Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 1977-04-19Arroyo Grande Planning Commission April 19, 1977 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman Pope presiding. Present were Commissioners Cole, Moots, and Ries; Commissioners Gerrish and Hitchen were absent and there is one vacancy existing on the Com- mission. Also present was Planning Director Gallop. MINUTE APPROVAL Commissioner Cole noted there were some typographical errors in the minutes of the regular meeting of April 5, 1977; there being no other additions or cor- rections, Chairman Pope approved the minutes of said meeting, as corrected. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION ON USE PERMIT CASE NO:'75- 214,'PATIO HOME CARE, 222.SOUTH ELM STREET, FOR EXPANSION OF EXISTING FACILITY (MULLINER) Director Gallop stated that the original use permit was granted about 22 years ago and there had already been a one year extension granted. The peti- tioner was now asking for another one year extension. He added that it had not been the custom to grant more than one extension on a - use permit- or parcel map however, in this particular case, no major change in the land use of the area or in the operation of the facility has occurred. He said the Commission could either hold to its past record' or give a temporary extension Chairman Pope asked for public input; there was none. Chairman Pope asked if they could note this would be the last extension granted; the Director said this could be done.- After discussion, on motion by Commissioner Moots, sec- onded by Commissioner Cole, and unanimously carried, that a one year extension be granted on Use Permit Case No. 75 -214, with the notation that this will be the last extension granted. PUBLIC HEARING AND REQUEST NEGATIVE DECLARATION — REZONING CASE NO.- 77 -102, HALCYON HILLS, FROM AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO '1 'PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (DUENOW). Director Gallop displayed a map of the property, noting that he was again recommending the same procedure be used as that followed for Oak Park Acres and Rancho Grande Properties: open the public hearing with no public input at this time, deny the Request. for Negative Declaration and require an EIR,.. and continue the public hearing until such time as the EIR is completed. He said the property is comprised of approximately 130 acres and lies easterly of the proposed South San. Luis Obispo County Citizens Facility, adjacent to Rancho Grande. After being assured by Planning Director Gallop that public hearing for the proposed rezoning had been properly advertised, posted, and property owners notified, the Chairman opened the public hearing. After'discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -513 EIR RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLA- RATION AND REQUIRING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner. Moots, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Moots, Ries, and Chairman Pope NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Gerrish and Hitchen the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of April 1977. On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and unanimously carried, the public hearing was continued until such time as the 'Environmental Impact Report is completed. 353 354 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -19 -77 Page 2 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO SECTION 9- 4.2602 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE CONCERNING MINIMUM OFF - STREET PARKING. REQUIREMENTS FOR LODGES, CLUBS, COMMUNITY CENTERS, CHURCHES, CHAPELS, AND MORTUARIES. Director Gallop stated that this subject was introduced several meetings ago, primarily by the Catholic Church who were interested in developing a new facility on Fair Oaks Avenue. They felt the parking requirements were not too consistent and were arbitrary. The Commission requested the staff to make a study on the matter; these recommendations were brought to the Commission at the last meeting for study. He said that the Planning Aide had contacted a large number of cities, particularly in this area, as well as the League of California Cities,' and the American Institute of Planning Officials. He reviewed the recom- mendations for the Commission. Using the new method of figuring parking spaces, the Catholic Church would now be within 1 -2 spaces of what the new ordinance would require. Planning Aide Sullivan noted that Commissioner Gerrish had ex- pressed concern at the last meeting over the term "congregational seating area ", and said the Commission could clarify this if they wished. Director Gallop sug- gested saying "the largest meeting room of the facility ". Chairman Pope asked if the architect for the Church had had a chance to review the proposed amend- ment; the Director replied that there was -a letter on file saying the changes would be acceptable. After being assured by Planning Director Gallop that public hearing on the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance had been duly published, the Chairman opened the public hearing. The Chairman asked for a show of hands- from those in the audience in favor of the proposed amendment; there were approximately ten. No one spoke in opposition to the