PC 08.b. VAR 16-001 and VSR 16-001 190 S. Elm St.TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: TERESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
BY: SAM ANDERSON, PLANNING TECHNICIAN
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE CASE NO. 16-001 & VIEWSHED
REVIEW CASE NO. 16-001; CONVERSION OF EXISTING HOME TO
SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW
TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY HOME, THREE (3) CAR GARAGE,
FIVE FOOT (5') SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK REDUCTION, AND
EIGHT FOOT (8') WEST REAR YARD SETBACK REDUCTION;
LOCATION - 190 SOUTH ELM STREET; APPLICANT - DANTE
TOMASINI; REPRESENTATIVE - DOUGLAS R. FANER
DATE: JUNE 21,2016
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution approving
Variance 16-001 & Viewshed Review 16-001.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
None.
BACKGROUND: Proiect Location
PLANNING COMMISSION
CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE 16-001 AND VIEWSHED REVIEW 16-001
JUNE 21,2016
PAGE 2
The subject property is zoned Multi Family (MF), and requires a Variance for
reductions side and rear yard setbacks, and a Minor Use Permit - Viewshed Review
for construction of a new two story home.
The City Council adopted Resolution No. 4052 on November 13, 2007, approving
General Plan Amendment Case No. 06-003 to amend the General Plan land use
designation and map for thirteen (13) properties along South Elm Street from
Medium Density Single-family Residential to Medium-High Density Multi-family
Residential (Attachment 1). The City Council also adopted Ordinance No. 593 on
November 27, 2007, approving Development Code Amendment Case No. 06-005
for the rezoning of the same thirteen (13) properties along South Elm Street from
Single Family (SF) to Multi-Family (MF). This rezoning was in response to several
factors, including the identification of the property as an opportunity site for infill
development and densification in the 2003 Housing Element of the General Plan.
This identification was due to the surrounding multi-family zoning and development
as well as the area's proximity to the mixed use corridor on E. Grand Avenue.
Additionally, the increased potential for infill development and densification along
South Elm Street was considered to compensate for the loss of density approved at
the same time at the corner of South Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks Avenue
(Attachment 2).
Architectural Review Committee:
The Architectural Review Committee (ARC) reviewed the proposed project at a
meeting on April 18, 2016 (Attachment 3). Members of the ARC discussed the
Variance, reducing the size of the driveway, and color palates. Members of the ARC
were in support of the project with changes that have since been made to project
plans, including widening the turnaround space, adding landscaping to the driveway,
a patio space, windows to the garage door, wood chips around the Coast Live Oak,
and columns to the entryway overhang.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
Proiect Description
The applicant is proposing to convert an existing single-family residence to a
secondary dwelling unit and to construct a new two-story single family home in the
rear of the property in the MF zoning district. The applicant has applied for a
variance to reduce the side yard setback on the south side of the property from ten
feet (1 0') to five feet (5') as well as a rear yard setback reduction on the west side of
the property from twenty feet (20') to twelve feet (12').
The project site is an existing 7,000 sq. ft. rectangular lot (50' by 140') located in the
MF zoning district. The lot's width of fifty feet (50') is less than the required width for
a new lot in the Multi-Family zoning district of eighty feet (80'). Additionally, the Multi-
Family zoning district has side yard setbacks of ten feet (20') on either side. These
setbacks are higher than the side yard setbacks of five feet (5') found in the Single-
Family zoning district, which have a minimum lot width of seventy feet (70'). The
PLANNING COMMISSION
CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE 16-001 AND VIEWSHED REVIEW 16-001
JUNE 21,2016
PAGE 3
applicant is requesting the side yard variance due to these unusually restrictive
setbacks on the property, which would force the proposed development to not be
feasible. Additionally, the applicant is requesting the rear yard variance of eight feet
(8') to allow for a safer driveway turnaround of twenty four feet one inch (24'1") and
provide adequate room for the uncovered parking space required for the secondary
dwelling unit. This request is in line with previous structures constructed and permits
issued on neighboring lots and properties.
Based on the size of the subject property and number of dwelling units per gross
acre allowed in the Multi-Family zoning district, the property is only able to build 1.4
dwelling units, which rounds down to one (1) unit. However, secondary dwelling
units do not count toward this density and are regulated to ensure they do not
adversely impact either adjacent parcels or the surrounding neighborhood.
