Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 1976-04-06224 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission April 6, 1976 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Vice Chairman Moots presiding. Present were Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Mathews, Ries, and Sandoval. There is one vacancy existing on the Commission Also present were Planning Director: Gallop, City Administrator Butch, City Engineer Garcia, Public Works Director Anderson, and Councilman Millis„ MINUTE AP PROVAL There being no corrections or additions, Vice Chairman Moots approved the minutes as prepared,. RUTH ANN WAY " -D" OVERRIDE - HEIGHT LIMITATIONS Director Gallop stated that the Commission had considered a " -D" override for height limitations in the Ruth Ann Way Subdivision about a year ago, He said that this would be an agend4 item for the next regular meeting,. and, if ,the_ Commission approves at that tin ; .thy', public- hearing would be set for the first meeting in May, LOOMIS HEIGHTS CC &R'S Planning Director Gallop stated that the Commission had received a copy of the proposed CC &R's for the Loomis Heights Subdivision with their agenda material,.. He noted that these are restrictions which a developer or subdivider may put on his property which are over and above those put on by the City through zoning ordinances., The Subdivision Review. Board requested that the Commission review these conditions as, part of the approval of this development. He added that he was concerned over the relinquishment of con- trols from Mr, Miller to new property owners as parcels are sold. He had also made two changes, noted in pencil, One was a change in terminology and one.referred to the size of trees; both changes appeared in Section 3..04, He stated that th^ title company had made a few changes, and that they approved the conditions for recordation, He added that the City does not enforce the CC&R's; these are additional restrictions enforced by the property- owners of the development, Commissioner Mathews moved that the size of the trees, as noted in Section 3:04, be changed from six (6) to four (4) inches; and that the word "may" in the same section be changed to "shall''; and that aft°.r the sale of nine lots, one owner join with Mr Miller in approval of development, after the sale of 15-18 lots, a second owner join, and upon the sale of 22 -25 lots, full approval is given to the home owners, The motion was seconded by Com- missioner Gerrish, and unanimously carried, MONTEREY PLANNING SEMINAR Director Gallop asked any members wishing to attend the Monterey County Planning Seminar to notify him as soon as possible so that reserva- tions and transportation could be arranged. NEW COMMISSION MEMBER Hugh Or Pope, Jr, was introduced to the Commission and the public as the new Commissioner. He will be formally seated at the April 20 meeting.. PUBLIC HEARING - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR OAK PARK ACRES Vice Chairman Moots noted that the Commission was just going to consider public input on the E,I.R.; they could not make any decision on the pending zone change or Tentative Map. Therefore, he asked the public to only speak on the E.I,R. Planning Director Gallop introduced Mr, Mackey Deasy and Ms. Beth. Hobbs, of Meyer, Merriam, and Associates, the firm which prepared the Oak Park Acres E.:I..,R . .Mr., Deasy then.briefly reviewed the highlights, of._the report. He stated that the Commission.was,reviewing a Draft,E „I,R which had been prepared over a period of about four months, The reason a draft is prepared is to provide an informational and factual document for review by the public and various other interested agencies,. The final E,I„R, will only be issued'upon a finding by the Commission that Draft is adequate and that all public input is encor- porated< All written.submissions by the public would become an appendix to the document. He stated that his agency had no interest -in the development; basically, they were acting as a consultant to the City, Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4-6 -76 Page 2 Mr, Deasy stated that the report is divided into three sections; the first is intended to describe the project itself (in this case, a "P - zone and development), the second part is a description of the environmental settings, and the third part is the impact of the project. He stated that basically there are fifteen lots, with a total of 251 residences being permitted, .Approximately 37 acres are planned for commercial use; however, a large amount of dila, would not be developed with buildings because of other restrictions such astopography. He said that the area was found to be fairly sensitive with regard-to the oak trees, however, the Planning Commission has methods whereby they could place conditions on the subdivision to preserve the trees. He added that there was some, concern with the soils in the area as far as septic tank leach'fields were concerned, However, through further investigation, if septic tanksdo not prove to be feasible for any part of the development, it is possible to hook up to the sewer system, He stated the main other factor of importance is the topography; a considerable amount of the area is in 'steep sloPee'. How- ever, development of these areas will be restricted•so that will not be allowed on the slopes, All cuts and fills are planned for five ; feet or less; there should not be a significant effect if this is achieved, Mr, Deasy said another important area was the hydraulogy of the area. The drainage-structure under the freeway may not be adequate by today's ': standards. A method of dealing with this is to create some method of maintaining th e water on the property and letting it off slowly. He stated that if the project is implemented, the loss of