Loading...
PC Minutes 1983-05-03ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION May 3, 1983 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Vice Chairperson Cole presiding. Present are Commissioners Benhardt, Carr, Moore, Moots and Pilkington. Chairman Gerrish is absent. City Manager Mack is also in attendance. MINUTE APPROVAL The minutes of the regular meeting of April 5, 1983 were approved as prepared on motion by Commissioner Pilkington, seconded by Commissioner Benhardt, and unanimously carried. REVIEW - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTIONS. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 83 -274, ADDITION TO STORAGE AREA, 1263 GRAND AVENUE, DOLLY'S DONUTS. (T. 'P. EVERETT). City Manager Mack advised that on April 27th the Architectural Review Committee reviewed the application and recommended approval of the proposal with the following condition: "Plans for drainage to be resolved prior to building permit ". Commissioner Moore commented that he inspected the site and it does have a need for correction of drainage problems. There being no further discussion. Architectural Review Case No. 83 -274 was approved subject to the condition recommended by the Architectural Review Committee Report, dated April 27, 1983. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 83 -275, MOBILE SCANNER ENCLOSURE, 345 SO: HALCYON ROAD. • (ARROYO GRANDE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL) Mr. Mack stated that on April 27th the Architectural Review Committee reviewed the subject proposal and recommended denial for the reasons. noted in their report dated April 27,'1983. . Mr. Mack commented it was the feeling of the Committee that this proposal could conceivably result in a more permanent structure than an awning. He stated the applicant has been granted permission to construct the slab, and has been requested to submit a proposal for a more temporary enclosure for review by the Architectural Review Committee. - Commissioner Benhardt stated that the Committee felt that the type of metal building originally prd- posed would not coincide with the rest of the architecture of the exist- ing building. Mr. Craig WoodmanseF, applicant, stated that the Committee's recommendations are agreeable with them. There being no further discussion, Architectural Review Committee Action, dated April 27, 1983,was approved on motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Benhardt, and unanimously carried. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 83 -276, HAPPY STEAK RESTAURANT, OAK PARK PLAZA. Mr. Mack stated that the Architectural Review Committee considered this application on April 27th, and recommended approval of the proposal subject to the 5 conditions listed in their report. Mr. Phil Parrish, representative of Happy Steak Restaurant, commented that the applicants concur with the recommended conditions. Considerable discussion followed regarding Conditions 4 and 5 of the report relative to landscaping and drainage. Commissioner Carr stated, in his opinion, the landscaping plan should be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Moore stated his feelings that there have been some severe comments regarding that hill, and the situation,, could be a little difficult without proper retaining walls. He agreed with Commissioner Carr that the .landscaping plans be brought back to the Commission for review and approval. Mr. Parrish commented that the developer is responsible for the landscaping of the area, and it is his understanding that the drainage is . something that is pretty much already set in place and was designed for the entire development. Mr. Mack pointed out that the grade has been established and the entire center is designed so that the water does flow across the parking lot to Carl's Jr. He stated, in his opinion, what the Committee was considering was, if they avoid dumping any more water on that surface and have it oriented to discharge on the street, it would be a far better solution than what we have now. After further discussion, on motion by Commissioner Pilkington, seconded by Commissioner Benhardt, and unanimously carried, Architectural Review Committee Action, dated April 27 1983 was approved subject to the following amendment to Condition No. 4: Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -3 -83 Page 2 "Landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and approval prior to building permit ". PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING CASE NO. 83 -169, PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 140 C.S. CHANGING THE LAND USE OF LOT 7, TRACT 604, OAK PARK ACRES FROM MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL P (SAN LUIS ENGINEERING, INC., AGENTS FOR J. E. FOREMASTER). Mr. Mack advised that the proposal has been reviewed by the City Engineer, Paul Karp, who indicated he had some serious concerns over the configuration proposed by the applicant,which suggests a typical "R -1" subdivision without regard to the topography on the site. Mr. Karp pointed out, in his letter of April 14, 1983, that Ordinance No. 140 C.S. stipulates a higher density type construction such as cluster housing, townhouses, condominiums and /or apartments. Mr. Karp also pointed out in his letter that the Subdivision Ordinance stipulates that certain minimum standards must be met with regard to lot size and percent of grading when subdividing property which exceeds 7% slopes, and the original concept outlined by Ordinance 140 C.S. envisioned a clustering of multi - family units which would be oriented to take advantage of the greenbelt abutting Lot 7. He also noted it was Mr. Karp's recommendation that, should the Commission wish to consider a change in the type of development proposed by Ordinance 140 C.S., they should consider a requirement of CEQA for some environmental review prior to recommending the appropriate ordinance change and, at a minimum, the review should discussing mitigating measures for the proposed inconsistencies with the City's Subdivision Ordinance relative,to dividing property on steeper grades within the parcel. Jim McGillis, agent for the applicant,, gave a brief history of the project. He advised that Tract 689. is a part of Oak Park Acres, Tract No. 604, which