HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 1973-05-15492
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission
May 15, 1973
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with
Chairman Jones presiding. Present are Commissioners Calhoon, Gullickson,
Pope and Spierling. Commissioners Goulart and Porter are absent. Also in
attendance are City Administrator Butch, City Engineer Gering, Director of
Public Works Anderson, and Planning Director Gallop.
MINUTE APPROVAL
On motion by Commissioner Gullickson, seconded by Commissioner
Spierling, and unanimoulsy carried, the minutes of the regular meeting of
May 1, 1973 were approved as prepared.
CONTINUATION m PROPOSED TALLY HO ROAD PLAN LINE
City Engineer Garing stated that he has a financial interest in a
parcel of property on Tally Ho Road and, therefore, felt it would be better
if he did not discuss the Plan Line.
Public Works Director Anderson, in discussing the proposed plan line,
suggested that the easterly straight portion of the street commencing at the
easterly edge of Mr. Cook's property on the south side, and the beginning of
the curve on the north side, be considered, and leave the curved section of
the street to Le Point for further design and engineering consideration.
Mr. Cook, 160 Tally Ho Road, asked why the City wanted to delete
that area of the Plan Line. Mr. Anderson stated that he felt the northerly
side was the most important because of problems with drainage and traffic
capacity, and that the whole road needs designing in that area. He pointed
out that the City can't develop a grade until they know where the right- of-way
is going to be and what kind of a road section they are going to have.
COUNCILMAN MILLIS ENTERED THE MEETING
Mr. Anderson pointed out that there are too many problems in the
curve area to try to establish a plan line at this time, and he did not
think there would be any further development that would encroach on the turn.
Commissioner Spierling stated he was concerned about the slope of the
driveway at 195 Tally Ho Road, and asked how much the plan line would move
the driveway back. Mr. Anderson advised that the two driveways are practically
inaccessible now, and the proposed plan line would move the property fine back
about 10', making the driveways more inaccessible than they are now. He stated
that new driveways would have to be developed and new access to;-the properties,
and he didn't feel we should sacrifice the whole road because /of two drive-
ways. Mr. Mark Strand, 191 Tally Ho Road, stated he has the property rented
to two boys and each have a car and he has not had any complaints from either
of them, and that if the plan line takes 10' off in front, it will be totally
inaccessible.
Chairman Jones declared the hearing reopened.
Mr. Harold Lee, 199 Tally Ho Road, stated he was also representing
property owners at 181 and 175 Tally Ho Road, and that the City has some
responsibility to the property owners in that the driveways were permitted
to be built and OK'd by City inspectors. He further stated that he felt
the people of Tally Ho Road have not had enough of a say in how or what should
be done and would like to request that there be a continuance and a more
representative study with the parties involved, and allow additional time to
study the plan line and make it more feasible, even if it doesn °t pertain to
the same straight direction, perhaps it could be made more of a curving road
and enable the street to be developed where it wouldn't affect the ingress
and egress of driveways if it were realigned to more suitably fit the needs
of the property owners involved.
Mrs. Mildred Logan, 195 Tally Ho Road, stated her driveway is very
steep and if the plan line is to move her property line back 10 °, this
would make the driveway impossible to use.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission; 5 -15 -73 Page 2
Mr. Chuck Reed, 150 Tally Ho Road, questioned as to why the 60° road-
way is needed. Mr. Anderson explained that a road is classified accord Ong to
the amount of traffic it will carry, and this road is classified as a corle ctor
road, with 44' improved width curb to curb and two 8° sidewalk areas. He stated
with regard to the curved portion of the road, they are proposing a 28° curb to
curb width, a 3' sidewalk area on the inside, and a 5° sidewalk area on the out-
side of the curve, with no parking.
Mr. Vincent Lechner, 331 Tally Ho Road, stated it seems this would make
an attractive road from Highway 227, running traffic to this bottleneck, and"
felt the two lane road with sidewalks right next to them would be more dangerous.
He stated with regard to drainage; he didn't think. it would chhange the water
problem and referred to a statement from the Engineers who made a study of the
water problem, that the water comes from outside the area.
Mr. Cook inquired if the City would have any objection to this group
bringing in a competent engineer to work in conjunction with Mr. Anderson to
solve,this simple problem. Mr. Chuck Reed stated he received a call from`Mr:
O'Neil, who is one of the property owners on the curve, requesting him to "
advise the Commission that he is opposed to the plan,line. Mr. Mike Duckworth,
136 Tally Ho Road, stated he is opposed to the plan line. Mr. John Sprague,
212 Tally Ho Road, stated he has some large pine trees in front of his property
and would not want to lose them, and inquired as to who is going to pay for all
of these improvements. Mr. Anderson stated that at the present time, the City
has no plans for financing or building this road, but what they are trying to
do now is formulate some kind of plan so that they have a way to go and protect
the plan for future improvement.