agricultural land is not a significant impact. The land is marginal grazing land, and grazing is perpetuated, it could aggravate the serious erosion problem Mr, Deasy also reviewed the report with regard to scenic value, commercial uses planned, mitigation measures, the traffic and circulation aspectsand economic growth related to the project. With regard to the growth inducing impact, he stated "that` 'number ' of units is not relatively large when compared to the acreage Mr, Deasy then referred to the letters received from the public; `He stated that several of the letters had said there had not been any public input received before preparing the report, He explained that this was what;. the public hearing was for, and that these letters would become part of the final report. Also, a letter had been received from Grover City; some people had expressed con- cern over that city's reactions to the. project. With regard to the school:prob- lem which several persons had mentioned, he felt that the E.I.R. acknowledged that there is a problem. However, the fact is that Arroyo Grande is'leas4a contributor to the problem than other areas in the County, and the report brings this out, This project will net be the only one aggravating the problem. Carolyn Moffatt, Noyes Road, said that most people in the Noyes; and Oak Park area use Noyes Road to get to San Luis Obispo. She felt; -that the poeple from the proposed development would probably work in San Luis Obispo and would also use this road. She said the road is not adequate to handle: ".this traffic, 'Mr. Deasy said it is difficult to predict where these new people 'will work; however, if there is a problem, the best thing to do would be totatk to the County, as this is a County road. Mrs. Moffatt also asked how a golf course could be Out in a flood plain. Mr, Deasy replied that this is often done;; it is the most economically feasible use, and lowers the degree of loss of roperty and persons, Mrs. Moffatt also expressed concern over the school pro iem,•'`she felt the report didn't offer any solutions. She also asked for clarifircation of the map in regard to how the residential portion is related to the ;c_ommercial portion on Oak Park Boulevard. William Langworthy, Printz Road, said that it seemed to him that the traffic, analysis was inadequate in that it did not take into account ' probable traffic patterns. He felt that Noyes Road was already hazardous, and, this`pro posed project would have an added impact on the road. He felt that the report should also consider the impact on Oak Park Boulevard across the freeway from the proposed project. Mr. Deasy said they would be willing to expand the'traffic analysis to account for the traffic on Oak Park Boulevard approaching Grover City, and Noyes Road between Oak Park Boulevard. and Highway 227. However, this would mean a lot;;of assumptions that might not be valid„ Mr. Langworthy alsp;eaid he 225 226 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -6 -76 Page 3 felt that the rural community outside the City Limits will be affected in subtle ways by the project. He expressed concern over the amount of commercial being proposed. He stated he felt that the report presented a sound picture of the school system. However, he questioned the use of the figure used for potential school -age children in the residential- agricultural section of the project. He added that he felt the district's bussing system was at capacity now, He suggested requesting the developer to provide a school site. He also questioned how James Way is going to cross the swale. He felt this was of enough impact to merit some consideration. He suggested that prior to the map's approval, a tentative grading map be required, Mr. Langworthy found fault with the report with regard to the economic analysis. He said he believed that the original resolution requiring the E.I.R. also required a report on the impact such a project would have on services and City budgets. He felt it was not clear who would pay for various capital items involved, such as water pressurized systems, or sewer lines. He strongly urged that there be developed a phasing agreement which would lead to development of some of the residential land before, or concurrent . with, the commercial land; he felt this would be to the City's best interests. Carol Hirons, Oak Park Boulevard, asked if the traffic analysis took into account the type of traffic in that area: jogging, bicycles, etc., and if pro - visions are being made so that those now using the road can continue to do so safely. Mr. Deasy said that the road would be a 44 -ft. section. This would provide for two travel lanes. What happened to the excess roadway would be determined by the City. This was not included under the mitigation measures. Mrs. Hirons asked if the .E.I.R. was recommending against the proposed golf course. Mr. Deasy said that it did not; all the report said was the golf course would have some impacts, as would any development. Mrs. Hirons than asked how much historical data was done on the flood plain area. Mr. Deasy replied that they used an ex- ceptionally heavy rainfall year figure. Mrs. Hirons asked about the section in the report which stated that in consideration of the property as permanent open space, there are other more valuable sites that could be preserved; she asked where this information had been received, and what sites did the report refer to. Mr. Deasy said that there was no definite list, but that there are other areas of greater interest, such as Pismo Lake. She then asked how much it would cost to buy this proposed project. Mr. Deasy said he did not have the assessed . or appraised figures for the property. Mrs. Hirons added that she felt that the phasing plan of developing first along Oak Park Boulevard was the best way to create an island of development; and, therefore, should not be done. Peggy Langworthy,,Printz Road, commented on the fact that many people use this area to get . to the County dump, and that consequently there is a great deal of debris in the area, Mr. Deasy referred to page 43 of the report, which recommends that a mandatory trash pickup be included in the CC &R's in order to avoid a public nuisance or adverse impact on the environment. Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fairview, said she felt that the term "commercial use" was far too vague. She asked for clarification of what was intended for this area. Mr. Deasy stated that the developer may not know exactly what he wants for the area. He reviewed some of the suggested uses for each of the parcels. Mrs. Jackson also asked if the development would be using sewers or septic tanks. Mr. Deasy said that they had a letter from the County Health Department, which is of the opinion that sewers should be provided. However, there is no substantiation for this with tests, etc. Whatever the tests showed, the development would have to meet the Health Department's standards, which could be'veiy expensive, and it might be more economical to connect to the sewer. Director Gallop said there had been no decision made as to what method would be used; this would need a soils report first. Mrs. Jackson asked if allowing septic: tanks in this area .would .set a precedence, as the City re- quired all homes within the City Limits to hook to the sewer system, City Engineer Garcia explained that the City only requires those within .250 feet of an existing line to hook up, Those more than 250 feet away may remain on septic tanks until such a time as a line is provided. Whether or not this development is required to hook-onto the sewer system will depend on where the lines are placed, and if the City requires lines to be extended; this would be determined from a soils report, Madeleine•Steele, 1598 Hillcrest, had two commendations for the E.I,R. The first.was that it recommended that the amount of commercial acreage be cut down. The second.was .the refusal to let just the commercial area be 1 1 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -6 -76 Page .4 developed and sold, and then let the residential be developed when it could. She added that she would like to see the report changed to something other than just "some" visual. impact. She felt the impact would be great. Mr. Deasy said that a lot could be done to mitigate the visual impact by specific site planning, Mrs. Steele also expressed concern over the tchool district problem. She felt that the district as a whole was in . trouble and Arroyo Grande should not add to the problem. Bart Stryker, the engineer for the proposed project, stated that they did not plan to just leave the map as submitted for the E.I.R. They would take into account the public input as well as the suggestions made in the report itself. He said one of the major concerns appeared to be the size of the commercial area, and they did plan to reduce this. Also, much of this is . in slope area and will not be developed. As one of the means of mitigating the impact on the swamp area, they had decided to eliminate the golf course, and consequently the clubhouse, Therefore, they would have to reevaluate this area. Regarding Grover City's concern about the downstream discharges, they planned to handle this through the use of the marshlands and flood plain as retarding basins, designed for a fifty to a hundred yearrstorm. He added that the grazing or an equestrian area would probably be left on the map for the flood plain. He said he felt that the erodability of the soil could be handled through proper velocity: outlet structures and rock structures. Wallace Helmuth, Los Berros Road, said he felt that the people should be concerned about the development going on in the County, which was causing a greater effect on the schools than that in Arroyo Grande. There being no further discussion for or against the Oak Park Acres Environmental Impact Report, the public hearing was closed. The Planning Director noted an error on the map on page Lot 9 should show 35 dwelling units on 19.9 acres, not 3.5. He there would probably be some recommendations from the staff to some of the density in view of the E.I.R. and the public input. staff had always been, concerned about the•commercial, area, and. tainly reconsider it, however, because of the topography, the shown for commercial could not be utilized, He added that fina E.I.R. by the Commission . could not take place until the first m since the State Clearing House action on all State agencies has until April 29. .After the State remarks are received, then the take any necessary action. It can adopt the draft E.I.R.,as. it any changes deemed necessary. 4 of the report,;: stated that redistribute He stated the they would.,cer- total acreage l action; 'eu the eeting in May not been set Commission can is, or make After a brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Ries, seconded by. Commissioner Cole, and unanimously carried, the Commission decided to have a study session on the E.I.R. following the next regular Commission meeting, and asked that representatives from Meyer, Merriam, and Associates be present at that time, Commissioner Ries noted that the public hearing could be reopened at any time upon unanimous approval of the Commission. Vice Chairman Moots suggested that anyone wishing to have additional input should submit it in writing to the Planning Department prior to May 9. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission, on .a motion by Commissioner Mathews, seconded by. Commissioner Sandoval, and unanimously carried, the Commission adjourned at 9:37 P.M. .. ATTEST: Secretary Vice Chairman 227