Loading...
PC Minutes 1988-06-07450 Arroyo Grande Planning Comission June 7, 1988 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Vice Chairman Gerrish presiding. Present are Commissioners Moore, Olsen and Scott. Comrmiissioners Boggess, Flores and Chairman Soto are absent. PUBLIC BEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 88 -436, EL CAM NO REAL (WEST OF BRTSOO'S LUMBER), RETAIL SALES AND STORAGE OF BULK LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS. (MIER BROS. LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS). Current Planner Lanning reviewed the staff report, dated June 7,1988. He stated that the subject property is located on a portion of a larger parcel in the Planned Industrial (P -M) zone. The zone's purpose is to provide an environment which is conducive to the development and protection of modern industry, research institutions, and administrative facilities, all well - designed and properly landscaped, which do not specialize in pedestrian traffic. The proposed use, retail sales of bulk landscape materials, is permitted in this zone subject to obtaining a use permit. Mr. Lanning advised that the proposed use would occupy just under 1/4 of the entire parcel, or approximately 28,000 square feet of the 122,000 square foot parcel. The rest of the parcel is being used for equipment rental and R.V. storage. In order to use a portion of a parcel for an individual use, a rental agreement must be engaged in by the owner and the applicant. A statement verifying the rental agreement has been provided by the property owner. Mr. Lanning referred to the plans submitted by the applicant. He pointed out that the plans show parking in the front of the sales room and office which is 5 feet from the front property line. He referred to Section 9- 4.1612 of the Zoning Ordinance which requires that off - street parking in the front of a building be no closer than 15 feet from the front property line. The applicant has agreed to relocate the parking to meet this requirement. He agreed to remove this front parking and provide four parking spaces along the eastern property line, across from the covered storage area in the middle of the yard and across from the proposed brick, blocks and masonry storage. An additional four parking spaces will be located at the rear of the property, where the truck and tractor parking and the employee parking is shown. his total of eight parking spaces exceeds the number of spaces required for this type of use. The area in the front of the sales roam and office will be landscaped. This landscaping will provide a buffer between the front property line and the sales room and office, covering the length of the required 15 foot front setback. The sales roan and office will also be rotated slightly northward so that it is parallel to the front property line. Additionally, landscaping will also be provided in the public right of way along El Camino Real. Mr. Lanning noted that Section 9- 4.1603 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that all equipment and material storage areas be screened by a solid fence, wall, or screen planting not less than 6 feet in height. A chain link fence currently surrounds the subject property. By adding slats to this fencing, solid screening can be provided. Mr. Lanning stated that the applicant would like to address this requirement because he feels it will add unreasonable cost and unnecessary screening to the proposed use, in view of the surrounding uses. Fran an environmental standpoint, Mr. Lanning stated that staff does not anticipate that the proposed use will have a significant environmental impact based on the initial study, and recommends that a Negative Declaration be adopted. Mr. Lanning advised that the Staff Advisory Committee has reviewed the project and recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the draft resolution approving the proposed use, subject to the listed conditions. Cam nissioner Olsen commented that the subject property is the old dump site, and inquired if that would have any environmental concerns. Planning Director Llberto- Blanck stated that staff is not aware of any environmental conditions on this property. Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Secretary that public hearing for Use Permit Case No. 88 -436 had been duly published and property owners notified, Vice Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing open. Mike Mier, Santa Maria, applicant, stated he is concerned with the Condition #10 requiring a screened perimeter around the property. He pointed out that the front will be screened and he intends to screen approximately 150 feet along the north side of the property. Upon hearing no further comments from the audience, Vice Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed. 451 452 Arroyo Grande Planning Canmvssion, 6-7 -88 Page 2 Commissioner Olsen stated she would like to get sane kind of opinion on the dump site problem. Current Planner Lanning stated that a condition could be added requiring the applicant to supply information regarding soils conditions because of the previous use. Vice Chairman Gerrish stated he didn't have a problem with deleting Condition #10 requiring a solid fence, wall or screen planting around the perimeter of the site. He suggested replacing this condition with a request that the applicant provide additional information on the previous use of the site relative to soils condition. After a brief discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 1184 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING A USE PERMIT, CASE NO. 88 -436 APPLIED FOR BY MIER LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS ON EL CAMINO REAL. On motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Vice Chairman Gerrish, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Moore, Olsen, Scott and Vice Chairman Gerrish NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Boggess, Flores and Chairman Soto the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 7th day of June 1988. Architectural Review Case No. 88 -412. After a brief discussion of the proposed development, Architectural Review Case No. 88 -412 was approved as submitted on motion by Conrnissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Moore, and unanimously carried. PUBLIC HEARING - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 88 -457, 1156 GRAND AVENUE. (SAN LUIS ENGINEERING REPRESENTING CORER Ei.i SWORTH). Current Planner Lanning reviewed that the parcel was originally subdivided as a part of the Folsom subdivision. The portion of the property along Grand Avenue is currently occupied by a gas station, with the remainder of the parcel being vacant. He stated the applicant is proposing to subdivide the existing 51,150 square foot parcel into three parcels. The resulting parcels will be 11,547 square feet, 12,686 square feet and 26,717 square feet in size respectively. The minimum parcel size for property in the C -2 General C aimercial zone is 10,000 square feet, per Section 9- 4.13A.7 of the Zoning Ordinance. This section also requires a minimum lot width of one hundred (100) feet. The proposed parcels 2 and 3 meet or exceed the 100 foot minimum width. Parcel 1, which contains the existing gas station, has approximately 109 feet of frontage along Grand Avenue and approximately 87.5 feet along the rear property line. Mr. Lanning pointed out that, per Section 9 -3.215 of the Subdivision Ordinance, a lot width is determined by dividing the sum of the length of the front and rear lot line by two. By this determination, Parcel 1 has an average lot width of 98.25 feet and does not meet the minimum lot width requirements of the C -2 General Commercial zone. Mr. Lanning stated that the proposed project is not anticipated to have a significant effect on the environment and staff has prepared a Negative Declaration on the project. The Staff Advisory Committee has reviewed the proposed lot split and recommends that the Planning Commission approve the proposal, and adopt the Negative Declaration subject to the findings and listed conditions in the staff report, dated June 7, 1988. Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Secretary that public hearing for Lot Split Case No. 88 -457 had been duly published and property owners notified, Vice Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing open. Jim McGillis, Surveyor for San Luis Engineering, spoke in favor of the lot split, and questioned Condition #2 under Planning Department requirements, and Condition #2 under Fire Department requirements. Mr. Lanning stated that the first condition is more or less a standard condition, and is a condition of the Public Works Department. With regard to Fire Department Condition #2, Mr. Lanning suggested that the words "as required by the Fire Chief" be added. Mr. McGillis also referred to Condition #3 under "Planning ", stating his feeling that, for building purposes it seems like it would make more sense to keep the new split lines rather than angle it toward Grand Avenue. Mr. Lanning stated the reason staff brought this issue up is that there a problem in interpreting the ordinance, in that there is no definition for lot width; and if the Commission wishes to make an interpretation, that would be acceptable to staff. Mr. McGillis stated that where the two flags come in is an existing driveway, and that existing driveway will be used as an easement. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6 -7 -88 Page 3 Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed lot split, Vice Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed. Vice Chairman Gerrish stated his feeling is that it makes more sense to approve the lot split the way the applicant has proposed. He conmented that the Planning Cormmssion doesn't get very many splits on commercial property. He stated it would be his interpretation that the applicant can comply with the ordinance by moving the lot line the way it is proposed. Coker Ellsworth, applicant, stated he would be able to meet those requirements in the ordinance, however, in his opinion it would be a planning mistake to create a front lot line with an irregular shaped lot. Commissioner Olsen stated she would be in favor of the proposal as long as it is not setting a precedent and won't create other problems. After a brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and unanimously carried, Lot Split Case No. 88 -457 was approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report, dated June 7, 1988, deleting Condition #3 under 'Planning Department ". PUBLIC HEARING - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 88-460 (REVERSION TO ACREAGE), 102 -110 TRAFFIC WAY. (SAN LUIS ENGINEERING, AGENTS FOR JOHN KUDEN). Mr. Lanning advised that The subject property was originally subdivided and recorded in 1906 as part of the Lowe's Addition. The original lots do not conform with the present zoning requirements. A shall, vacant commercial building and accompanying asphalt parking area currently occupy the site. A proposed zone change from Highway Service ((C -3) to General Commercial (C -2) has already been recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. This zone change will allow the subject property to be used for a wide range of retail stores, service enterprises and business and