PC Minutes 1987-11-03Arroyo Grande Planning Ccamissinn
November 3 198
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman Carr presiding.
Present are Commissioners Flores, Olsen, Gerrish and Soto. Cormnissioners Moore and Boggess are
absent. Planning Director Liberto- Blanck and Interim Planning Director Rogoway are also in
attendance.
CONTINUATION - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 87-384, GUIDEITI SQUARE RETAIL
CENTER, WEST BRANCH STREET AND WESLEY AVENUE IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS
DISTRICT. (J. AND J: GUIDETTI/RICHMOND, ROSSI AND MONTGOMERY).
Planning Director Liberto- Blanck advised that this item is being continued by the applicant to
the Planning Commission meeting of November 17, 1987.
PUBLIC HEARING (CONTINUED FROM 10 -20-87 MEETING) - VARIANCE CASE NO. 87 -107,
REQUEST TO ALLOW LESS THAN 80 FT. FRONTAGE ON LOTS WTIH 7% TO 20% CROSS SLOPES
(SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SECTION 9- 3.403), 511 PLATINO LANE. (EA AND L.M.
OSTAPOWIEZ).
Planning Director Liberto- Blanck briefly reviewed that the subject item was continued from
the last Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant to submit additional information regarding
similar sized lots in close proximity to the subject site. She noted that the Carmission had requested
this information so they could determine whether the necessary findings for the Variance could be
made.
Chairman Char re- opened the public hearing for comment.
Ken Ostapowiez, 511 Platino Lane, applicant for the variance and lot split, referred to the
information submitted outlining similar lot sizes in close proximity to the subject parcel. Based on the
information submitted, Mr. Ostapowiez requested that the Commission render a decision in favor of the
variance and lot split.
Bill Harvey, 308 Oro Drive; Mike Miner, 316 Oro Drive; Will Tower, 332 Oro Drive; James
Bolin, 508 Platino Drive, and Mike Rollie, 423 Platino Lane, spoke in opposition to the proposed
variance and lot split.
Jerry Bowser, 510 Woodland Drive, Surveyor, representing the applicant, stated that Lots 11,
12,13 and 14 of the original subdivision are the larger lots that could possibly be split. He commented
that the reason for those large parcels is because of the relatively steep slope from Oro Drive to Lots
12 and 13. He noted that since this original subdivision was done, Wildvrood Ranch was developed,
and, because of the improvements required in that tract, they were able to get pressurized water and
sewer to that street. He stated that, in his opinion, this was the reason those parcels were left as large
as they were; they couldn't loop the water lines up there for fire protection.
Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed variance, Chairman Carr declared
the hearing closed.
Planning Director Liberto- Blanck advised the Carmis ion that all four findings for a variance
would have to be made if the Camlission wishes to grant the request. It was the consensus of the
Commission that all four findings for the variance could not be made and, after a brief discussion, the
following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 87 -1136
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING VARIANCE CASE
NO. 87 -107, AT 511 PLATINO LANE, APPLIED FOR
BY KJ. AND L.M. OSTAPOWIEZ.
On motion by Can nissioner Flores, seconded by Carnmissioner Soto, and by the following roll
call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Qrmmissioners
None
Carmissioners
Commissioners
Flores, Soto and Chairman Carr
Gerrish and Olsen
Moore and Boggess
the foregoing resolution was adopted this 3rd day of November 1987.
PUBLIC HEARING - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 87-448, 511 PLATINO LANE (K.A dr I.M. OSTAPOWIEZ.
Planning Director Liberto- Blanck pointed out that since the Variance was not granted, it is
difficult to make findings to grant the lot split.
381
382
Arroyo Grande Planning Omission, 11 -3-87 Page
Upon being assured by the Planning Caranlssion Secretary that public hearing for Lot Split
Case No. 87 -446 had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Carr declared the
hearing open.
Ken Ostapowiez, 511 Ratios Lane, applicant, stated he would appeal the Commission's denial
of the variance.
Heating no further comments for or against the proposed lot split, Chairman Carr declared the
hearing closed and, on motion by Commissioner Soto, seconded by Commissioner Flores, and unanimously
carried, Lot. Split Case No. 87 -446 was denied for the reason that findings could not be made to grant
the requested variance.
