PC Minutes 1987-02-03324
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
February 3, 1987
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman Carr
presiding. Present are Com issioners Moore, Olsen, Boggess and Flores. Commissioners Soto and
Gerrish are absent. Planning Director Eisner and Associate Planner Iversen are also in
attendance.
MINUTE APPROVAL
The minutes of the regular meeting of January 20, 1987 were approved as prepared on
motion by Commissioner Olsen, seconded by Commissioner Flores, and unanimously carried.
PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 87 -417, FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT CENTER,
114 -116 W. BRANCH STREET IN THE "G -B-D" CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. (JEFFREY
AND TONI BURKHAMMER). •
Planning Director Eisner advised that this item has been withdrawn from the agenda by
the applicant.
PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE CASE NO. 87 -105, REQUEST TO INSTALL A 5 FT. FENCE
IN THE FRONT SETBACK, 251 SPRUCE STREET IN THE "R -3" MULTIPLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. (EDGAR MUELLER, AGENT FOR LUKINS MANAGEMENT).
Planning Director Eisner advised that the request is for a minor Variance from a
condition in the Zoning Ordinance that requires that a rear yard fence be no higher than 3 ft.
as it approaches the street. He explained that the project was design oriented to create a
situation in which the rear yards of 4 units abut Spruce Street. He stated that, in order to
make use of those rear yards, they will need a fence higher than 3 ft. tall,
Mr. Eisner advised that the request has been reviewed by the Staff Advisory Committee
and is submitted to the Commission without recommended conditions. He stated staff's only
concern was the traffic question, and the Public Works Department has determined that in this
location, the higher fence will not constitute a traffic hazard.
Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Secretary that public hearing for
Variance Case No. 87 -105 had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Carr
declared the hearing open.
Mr. Edgar Mueller, Agent for Luldns Management Co., briefly described the fencing
proposed for the project.
Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed Variance, Chairman Carr
declared the hearing closed.
Commissioner • Flores recommended that a condition be added that review and approval
of the fence design and materials be approved by the Planning Director. After discussion, the
following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 87 -1108
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A VARIANCE,
CASE NO. 87 -105, APPLIED FOR BY EDGAR MUELLER,
AGENT FOR LUKINS MANAGEMENT.
On motion by Commissioner Flores, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and by the
following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Moore, Olsen, Boggess, Flores and Chairman Carr
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Soto and Gerrish
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 3rd day of February 1987.
Planning Director Eisner advised that this matter is final with the Planning Commission
unless appealed to the Council within ten (10) days.
PUBLIC HEARING - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 86 -440, 1320 HILLCREST DRIVE IN THE "R -1"
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. (KIM AND CYNTHIA HUGHES).
Planning Director Eisner reviewed the staff report, dated February 3, 1987. He noted
that the property is being requested for a lot division into two parcels, pointing out that the lot
configurations are not entirely rectangular. The lot division, for the most part meets the basic
requirements for a tentative map under the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. He stated that
the proposal has been reviewed by the Staff Advisory Committee and comes to the Planning
Commission without specific recommendation for approval or denial, but with some specific
conditions to be attached to the map if approved.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 2 -3 -87 Page 2
Mr. Eisner advised that this proposed lot split has received a good deal of interest by
the people in the Hillcrest area, and a petition has been received by the Planning Department
signed by approximately 52 residents of the area protesting the proposed lot split. Mr. Eisner
pointed out that, under the Subdivision Map Act, the issues for approval or denial are whether
or not it meets the standards of the ordinance, which this appears to do, but the design of the
parcels themselves do not seem to conform to the basic configuration of adjacent lots.
Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Secretary that public hearing for Lot
Split Case No. 86 -440 had been duly published, posted and property owners notified, Chairman
Carr declared the 'hearing open.
Kim Hughes, 160 Nogal Drive, Santa Barbara, applicant for the lot split, and Leonard
Longer, Agent, spoke in favor of the proposed lot split.
Mr. Bob Mitchell read a letter from Amanda Waite, 1529 Hillcrest Drive, stating her
opposition to the lot split. The following persons spoke in opposition to the proposed lot split:
Bob Mitchell, 1360 Hillcrest; Sam Stagg, 1353 Sierra Drive; William Glenn, 1315 Hillcrest Drive;
Joe Zdana, 1341 Hillcrest Drive; Donald Dennison, 1353 Hillcrest; Carol Glenn, 1315 Hillcrest
Drive; R. Axtell, 1401 Hillcrest Drive; Mary Evelhoch, 1450 Hillcrest Drive; Josephine Turner,
1401 Hillcrest Drive. Reasons cited for the opposition were proposed lot configuration, loss of
views, increased traffic, proposed split would affect property values and aesthetic values and
may set a precedent for more lot splits and smaller lots in the area affecting the character of
the neighborhood.
Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed lot split, Chairman Carr
declared the hearing closed.