The existing single family home totals 1,015 sq. ft, which is less than the maximum
size for a secondary dwelling unit in the Multi Family zoning district of 1,200 sq. ft.
The proposed single family home totals 2,689 sq. ft. The project meets all applicable
Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Standards such as parking, height, lot coverage,
floor area ratio, etc, except for the setback infringements on the south and west
sides of the property.
General Plan
The Land Use Element and Housing Element of the General Plan each contain
objectives and policies that support the proposed project. Land Use Objective LU3
states: the City shall accommodate a broad range of Multi Family Residential (MFR)
and special needs housing types and densities within the City.
Additionally, Housing Element Policy A.2 states: that the City shall utilize incentives
for the production of affordable housing including allowing secondary dwelling units
under specified criteria.
Architectural Character
The proposed project is designed in a modern cottage style, with pitched roof and
stone veneer elements. The project is a simple design; almost entirely rectangular,
with a small cantilevered second story overhanging the front facing garage. The
proposed home will not be very visible from the street due to the existing structure's
location on the front of the property. Livable space will surround both above and
behind the garage. Windows and small roof dormers provide some level of visual
interest on the project. A color board and colored elevations will be provided at the
meeting.
Landscapinq
Landscaping changes are minimal for the proposed project. The changes proposed
are to install a small decomposed granite area and two (2) Mediterranean Fan
Palms on small banks in the corners of the rear yard behind the proposed residence.
PLANNING COMMISSION
CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE 16-001 AND VIEWSHED REVIEW 16-001
JUNE 21,2016
PAGE 4
The existing Coast Live Oak tree will be retained. Prior to issuance of building
permit, the project will be reviewed for compliance with the State Model Water
Efficient Landscape Ordinance.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are presented for Planning Commission consideration:
1. Adopt the attached Resolution, approving Variance Case No. 16-001 &
Viewshed Review Case No. 16-001; or
2. Modify and adopt the attached Resolution, approving Variance Case No. 16-
001 and Viewshed Review Case No. 16-001
3. Do not adopt the attached Resolution, take tentative action to Deny Variance
Case No. 16-001 & Viewshed Review Case No. 16-001 and provide direction
on specific findings for denial of Variance case No. 16-001 & Viewshed
Review Case No. 16-001
4. Provide direction to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code
expected setbacks for a single-family sized lot, and will allow the property owners to
provide a secondary dwelling unit in the MF zoning district. This is a way to provide
denser housing in the MF zoning district on lots too small for traditional multi-family
developments.
DISADVANTAGES:
The proposed project would require a variation in development standards for
reduced setbacks on the property.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The project has been reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and staff has determined it to be categorically
exempt per Section 15305(a) - Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations and
Section 15332(b) - In-Fill Development Projects - of the CEQA Guidelines.
PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT:
A public hearing notice was mailed to all property owners within 300' of the site, was
posted in the Tribune, and was posted at City Hall and on the City's website on
Friday, June 10, 2016. The agenda and staff report were posted at City Hall and on
the City's website on June 17, 2016. No public comments have been received.
Attachments:
1. City Council Resolution No. 4052
2. City Council minutes, November 13, 2007
3. Minutes of the April 18, 2016 Architectural Review Committee Meeting
4. Project Plans
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING VARIANCE
16-001 AND VIEWSHED REVIEW 16-001; LOCATED AT
190 SOUTH ELM STREET; APPLIED FOR BY DANTE
TOMASlNl
WHEREAS, the applicant submitted an application for Variance 16-001 and Viewshed
Review 16-001 for conversion of an existing home to a secondary dwelling unit and
construction of one (1) new two-story single family home, a three (3) car garage, a five foot
(5') south side yard setback reduction and an eight foot (8') rear yard setback reduction on
January 6,2016; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Committee recommended approval of Variance 16-
001 and Viewshed Review 16-001 based upon the findings for approval of the permit on
April 18,2016; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the project in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Arroyo
Grande Rules and Procedures for Implementation of CEQA and has determined that the
project is exempt per Section 15305(a) of the CEQA Guidelines regarding minor
alterations in land use limitations and Section 15332(b) - in-fill development projects; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande has reviewed the
project at a duly noticed public hearing on June 21, 2016; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds, after due study, deliberation and public
hearing, that the following circumstances exist and findings can be made:
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - VARIANCE:
1. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation
would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship not otherwise shared
by others within the surrounding area;
The project is located on a legally non-conforming lot in regards to width and
minimum lot size. Additionally, the project is a single-family home located on a
property zoned Multi-Family. Strict or literal interpretafion of the specified
regulation would result in practical difficulfy in any efforts to build denser housing
not typically faced on nearby properties.
2. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable
to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply
generally to other properties classified in the same zone;
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
The majority of properties zoned Multi-Family in Arroyo Grande are significantly
larger than the property in question. The irregular width of the property is an
exceptional or extraordinary circumstance that creates an issue with increasing
density in the Multi-Family zone.
3. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation
would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other
properties classified in the same zone;
The Multi-Family zone is intended to provide for a variety of residential uses,
encourage diversity in housing types with enhanced amenities, or provide
transitions between higher intensity and lower intensity use. Strict or literal
interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would deprive the
applicant of the privileges enjoyed by the owners of properties classified in the
same zone by preventing denser housing development.
4. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in-the same zone;
The granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privileges
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone.
The majority of properties zoned Multi-Family are legally conforming lots and
contain multi-family development. The property in question is legally non-
conforming in regards to width and contains a single-family home. Properties
zoned Single-Family would not face the stricter setbacks currently in place for this
property.
5. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety
or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity;
The granting of the variance will permit higher density housing options in a Multi-
Family zoning district. This will nof be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, as
similar projects in the past have been approved nearby.
6. That the granting of a variance is consistent with the objectives and policies of the
general plan and the intent of this title;
The granting of the Variance is consistent with the objectives and policies of the
General Plan and implements Land Use Objective LU3 and Housing element
Policy A.2 by providing a broad range of Multi Family Residential housing,
including allowing secondary dwelling units.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - VIEWSHED REVIEW:
1. The proposed structure is consistent with the intent of Municipal code Section
16.16.110;
Second story additions are allowed in the Multi-Family zoning district with the
approval of a Viewshed Review. The project has been reviewed to ensure that
views, aesthetics, and other property values in the neighborhood are maintained.
2. The proposed structure is consistent with the established scale and character of
the neighborhood and will not unreasonably or unnecessarily affect views of
surrounding properties;
The proposed structure is consistent with the established scale and character of
the neighborhood; homes on both sides of the property contain second story
elements. The project will not unreasonably or unnecessarily affect views of the
surrounding properties.
3. The proposed structure will not unreasonably or unnecessarily interfere with the
scenic view from any other property, judged in light of permitting reasonable use
and development of the property on which the proposed structure or expansion is
to occur;
The proposed structure will not unreasonably or unnecessarily interfere with the
scenic view from any other property, judged in light of permitting reasonable use
and development of the property on which the proposed structure is to occur.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Arroyo Grande hereby approves Variance 16-001 and Viewshed review 16-001 as set
forth in Exhibit "B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, with the
above findings and subject to the conditions as set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference.
On motion by Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner
by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
and
The foregoing Resolution was adopted this 21'' day of June 2016.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 4
ATTEST:
DEBBIE WElCHlNGER
SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION
AS TO CONTENT:
TERESA McCLlSH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
LAN GEORGE, CHAIR
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 5
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VARIANCE 16-001
VIEWSHED REVIEW 16-001
190 SOUTH ELM STREET
This approval authorizes the construction of a new two-story single family residence
located at 190 South Elm Street.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
GENERAL CONDITIONS:
1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all State, County and City
requirements as are applicable to this project including obtaining a building
permit.
2. The project shall occur in conformance with the application and plans on file in
the Community Development Department.
3. This application shall automatically expire on June 21, 2018, unless a building
permit is issued. Thirty days prior to the expiration of the approval, the applicant
may apply to the Community Development Director for an extension of one year
from the original date of expiration.
4. The applicant shall agree to indemnify and defend at hislher sole expense any
action brought against the City, its present or former agents, officers, or
employees because of the issuance of this approval, or in any way relating to the
implementation thereof, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The
applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any
court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers or employees
may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its
sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action
but such participation shall not relieve applicant of hislher obligations under this
condition.
5. The applicant shall comply with the current California Codes including the
specifically adopted City of Arroyo Grande.