PUBLIC BEARING - REZONING CASE NO. 87- 202, PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO REZONE TWO
(2) ACRES OF LAND IN TUE RANCHO GRANDE PROPERTIES FROM UNPLANNED "PD"
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO PLANNED "PD" PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
SPECIFYING RESIDENTIAL AND BED AND BREAKFAST INN USES, 1190 W. BRANCH STREET.
(WESLEY AND DONNA CARLSON).
Interim Planning Director Ned Rogoway reviewed that the applicant requested establishment
of a Bed and Breakfast Inn located in the center of the Rancho Grande development. The item went
through a conditional use permit hearing, with the Commission recce approval of that permit.
When the item was heard by the City Council, they indicated the project was in an Unplanned PD Zone,
thus requiring a zone change for the Bed and Breakfast we to a Planned PD zone. The applicant
wishes to have City Council amend Ordinance 186 C.S., Section 2, Paragraph 42 by adding, "Parcel 2 of
Parcel Map AG 73 -380 be used for residential and Bed and Breakfast Inn uses in the amount of four (4)
single family units; one of those single family touts is the existing ranch house to be used for the Bed and
Breakfast Inn unit."
Chairman Corr pointed out that the proposed full density of 133 units allowed in the Rancho
Grande subdivision would then, perhaps, have to be changed to 136 units to include the three additional
lots proposed by the applicant. This would require a zone 'change of the applicant's parcel to Planned
PD, with a density designation. He stated there was no plan presented to consider a Planned
Development on the property. Therefore, in his opinion, the Commission could not act on the Planned
PD rezoning.
Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Secretary that public hearing for the proposed
Rezoning Case No. 87 -202 had been duly published and posted, Chairman Carr declared the hearing
open.
Mr. Wesley Carlson, applicant, 1100 W. Branch Street, commented that a historical trail of
exclusions for this parcel and for easements to this parcel fra u PD zoning was available to the Planning
Commission for their perusal. He also stated that he has no problem with the parcel being zoned PD,
but he requested that the property be recognized as being separate from Rancho Grande and,
therefore, separate from any density designation associated with Rancho Grande.
After hearing Mr. Carlson's carments, azmiissioner Gerrish stated that, as far as he was
concerned, the parcel is zoned Agriculture (A), it has never been rezoned, and it is not recognized as a
part of the Rancho Grande project.
On motion of Commissioner Gerrish, seconded by Ca missioner Olsen, and unanimously carried,
the public hearing Rezoning Case No. 87 -202 would be continued to the November 17, 1987 Planning
Carmission meeting to allow Staff time to research the present zoning designation and to determine
future zoning designation.
PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE DELETING
ARTICLE 36 AND ADOPTING A NEW ARTICLE 36, ENTITLED "FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION
DISTRICT OR FLOOD HAZARD (F -II) DISTRICT"
Planning Director Liberto - Blanck opened by stating that this item was referred to the
Planning C7anmission by the City Council on October 30, 1987, after Council's review and approval.
The proposed amendment basically amends the Flood Hazard District in the Zoning Ordinance. The
Federal goverment has requested the City to make modifications to its flood insurance ordinance if the
City is to stay within the Federal project area.
Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Secretary that public hearing for the proposed
Ordinance amendment had been duly published and posted, Chairman Carr declared the hearing open.
Public Works Director Paul Karp referred to two maps of the City, the FIRM (Flood Insurance
Rate Map) which is used by insurance companies to determine premiums for flood insurance , and the
Floodway Map which demonstrates floodway -s and flood zones and is used as an engineering tool to
determine the involvement of properties with respect to floodways and flood elevations in various types
of stores. Mr. Karp stated that there are no changes made to these maps with the proposed
amendment, only changes to the text relating to new definitions not previously outlined in the City
ordinance.
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Win, 11 -3-87
Hearing no further carments for or against the proposed Ordinance amendment, Chaiiman
Carr declared the hearing closed.
On motion of Commissioner Gerrish, seconded by Carmissioner Flores and unanimously carried,
recarmending to the City Council that the proposed Amendment deleting Article 36 and adopting a new
Article 36, entitled "Flood Damage Prevention District or Flood Hazard (F -H) District" be approved.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by the
Chairman at 9:00 PM.
ATTEST: n t
Secretary
Chairman
383