Planning Director Eisner stated that the issues before the Commission on a parcel map
are specifically dictated in the Map Act, and the only latitude that the Commission has in this
matter is the question . of appropriateness of design; all other matters relating to this have been
met in this map, subject to the conditions. He commented the neighbors' concerns are
understandable, however, most of the concerns mentioned are not covered in the Map Act. He
pointed out that it is important to recognize that because the State has entered into the field
of subdivisions, those areas in which local jurisdictions have to use their discretion is very
limited, such as minimum lot sizes, basic configuration, slope requirements, etc. Mr. Eisner
stated in this application all of the minimum standards have been met and there is a question
regarding the design configuration. Chairman Carr inquired if there is an official City Council
position on the creation of flag lots. Mr. Eisner commented that there is a policy having to do
with flag lots, in that the Council has stated, but never in writing, that they are fundamentally
opposed to more than one flag lot being created in any given circumstance.
Commissioner Boggess stated he is concerned about a traffic hazard there at the curve
on Hillcrest.
After discussion, on motion by Canmissioner Moore, seconded by Canmissioner Olsen,
and unanimously carried, Lot Split Case No. 86 -440 was denied based on the findings that the
shape of the lot and creation of a flag lot is an inappropriate design and is not consistent with
other lots in the neighborhood, and also the creation of the second lot may compound an
existing traffic problem.
Chairman Carr advised the applicants that the Con nisssion's denial may be appealed to
the City Council within 10 days or may be resubmitted with a new design.
PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN.
Planning Director Eisner briefly reviewed the proposed changes to the Circulation
Element. Mr. Eisner advised that a study was done by an independent traffic consultant. The
recommendations to delete the bridge over Tally Ho Creek between Le Point Street and Le
Point Street, and the extension of Le Point Street as a public right of way from Nevada Street
to Wesley Street were reviewed by the Staff Advisory Canmittee and the Committee, concurred
with the conclusions of the consultant. He stated, as far as the General Plan Amendment is
concerned, it is recommended for approval with the following findings: (a) The amendment is
consistent with the Negative Declaration requirements under CEQA; and (b) The amendment is
consistent with the Goals and Objectives and all other portions of the General Plan.
Upon being assured by the Planning Director that public hearing for the proposed
amendment to the Circulation Element had been duly published and posted, Chairman Carr
declared the hearing open.
Mr. Rob Strong, Planning Consultant to Loomis and Scolari, stated that the staff report
not only identifies the conclusions of the independent traffic engineers that the bridge across
Tally Ho Creek is not warranted, but goes beyond that conclusion and states that it could be
325
326
Arroyo Grande Planning Conrnissian, 2 -3 -87 Page 3
detrimental to the neighborhood to the east that fronts on Le Point Street, and could congest
portions of Tally Ho Road, Le Point and Mason Streets as it canes back into East Branch
Street. He stated the concern from their standpoint is that the bridge is an inappropriate and
detrimental expense that would not benefit the City.
Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed amendment, Chairman Carr
declared the hearing closed.
Chairman Carr stated he is concerned about the language in Item No. 19 and suggested
it be changed to read... "No street or bridge connection shall take place over or across Tally
Ho Creek between Le Point and Le Point Streets ", so that it is clear what the intent is.
After a brief discussion, the following action was taken:
Secretary
RESOLUTION NO. 87 -1109
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN.
On motion by Commissioner Olsen, seconded by Commissioner Moore, and by the
following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Corm issioners Moore, Olsen, Boggess, Flores and Chairman Carr
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Soto and Gerrish
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 3rd day of February 1987.
PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GPA 85-2, AND GPA 86-2
CHANGING CLASSIFICATION FROM HEAVY COMMERCIAL/LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND FROM HEAVY COMMERCIAL/LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO
MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, EAST BRANCH STREET. (CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE /PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF INTENTION).
'Flaming Director Eisner advised that this matter is again being continued. He briefly
reviewed the status of this project, stating we are now dealing with environmental concerns and
once the certification of that aspect is in place, we can move on with the proposed amendment.
COMMUNICATIONS - REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION
Planning Director Eisner referred to a letter from Thomas McMullen requesting to
install a shooting and firing range wholly within an enclosed building in the Village area. He
stated the request comes under the heading of amusements, which is already subject to a
Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Eisner pointed out that, in considering whether this use would be
added to the uses permitted subject to the issuance of a Use Permit, the Commission has to
assume that all of the considerations of the General Plan would be met and, in this case, the
Noise Element would be met. Also, the Comission would have to assume that the use, as a
recreational activity, met the goals and objectives that are set forth in the General Plan and
the Zoning Ordinance for the Village.
After a brief review of the requested use, on motion by Commissioner Boggess,
seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and carried .with one "no" vote, it was determined that the
requested use is not compatible with other uses in the Central Business District.
STUDY SESSION - OPEN SPACE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN.
Mr. Eisner advised the Commission that Associate Planner Nancy Iversen would be
handling the study session on the Open Space Element and would be able to answer any
questions the Commission may have.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mr. Eisner advised the Commission that he has accepted a position in the Town of
Loomis as Town Manager, effective February 19th. He expressed his appreciation to the
Commission for their continued cooperation and efforts. Chairman Carr thanked Mr. Eisner on
behalf of the Commissioners, expressing their appreciation for his dedication, sincerity and
professionalism in the work he has brought to the Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by
the Chairman at 10:15 P.M.
fri(A-t
Chahman