HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2026-05-12_10a Public Art 227 East Branch StreetItem 10.a.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Andrew Perez, Interim Director of Community Development
BY: Shayna Sutherland, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Architectural Review 25-004; Public Art on Private Property; Location
– 227 East Branch Street
DATE: May 12, 2026
RECOMMENDATION:
1) Adopt a Resolution approving Architectural Review 25-004 for a proposed mural at 227
East Branch Street; and
2) Find that the project is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 for minor alterations to existing
structures.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
No financial impact is projected.
BACKGROUND:
The applicant, Village Creative, proposes to paint a mural on the painted brick façade
along the east side of the building located at 227 E. Branch St, located at the northwest
corner of the intersection of E. Branch Street and Mason Street (Attachment 2). The
proposed mural meets the definition of public art and is subject to the City’s Public Art
Guidelines and Public Art Donation Program1 (“the Guidelines”).
The Guidelines were most recently updated on May 14th2, 2024, when the City Council
adopted Resolution 5358. The stated purpose of the Guidelines is to establish a
framework to facilitate and encourage property owners to provide outdoor public art. The
Guidelines define "Public Art" as art located either:
1. On private property with a non-residential land use that is visible from a public
right-of-way or public property; or
2. In the adjacent public right of way; or
1 https://arroyogrande.org/documentcenter/view/1690
2 https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=10890
Page 202 of 335
Item 10.a.
City Council
Architectural Review 25-004; Public Art on Private Property; Location – 227 East
Branch Street
May 12, 2026
Page 2
3. On property owned or managed by the City of Arroyo Grande (City), that is openly
displayed to the public without charge.
The Guidelines establish the City's goals regarding art that is publicly displayed and
accessible to the public. The City recognizes that art and artistic expression are protected
activities, and these Guidelines are not intended to unduly restrict creative expression or
limit the types of public art possible. Rather, they are intended to facilitate and encourage
the best possible combination of sites and artwork and help to guide what is essentially a
form of communication between the artist and the community.
The Guidelines also describe the approval process and selection criteria for public art
proposals. Under the amended guidelines, all public art projects require review by the
Architectural Review Committee (ARC), which makes a recommendation to the City
Council. Decisions by the City Council shall be based on compliance with the selection
criteria.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
Project Description
The project proposes the installation of a mural on the painted brick façade along the east
side of the building at 227 East Branch Street. The artwork would extend across the full
length of the complex, which consists of two structures connected by a private courtyard,
and would cover approximately 760 square feet.
The artwork features seven figures engaged in various creative activities, including
playing musical instruments, sewing, painting, and photography. The composition is
unified by a continuous linework element that symbolizes the shared connection and
community inspired by creativity. The mural is composed of simple black linework against
the existing painted brick building façade, which is currently teal on the northern portion
of the structure and an off-white on the section closest to the intersection. If the mural is
approved, the teal portion will be repainted to match the off-white color prior to painting
the mural. A rendering of the proposed mural can be viewed below, and as Attachment
3.
Page 203 of 335
Item 10.a.
City Council
Architectural Review 25-004; Public Art on Private Property; Location – 227 East
Branch Street
May 12, 2026
Page 3
Figure 1: Rendering of Proposed Mural
Review Process Under Public Art Guidelines
Following an initial determination on the completeness of the application by the
Community Development Department, the ARC reviews all public art applications and
makes a recommendation to the City Council. The Selection Criteria, which both ARC
and the City Council use to review applications, are discussed below.
Architectural Review Committee (ARC)
The ARC reviewed the proposal at the regular meeting on December 15, 20253. The
Committee was supportive of the prominent location and the intent to create public art
that reflects the community’s tradition of live music and the arts. The ARC commented4
that the family-friendly art style is approachable and appropriate for a highly visible area
frequented by children, young families, and the broader community.
3https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/Meeting.aspx?Id=c1ca4f99-c942-4ff7-844e-
15033902e140&lang=English&Agenda=Agenda&Item=14&Tab=attachments
4 https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=16697
Page 204 of 335
Item 10.a.
