Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 1977-04-05Arroyo Grande Planning Commission April 5, 1977 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman Pope presiding. Present were Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Hitchen, and Moots. Commissioners Mathews and Ries were absent. Also present were Planning Aide Sullivan and City Administrator Butch. MINUTE APPROVAL There being no additions or corrections, the Chairman approved the minutes of the regular meeting of March 15, 1977 as prepared. REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTIONS Architectural Review Case No. 77 -136, Juniper and Grand, Mini - Warehouses (Caudill) - Planning Aide Sullivan displayed a map of the property and reviewed the recommended conditions, noting that these warehouses are prefabricated. Commissioner Gerrish added that although the parcel of property is landlocked, the property owner owns a substantial amount of the surrounding property and there will never be a problem with access. Chairman Pope asked for public input; there was none. There being no additions or corrections, the Chairman ordered the report filed. Architectural Review Case No. 77 -137, 379 Alder Street, Apartment Complex (Green) - Planning Aide Sullivan stated that this was a request to build a 5 -unit apartment complex, noting that unless the City Council acts on the recommended changes to the Zoning Ordinance, this will require a use permit. He added that the petitioner had originally shown a 16 ft. driveway, which the Committee had increased to 20 ft., which is common for all multiple development. He reviewed all the conditions for the Commission and the audience. The Chairman asked for public input; there was none. The Chairman ordered the report filed, with no additions or corrections. Architectural Review Case No. 77 -138, 1385 Brighton Avenue, 16 -Unit Apartment Complex (Severn) - Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fairview, asked the Commission to be aware that the address was incorrect on the agenda; it should be 1385 Brighton, not 1235 Brighton Avenue. City Administrator Butch felt it would be best to consider all agenda items on this property at one time (Architectural Review Case No. 77 -138, reconsideration of Lot Split Case No. 77 -262, and Request for Negative Declaration) Chairman Pope stated there had been some confusion at the last meeting, at which time there was a motion to deny the proposed lot split on this property. There was a tie vote on the matter and there was then no consideration by the Chair for the proposed lot division. Since that time, there had been a communique from Mr. Caballero, the petitioner's engineer, along with a portion of the Subdivision Map Act attached. The staff had contacted the City Attorney with regards to the validity of the motion. COMMISSIONER GERRISH EXCUSED HIMSELF DUE TO A POSSIBLE CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND IS NOW ABSENT. Planning Aide Sullivan noted that the Commission should take some definite action, either approving, conditionally approving, or denying the proposed lot split, based on one or more of the eight guidelines set out in the State Map Act. If the Commission does not act, and the tie vote constitutes no action, the lot split will automatically become approved 30 days after the filing date, as set out in the City's Municipal Code. Chairman Pope reviewed what had happened at the previous meeting, noting that this was a request to split a parcel of property into two pieces, zoned "R -3" and "C -N ". COUNCILMAN SPIERLING ENTERED THE MEETING. Chairman Pope stated there had been several citizens at the last meeting to give public input. He reviewed the existing zoning of the surrounding properties. Commissioner Hitchen said he felt the lot would be split as none of the :reasons for denial under the State Map Act would apply. Commissioner Moots said he would abstain on the matter as he was not present at the last meeting to hear the public input. Chairman Pope asked if the matter could be referred to the City Council for action by them. Planning Aide Sullivan said that if they did not act, there was 347 348 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -5 -77 Page 2 no way the matter could go to the City Council unless by appeal of the petitioner. City Administrator Butch noted that the petitioner has appealed the matter. If the Commission did not act, and Mr. Baden withdrew his appeal, the split would automatically be approved after 30 days. Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fairview asked if they could appeal the matter if the petitioner withdrew his appeal. Planning Aide Sullivan replied that he believed they could; however, he was not sure of the technicalities of law. Margaret Stone, of Haynes and Olpin, attorney for Mrs. Jackson, said that the General Plan was not consistent with the zoning on this property. Chairman Pope noted that the Addendum to the Land Use Plan ,addresses this matter. Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fairview, noted several reasons she felt this split could be denied under Section 66474 of the State Map Act, items a -g: a) the proposed map is not consistent with the General Plan, which is "R -1 "; b) the same reason; c) the site is not physically suitable for development, as a problem was noted earlier with the sewers, and that situation has not changed; d) the property is not suitable for the proposed density, as there are not adequate roads for the circulation. Planning Aide Sullivan noted that items a and b were addressed in the Addendum to the Land Use Plan in the section dealing with pre- existing spot zonings. It was his opinion that there is con- sistency. He said he would have to get an engineering determination as to whether the site was physically unsuitable, and he would have to see a cross - slope to determine if the site is unsuitable for the proposed density. Mrs. Jackson said that Section 65860 requires the Zoning Ordinance to conform to the Land Use Map. She also felt that residential parking is not a designated "C -N" use. Section 9- 4.1202 of the Zoning Ordinance, which sets out commercial use and authorization for the "C -N" Zone makes no mention of any residential parking use. Section 9- 4.1203 allows other uses not specifically set out in the above section if the Commission determines such uses are similar in character to uses in the above section. She did not