6. The applicant shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to any construction
or demolition.
7. Development shall conform to the Condominium~~ownhouse (MF) zoning
requirements except as follows: Rear Yard Setbacks - no less than twelve feet
(12'); Side Yard Setbacks - no less than five feet (5').
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 6
8. The applicant shall record a deed restriction against the title of the property prior
to the issuance of a building permit. The deed restriction shall stipulate that the
second dwelling cannot be sold separately from the main residence.
9. The second residential dwelling shall be served by City water.
BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
10.lf the new building is within ten feet (10') of the existing single family residence,
the existing residence shall be required to be fully sprinklered per Building and
Life Safety Division Guidelines
11 .Prior to occupancy, the new building must be fully sprinklered per Building and
Life Safety Division guidelines.
12.Provide Fire Department approved access or sprinkler-system per National Fire
Protection Association Standards.
13. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a demolition permit must be applied for,
approved and issued. Development fees resulting from demolition will be
appropriately credited to the property.
FEES TO BE PAID PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT:
14. Water Meter, service main, distribution, and availability fees, to be based on
codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
15. Water Neutralization fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of
building permit issuance.
16.Traffic Signalization fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of
building permit issuance.
17. Sewer hook-up & facility Permit fees, to be based on codes and rates in effect
at the time of building permit issuance.
18.Drainage fee, as required by the area drainage plan for the area being
developed.
19.Building Permit fees, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of
building permit issuance.
20.Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (SMIP) fee, to be based on codes
and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance in accordance with
State mandate.
21 .Park Development fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of
building permit issuance (Residential Development only).
22. Park Improvements fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of
building permit issuance (Residential Development only).
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 7
23.Street Tree fees, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building
permit issuance (Residential Development only).
24. Community Centers fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of
building perm~t issuance (Residential Development only).
25.Fire Protection fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of
building permit issuance.
26.Police Facilities fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of
building permit issuance.
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 4052
A RESOLUTION OF THE CIP( COUNCIL OF ARROYO GRANDE
APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CASE NO. 06003 TO
CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR
FIVE PROPERTIES AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF S.
HALCYON ROAD AND FAIR OAKS AVENUE FROM MULTIPLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL VERY HIGH DENSITY TO MIXED USE
OFFICE PROFESSIONAL; AND CHANGE THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION FOR THIRTEEN PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY OF
S. ELM STREET NEAR POPLAR STREET FROM MEDIUM DENSITY
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
WHEREAS, the City Council of Arroyo Grande adopted the updated General Plan which
became effective on October 9,2001 and which includes the Housing Element adopted in
2003 and updated on March 8,2005; and
WHEREAS, the city'has a responsibility to assure adherence to the General PIan in
meeting the needs and desires of the residents and the community; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has conducted current initial
studies and concluded that environmental impacts associated with the project will be
mitigated to less than significant as outlined in a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
dated June 28,2007; and
WHEREAS, the City Council. after public hearing, consideration of the draft Mitigated
Negative Declaration, all testimony and evidence presented, found the Mitigated
Negative Declaration appropriate and adequate pursuant to State and local CEQA laws
and guidelines including requirements per SB 18; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, after public hearing, consideration of staff report
regarding the 2003 Housing Element and Land Use Elements, all testimony and
evidence presented finds the proposed land use map changes as shown on Exhibit A to
be appropriate and consistent with the intent of 2001 General Plan Update adopted
policies. specifically those policies in the Housing Element and Land Use Element; and
WHEREAS, after consideration of all testimony and all relevant evidence, the City
Council has determined that the following General Plan Amendment findings can be
made in an affirmative manner:
1. The proposed amendment to the 2001 General Plan land use element
designation provides consistency with the goals, objectives, policies and
programs of the General PIan and is specifically consistent with the 2005
Housing Element Housing Opportunity Site Inventory; and
RESOLUTION NO. 4052
PAGE 2
2. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and
welfare and is being considered concurrent with zoning amendments that
provide for multi-family or single family use in the vicinity of South Elm Street and
mixed residential and office use in the vicinity of South Halcyon Road and Fair
Oaks Avenue; and
3. The proposai has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). the State CEQA Guidelines. and the Arroyo Grande Rules
and Procedures for Implementation of CEQA and it has determined that the
proposed project is described and included in a Negative Declaration dated June
28,2007; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande amends the General Plan Land Use Map as shown in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto and inc~lporatd herein by this reference:
On motion by Mayor Pro Tem Arnold, seconded by council Member Costello, and by the
following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Arnold, Costello, Guthrie, Fellows, and Mayor Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 13~ day of November 2007
RESOLUTION EXHIBIT "A"
. -
Office ~rofe~sionall~edical ~os~ital *
Multiple ~aril~ Residential Medium-High Density (MF)
OFFICIAL CERTIFICATION
I, KELLY WETMORE, City Clerk of the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis
Obispo, State of California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the attached
Resolution No. 4052 is a true, full, and correct copy of said Resolution passed and
adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande on the 13"
day of November 2007.
