staff report dated February 7, 1989. Upon being assurecl by
the Planning Commission Clerk that public hearing for Use Permit Case No. 89 -448 had been duly
published and property owners notified, Chairman Soto .opened the public hearing.
Robert Asbell, applicant, spoke in favor of the use permit being granted and reiterated his comments
made in tine review of the existing use permit, that he would like to have a longer review period than five
years.
Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed use permit, Chairman Soto declared the
hearing closed.
Commissioner McCann suggested that the review period requirement for five years be increased to
twenty years (Condition #2 under "Planning Department" requirements).
'5
!c
Arroyo Grande Planning Commi 2-7-89 4
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -1225
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMJS'SION OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
CASE NO. 89 -448, APPLIED FOR BY ROBERT ASBELL, 200
ORCHID LANE TO CONSTRUCT A GREENHOUSE.
On motion by Commissioner P-JJcCar►n, seconded by Commissioner Cerrish, and by the following roll
call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Cerrish, Scott, McCann, Moore and Chairman Soto
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Gallagher and Flores
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 7th day of February 1989.
PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL OF PLANNING DIREICI'OR'S DENIAL OF A HOME OCCUPATION
PERMIT, 1219 MONTEGO STREET. (JANE MCLAIN) -
Planning Director Liberto- Blanck reviewed the staff report dated February 7, 1989 and gave a brief
report on the history of the application. She stated that Jane McLain, resident at 1219 Montego, filed
a I -tome Occupation Permit application on Deeember 1, 1988 for cutting millinery in her home. On
December 15, 1988, the application was denied because the necessary findings could not be made.
Since June 1988, City staff has received a number of complaints, in writing and over the telephone, from
anonymous persons regarding an alleged manufacturing business being conducted from 1219 Montego.
The phone callers alleged that there were employees on site, a nuniker of UPS trucks delivering material
and picking up boxes, and loud noises from sewing machines.
In July, Paul Lanning, Current Planner, and Chris 'rhyming, Building inspector, visited 1 Montego
and were informed by Ms. McLain that she and her friend sew for their children (a total of 22 children),
A letter dated July 25th was mailed indicating that sewing as a personal hobby was not an issue,
however, the operation of a business in the R -1 zone was not permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. 1V1s.
McLain was informed that if complaints continue, the City would have to take further action.
She stated that the complaints about the alleged business use continued, and on September l6t.h, she
and Paul Lanning visited 1219 Montego and witnessed what appeared to be a business. Patterns and
materials were scattered throughout the garage and three individuals, who appeared not to understand
English, were working in the garage cutting patterns and operating sewing machine. Ms. McLain was
not available but a business card was left requesting a telephone call. Ms. McLain called to indicate
that the three individuals were her friend's employees. The friend was to return to the area during the
following weekend and the sewing operation would discontinue. A certified letter was railed to the
owner of the property arid Ms. McClain indicating that a business was not a permitted use in the
zone. She advised that the Fire Chief and Chief Building Official have also visited the site and found
that there were no apparent building of lire violations. Pictures tal:en.by the hire Chief, however, do
illustrate that there is a considerable amount of material stored in the garage, as well as a cutting table
and equipment.
Ms. Liberto - Blanck submitted a list of the findings to be used to deny the request, as follows:
1. The project will have an effect upon the public health, safety and general welfare of the
neighborhood involved and the City at large, because it appears a full time business %vitth
employees is being conducted from 1219 Montego, along with large amounts; of material
storage;
2. The project will have an effect upon traffic conditions, bc- eciuse of the number of truck
deliveries and pick -ups, and apparent employee vehicle parking along Montego; and
3. There will be an effect upon the orderly development of the area in question, and the City at
large in regard to the general planning of the wnole cc rntinity because an apparent
manufacturing use is being conducted in a residential zone.
``.F ;cki ^:11:
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 2 -7 -89 5
Ms. Liberto- Blanck stated that a nurnter of items were included in the Planning Commissioners' packets
such as letters and notes of complaints, and also a letter that the applicant put together with signatures
from neighbors. Chairman Soto mentioned in addition to the letters, there are some photographs taken
at the residence that he would like to pass around to the Con and a, petition with approximately
15 signatures • from neighbors opposing the project.
Upon being assured by the Planning Conrrission Clerk that public hearing for Denial of a Home
Occupation Permit at 1219 Montego had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman
Soto declared the hearing open.
Keith Borg, Montego resident, stated he would find it desirable if the commercial operation would move
to a commercial area, and he doesn't think it is consistent with the neighborhood to have any visible
commercial activity going on there. Rose Torrigan, stated she lives next door to the applicant, and
spoke in favor of the applicant's use. She stated Ms. McLain has found a place for her business on
Grand Avenue and, in her opinion, things have quieted down quite a bit. Nancy Pife, representing the
applicant, spoke in favor of the requested use. She stated that the, only operation. now being
conducted from • the residence is just the cutting of material. Max Poole, 1207 Montego, spoke in
opposition to the requested use.
Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed use, Chairman Soto declared the hearing
closed.
•
Commissioner McCann pointed out that if she is just sewing for her ,children and her friend's children,
and if that is the case, why does she need a hope occupation permit? Pl inning Director Liberto-
l3lanck stated if she just "sewing rjs a hobby that is one'thing, however; the Planning Depart lent had
received'carplaints that there is some sort of commercial business being run out of the residence.
Commissioner Cerrish stated his feelings that a cormercial business should be run in commercial
locations, and a home occupation permit is pepple who have small businesses they want to run
out 'of their house. Commissioner 'Soto pointed out there are clear -cut guideline; what type of
occupations can be maintained' in residential districts, and businesses cannot be conducted in a
residential zone without a Home Occupation Permit.
After further discussion, on-motion by Corrnassigner Gerrish, seconded by Conrnissioner McCann, and
carried with one "no" vote, the Planning Commission upheld the Planning Director's decision to deny a
Home : Occupation Permitat 1219 Montego Street based on the findings outlined in the staff report.
Planning Director Liberto-Blanck advised that the Commission's decision can be appealed to the City
Council within 10 days.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 88-418, CONST RUCTION OF MIDAS MUFFLER SHOP AND
SPACE FOR A FUTURE TENANT, 509 GRAND AVENUE... (RMO ARCHITECTS)
Current Planner Spierling reviewed the staff report dated February 7, 1989. Ne commented that
access to the site as proposed by the applicants would be through two driveway approaches; one
approximately in the middle of the project and one through a 25' common access easement that serves
Crockers Lockers Mini - Storage and also the parcel to the east which is currently a used car lot. He
stated that the Public Works Department, in their conditions for approval, have asked that the access
to Grand Avenue in the center of the project be eliminated for reasons of public safety.
He further stated the parking proposed by applicants far exceed the parking requirements. He
reviewed the architecture of the proposed structures, loading areas, drainage, setbacks and
landscaping, IIe commented on the five major concerns listed in the staff report, and noted that the
Staff Advisory Committee has chosen to withhold recommendation on this project. It was felt that the
project, with the exception of the architectural design itself, was acceptable subject to the
r•ecorrrrrended conditions.
Tony Orefice, Architect representing the applicant, spoke regarding staff's comments on the design of
the project. He:stated he is attempting to create the village style by using types of materials, such as
the split face block and wrapping that block around the front of the building and mixing with the
Victorian style. Also, in response to staff's request, he presented two other variations to the original
submittal.
Mr. Orefice referred to staff's comments regarding access on Grand Avenue. He stated that the
Public Works Department contends that the access is part of that subdivision, however, he could not
find where the subdivision was conditioned for any kind of deed restriction that three businesses use the
access for the mini- storage. Mr. Orefice stated he discussed with the Public Works Director the
possibility of getting the red curb on the other side to allow for a left turn lane. He stated, however,
looking at the site he noticed that the left turn lane would have to stop at Bell Street because there is
not enough width in the street to continue the left turn lane and, in his opinion, the request for this
access is well justified. He further stated it is difficult to have a 110 unit rrini- warehouse and possril ly
Arroyo Grande Planning Cali ASS1011, 2 -7 -89 6
a car wash facility that is supposed to be on Parcel A, plea a Midas shop and Trans -King that are going
to generate a lot of traffic converging on that one access. Mr. Orefice stated, in his opinion, the
condition requiring that they have to have that left turn lane before they have the access is wrong.
