PC Minutes 2008-12-021
1
1
CALL TO ORDER - The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session
with Chair Ray presiding; also present were Commissioners Barneich, Keen and Ruth;
Commissioner Tait was absent. Staff members in attendance were Community
Development Director, Rob Strong, Associate Planners, Kelly Heffernon and Jim
Bergman and Public Works Director, Don Spagnolo.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 2, 2008
6:00 P.M.
AGENDA REVIEW: No changes requested.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chair Ray made a motion, seconded by Commissioner
Barneich, to approve the minutes of November 18, 2008 with the following corrections
requested by:
Barneich:
• Page 3, second bullet, clarify language to state ...when residents turn left and
"oncoming traffic from Tally Ho" comes around the corner....
• Page 3, second from last bullet, add wording after semi -colon to clarify, she is not
in favor of so much stone....
• Page 7, first bullet, replace angels with angles.
Ray:
• Fifth bullet, delete ...if it gets pushed back... at the end of the sentence.
The motion passed on a 4/0 voice vote, Commissioner Tait being absent.
A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None.
B. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS AFTER AGENDA PREPARATION: None.
II. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
A. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 08 -003b; APPLICANT — CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE; LOCATION - HISTORIC CHARACTER DESIGN
OVERLAY DISTRICT D -2.4
Associate Planner, Teresa McClish, presented the staff report for consideration of a
proposal to amend the Design Guidelines and Standards for Historic Districts to restrict
design features for "Spanish Eclectic" styles applicable to residential development in the
Historic Character Design Overlay district D -2.4. as recommended by City Council. Ms.
McClish then explained that the ARC at their November 3, 2008 meeting recommended
that "no new construction of "Spanish Eclectic" homes be allowed in the HCO residential
districts except subject to conditional use permit. In conclusion, Ms. McClish
recommended the Commission review the alternatives in the staff report and make
recommendations to the City Council for their final decision.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DECEMBER 2, 2008
In reply to Commission questions, Ms. McClish clarified that:
• Existing Spanish Eclectic style homes would be allowed to be remodeled through
the regular design review process.
• The discussion at ARC that lead to requiring a CUP, was to elevate the review of
new homes in the Spanish Eclectic style in the D -2.4 zoning rather than
prohibiting them given the fact that there are some good examples of these
styles reflective of the historic era.
• Regarding building colors and remodels, an existing structure in the D -2.4 zoning
does have to have design review for a change that affects 10% or more of the
building facade.
Chair Ray opened the hearing for public comment and hearing none closed it.
PAGE 2
Commission comments:
Ruth:
• Homeowners deserve good guidelines so they don't spend a lot of time and
energy planning something that's not going to be suitable.
• The recommendation is a good middle ground so we're not encouraging Spanish
Eclectic, but if someone really wants it and is willing to go through the process to
make sure it's going to fit then she can support what staff and the ARC is
recommending.
Keen:
• He also supports staffs recommended language in the resolution, but asked that
Exhibit 'A', regarding amendments to the Design Guidelines and Standards,
Page 17 &18, "Spanish Eclectic" Style remove the negative language as follows:
"ne new construction of Spanish Eclectic homes are allowed in the HCO
residential districts except subject to conditional use permit approval" - this will
make a better fit.
Barneich:
• She would like to include photos from Larchmont, Short and Allen Streets in the
Design Guidelines and Standards to help applicants when they are coming
forward with a proposal.
• Even if a CUP is required for a new house there may still may be a disconnect
after review.
• She has a concern as to whether Spanish Eclectic style homes are appropriate
for Arroyo Grande and that if too many new homes are built in this style they will
not reflect what the Village is supposed to look like. The changed character
would reflect a newer era.
Ray:
• She agrees with the ARC and some of the Council that it would be better to
restrict rather than prohibit this style; she does not like the idea of prohibiting
something so specific that is also so subjective and may lead to reactionary code
and micro - managing.
1
1
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DECEMBER 2, 2008
• She is. In favor of requiring the CUP process; she does not believe that most new
houses will be of a Spanish Eclectic style, but she would not like to see this style
used as a cost cutting tool.
• A property owner has the right to design what they want and there are some
good examples of well done Spanish Eclectic in the Village.
Chair Ray made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Ruth, to approve Development
Code Amendment Case No. 08 -003b, with modifications as follows:
1. Include the changes in the language of the Resolution, as recommended by staff.
2. Require a CUP for a new "Spanish Eclectic" Style house, as recommended by
the ARC.
3) Strike the words "no" and "except" in the proposed amendments to the Design
Guidelines and Standards in Exhibit 'A ", on Page 17 & 18, as requested by
Commission Keen, and adopt:
RESOLUTION NO. 08 -2074
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF
ARROYO GRANDE APPROVE DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT
08 -003b TO AMEND THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS
FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS TO RESTRICT DESIGN FEATURES FOR
"SPANISH ECLECTIC" STYLES APPLICABLE TO RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT IN THE HISTORIC CHARACTER DESIGN OVERLAY
DISTRICT D -2.4
The motion was approved by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Chair Ray, Commissioners Ruth, Barneich and Keen
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tait
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 2 nd day of December 2008.
7:15 pm
The Commission took a 10- minute break.