WITNESS my hand and the Seal of the City of Arroyo Grande affixed this 14~ day of
November 2007.
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 7 Minutes: City Council Meeting
Tuesday, November 73,2007
9.c. Consideration of General Plan Amendment Case No. 06-003 to Amend the General
Plan Land Use Map and Development Code Amendment Case No. 06-005 to Amend
Title 16 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Zoning Map - Co-Applicant The City of
Arroyo Grande for Five Properties at the Northwest Corner of S. Halcyon Road and
Fair Oaks Avenue and Co-Applicant - David Robasciotti for Thirteen Properties in the
Vicinity of South Elm Street near Poplar Street.
Associate Planner McClish presented the staff report and recommended the Council: I) Adopt a
Resolution to change the General Plan land use designation for five properties at the northwest
corner of S. Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks Avenue from Multiple Family Residential Very High
Density to Mixed Use Office Professional; and change the General Plan land use designation for
thirteen properties in the vicinity of S. Elm Street near Poplar Street from Medium Density Single-
family Residential to Medium-High Density Multi-family Residential; and 2) Introduce an Ordinance
to change the zoning for five properties at the northwest corner of S. Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks
Avenue from Multiple Family Residential Very High Density to Office Mixed Use; and change the
zoning for the properties in the vicinity of S. Elm Street near Poplar Street from Single Family
residential to Multi-Family. She noted for the record that the Ordinance had been modified io
indicate the zone change would be to Multi-Family (MF), not Multi-Family Apartment (MFA).
Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing.
Colleen Martin, Olive Street, noted that when a future project comes forward in the vicinity of S.
Halcyon and Fair Oaks Avenue, there would be concerns expressed about traffic. She also spoke
about the lack of curb, gutter, and sidewalk on portions of S. Elm Street and noted there is a need
for substantial road improvements to ensure safe pedestrian traffic.
Dave Robasciotti, S. Elm Street, noted he has seen'a lot of improvements along S. Elm Street over
the years; however, the west side has been challenging. He spoke in support of the rezoning and
stated this was a good opportunity for in-fill projects to improve S. Elm Street.
Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ferrara closed the public hearing.
Council comments included general support for the rezoning proposals; some concern that the
areas need to be reviewed more comprehensively, specifically S. Elm Street as it relates to
evaluating higher density land uses; acknowledgement that there is a lot of potential on S. Halcyon
for medical and office uses; acknowledgement that the proposed action would not preclude the City
from completing a more comprehensive land use review in the future; a suggestion that design
overlays may be appropriate for the S. Elm Street area; a suggestion that the City utilize Cal Poly
students to prepare a comprehensive land use study of S. Elm Street; and a request that Lucia Mar
Unified School District be notified and invited to participate on any future development proposals on
Fair Oaks Avenue across from Harloe Elementary. In response to a question by Mayor Pro Tem
Arnold, Mr. Robasciotti stated he did not have any development plans to submit at this time;
however, he would support higher density zoning on the S. Elm Street if the City chose to study the
matter further in the future.