feel residential parking is similar in charac- ter to the uses set out in Section 9- 4.1202. Mrs. Jackson added that last year there had been a request to rezone this property and said request was denied after 71 residents signed a petition saying they wanted only single - family residences. The residents have again signed a petition to prevent the construc- tion of apartments in the area. She said allowing residential parking in a "C -N" Zone would be allowing the owners to circumvent the laws that require a zoning change and give the owners preferential treatment when the law requires that the Planning Commission treat all the people equally. She said there is no evidence that the sewer problem previously noted had been resolved. She stated there were many reasons for the Commission to deny the request: a) the land should be re- zoned to "R -1" to conform to the Land Use Map and State law; b) off- street parking is not lawful in a "C -N" District. Hal Severn, 1132 Buchon, felt that what the issue was, was the right of a man to draw a line and sell part of his property; what he plans to build on it was not before the Commission. Joyce Bealer, 1304 Brighton, asked about the improvement of Brighton Avenue. Planning Aide Sullivan replied that the developer would be required to improve a 30 ft. section, which would allow two -way traffic. Cora Higdon, 183 Fairview, felt that the other side of the road would never be built, as it is• "R -1 ", and people wouldn't want single family residences across the street from apartments. Jim Kooley, 191 Fairview, asked if the Brighton Avenue improvement would be along the full frontage of this property; Chairman Pope replied that it would. Mr. Kooley asked about the north -south road on the west side of the property. Planning Aide Sullivan replied that this would not be a dedicated road. Mr. Kooley then asked about the parking area. The Chairman stated this would be considered under the Architectural Approval. Mrs. Stone stated she would like to re- emphasize that it is necessary to find that residential parking is a permitted use in a "C -N" District. yard. Letha Anderson, 187 Fairview, said she did not want apartments in.her back Bill McCann, 428 Tanner Lane, suggested that they deny the request without prejudice, and perhaps waive the appeal fee to the City Council, so the matter Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -5 -77 Page 3 could be appealed to the City Council. _ After further discussion, GoMmissioner "`Cole''moved that the recommended conditions on Lot Split Case No. 77 -262 be approved; the motion died for lack of a second. The Chairman declared the motion to have failed and noted that in 30 days from the date of filing the map would be deemed approved, noting that the petitioner could withdraw his appeal to the City Council. The Architectural Approval of the development and the Request for Negative Declar- ation were not considered. ;..:;;; -..._ PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING CASE NO. 77 -100, SOUTH SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY CITIZENS FACILITY, FROM "A" TO "P -D" The Chairman stated that the staff had recommended that the public hearing on this item be opened, without public input, and continued until the EIR is ready for consideration. The staff also recommended that the Request for Nega- tive Declaration be denied, with the request that an EIR be prepared. Planning Aide Sullivan noted that the County is already in the process of preparing the EIR. After being assured by Planning Aide Sullivan that public hearing for the proposed rezoning had been properly advertised, posted, and property owners notified, Chairman Pope opened the public hearing. Howard Mankins, representing the applicant, asked why they could not approve the Negative Declaration for the rezoning, since the County is already doing an EIR on the planned development and it is practically finished. Plan- ning Aide Sullivan replied that this is normal City procedure in a planned development. Bruce Dodson, architect for the applicant, said that the EIR would then be addressing itself to the rezoning rather than to the master plan; Chair- man Pope replied that it would not. Mr. Mankins said they accepted that this was City policy, it just seemed to be wasting time. After further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -509 EIR RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING A " REQUEST 'FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND REQUIRING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT. On motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Cole, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Hitchen, Moots, and Chairman Pope NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Mathews and Ries the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 5th day of April 1977. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING CASE NO. 77 -101, BRANCH MILL ROAD., FROM "A" AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT. TO "A -D" AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT WITH A " -D" OVERRIDE TO PROVIDE A BASIC 5 ACRE MINIMUM PARCEL SIZE (GREENWOOD) COMMISSIONER MOOTS EXCUSED HIMSELF DUE TO A POSSIBLE CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND IS NOW ABSENT. Chairman Pope noted that the Commission had previously approved a lot split on this parcel. Since that time, the citizens of the area got a petition together, which Mr. Greenwood agreed to, requesting the " -D" override. Planning Aide Sullivan noted that basically the " -D" override is to keep the four parcels as close to 5 acres as possible and not allow them to resplit. After being assured by Planning Aide Sullivan that the request for rezoning had been properly advertised, posted, and property owners notified, Chairman Pope opened the public hearing. Bill McCann, 428 Tanner Lane, said he was in favor of the requested rezoning. 