office uses. Mr. Lanning commented that the applicant is proposing to canbine the original seven (7) lots plus an abandoned right -of -way into one (1) parcel through a Reversion to Acreage. The original lots range in size 600 sq. ft. to 6,000 sq. ft. None of these lots meet the minimum standards for lot width or building site required in either the present C -3 zone or the proposed C -2 zone. In addition, access and slope problems are associated with some of the original lots. The proposed Reversion to Acreage will create one (1) parcel consisting of 29,185 sq. ft. Although the parcel would be of an irregular, triangular shape, the minimum requirements for lot width and building site would be met. This reversion would also create a parcel with frontage on, as well as vehicular access from, a dedicated street as required by the zoning ordinance. Staff feels that this proposed reversion will be an improvement over the existing lot configurations. Mr. Lanning pointed out that a creek easement dedicated to the City is also proposed. This easement would designate land along the northern bank of Arroyo Grande Creek for the purposes of preserving open space and ensuring flood control. He stated that, while this easement will reduce some of the usable area of the project, it will not substantially affect the development potential of the parcel. With regard to environmental concerns, Mr. Lanning stated that no significant impact to the environment is anticipated to occur as a result of the proposed Reversion to Acreage, and a Negative Declaration has been prepared for adoption by the Planning Commission. The proposal has been reviewed by the Staff Advisory Committee, and it is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution approving Lot Split No. 88 -460 subject to the proposed findings and conditions of approval listed in the staff report, dated June 7, 1988. Mr. Lanning requested that an additional condition be added to the proposed conditions to take care of some technicalities in the title report. The condition would read as follows: "The applicant shall provide a revised title report showing the common ownership for Lot 1 prior to recordation of final map." Mr. Lanning stated one issue is whether that portion on the other side of the creek is a separate legal parcel; if it is somehow attached to the other portion of Lot 16, the applicant would have to revise the map and come back in with the resubmittal. Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Secretary that public hearing for Lot Split Case No. 88 -460 had been duly published and property owners notified, Vice Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing open. 453 454 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6 -7-88 Page 4 Jim McGiilis, Surveyor with San Luis Engineering, stated the tentative map submitted for approval has to show all of the property; the problem is proving that Lot 16 is a separate legal parcel. He noted that it has a separate APN number and a separate tax bill. John Kuden, applicant, advised they are having a title search done on that, however, he is pretty sure it is a separate parcel. Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed lot split, Vice Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed and, after a brief discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 1185 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMML'SSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 88 -460 (REVERSION TO ACREAGE), 110 TRAFFIC WAY (JOHN KUDEN). On motion by Commissioner Olsen, seconded by Commissioner Scott, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Moore, Olsen, Scott and Vice Chairman Gerrish NOES: None .. ABSENT: Commissioners Boggess, Flores and Chairman Soto the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 7th day of June 1988. RESUBMITTAL - ARCHITECITIRAL REVIEW CASE NO. 88-407, 100 TRAFFIC WAY, OFFICE/REI'AIL PROJECT. (MID -COAST LAND COMPANY). Mr. Lanning reviewed that at the last meeting, the Planning Commission expressed concerns with the proposed building design for the project, and directed the applicant to modify the proposal. He referred to copies of the revised elevations submitted by the applicant for the Commission's review. Warren Hemrick, Midland Pacific Architectural Group, briefly . reviewed the revised elevations. He stated they are attempting to continue the theme of the existing project. He stated they would like to use similar building materials and similar landscape materials. He comnented that they have changed the proposed roofing materials and have gone through and re- evaluated the roofing configurations. Another thing they have done is to provide some metal grill work around some of the openings in the tower areas. He stated they have tried also to break up the long facade facing Traffic Way. Commissioners Olsen and Moore commented that the revised elevations are an improvement over the previous submittal. After a brief discussion, Architectural Review Case No. 88 -407 was approved, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated May 17, 1988, on motion by Carman issioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Scott, and carried with one "no" vote. PLANNING DIRECPOR'S REPORT/DISCUSSION Current Planner Lanning advised that at the existing Village Creek Plaza, one of the tenants, a video store, is going to be closing one entrance off and a window. The amount to be covered is about 200 square feet, which is on the creek side and is not visable from the street. No comments were made by the Commissioners regarding this item. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by the Vice Chairman at 8:40 P.M.