Mr. Lee inquired if the property owners could have as much as 90 days
in order to come to some agreement on a plan to submit to the Planning
Commission. Mr. Anderson explained that next winter we are going to have some
more problems, and if development does come on the north side of Tally Ho Road,
the City is going to have to have some kind of guide in there. Mrs. Elizabeth
Jackson, 998 Sycamore Drive, commented that if there were going to be problems
this winter coming up because of possible development, that until the drainage
is solved, suggested that the City not grant any more permits in that area.
Director Gallop advised that to deny a property owner the use of his property
could leave the City open to lawsuit.'
Mr. Lyon, 168 Tally Ho Road, inquired if it is mandatory to put in
sidewalks, and felt that curb and gutter would solve the flooding problem.
Mr. Anderson stated that curb and gutter would help the flooding and will
protect the surfacing, and that with a building permit, the City does re-
quire that curb, gutter and sidewalks be installed. He further stated that
sidewalks are necessary to give the children a place to walk; you can't
have children walking In the driving lane of the street. Because of the
hill and the narrow roadway and the 40' width, what we propose is a 28' curb
to curb width and a 5' sidewalk on one side only in the curve area. We
do need a sidewalk and we do need the two driving lanes.
In answer to Commissioner Gullickson's question regarding existing
plan lines on Lopez Drive, Halcyon, Elm Street and Cherry Avenue, Mr.
Anderson stated that Cherry Avenue has been plan lined for two years;
Halcyon has been plan lined for about 10 years; Elm Street had been plan
lined for 8 or 9 years; and Lopez Drive plan lined for 4 or 5 years. He
again advised that plan lines are mandatory If there is any development
adjacent to the road because If people start building, then the City is
going to be purchasing the structures.
With reference to the curve 'area, Mr. Cook stated he has seen hills
ten times that large,and particularly 'referred to Lopez Drive to Lopez Lake,
taken down and graded down. Mr. Duckworth, 136 Tally Ho Road, inquired if
there will be any zoning change on Tally Ho Road? Chairman Jones advised
that we are not planning any zone change on Tally Ho Road right now; some -
one may come In tomorrow and request a building permit.
Mr. Reed advised that he had a registered civil= engineer take
samples of this hill and advised It would be no problem at all moving the
hill. He Inquired If the property owners could get together with a civil
engineer and he gives an opinion, would the City consider the opinion?
493
494
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 - 15 - 73 Page 3
Mr. Anderson pointed out that he never stated the hill could not be moved; there
would be some difficulty and it would be very expensive. All the City is trying
to do is work out something that is reasonable; both economically and - safe.
Mr. Lee again inquired if they could be granted a 90 day continuation,
stating he felt the people on Tally Ho Road haven °t been taken into consideration
enough and would like to submit a plan of their own to be appraised by their
engineers and the Planning Commission, and if 90 days is not possible, they
would be very happy to have 60 days.
Commissioner Gullickson remarked it was his understanding that if a man
owns a piece of ground and applies for a building permit, the City can't refuse
to give him a building permit, and inquired if there are any steps that can be
taken now to say we don't want to ;issue building permits in that area right now.
Director Gallop pointed out that the City would have no basis for denying the
people the use of, their property, and the City would be open to lawsuit if this
action were taken.
Commissioner Pope stated he didn't see any way that the City is going
to be able to go in and do any drainage work, and suggested the Chair entertain
a motion that this be delayed for a 60 day period for further evaluation.
Mr. Anderson commented that the reason the City put this plan line up
for consideration was to give the people in the area a chance to revrew it and
see if we can't come up with a reasonable solution, and perhaps working with a
citizen's group to develop a plan line that will result in a safe street for
the area.
Mrs. Jane Frisby inquired that if it might be 10 years before all of this
comes about, does that mean it will be 10 years before anything can be done about
the drainage, and if there was any connection between this plan line and the
proposed housing development on Tally Ho Road. Mr. Anderson replied that the
only thing that does influence this plan is that there is some vacant property
in there that is going to rely on Tally Ho Road for access. Mrs. Frisby asked
who Tally Ho Enterprises is and who wished to put in a housing development
right in a natural drainage channel? City Engineer Gering stated that he is
involved in Tally Ho Enterprises.
Mrs. Betty Reed, 150 Tally Ho Road, stated she couldn't see why park-
ing lanes are needed; everyone has plenty of driveways to accommodate their
own cars and their guests. Chairman Jones pointed out that all City streets
have parking lanes available.
No further discussion for or against the proposed Tally Ho Road Plan
Line, Chairman Jones declared the hearing closed.