was accepted into the City under general Planned Develop- ment zoning. He stated an EIR was prepared on the overall planning process and every particular tract was addressed. There was an authorization for 85 units with a density bonus if it were held for senior housing. He noted that the applicant would like for the Commission to view the proposal as a development plan under "P -D" zoning and not under "R -1" zoning and, in his opinion,the area adequately suits the proposed use. He commented that the proposal is approvable under the subdivision section that allows for Optional Design Standards. Mr. Rueben Kvidt, developer, advised that at the time Tract 689. was approved, he had agreed to widen, straighten and improve Oak Park Road, with. the understanding that he would be allowed to build 96 units on that. tract. He stated they installed all of the utility lines to the entry of that tract and would hate to see all of that money wasted, because it would increase the cost of housing to the home buyer and, in his'opinion, it is more important to address the specific plan as it is changed to meet the needs of the public. Also, he stated he would ask that the park site be. lowered somewhat to allow for better line of sight around that corner for safety reasons. Upon hearing no further comments for or against the proposed Zone Change, Chairperson Cole declared the hearing closed. In answer to Commissioner Carr's question relative to approval of the tract, Mr. McGillis advised that there was a tract approved, however, construction failed to commence and the approval ran out as of October of last year. Vice. Chairperson Cole stated that since Mr. McGillis feels that a zone change is not needed; that this proposal would be a shifting of the idea of Planned Development, she feels there may be a need for a legal opinion. In answer to Mrs. Cole's question regarding the grading, Mr. McGillis advised that they have taken the same plan and cut the grading down by 35 to 40 %, plus reduced a lot of the retaining walls. Commissioner Moore stated the plans notes that it is proposed to destroy 4 oak trees, one of which is in very good health and, in his opinion, this matter should be reviewed. Commissioner Carr stated he feels that the ordinance was set up to lock things in place and there was a great deal of effort and review that went into the process. He commented he did not receive a copy of the grading plan or a copy of the maps displayed on the board and, in his opinion, the Commission should have the opportunity to review the ordinance Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -3 -83 Page 3 and the maps. He further commented that changing the ordinance certainly would require a more in -depth review of a change of this nature than what has been presented here tonight. After discussion, on motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Benhardt, and unanimously carried, the matter was continued to the meeting of May 17, 1983 pending a legal opinion from the City Attorney. The Commission also requested that copies of the ordinance, copies of the maps, and any previous maps be included in their agenda packets for the next meeting. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING CASE NO. 83 -170, ZONE CHANGE FROM "RA -B3" RESIDENTIAL - AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT (40,000 SQ. FT. MIN. BLDG. SITE) TO "RA -B2" RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT (20,000 SQ. FT. MIN. BLDG. SITE), 401 PRINTZ ROAD. (RICHARD DEBLAUW). Mr. Mack advised that the property under discussion is located in the "RA -B3" zone. He noted that the Public Works Director has reviewed the proposal and his recommendation is that this rezoning would create spot zoning within that area. Upon being assured by City Manager Mack that public - hearing for Rezoning Case No. 83 -170 had been duly published and property owners noti- fied, Vice Chairperson Cole declared the hearing open. Mr. Richard DeBlauw, 744 Alta Vista Way, petitioner for the zone change, advised that when he first considered rezoning this property he had talked to the former Planning Director, who more or less encourged him to go ahead and pursue the rezoning. He commented that the Acting Planning Director, Mr. Karp, has now come up with the recommendation to deny this because he.feels it would be spot zoning. Mr. DeBlauw stated if he is denied the zone change, he would request. a refund of his $250.00 filing fee. Mrs.. Ella Honeycutt, 560 Oak Hill Road, stated that there is a sump problem on the property which is a health hazard, and two of the property owners close to the property asked her to speak on the matter to get it cleaned up. Mr. Sandy Fachetti, Tally Ho Road, stated he would be concerned about the. drainage. Mr. Bill McCann, 575 Crown Hill, stated his feelings that this would be spot zoning and he would be against it. Upon hearing no further comments for or against the proposed zone change, Vice Chairperson Cole declared the hearing closed. Mr. DeBlauw commented that there is a slew in the bark and it has been there a long time, however, that is not where he is proposing to build. • The. Commissioners indicated they were in agreement with the 'staff's recommendation. They felt that since the area that surrounds the property is zoned "RA -B3 ", rezoning a piece right in the middle to "RA -B2" would not be. appropriate. After further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 83-939 Z RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF AN AMEND- MENT TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AS PROVIDED BY CHAPTER 4, ZONING, ARTICLE 32 OF SAID CODE. On motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Carr, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Benhardt, Carr, Moore,. Moots and Vice Chairperson Cole NOES: Commissioner Pilkington ABSENT: Chairman Gerrish the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 3rd day of May 1983. With regard to Mr. DeBlauw's request for a refund of his filing fee, Mr. Mack advised that City Council action would be required to authorize a refund. After a brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Benhardt, and unanimously carried, that a recommendation be made to the City Council to refund Mr. DeBlauw's $250.00 filing fee. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -3 -83 Page 4 CONTINUATION (PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED) - PREZONING CASE NO. 81 -151, ZONE CHANGE FROM "A" AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO "P -M" PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT - SHANNON RANCH. (TONY DECKER). City Manager Mack gave a brief history relating to this prezoning request up to this time. He stated that.on March 3, 1983 the Commission held a public hearing on the matter. At that time it was continued to the April 5th meeting and the Commission requested a joicp meeting with the City Council to discuss resource planning. The City Council declined the invitation with ' the feeling that they wished to maintain due process and their rights to have a review of the matter if it was appealed to them. He further noted that in his letter of March 15, 1983, the applicant had requested a continuance of this matter to the May 3rd meeting. Vice Chairperson Cole announced that the public hearing has been closed, however, she.' ould give the applicant a chance to speak if he wished, to- do so. Tony Decker, applicant for the Shannon Ranch project, spoke relative to the project, stating that the proposed overpass seemed to be their biggest hurdle and describing ways to overcome it. He further stated that he had consultants look at the project and survey the area and, it was their feeling, that the proposed site is a good parcel for a major user and the biggest drawback was lack of an overpass and a major airport. Mr. Jim McGillis, San Luis Engineering, pointed out that pre - zoning is being considered, where the Planning Commission is trying to decide if this parcel should come into the City, what its best use would be and, if it is accepted, does the City have the resources to serve it. He stated that the Resources Study recently done by Mr. Karp makes it pretty clear that we do have adequate resources for this type of project. Mr McGillis pointed out the advantages this project would bring to the City, such as employment He further noted that Shannon. Ranch, if served by an interchange, would basically be segregated from the rest of the community. Vice Chairperson out that the City voted to keep the Sphere of Influence within the confines of the city limits. Commissioner Moore referred to the Resources Study that the Planning Commission asked for... He stated he still has questions regarding water, roads and drainage. He referred to the Resources document, the EIR and the Ground Water study for our area. In summary, he stated that the study gives a pretty good impression that we have enough water to build out the City between now and 1995 but, in his opinion, it doesn't leave a lot of extra land. He that the-figures show that we expected to have 12,000 people in 1990; and we have the. 12,000 people already, and we need more planning and more evaluation and updating of the plans we have. He further stated, with regard to the EIR for Shannon Ranch, the question is - would this be growth inducing? He also commented regarding the number of people who have property within the City and inquired if there is going to be any way to assure a certain number of hookups will be available to these owners if they come up with the $2,000? He commented that the EIR indicates that the developers can solve the drainage problems and, in his opinion, they can solve these problems, but there is nothing very specific in the EIR as to how it is going to be done. Commissioner Carr commented he has a hard time supporting the prezoning of this piece of property. In his opinion, t h e drainage problem is the biggest problem; also this piece of property is in agricultural preserve. Commissioner Pilkington commented that we are probably somewhat limited on water, however, in his opinion, our eyes are closed relative to the City Limits of Arroyo Grande and he feels the community could possibly benefit by rezoning something like the project before the Commission tonight. Commissioner Moots stated he agrees with Commissioners Moore and Carr. He commented that since our Sphere of Influence ends at the city limits, we really don't have any jurisdiction outside of the city limits. He further stated that, in his opinion, this is very premature and there are some very big obstacles to overcome, such as the overpass, drainage and circulation. Vice Chairperson Cole stated, with regard to the Sphere of Influence being confined to the present city limits, in spite of the fact that we have water, drainage and circulation problems, we are allowing this city to become a bedroom community. She asked once the area is built out, where does the source of revenue come from in order to maintain services? She pointed out that we are going to have a water problem in a short time because (87- Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -3 -83 it takes a long time to plan a water project and get it into action; circulation costs money and this money comes from developments, and also our sewer facilities comes from development. She further stated, in her opinion, the City has to start thinking about where we are going to be when we are full, and where is the money going to come from, and this is the only way for Arroyo Grande to go with a look to the future. She commented that we do not have the water at this point in time and the request for prezoning seems to be, in her opinion, premature, however, she would hope that within a year or so this could be given serious consideration. ADJOURNMENT ATTEST: There being no further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 83 -940 Z RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AS PROVIDED BY CHAPTER 4 ZONING, ARTICLE 32 OF SAID CODE. Page 5 On motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and by the. following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Benhardt, Carr, Cole, Moore and Moots, NOES: Commissioner Pilkington ABSENT: Chairman Gerrish the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 3rd day of.:May 1983. (REASON FOR DENIAL BASED ON WATER, GROWTH AND DRAINAGE). There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M. by Vice Chairperson Cole. Secretary Vice Chairperson 1 1 1 1 1 Y87 L/90