Action: Mayor Pro Tem Amold moved to adopt a Resolution as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE -
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT CASE NO. 06-003 TO CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESlGNATlOEJ
Minutes: City Council Meeting
Tuesday, November 13,2007
Page 8
FOR FIVE PROPERTIES AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF S. HALCYON ROAD AND FAIR
OAKS AWE FROM MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL VERY HIGH DENSITY TO MIXED
USE OFFICE PROFESSIONAL; AND CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THIRTEEN
PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY OF S. ELM STREET NEAR POPLAR STREET FROM MEDIUM
DENSITY SNVGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL", and to direct staff to look, in a timely manner, at potentially increasing the size of
the project area and increasing the density. Council Member Costello seconded, and the motion
passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Arnold, Costello, Guthrie, Fellows, Ferram
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Mayor Pro Tem Arnold moved to introduce an Ordinance as follows: "AN ORDNVANCE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROMNG DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT CASE NO. 06-005 TO CHANGE THE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTIES AT 362:
370; 378; & 382 S. HALCYON ROAD & 906 FAIR OAKS AVENUE FROM MULTIPLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL VERY HIGH DENSITY TO OFFICE MIXED USE; AND CHANGE THE ZONING
FOR THE PROPERTIES AT 160; 162; 166; 168; 170; 174 178; 180; 186; 190; 194; & 198 S. ELM
STREET 8 1205 POPLAR STREET FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO MULTI-FAMILY".
Council Member Costello seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Arnold, Costello, Guthrie. Fellows, Ferrara
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
10. CONTINUED BUSINESS ITEMS
None.
11. NEW BUSINESS ITEMS /
1l.a. Consideration of Proposed Ordinance Amending
as it relates to Building and Construction Codes.
rst presented the staff report and
g hyo Grande Municipal Code
Code and International Fire Code,
nding Section 15.04.010 related to
cal Code, California Mechanical
Building Code, and the International Property
in Titles 8, 12, 15 and 16 for
s from Council concerning the
re sprinkler requirements.
Mayor ~ka invited ~ublic comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the
ATTACHMENT 3
ACTION MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
MONDAY, APRIL 18,2016
CITY HALL SECOND FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM, 300 EAST BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CA
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Hoag called the Special Architectural Review Committee meeting
2. ROLLCALL
ARC Members: Committee Members Warren Hoag, and Mary
P Hertel were present. Bruce Berlin and
City Staff Present: Associate Planner Matt and Planning Interns Patrick Holub
and Sam Anderson
3. FLAG SALUTE
Warren Hoag led the Flag Salute.
a motion, seconded by Michael Peachey, to approve the minutes of April
The otion passed on a 3-0-2 voice vote, with Bruce Berlin and John Rubatzky absent. 7'
6. PROJECTS
6.a. CONSIDERATION OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW 16-002: CONSTRUCTION OF
ONE NEW TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND SECONDARY DWELLING
UNIT; LOCATION - 242 LARCHMONT DRIVE: APPLICANT - JUSTIN CAREY;
REPRESENTATIVE - GREG SOT0 (Holub)
Planning Intern Holub presented the project
Planning lntern Holub and Associate Planner Downing responded to questions from the
Committee regarding the front facing garage, driveway width, and the absence of sidewalks
on Larchmont Drive.
Greg Soto, representative, spoke in support of the project and responded to questions from
the Committee.
Minutes: ARC
Monday, April 18,2016
The Committee provided comments regarding ways to reduce the amount of impervious
surfaces, making the courtyard more attractive to neighbors, and incorporating more variety
in the landscaping plan.
Michael Peachey made a motion, seconded by Mary Hertel, to recommend approval of the
project to the Community Development Director with the following conditions:
1. lncorporate additional detailing on roof supports;
2. Maintain consistency of window treatments;
3. lncorporate more density and variety into the landscape plan;
4. Utilize more pervious materials in the motor court;
5. Narrow the driveway to 12' and offset with landscaping at the end of the driveway
nearest the street; and
6. Clarify the species name of "Apricot Bush"
The motion passed on a 3-0-2 voice vote, with Bruce Berlin and John Rubatzky absent.
Planning Intern Anderson presented the project. /
Planning Intern Anderson responded to questions from the ommittee regarding whether
Viewshed Reviews apply to multi-family residences, the sign of the proposed three car
garage, and the decision making body on the variance. /
Douglas Faner, representative, spoke in project and responded to questions
from the Committee.
The Committee provided the variance, reducing the size of the
driveway in order to along the house, and the preferred color
seconded by Michael Peachey, to recommend approval of the
with the following considerations:
the rear of the lot five feet (5') as long as this does
rear of the property;
along the existiig house in order to increase
Investigate eliminating turf from the landscaping plan;
,; 5. Paint roof vents to match the color of the roof;