On motion by Commissioner Spierling, seconded by Commissioner Pope,
and unanimously carried, that the citizens of the Tally Ho Road area be per-
mitted to hire an engineer at their own expense to work with the City staff
to develop an acceptable alternate plan line and to work out recommendations
to this Commission prior to July 15th of this year. Director Gallop advised
that the hearing has been closed, and that a new public hearing can be called
based upon new evidence presented. Commissioner Pope explained to the
audience that the motion presented allows a postponement of the Planning"
Commission decision until the property owners on Tally Ho Road have had an
opportunity to seek outside advice and meet with the engineering staff of
the City to come up with a proposal by July 15th so that a decision can be
made at that time.
Director Gallop advised that the matter would be on the Agenda for
the second meeting in July.
CAL POLY EXTENSION COURSE
Director Gallop referred to a letter sent to the Commission with
their agenda from Cal Poly regarding a planning course to be considered
and to be oriented primarily toward Planning Commission members. He pointed
out that at this point they are merely asking for an expression as to how
many people might be interested in taking this course. The Planning
Commissioners present indicated an interest in such a course, depending
on what evening the course would be scheduled.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5- 15 -73 Page 4
DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR SUNRISE TERRACE MO,BILEHOME PARK FORMERLY "CUE'PO VISTA"
MOBILEHOME PARK
Director Gallop pointed out that several weeks ago the Planning Commission
reviewed the status of the mobilehome park on Valley Road, and that the Developer,
Mr. H. C. Elliott, comes before the Commission now with the fiial development plans
in compliance with the requirement set out under Item 25, Resolution No. 72 -244 U,
adopted March 7, 1972, and that landscaping plans are still to be presented to the
Commission for their consideration. He advised there is a change in the develop-
ment plans between what was approved in March of 1972 and the plan which is before
the Commission now, and that a change is acceptable providing ehe change is better
than that which was originally approved by the Commission. The alternate plan
being presented tonight is based upon the outline adopted by Resolution No.
72 -244 U, but is a refinement of it. He 'stated that there is a maximum of 300
lots permitted on the original Use Permit.
Mr. Harry Elliott, subdivider from Walnut Creek, explained that he had
retained Mr. George Kemmeny to do a refinement of the original plan, in that it
did not take care of the natural contour of the ground. He explained the changes
to the original plan and the reasons for such changes. He advised the storage
was enlarged and put up in n more remote area of the park, making It a safer
storage area and keeping the boats, trailers, etc. away from the front of the
park. He pointed out they tried to take as much advantage of the view of the
valley as possible, and have provided for another small laundry area.
Mr. George Kemmeny, Engineer, Tustin, California, pointed out that the
original lots were too small for the coaches they wish to accommodate; that the
drainage channel is 4' deep and 40' wide so it is not dangerous; and that the
plan provides the same number of lots but they are taking the whole area into
consideration, which means the iota are larger.
It was pointed out that Valley Road is presently a 50' right - of-way
and that it will be increased to an 80' right -of -way. Mr. Kemmeny pointed
out there will be parking along the concrete curbs because the street is 32'
wide, and all interior streets are one way streets to reduce the traffic.
Chairman Jones stated that on the previous plan there was a great deal of
off - street parking and on this plan they have on- street parking. Director
Gallop pointed out that they have supplemented more on- street parking by
widening the street than was on the original plan. He further noted that
he liked the transfer of the storage area to the top of the hill, providing
there Is screening planted so that it is not visible from Valley Road or
abutting properties, and the screening will come up in the landscaping plan.
A rendering of the recreation building was presented, and Director Gallop
stated it was a rather impressive building with the open heavy beam construc-
tion.
As there was no further discussion, on motion by Commissioner
Splerling, seconded by Commissioner Calhoon, and unanimously carried, that
the Plans dated April 1973 be accepted as prepared and supersede previous
plans, and that the requirements of the Development Plans in Item 25,
Resolution No. 72 -244 U, have boon compiled with.
ABANDONMENT OF . "JOE" STREET
Director Gallop advised that the abandonment of "Joe" Street is a
recommendation from the Subdivision Review Board to the Cornmisslon,as a
result of a Lot Split consideration on property below and southerly of
what.would be the extension of Joe Street. He pointed out that the ele-
vation differential between the existing portion of the street at Montego
and a projected street from the south would require an exceedingly steep
grade and probably would have a very definite adverse affect on the de
velopment of the properties on either side of the street extension.
If the street is not built, then there would be no need of this
"stub ", and it should be disposed of to eliminate maintenance,.and ' it
would also provide a building site to whomever the title were to revert
to. Mr. Anderson noted that it may be necessary to retain a public
utility easement along one side of this street for drainage and perhaps
other uses.
After discussion, on motion by Commissioner Gullickson, seconded
by Commissioner Pope, and unanimously carried, that a public hearing be
set for consideration of the disposal of "Joe" Street.
496
7r
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5-15-73 Page 5
ABSENCE OF COMMISSIONER GULLICKSON
Commissioner Gullickson informed the Commission that he would be out
of town for the next five weeks.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, on motion by
Commissioner Spierling, seconded by Commissioner Calhoon, and unanimously
carried, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M.
ATTEST: