Loading...
PC Minutes 1983-08-161 1 ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION August 16, 1983 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Vice Chairman Moots presiding. Present are Commissioners Benhardt, Moore and Olsen. Commissioners Carr, Fischer and Chairman Gerrish are absent. Planning Director Eisner is also in attendance. MINUTE APPROVAL Upon hearing no additions or corrections, the minutes of the regular meeting of July 19, 1983 were approved on motion by Commissioner Benhardt, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and unanimously carried. ARCHITECTURAL.REVIEW._CASE,.NO. 83- 289,_St,.. PATRICK'S SCHOOL, IHIGHWAY 101 AND BRISCO ROAD - GYMNASIUM /MULTI - PURPOSE BUILDING. Planning Director Eisner advised that this matter was reviewed by the Architectural Review. Committee at its meeting of August 4, 1983 and, that time, the Committee was concerned about the'general presentation in terms of the building's appearance from the street and the way it blended in with the existing school and other developments planned for the immediate area. He stated another concern of the Committee was vehicular access, and there was a suggestion that the school acquire an easement from the County for a driveway off of Halcyon Road. Also, it was recommended that the fire hydrant be relocated, and that there be some re- design of a -curve in the driveway ta school,buses and fire apparatus. Mr. Eisner referred to the staff report, dated August 9, 1983, listing 8 recommendations made by the Architectural Review Committee. He stated that in the resubmittal, the architect has been very responsive to those concerns and has addressed all of the issues.. and., based on the resubmittal, staff recommends approval of the project. COMMISSIONER FISCHERjENTERED THE.;MEETING DURING.THE ABOVE DISCUSSION. After a brief discussion. Architectural Review Case No. 83 -289 was approved on motion by Commissioner Benhardt, seconded by Commissioner Moore, and unanimously carried, subject to the 8 conditions listed in the staff report, dated August 9, 1983. • PUBLIC. HEARING..- !REZONINGCASE._N0...83,t371,_ GE■ERAL.. PLAN. AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE,. PROPERTY.FRONTING_ON_TRAFFIC WAY, . HIGHWAY_101..AND_ FAIR_ OAKS AVENUE. ( GENERAL. PLAN CHANGE_ FROM. HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL_ TO. HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; ZONE CHANGE. FROM, "H -S" HIGHWAY SERVICE. DISTRICT.TO,. "R. -3" MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT). (FAIR OAKS AVENUE PARTNERSHIP). Planning Director Eisner advised that the application has•been submiltted by San Luis Engineering as agents for Fair Oaks Partnership, requesting a General Plan amendment and zone change. He noted that the site is.4.5 acres and its present General Plan designation is Highway Commercial and the zoning is Highway Service. The request for rezoning and the accompanying General Plan amendment have been reviewed by the Staff Advisory Committee and, for a number of reasons, denial of the request is recommended. He stated that the property is 'sandwiched' between the freeway and one of the City's primary tourist oriented streets, and. the General Plan recognizes this by identifying this area as Highway Service He further stated that as tourism grows in this area, the economic advantage of 'Visitor Servicing Commercial' will increase and, in staff's opinion, this opportunity should not be lost. He further pointed out that there are issues of noise impact to be considered because of the proximity of the site to the freeway and Traffic Way. Also, the City Fire facility will be impacted. Upon being assured by Planning Director Eisner that public hearing for Rezoning Case No. 83 -371 had been duly published and property owners noti- fied, Vice Chairman Moots declared the hearing open. Jim McGillis, Surveyor for San Luis Engineering,speaking for the applicant, pointed that they are not asking for a zone change on the total property, but only a portion of it. Mr. McGillis stated that the people who own the property have spent in excess of two years to try and develop this site into Highway Commercial but to no avail. One of the big drawbacks was the fact that the City took a large parcel on Traffic Way for the new fire station. He stated the applicants have a proposal for a motel and restaurant that will use only about one -half of the site, and the other half is considered wasted because of its size and location, and the applicants want to construct apartments on that portion of the property. Mr. McGillis pointed out that — there a dire need for apartments in this community and, in his opinion, it would fit in with the Village and would be a very good use of the property. Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, Chairman Moots declared the hearing closed. •s 17 - 18 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 8 -16 -83 After a brief discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission that the Highway Commercial designation was proper for the subject property, and the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 83 -952 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE DENIAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION NO. 83 -371 FILED BY SAN LUIS ENGINEERING AS AGENT FOR FAIR OAKS PARTNERSHIP. on motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Benhardt, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Benhardt, Fischer, Moore, Olsen and Vice Chairman Moots NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Carr and Chairman Gerrish the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 16th day of August 1983. Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING - LOT SPLIT CASE NO 83 -384, EL CAMINO.REAL. (LEO A. BRISCO) Planning:Director Eisner referred to.the tentative map that was sub- mitted by the applicant along with the lot split application. He advised that the matter was reviewed by the Lot Split Committee and the Staff Advisory Committee, and the lot split was recommended for approval subject to the conditions noted in the staff report, dated August 9, 1983. Upon being assured by Planning Director Eisner that Lot Split Case No. 83 -384 had been duly published and property owners notified, Vice Chairman Moots: declared the hearing open. Howard Mankins, speaking on behalf of the applicant, requested a waiver of Condition #2 requiring full street improvements on El Camino Real. He stated that there is a concrete swale in front of that area and the entire area is black topped and, in their opinion, the improvements would not enhance the area at all, and the sidewalk would create more of a hazard for the large trucks going in and out of there. He pointed out that the requested lot split is mainly to separate the developed land from the undeveloped land. Planning Director Eisner commented that the reasoning behind the require- ment was that curb and gutter improvements have been made by other property owners along El Camino Real. He stated he was out and looked at the property and the water does drain down toward the street. He stated that making the requirement was a matter of consistency with other properties that have been required to make those improvements. Ed Phillips he is employed with 7 -Up Company, and he agrees with Mr. Mankins that the required improvements would be a hazard to the trucks. Upon hearing no further comments from the audience, Vice Chairman Moots declared the hearing closed. After a brief discussion, Lot Split Case No. 83 -384 was approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated August 9, 1983, deleting Condition No. 2, onmotion by Commissioner Benhardt, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, motion carried on a 3 to 2 vote. PUBLIC HEARING - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 83 -385, CANYON WAY. (C. J. McKEE). Planning Director Eisner advised that the application is for a lot line ad- justment.on. Canyon Way. He stated that the lot split has been reviewed by the Minor Subdivision Committee and the Staff Advisory Committee and they recommend approval of the lot split subject to the conditions listed in the staff report, dated August 9, 1983. Mr. Eisner pointed out that several inquiries have been received relative to the proposed lot split relating to drainage concerns. Upon being assured by Planning Director Eisner that public hearing for Lot Split Case No. 83 -385 had been duly published and property owners notified, Vice Chairman Moots declared the hearing open. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 8 -16 -83 Page 3 Bob Lupinek, Ervin Engineering, speaking on behalf of the applicant, advised that the motivating factor to this request came about because of the rains this past winter. At that time it was realized that there is a spring area where the road would be crossing on the diagonal, and it would seem to be more appropriate to go on the northwest side of the parcel. Mr. McKee, applicant for the lot split, stated after the road was designed it was realized that it would go above a spring, and they want to change it because it would create a hazardous condition. Mr. Bob Taylor stated he owns the lot on Canyon Way and he would like to see a berm of a permanent nature rather than .just a dirt berm because'of drainage concerns.. Planning Director Eisner advised that a condition of the split would be that a drainage plan be submitted for approval by the Public Works Director. Upon hearing no further comments for or against the proposed lot split, Vice Chairman Moots declared the hearing closed. After'a. brief discussion, Lot Split Case No. 83 -385 was approved.on motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Benhardt, and unanimously carried, subject to the 4 recommended conditions listed in the staff report, dated August 9, 1983. PUBLIC HEARING.. - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 83-386, HIGHWAY 227 NEAR CORBETT CANYON ROAD. (E. GUIDOTTI). Planning Director Eisner advised that the subject parcel map is.for the purpose of a lot line adjustment. The map has-been reviewed by the Minor Subdivision Committee and the Staff Advisory Committee and is recommended for approval subject to the recommended conditions listed in the staff report, dated August 9, 1983. Mr. Eisner noted that at the present time the applicant is improving the creek area on his own by removing the debris that is in there, and the dedication lines are also.spelled out on the parcel map as set forth in the recommended conditions. Upon being assured by Planning Director Eisner that public hearing for Lot Split Case No. 83 -386 had been duly published and property owners noti- fied, Vice. Chairman Moots declared the hearing open. Jim McGillis, San Luis Engineering, representing the applicant in favor of the approval of the request. He stated that there are 3 parcels now and the applicant is asking for 3 parcels allowed under the Subdivision Map Act. . Mr. Hall, 330. Tally Ho Road, stated that a share of the bank has been taken out and he inquired if an environmental determination had been made on the impact. Mr. Eisner advised that the request is for a lot line adjustment and does not require an environmental determination at this time, however, at a future time when the properties are improved, there will be an additional update of environmental assessment. Joe Agrusa, 300 Tally Ho Road, stated he is aware that the request is strictly to move lot lines, however, it will probably be developed in the future. He commented that at one time it was stated by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande that this land was never to be developed because of the low condition of the ground. He stated they are taking water shed away by moving trees and /or building houses,; which is not going to improve the problem and, in his opinion, it will be creating a bigger problem. Mr. McGillis pointed out that what the applicant is requesting is taking some unusable parcels and making them a little more usable, and basically creating a marketing parcel out of the existing house. Upon hearing no further discussion, Vice Chairman Moots declared the hearing closed. With regard to the drainage concerns, Vice Chairman Moots suggested that a 4th condition be added requiring that a drainage plan be submitted prior to issuance of building permits. Commissioner Benhardt moved to approve Lot Split Case No. 83 -386 subject to the 3 conditions listed in staff report, dated August 9, 1983, adding Condition No. 4 as follows: "A drainage plan shall be prepared land submitted to the Public Works Director for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits ". Motion lost for lack of a second. After further discussion, on motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Moore, and