City Council
Architectural Review 25-004; Public Art on Private Property; Location – 227 East
Branch Street
May 12, 2026
Page 4
During its review, concerns were expressed regarding imagery that may relate to services
offered by the business. Based on a prior interpretation of Selection Criterion 7.e of the
Guidelines, the Committee concurred with staff’s analysis that such imagery could be
construed as referencing on-site services and therefore conflict with the prohibition on
signage. Based on these findings, the ARC recommended denial of the proposal as
presented at the meeting.
Selection Criteria
The Guidelines state that certain selection criteria (the “Selection Criteria”) shall be the
basis for all decisions on public art applications. The first seven criteria apply to all public
art applications, and the final criterion is specific to proposals in the D -2.4 Historic
Character Overlay District. The Selection Criteria are as follows:
1. Evaluation of artistic excellence, examining:
a. The artist’s qualifications, including education, training, experience, body of
work, recognition of the artist, and the consistency of the artist’s
qualifications with the stated goals of the project;
b. The artist’s record of previous collaboration with other agencies,
organizations, artists, fabricators, or installers to achieve a successful result
in implementing the proposed project;
c. The artist’s experience working in the public realm;
d. To the extent applicable, the artist’s previous proven successful experience
in creating, producing or otherwise implementing projects similar to the one
proposed;
e. The original nature of the proposed concept;
f. The inherent artistic quality and aesthetic merit of the work;
2. Appropriateness of scale, form, material, content and design relative to the
immediate neighborhood and environment; no mural shall be approved if the
mural, as proposed, would create an objective risk to public health, safety, or
welfare (e.g. a mural near a roadway would be rejected for the use of reflective
materials, like mirrors, which could cause a distraction to drivers). Scale is defined
as the relative size of a building element in relation to other forms and the human
body. Form is the shape or configuration of the artwork;
3. Appropriateness of proposed materials in regard to structural and surface integrity.
Materials should be considered in the context of ability to deter against vandalism,
withstand weathering, and maintain the intended design;
4. Ease of maintenance and longevity of the proposed materials;
5. Appropriateness of the proposed method of installation of the artwork with
consideration given to the safety and structural factors involved in installation;
6. Location, considering the intended audience for the proposal, whether the public
will be a captive audience or whether a person would need to take affirmative steps
to view the project. Consideration shall be given to whether the mural would be in
an area typically accessed or viewable by m inors;
7. A mural shall not be approved if it includes:
Page 205 of 335
Item 10.a.
City Council
Architectural Review 25-004; Public Art on Private Property; Location – 227 East
Branch Street
May 12, 2026
Page 5
a. Copyrighted work without permission of the holder of the copyright.
b. Obscene materials.
c. Defamatory content.
d. Fighting words or advocates imminent lawless action.
e. Content, including but not limited to, words, symbols, signs, trademarks, or
references to products or services provided on the premises. Such content
meets the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code (AGMC) definition for signage, as
regulated by AGMC Chapter 16.60;
8. Public Art proposed in the D-2.4 Historic Character Overlay District is also subject
to the following criteria:
a. An identified relationship to the social, cultural, and historical identity of the
area;
b. An identified relationship to the site's existing architectural features;
c. The nature of the site's surrounding neighborhood and potential impact of
the public art project on residents, businesses, and existing works of art or
design elements within the site's vicinity.
Findings
Staff is able to make the required findings that the mural is consistent with the Selection
Criteria described by the Guidelines. Staff’s analysis of the findings is as follows:
1. The artwork was designed by Canned Pineapple Co., a studio based in Nashville,
Tennessee, that specializes in murals and large-scale artwork. The artist has
completed multiple installations within the Central Coast region, including in public
and high-visibility settings at Cal Poly and Duncan Alley. The studio has an
established portfolio of large-scale mural projects comparable in scope and
method to the proposed installation. Their previous work demonstrates experience
in designing, coordinating, and implementing public -realm projects, including
collaborations with property owners, agencies, and installation teams. The
submitted materials indicate a history of producing original designs and concepts
tailored to specific sites.