Commissioner Cerrish stated he recalls that when the property was subdivided the agreement ent was that
the only access be that access easement to the back.
Mike hing, one of the owners of the property, spoke regarding access driveway, stating that by having
both accesses, customers will be able to come into the property without having to stop out in the street
waiting for a vehicle coming out of the one driveway. He commented that a customer would have two
shots of getting into the property in case there is saneone blocking the 25 foot middle driveway, he
could then bypass the one and get into the other one and not stop in the street, which is where the
traffic tie -up problem is going to occur. He stated it is his feeling that this is a far greater benefit
traffic -wise than by limiting and jamming the traffic all into one driveway.
Frank Bucklin, one of the owners of the Midas shop, stated it is thheir desire and intention to provide a
needed service for the corn iunity, however, if the access to the property is limited to one small 25 foot
driveway, he feels it would be a disaster trying to get traffic flowing into one spot. He further stated
that the safety factor involved by limiting the access is a major concern.
Current Planner Spierling stated that staff did not find anything that limited the access to one driveway
from Grand Avenue, and staff feels the requirement can be enlarged to meet their reeds. He further
stated that if the Planning Commission wanted to go that route, he sugested placing another condition
on the approval of the project that the applicant submit another design to the Public Works and
Planning Department for their approval.
After considerable discussion, Commissioner Gerrish moved to approve Architectural Review Case No.
88 -418, subject to the conditions of approval as listed in the staff report. Motion lost for lack of a
second.
After further discussion, on motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Corrnussioner Scott, and
carried with one "no" vote, Architectural Review Case No. 88 -418 was approved subject to changing
the white panels over the door and changing the doors to another color that blends in with the wall, and
also subject to the recommended conditions listed in the staff report dated February 7, 1989, amending
Public Works Condition No. 8 to read as follows: "The developer shall repair and replace frontage
improvements along Grand Avenue to meet City standard".
PLANNING DIRECTORS REPORT/DISCUSSION
The New Regionalism. Planning Director Liberto- Blanck briefly reviewed the memo to the Commission
relative to The New Regionalism.
Development Fees - Discussion. There was considerable discussion among the Commissioners and staff
regarcing the proposed development fees. Planning Director Liberto- ]Banck referred to the updated
material developed by the City Council, noting that the Urgency Ordinance was adopted by the Council
on the 24th of January. She described certain areas throughout the City where these surcharges would
be applicable.
Planning Commission Institute Attendance - Planning Director Liberto - Blanck referred to the
information handed out on the upcoming Institute, requesting that those Commissioners interested in
attending inform her by Thursday so that she can go to the Council and request the necessary funding.
Interpretation of Similar Use in the CI3D Zone Regarding Liquor Stores. Current Planner Spierling
stated that staff has received a request for a liquor store in the CI Zone. Mr. Spierling reviewed the
uses permitted in the CBD District arid those pernitted subject to obtaining a Conditional Use Permit.
He stated that staff is requesting a determination from the Commission as to whether this use cones
under the permitted use category or if the requested use would come under the Conditional Use Permit
category. He noted that the proposed location for the business is the old "Poor Richard's Press ".
building.
Commissioner Gerrish stated he has no particular problem with the use, however, he does feel that a
Conditional Use Permit should be required. After' a brief discussion, the Con - mission agreed that a
liquor store is a permitted use in the Central Business District subject to a Conditional Use Permit.
City Council Answered Agenda. Chairman Soto noted that he likes receiving these and they, are
helpful and informative.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by the Chairman at
10:30 P.M.
Mary ininger
Commission Clerk / Chai `tart