proposal. Director Gallop noted there was also a letter on file from Ghormley Engineering, regarding parking for a proposed ex- pansion of the First Baptist Church., He said the only way their problem could be resolved would be after the new amendment is adopted. After discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -514 Z RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 24 C.S. On motion by Commissioner Cole,-sseconded by Commissioner Ries, and by the following roll call vote, to wit:• AYES: Commissioners.Cole, Moots, Ries, and Chairman Pope NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Gerrish and Hitchen the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th. day of January 1977. LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 77 -265, SOUTH ELM STREET (PACE) - REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AND REQUEST FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION Director Gallop stated that this was a parcel map on a large piece of property with doiuble frontage on Elm Street and on Aspen Street, in an "R -G" zone. The four parcels will produce property which can have fourplexes. All parcels meet the requirements of the zone. The Director then reviewed the recommendations of the Review Committee. The Chairman asked for public input; there was none. There being no additions or corrections, the Chairman ordered the report filed. Chairman Pope asked for public input on the Request for Negative Decla- ration; there was none. After discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -515 EIR RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION. LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 77 -267, 1385 BRIGHTON AVENUE (SEVERN FOR BADEN) - REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AND REQUEST FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4- 19 -77 §g On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Ries, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Moots, Ries, and Chairman Pope NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Gerrish and Hitchen the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of April 1977. LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 77 -266, 303 SOUTH HALCYON ROAD (GRIEB) Director Gallop stated that this was technically a lot line adjustment. There is already a recorded parcel map existing. The petitioners were asking to move one line northerly 60 feet; both parcels would still meet the require- ments of the zone. The Chairman asked for public input; there was none. There being no additions or corrections, the Chairman ordered the report filed.. The Chairman reviewed what had occurred previously for the Commission and the audience. The petitioner has since paid a new filing fee and gone through the Review Committee again. The matter was now before the Commission for re- The Planning Director reviewed the recommendations of the Review Com- 'mittee. He stated that there had been a question raised if residential parking is -a permitted use in a "C -N" Zone. He felt it was however, if the wished to clarify this, they could adopt a resolution determining that resi- dential was a permitted use in a Commercial District when that district abuts a multiple residential district. The Chairman asked for public input. Margaret Stone, of Haynes and Olpin, representing Elizabeth Jackson, stated several objections to the lot split: an overload of the school problem; a sewage problem brought up in 1976 in a study and,never dealt. with there has never been a resolution of whether or not &righton.wll +be idequate to handle traffic which will flow on it once it is � exten'ded, the project °is -not consistent with the. Land. Use' Plan, the Addendum only speaks to "light - industrial" non - conforming spot zoning; ,a' resolution of determination saying residential parking is permissive would not be correct under the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, which requires that residential parking be found similar in character to those uses already permitted, and it is not. There was no other public input. There being no additions or corrections, the Chairman ordered the report filed. The Chairman asked for public input on the Request for Negative Declaration. Margaret Stone, of Haynes and Olpin, representing Elizabeth Jackson, stated that by allowing residential parking in a "C-N" Zoned District, the Commission was in effect creating a zone change, as residential parking is not a permitted use; and, therefore, the California Environmental Quality Act required an EIR to be prepared. She there would also be effects on the cultural resources which were not noted on the Form B -1. These would be the overloading of the school, the sewage problems, and the traffic problems on Brighton Avenue.. She also questioned the way the Form B -1 was marked on two items. On Item f, Page Q, she felt this should be marked "no" to show that the adjoining land use is not the same; it is residential, not apartments. Director Gallop noted that the form says both "yes" and "no ". The - property does abut a 16 unit apartment which is under construction. She said that, in their view, Item 3, Page Q should have been marked "yes ". Item 4, Page Q should also have been marked "yes" as the fact that 54 neighboring