349 350 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -5 -77 Page 4 Fred Steele, 1598 Hillcrest, said the public had gone to a.big effort and spent money, and he felt that it was up to the staff not to allow .a'slip up like this to come through. He also felt that the property owner might have taken the initiative if the staff had advised him. He said the staff is working for the public and they wanted the full benefit of the staff's knowledge and effort. Chairman Pope noted that if the present owner sells the parcels, the new owner(s) could come in and request another zone change. After further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -510 Z RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT 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 Hitchen, seconded by Commissioner Cole, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Hitchen, and Chairman Pope NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Mathews and Ries ABSTAINING: Commissioner Moots the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 5th day of April 1977. COMMISSIONER MOOTS REENTERED THE MEETING AND IS NOW PRESENT. LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 77 -264, 1169 MAPLE STREET (CURTIS) - REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AND REQUEST FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION Planning Aide Sullivan noted that this is technically a lot line adjustment. The owner was requesting that a 25 ft. flag be created, rather than the existing 50 ft. flag. He reviewed the recommended conditions of the lot split. Chairman Pope asked for public input; there was none. Jerry Bowser, 510 Woodland, engineer for the developer, questioned Item 3 of the Review Committee Action, which required undergrounding of utilities to all new construction and to the existing house. He said the owner had told him that the two parcels get their utilities from different streets, and they re- quested that they not have to underground the utilities to the existing house. After discussion, on motion by Commissioner Gerrish, seconded by Commissioner Cole, and unanimously carried, the Review Committee Action was amended on Item 3 to read that if the power source for Parcel B is on Maple Street, the utilities for Parcel A and Parcel B must be undergrounded; if Parcel B is served by a utility easement other than on Maple Street, Parcel A can remain with the existing service and Parcel B must be undergrounded. Chairman Pope asked for public input on the Request for Negative Declaration; there was none. After a brief discussion, the following action was taken: NONE: ABSENT: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -511 EIR RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION. On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Gerrish, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Hitchen, Moots, and Chairman Pope None Commissioners Mathews and Ries. the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 5th day of April 1977. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -5 -77 Page 5 STAFF REPORT ON PARKING REQUIREMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Chairman Pope noted that the staff has recommended that a public hearing be held on a change which they have proposed to the Zoning Ordinance. Planning Aide Sullivan reviewed the proposed change, which consisted of changing the parking requirement for lodges, clubs, community centers, churches, etc. from one (1) parking space for each 31/2 fixed seats, but not less than one (1) space for each 15 sq. ft. of the largest meeting room, to one (1) parking space for each 25 sq. ft. of the congregational seating area. He added that the staff felt this revision would be more just and stillmeet the needs of the City. After discussion, the Chairman ordered this item to be placed on the agenda for the next regular meeting of the Commission. REVIEW USE PERMIT CASE NO. 76 -249, 1524 GRAND AVENUE, AUCTION SALE OF FURNITURE AND ANTIQUES (GARRISON) Chairman Pope noted that the use permit had been granted to Mr. Garrison, with a condition of review in 6 months. During that time, the use permit has not been used, and the staff recommended the use permit be extended for another 6 months. It would then run out if it is not utilized. Planning Aide Sullivan added that the petitioner, Mr. Garrison, has made considerable effort to meet the conditions placed on the use permit. After discussion, on motion by Com- missioner Gerrish, seconded by Commissioner Moots., and unanimously carried, Use Permit Case No. 76 -249 was extended for six months. MODIFICATION OF JAMES WAY ALIGNMENT AND OAK PARK ACRES DEVELOPMENT Larry Rohloff, of Ghormley Engineering, engineers for Oak Park Acres, displayed maps and cross - sections of the proposed intersection of James Way and Oak Park Boulevard. He stated there was an alignment problem in the area of Lots 4, 5, 6 and Oak Park. Bou1evardhey were proposing the re- alignment of James Way to the north about 700 ft. of. the original site. This would place James Way between Lots 5 and 6, rather than between Lots 4 and 5. He said they had met with a hydrology consultant and members of the City staff, and all felt that this realignment was the best solution to several problems they were experiencing. He reviewed the changes this would incur in cut and fill, etc. RESOLUTION NO. 77 -512 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT. TO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP #604; FOR THE REALIGNMENT OF A PORTION OF JAMES WAY,_ On motion by Commissioner Hitchen, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Hitchen, Moots and Chairman Pope NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Mathews and Ries the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 5th day of April 1977. Mr. Rohloff said he would like to say that when the development gets into the commercial frontages, there will be, as a matter of necessity, some grading involved. Chairman Pope noted there would be a public hearing on each parcel through the use permit procedure. WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE Resignation of Commissioner Mathews - Chairman Pope noted that he had received a letter from Commissioner Mathews, dated April 4, addressed to the Mayor He stated that Mr. Mathews had dedicated many years to the Commission He recommended that the City Council prepare the necessary documents recognizing Mr. Mathews' service to the City, and accept his resignation. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. Madeleine Steele, 1598 Hillcrest, said it appeared that someone on the staff was watching out for the public in general in the concerns that had been expressed 351 352 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -5 -77 before for minimum grading on Oak Park Acres, and she thanked them. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Commission adjourned at 8:48 P.M. ATTEST : pd Secretary Page 6