2. The mural would not create a risk to the health, safety, or welfare of the general
public. The mural does not include reflective or hazardous materials. In terms of
scale, the mural is proportionate to both the building façade and the surrounding
environment. The proposal is sized to be clearly visible and engaging for both
pedestrians and vehicles, including those idling at the prominent intersection of E.
Branch and Mason Streets. The dimensions are appropriate for the viewing
distance and speed of passersby, ensuring visibility without overwhelming the
architectural setting.
3. The mural is proposed to be hand-painted using durable exterior latex paint, a
material commonly used in public art installations due to its long-term performance
and relatively low maintenance needs.
4. The artist and property owner propose the use of durable exterior latex paint based
on the artist’s proven success with these materials in completing similar projects.
Exterior latex paint is suitable for outdoor murals due to its resistance to
Page 206 of 335
Item 10.a.
City Council
Architectural Review 25-004; Public Art on Private Property; Location – 227 East
Branch Street
May 12, 2026
Page 6
weathering. Additionally, the selected materials can be easily cleaned, touched up,
or refreshed if needed.
5. The proposed use of paint on the painted-brick exterior of the building is
appropriate and would not negatively impact the structural integrity of the building.
Installation of the proposed mural would likely require a temporary sidewalk
closure and rerouting of pedestrians, which would be assessed through an
encroachment permit.
6. The proposed location is situated at a highly visible intersection along Mason
Street at Branch Street, making it readily viewable to both vehicular and pedestrian
traffic. The intended audience includes members of the public who encounter the
mural in the course of their daily activities, rather than individuals who must take
affirmative steps to seek it out. Given that the site is an area commonly accessed
by a broad cross-section of the community, including minors, the content of the
mural was intentionally designed to be appropriate for all ages.
7. The mural does not include words, logos, symbols, or direct references to products
or services offered on the premises. While the image ry depicts general creative
activities such as music, visual art, and photography, these themes are broadly
interpretive and are not unique to the services offered by the business. The intent
and composition of the artwork are community-oriented and symbolic in nature,
and the imagery is not presented in a manner that functions as advertising or
signage, as defined by the Municipal Code. The mural is designed to be viewed as
public art independent of the continued presence of the business and is not
dependent on the identification of any specific service or program.
8. The proposed mural reflects themes of artistic expression, including music, visual
arts, and craftsmanship. These themes are consistent with the Village’s identity as
a pedestrian-oriented district with an established history of creative and cultural
activity. The artwork reinforces, rather than conflicts with, the area’s cultural
character by depicting community-based creative engagement.
The use of painted brick as a canvas is consistent with historic precedent for
painted wall graphics within commercial and mixed-use buildings in the area and
maintains the underlying architectural form and materials of the structure. The
mural is not anticipated to result in adverse impacts to surrounding uses, existing
artwork, or design elements in the vicinity. The scale, composition, and subject
matter are compatible with the pedestrian character of the area and are expected
to enhance visual interest within the public realm without introducing visual clutter
or inconsistency with nearby development.
The ARC had originally recommended denial at its December 15, 2025, meeting on the
basis of Criterion 7.e. On April 14, 2026, the City Council reviewed Architectural Review
25-005 for a separate mural proposal and had a robust discussion regarding the
interpretation of Selection Criterion 7.e. Although the ARC’s recommendation was based
on a strict interpretation of Criterion 7.e, staff ha ve reexamined the proposal in
Page 207 of 335
Item 10.a.
City Council
Architectural Review 25-004; Public Art on Private Property; Location – 227 East
Branch Street
May 12, 2026
Page 7
consideration of recent City Council action on Architectural Review 25-005 involving the
same criterion. In that case, the City Council approved the mural despite a
recommendation that the mural’s imagery could be interpreted as referencing products
sold on-site.
The imagery, which is interpretive and reflects general activities, such as music, art, and
photography, does not constitute signage, consistent with the Council discussion on April
14, 2026. While staff initially recommended denial during the ARC review process based
on a strict reading of Criterion 7.e, the City Council’s prior action provides relevant
direction supporting a more contextual interpretation. The proposed mural is community-
oriented and symbolic in nature and is not presented in a manner that promotes a specific
product or service.