PAGE 3
III. NON - PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
A. PRE - APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. 08 -005; APPLICANT — ESTHER
EDWARDS; REPRESENTATIVE — JEFFREY EMERICK; LOCATION — 1407
CHILTON STREET
Associate Planner, Kelly Heffernon, presented the staff report for consideration of a
proposal to subdivide a 0.5 -acre property into two (2) residential Tots, subject to Planned
Unit Development and Parcel Map application approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DECEMBER 2, 2008
PAGE 4
In describing the property Ms. Heffernon stated staff's concerns which included the
steeply sloping site, potential impacts to the four Coast Live oak trees existing on the
back portion of the property where the applicant proposes to construct a new residence,
and density requirements. The minimum lot size for Residential Suburban (RS) is 12,000
sq. ft. and the applicant is proposing lot sizes of 11,100 and 10,680 sq. ft. which would
require approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), assuming the necessary findings
could be met; however the property is too small to meet the performance standards that
are normally required to approve a PUD, especially regarding open space requirements.
The existing neighborhood resembles the Single Family zoning district more than the
Residential Suburban district; approximately 59% of the properties in the area are less
than the minimum lot size. Ms. Heffernon then explained how the new residence could
be built into the slope using stem walls, which would require only one oak tree to be
removed and no grading.
Whether a PUD is appropriate, or the land use and zoning should change from RS to SF,
are issues the Planning Commission might want to discuss. It is staff's opinion that a
Variance is not appropriate in this case because it is not likely that all of the variance
findings can be made, as required per the Development Code.
In conclusion, Ms. Heffernon recommended that the Planning Commission review the
proposed project and provide suggestions to the applicant. Direction regarding the type
of formal application is also requested.
In reply to questions from the Commission, staff explained that:
• The driveway width must be 18 feet to meet Fire Department requirements.
• It would be possible to design a hammerhead turnaround for a Fire truck at this
site — it would be a condition of approval.
• Maintenance of any open space has not been discussed, but the upper portion of
the lot with the oak trees could remain in a natural state and might be able to
fulfill the open space requirement. It is uncertain given lack of technical data.
• Whenever a subdivision is created the Ordinance allows slopes to be calculated
as an average over the entire property versus calculating slope for each
proposed lot with the Commission having discretion.
• Regarding the sidewalk in -lieu fee for this property, there have never been
sidewalks on this street due to steep slopes and if there were sidewalks it would
probably have to preclude on- street parking.
• Stem walls can be used to avoid a grading permit.
• The City strongly discourages variances due to the difficulty of making the
findings.
Chair Ray opened the non - public hearing, but hearing no comment and the Applicant
not being present she closed it.
1
1
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DECEMBER 2, 2008
PAGE 5
Commission comments:
Barneich:
• She expressed concern with not knowing the percent of the slope on site.
• She agrees with all the concerns expressed by the SAC for fire issues, etc.
• She is in favor of the idea of the open space encompassing the oak trees.
• She is not comfortable about making both lots substandard in the RS zoning
district.
• It seems there are too many obstructions to try to make a good fit and make a
safe house for someone to live in.
Keen:
• He is in agreement with splitting this lot as the City has allowed this on Chilton
Street several times in the past and they should be afforded the same privileges
as others.
• He is adamantly against starting PUD's on a two -lot subdivision as this is not
what the PUD was designed for; he would rather have a variance.
• The house could be designed around the trees and the slope by conditioning the
project; there is a similar situation on a lot that has been developed just down the
street from this one.
• Regarding Commission Barneich's concern with Fire safety, it's mandatory that
all flag lot houses have to be sprinklered so it would not need a hammerhead
turn around (which would be a big waste of land).
Ruth:
• She agrees with Commissioner Keen that the owner should be allowed to
subdivide.
• She looked over the findings for a variance and did not think all of them could be
met; however, after looking at the neighborhood there may be a problem with the
way it is zoned versus what it really looks like so the zoning does need to be
looked at.
• This could be conditioned for what would be suitable and it would be up to the
owner to resolve the problems that have been brought forth.
Ray:
• We do not have a lot of information to be able to comment on with this pre -
application.
• She agrees with Commissioner Keen and Ruth's comments; the subdivision
should go forward and the applicant will have to deal with the requirements,
which could be a re -zone from RS to Single Family (SF), a variance or a PUD -
that they may not be able to make the findings for. Without a slope analysis or a
building design it is difficult for the Commission to comment further.
Staff and the Commission then discussed the possibility of rezoning to make the lots
conforming. Ms. Heffernon stated that the applicant would have to initiate the zone
change request. Director Strong explained the history of the lots in this area and how
this situation transpired and that there were many lots remaining for development.
Case No
App.
Address- =
Description ` .� '`�'_, ;
' Action '
i'Planner v
1. TUP 08 -023
St. Patrick's
Catholic School
900 W. Branch Street
Christmas Tree Fundraiser
A.
J. Bergman
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DECEMBER 2, 2008
The Commission had no further comments.
NOTICES OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS: SINCE NOVEMBER 18, 2008:
The Commission had no concern with this temporary use permit.
V. DISCUSSION ITEMS: None.
VI. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS: None.
VII. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW -UP:
None.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. on a motion by Chair Ray, seconded by
Commissioner Keen.
ATTEST:
LYN REARDON- SMITH,
SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION
AS TO CONTENT:
ROB STRONG,
COMMUNITY DEVELO MENT DIRECTOR
(Minutes approved at the PC meeting of December 16, 2008)
PAGE 6
1