residents had signed a petition against the lot split indicated that they would be permanently annoyed. Director Gallop noted that the Public Works Department had spoken to the temporary annoyance caused by grading and construction. They felt there would.not be any more annoyance -than from any other type of development. As far-as the traffic problem, Brighton Avenue has a capacity to carry traffic of a much higher density than this development would generate. The standards of the State Department of Transportation indicated that the capacity would be a 4 -5 times higher tan would be generated, by this project. He stated that zoning is not a consi4eration. He added that any development would have some impact on the schools. The City, however, is working on some means of providing additional schools.- He said that when Mr.- Baden spoke of the costs of- sewering, he meant to a single family home, not on multiple residences. The sewers are capable of handling the development..- 355 356 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -19 -77 Page 4 He said that if the parking was a problem, the Commission could deny the peti- tioner the right to use the "C -N" portion for parking and make the development much more congested. This could be a condition of approval. He said that if Mrs. Stone wished to argue the requirement of an EIR, she should talk to the City Attorney. Cora Higdon, 183 Fairview, felt that if the property were split, the exist- ing house would eventually be torn down and more apartments put in. She felt the development would affect the environment; she felt it would be run down in 20 years, and no one would want to build on "R -1" property across from apartments. Lou Caballero,. of San Luis Engineering, 1115 Grand Avenue, representing Mr. Severn and Mr.. Baden, displayed some drawings that gave a perspective on the effects of the environment. He stated that this zoning is a transition zone from commercial to residential "R -1" zoning, and they felt the best use had been made from a planning and land use standpoint. Putting the parking behind the apartments would minimize the effects on the environment as far as noise, visual, etc. Madeleine Steele,1598 Hillcrest, said that what Mrs. Higdon was trying to say was in regard to Item 3, Page Q, in that it could disrupt or divide an es- tablished community. John Silva, 195 Fairview, asked if any consideration had been taken on the effect of run -off water to Grand Avenue. Director Gallop replied there would be: a retention and-measuring basin. He said there was an area set aside for a retention pond and the water will be metered out.- The owners have paid an as- sessment to take the water to Ruth Ann Way. , Mr. Silva said that if there was water standing in the pond, there would be mosquitos.- The Director said the water wouldn't be there that long. Florence Rose, 1305 Brighton, said she was opposed because of the reasons already expressed. Leitha Anderson, 187 Fairview, also was opposed to the proposed development. Margaret Stone said she would like to re- emphasize that zoning laws came before the California Environmental Quality Act. Whether the zoning existed before is no reason to go ahead without serious discussion of the development. Director Gallop noted that the petitioner could develop the property with apart- ments without a lot split. After discussion, Commissioner Cole moved to accept the Request for Nega- tive Declaration, as prepared; the motion died for lack of a second. Commissioner Cole asked how many apartment units could be.built without a split; the Director stated approximately 32 -36 units. Director Gallop said that state legislation says that even if a full -blown EIR is prepared on a project, this still is not the basis for denial of the project. An EIR is an informational. document only, and is not the basis for denying or granting a project. Planning Aide Sullivan stated that if the Commission took no action on the Environmental Statement, no further action could be taken to physically change the site by the proposed de- velopment; it freezes this particular project on the property. However, another project could be proposed. After further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77-516 EIR RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION. On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Chairman Pope, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -19 -77 Page 5 AYES: Commissioner Cole and Chairman Pope NOES: Commissioners Moots and Ries ABSENT: Commissioners Gerrish and Hitchen The Chairman ordered the matter tabled until the next regular meeting when there will be a full Commission present. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 77 -138, 1385 BRIGHTON AVENUE; 16 -UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX (SEVERN) - REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION This matter was tabled until a decision is reached on the Request for Negative Declaration- for the property. APPEAL OF REQUIRED CONDITIONS AT 155 WALNUT STREET, REQUIRING EITHER CONCRETE OR A -C DRIVEWAY (VAN GORDER) Director Gallop stated that this request was for a parking and drive area for an R -V vehicle. He said that in the past, the City has required paving of all driveways, particularly in connection with building permits.