In its review of the application, City Council shall consider any material submitted by the
applicant, city staff, the administrative record of the decision on the application, and
evidence presented at the hearing. The applicant shall be given a reasonable time to
present their case. Using the Selection Criteria as the basis for its decision, the City
Council may:
1. Request that the applicant clarify its proposal or redesign and resubmit its proposal
to ARC or City Council. If the City Council requests that the applicant resubmit the
proposal to ARC, the resubmitted proposal shall be reviewed as a new application;
or
2. Approve the proposal, providing a written explanation of the basis for approval
through the Selection Criteria; or
3. Deny the proposal, providing a written explanation of the basis for denial through
the Selection Criteria.
All decisions of the City Council are final and conclusive.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt the attached Resolution approving the project;
2. Direct the applicant to redesign and resubmit the project;
3. Do not adopt the prepared Resolution; or
4. Provide other direction to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
Approval of the application would result in the addition of public art at a highly visible
intersection within the Village, contributing to the visual character of the area and
reinforcing a sense of community identity. The mural would also activate an otherwise
blank façade and support the City’s goal of encouraging publicly accessible art.
Page 208 of 335
Item 10.a.
City Council
Architectural Review 25-004; Public Art on Private Property; Location – 227 East
Branch Street
May 12, 2026
Page 8
DISADVANTAGES:
As with any exterior mural, there is a risk of weathering, fading, or vandalism over time,
which could affect visual quality and necessitate ongoing maintenance coordination
between the property owner and the City.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The proposed mural is categorically exempt from t he California Environmental Quality Act
(“CEQA”) under the Class 1 exemption, which applies to the operation, repair,
maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing structures,
facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features where the project involves
negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15301.)
The City further finds that no exceptions to the Class 1 exemption apply.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:
The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with
Government Code Section 54954.2.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
Exhibit A – Rendering
2. Project Location
Page 209 of 335
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE APPROVING ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW 25-004 FOR A
PROPOSED MURAL AT 227 EAST BRANCH STREET
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Committee reviewed the proposed mural at 201
East Branch Street (the “Project”) at its meeting on December 15, 2025, and
recommended denial of the Project in accordance with the City’s Public Art Guidelines
and Public Art Donation Program (“Guidelines”); and
WHEREAS, the applicant for the proposed mural is Village Creative, which operates as
a business that offers lessons in music, art, sewing, and photography; and
WHEREAS, on May 12, 2026, the City Council considered approval of Architectural
Review 25-005 at a duly noticed public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Project and the applicable environmental
determination under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the State
CEQA Guidelines, and has determined that the project is categorically exempt pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 for minor alterations to existing structures; and
WHEREAS, all prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande
that:
1. Recitals. All recitals above are true and correct and hereby incorporated into
reference.
2. CEQA. The proposed mural is categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the Class 1 exemption, which applies
to the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor
alteration of existing structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical
features where the project involves negligible or no expansion of existing or former
use. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15301.) The City further finds that no exceptions
to the Class 1 exemption apply.
3. Architectural Review Findings:
1. The proposal is consistent with the architectural guidelines of the city, or
guidelines prepared for the area in which the project is located;
The proposal to paint a wall mural on a painted brick wall is consistent with all
applicable architectural guidelines for the project. Painted wall murals are
appropriate for this location due to the historical use of painted wall signs
Page 210 of 335
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
directly onto brick buildings. The colors and the content of the mural are
consistent with all relevant guidelines, including the City’s Design Guidelines
and Standards for the Historic Character Overlay District (D-2.4).
2. The proposal is consistent with the text and maps of the Arroyo Grande general
plan and this title;
The Project as proposed is consistent with the City’s General Plan, specifically
the Economic Development Element, which emphasizes the implementation of
public art.
3. The proposal will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and general
welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed
project;
The Project will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the general public
due to being designed with materials that are intended for use on outdoor walls.