carried on a 4 to 1 vote, denying Lot Split Case 19 "20 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 8 -16 -83 No. 83 -386 because of drainage problems in the area. Page 4 PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP, TRACT NO. 1137, "HUNTER'S HAVEN ", 512 IDE STREET, AN 8 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION IN THE "R -1" DISTRICT. (MARGARET R. WORK). Planning Director Eisner .advised that the submission before the Commission is identified as Tentative Tract No. 1137 at 512 Ide Street; the site is approximately 2 acres in size; the present zoning is "R-1" Single Family Residential, and the land is vacant with the exception of Parcel 8, which has an existing single family dwelling. He further advised that the General Plan designation for this property is low density residential and the request for the subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. Also, since it has been determined that the request is consistent with the General Plan, it is subject to Negative Declaration. He stated that the only zoning standard that would come into play would be the minimum lot size, which is 6,000 sq. ft.; and the proposed lots range from 6,100 sq. ft. to 13,785 sq. ft. Mr. Eisner pointed out that the project has been reviewed by the Subdivision Review Board and the Staff Advisory Committee, and both recommend approval of the tract subject to the conditions recommended in the staff. report dated August 9, 1983. He stated that, in recommending approval of the tract to the Planning Commission it is with the recommendation and understanding that the drainage would be picked up and carried to Ide Street, down Ide Street to a point where there is now a drainage inlet and carried to the creek. This method has been deemed adequate by the Public Works Director, and the recommendation in the staff report is that before building permits are issued, a complete grading and drainage plan be submitted to the Public Works Director for review and approval. He noted that the Staff Advisory Committee, and specifically the Public Works and Planning Departments are aware of the concerns that will be expressed by the people in the area, and the conditions as set forth in the recommendations will protect the people in the area and surrounding property owners. Upon being assured by Planning Director Eisner that public hearing for Tentative Subdivision Map, Tract No. 1137, had been duly published and property owners notified, Vice Chairman Moots declared the hearing open. Jim McGillis, San.Luis Engineering; representing the applicant, spoke in favor of the Tentative Subdivision Map, and briefly described the pro- posed project. Bill Clark, Cross Street, inquired if the City plans to take Cross Street all the way through and if they do, in his opinion, it would be a big mistake. Mr. Eisner advised that the present recommendation is for Ide Street, which is on the master plan of streets, to eventually be completed at some time in the future with full improvements As part of the subject proposal, the City is considering the improvement of Cross Street on one side only. Alan Emerson, agent for the owner, spoke in favor of approval of the tentative subdivision map. Mr. and Mrs. Jack Egan, 521 Allen Street, expressed their concerns regarding increased traffic on Allen Street. Carol Potter stated she owns property adjacent to the proposed development, and expressed concern regarding the grading. Mr. Eisner advised that a grading and drainage plan would have to be submitted for approval, and it would have to be adequate in all areas before it would be accepted by the City. Ms. Potter pointed out that at the present time that 2 acre parcel is a walnut orchard and stated she is concerned about the trees disappearing. She stated that there needs to be some provisions made to protect as many of the trees as possible. Upon hearing no further discussion for or against the proposed tract, Vice Chairman Moots declared the hearing closed. Commissioner Olsen commented that this property is a very desirable piece of property and should be developed. She also stated she is concerned about getting the street fully improved and not just one -half of it improved. She further commented about her concern that two walnut trees and various fruit trees that will have to be removed. Commissioner Fischer stated she is sorry to see the problem again of waiving City standards, but,•hopefully, the City would not demand the standards be met on Cross Street. Vice Chairman Moots stated it is his understanding that Cross Street was originally intended to be completed, and it is also his understanding that improvements are required with development. He further stated he couldn't see anything wrong with the proposed development and it seems, in this case, the developer has over - extended himself as far as the street improvements are concerned. Commissioner Moore stated he likes the fact that they are going to take the water off this land and put it in the Arroyo Grande Creek. With regard to the concerns expressed about Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 8 -16 -83 the trees, Commissioner Moore stated he is a professional conservationist and right now he is working on a tree ordinance for the City. He further . stated as walnut trees get older, every year they require more and more care and it is not a good idea to have large trees on little lots. He pointed out that the developer is taking care of the basic concern, and that is the drainage. Commissioner Benhardt commented he agrees with Commissioner Moore and Vice. Chairman Moots. On motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Benhardt, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Benhardt, Fischer, Moore, Olsen and Vice. Chairman Moots NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Carr and Chairman Gerrish the. foregoing Resolution was . adopted this 16th day of August 1983. COMMUNICATIONS Planning Director Eisner advised that a study session has been scheduled for Tuesday, August/30, 1983 at 7:30 P.M. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by Vice Chairman Moots at 10:30 P.M. ATTEST: There being no further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 83 -953 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 1137, "HUNTER'S HAVEN ", AND REFERRAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. 21 Page 5