- He referred to the proposed change to the Zoning Ordinance which is now being considered by the City Council on Section 9- 4.2601, which says that improvements for driveways and parking shall be surfaced in concrete or A -C paving. This was to clarify the existing section which did not specify what the driveways or parking - areas should be. Alex Ramey, representing the petitioner, said the petitioner had an exist- ing house next door which had a gravel drive which she was quite happy with. - The curb, gutter, and sidewalk are already in on the subject property. The driveway would be on her own property. Mrs.. Van Gorder added that the abutting house did not face on Walnut, it faced on Sunset. Commissioner'Cole asked if the property were level. Mr. Ramey said there was about a 1% grade.- Mrs. Van Gorder asked if the Commission would consider partial paving of the driveway, with gravel on the remaining portion. Chairman Pope asked how long the driveway would be; Mr. Ramey replied that it would be about 23 feet. Director Gallop added that zoning requirements are not necessarily a- requirement- for the pro- tection of the property owner, but for protection of the abutting properties. He did not feel that a partial driveway would be any more protection than a gravel one.. Mrs. Van Gorder said she just liked the looks of a gravel drive better than a concrete or asphalt one. Fred Steele, 1598 Hillcrest, suggested using something like macadam or soil cement. Both are dust -free. Mr. Ramey said they could argue back and forth over what is dust -free and what isn't; he felt gravel could be. The Planning Director said that gravel could be if the ground was treated; just gravel would not be dust -free and weatherproof: Allen Jackson, 208 Fairview, noted there had been no trouble with the racing track in Santa Maria. It was treated with calcium chloride- After further discussion, on motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Ries, and unanimously carried, that the driveway be concrete or A -C paving from the sidewalk to the front of the house, with the rest to be done in the most dust -free and weather -proof rock. Mr. Ramey then commented on how the different requirements of the City were causing homes to be so expensive that the normal young family could not afford to buy one. The Chairman recommended he attend City Council meetings and voice his opinions. REFERRAL FROM CITY COUNCIL RE: PROPOSED "P -F" PRIMARY FLOOD PLAIN DISTRICT AND "S -F" SECONDARY FLOOD PLAIN DISTRICT Director Gallop noted that these two items had been considered by the Commission last fall and recommended to the City Council for adoption. Since that time, one of the Councilmen felt uncomfortable with the Flood Plain 357 358 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -19 -77 Page 6 Districts as written, and he recommended that both the Secondary and the Primary Flood Plain Districts be made combining districts. The Planning Director did not feel that the Primary Flood Plain District could be a com- bining district, as it in essence, prohibits any kind of development. It can only be used for grazing and things that would not be disturbed by flood waters. To put this designation on an existing zoning would make it non - conforming. Any buildings destroyed in a flood could not be replaced. However, there was not this problem in the Secondary Flood Plain District. This is an area which could potentially be unindated through natural flooding; it had nothing to do with the dam breaking. Any new construction could be built anticipating the elevation theoretically protected from these waters. Chairman Pope asked for any public input; there was none. The Director stated that, since this would be an entirely new ordinance, the public hearing would be set for the next regular meeting. The Chairman ordered the required public hearing. WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA MEETING - The Chairman noted that the Commission had received an invitation to a League of California Cities Channel Division meeting in Ventura. Director Gallop instructed members wishing to attend to contact Mrs. Queen. URBANIZATION PAMPHLET - Director Gallop noted this was a planning study made by a group in Visalia, which is attempting to answer some of the questions on agricultural lands. He said there was a lot of information, but no answers. RESIGNATION OF COMMISSIONER MATHEWS - Director Gallop stated he had re- ceived a copy of a letter from City Administrator Butch to Morgan Mathews, thanking him for his service to the City. RESIGNATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY - The Planning Director said he had also received a letter of resignation from the Planning Commission Secretary, effective April 29th, and noted they would be getting a new secretary in the near future. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Bill Langworthy, Printz Road, felt that some of the comments the Chairman made. with Mr. Ramey were uncalled for. Doris Olsen, representing the Santa Maria Times, asked for clarification on the procedure followed in adopting lot splits, which the Planning Director provided. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Commission adjourned at 9:28 P.M. ATTEST: L40e-442� x _ Secretary