Further, the applicant will be required to implement appropriate safety
measures for pedestrians while the work is occurring , which will mitigate any
potential safety issues during installation.
4. The general appearance of the proposal is in keeping with the character of the
neighborhood;
The Project is not anticipated to result in adverse impacts to surrounding uses,
existing artwork, or design elements in the vicinity. The scale and composition
are compatible with the pedestrian-oriented character of the area, and the
subject matter is consistent with the broader visual context of the Village. The
mural is expected to contribute positively to the visual interest of the public
realm without overwhelming or detracting from adjacent development or design
features.
5. The proposal is not detrimental to the orderly and harmonious development of
the city;
The approval of this artwork will not have any detrimental effect on the
harmonious development of the City due to being consistent with the adopted
guidelines for public art. Further, the installation of public art in the Village
supports the City’s Economic Development goals related to public realm
enhancements and placemaking.
6. The proposal will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the
neighborhood.
The Project will not impair the desirability of the neighborhood due to being
consistent with the adopted guidelines for public art. Further, the installation of
Page 211 of 335
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
public art in an area designed for pedestrian activity increases the visual
intrigue and creates a sense of community that will promote further investment
in the neighborhood.
4. Public Art Selection Criteria Findings:
1. Evaluation of artistic excellence, examining:
a. The artist’s qualifications, including: education, training, experience,
body of work, recognition of the artist, and the consistency of the artist’s
qualifications with the stated goals of the project;
b. The artist’s record of previous collaboration with other agencies,
organizations, artists, fabricators, or installers to achieve a successful
result in implementing the proposed project;
c. The artist’s experience working in the public realm;
d. To the extent applicable, the artist’s previous proven successful
experience in creating, producing or otherwise implementing projects
similar to the one proposed;
e. The original nature of the proposed concept;
f. The inherent artistic quality and aesthetic merit of the work;
The submitted artwork was designed by Canned Pineapple Co., a studio based
in Nashville, Tennessee, that specializes in murals and large-scale artwork.
The artist has completed multiple installations within the Central Coast region,
including in public and high-visibility settings at Cal Poly and Duncan Alley. The
studio has an established portfolio of large-scale mural projects comparable in
scope and method to the proposed installation. Their previous work
demonstrates experience in designing, coordinating, and implementing public-
realm projects, including collaborations with property owners, agencies, and
installation teams. The submitted materials indicate a history of producing
original designs and concepts tailored to specific sites.
2. Appropriateness of scale, form, material, content and design relative to the
immediate neighborhood and environment; no mural shall be approved if the
mural, as proposed, would create an objective risk to public health, safety, or
welfare (e.g. a mural near a roadway would be rejected for the use of reflective
materials, like mirrors, which could cause a distraction to drivers). Scale is
defined as the relative size of a building element in relation to other forms and
the human body. Form is the shape or configuration of the artwork;
The mural would not create a risk to the health, safety, or welfare of the general
public. The mural does not include reflective or hazardous materials. In terms
of scale, the mural is proportionate to both the buildi ng façade and the
surrounding environment. The proposal is sized to be clearly visible and
engaging for both pedestrians and vehicles, including those idling at the
prominent intersection of E. Branch and Mason Streets. The dimensions are
appropriate for the viewing distance and speed of passersby, ensuring visibility
Page 212 of 335
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 4
without overwhelming the architectural context. The content is community-
oriented, making it suitable for a public-facing location. The simplistic design is
legible and avoids creating visual clutter.
3. Appropriateness of proposed materials in regards to structural and surface
integrity. Materials should be considered in the context of ability to deter against
vandalism, withstand weathering, and maintain the intended design;
The mural is proposed to be hand-painted using durable exterior latex paint, a
material commonly used in public art installations due to its long -term
performance and relatively low maintenance needs.
4. Ease of maintenance and longevity of the proposed materials;
The artist and property owner proposed the use of durable exterior latex paint
based on the artist’s proven success with these materials in completing similar
projects. Exterior latex paint is suitable for outdoor murals due to its resistance
to weathering. Additionally, the selected materials can be easily cleaned,
touched up, or refreshed if needed.
5. Appropriateness of the proposed method of installation of the artwork with
consideration given to the safety and structural factors involved in installation;
The proposed use of paint on the painted-brick exterior of the building is
appropriate and would not negatively impact the structural integrity of the
building. Installation of the proposed mural would likely require a temporary
sidewalk closure and rerouting of pedestrians, which would be assessed
through an encroachment permit.
6. Location, considering the intended audience for the proposal, whether the
public will be a captive audience or whether a person would need to take
affirmative steps to view the project. Consideration shall be given to whether
the mural would be in an area typically accessed or viewable by minors;
The proposed location is situated at a highly visible intersection along Mason
Street at E. Branch Street, making it readily visible to both vehicular and
pedestrian traffic. The intended audience is members of the general public who
encounter the mural in the course of their daily activities, rather than individuals
who must take affirmative steps to seek it out. Given that the site is an area
commonly accessed by a broad cross-section of the community, including
minors, the content of the mural was intentionally designed to be appropriate
for all ages.
7. A mural shall not be approved if it includes:
a. Copyrighted work without permission of the holder of the copyright.
b. Obscene materials.
Page 213 of 335
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 5
c. Defamatory content.
d. Fighting words or advocates imminent lawless action.
e. Content, including but not limited to, words, symbols, signs, trademarks, or
references to products or services provided on the premises. Such content
meets the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code (AGMC) definition for signage, as
regulated by AGMC Chapter 16.60;
The mural does not include words, logos, symbols, or direct references to
products or services offered on the premises. While the imagery depicts
general creative activities such as music, visual art, and photography, these
themes are broadly interpretive and are not unique to the services offered by
the business. The intent and composition of the artwork are community -
oriented and symbolic in nature, and the imagery is not presented in a manner
that functions as advertising or signage, as defined by the Municipal Code. The
mural is designed to be viewed as public art independent of the continued
presence of the business and is not dependent on the identification of any
specific service or program.
8. Public Art proposed in the D-2.4 Historic Character Overlay District is also
subject to the following criteria:
a. An identified relationship to the social, cultural and historica l identity of the
area;
b. An identified relationship to the site's existing architectural features;
c. The nature of the site's surrounding neighborhood and potential impact of
the public art project on residents, businesses, and existing works of art or
design elements within the site's vicinity.
The proposed mural reflects themes of artistic expression, including music,
visual arts, and craftsmanship. These themes are consistent with the Village’s
identity as a pedestrian-oriented district with an established history of creative
and cultural activity. The artwork reinforces, rather than conflicts with, the
area’s cultural character by depicting community-based creative engagement.
The use of painted brick as a canvas is consistent with historic pre cedent for
painted wall graphics within commercial and mixed -use buildings in the area
and maintains the underlying architectural form and materials of the structure.
The mural is not anticipated to result in adverse impacts to surrounding uses,
existing artwork, or design elements in the vicinity. The scale, composition, and
subject matter are compatible with the pedestrian character of the area and are
expected to enhance visual interest within the public realm without introducing
visual clutter or inconsistency with nearby development.
5. Severability. If any section, division, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this
resolution or the document in the record in support of this resolution is determined
by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, unenforceable, unconstitutional
Page 214 of 335
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 6
or otherwise void, that determination shall not affect the validity of the remaining
sections, divisions, sentences, clauses, or phrases of this resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande hereby approves the project as described and shown in Exhibit “A” attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference with the above findings, attached hereto
and incorporated herein by this reference.
On a motion by Council member _________, seconded by Council member __________,
and by the following roll call vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 12th day of May 2026.
Page 215 of 335
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 7
_______________________________________
CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________________
JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
_______________________________________
MATTHEW DOWNING, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________________
ISAAC ROSEN, CITY ATTORNEY
Page 216 of 335
VILLAGE CREATIVE
Exhibit A
Page 217 of 335
VILLAGE CREATIVE
OPTION A
Page 218 of 335
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 219 of 335