Loading...
PC Minutes 2007-12-18II II 1 CALL TO ORDER - The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chair Ray presiding; also present were Commissioners Barneich and Keen; Commissioners Marshall, and Tait were absent. Staff member in attendance was Community Development Director, Rob Strong. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. AGENDA REVIEW: No changes. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of December 4, 2007 were approved as written on a 3/0 voice vote, Commissioners Marshall and Tait being absent. A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 18, 2007 6:00 P.M. B. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS AFTER AGENDA PREPARATION: 1. Memo from Mark Vasquez, Architect, regarding Village Residential District concerns and item II.A. Architectural Review 07 -007. 2. Memo from Planning Commissioner Marshall, with comments on agenda item II.A. Architectural Review 07 -007. 3. Memo from Gary Scherquist, Architect, with comments on agenda item II.A. Architectural Review 07 -007. II. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: A. APPEAL OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW 07 -007; APPLICANT — BILL COCKSHOTT; LOCATION — SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WHITELEY AND IDE STREETS Director Strong presented the staff report, prepared by Associate Planner, Ryan Foster, for consideration of an appeal of the approval of Architectural Review 07 - 007 plans to construct a new two - story, 2,795 square - foot single - family home on a 6,996 square - foot lot in the Village of Arroyo Grande. He stated that this was initially approved by the ARC and appealed after the last Planning Commission meeting which was requested to allow discussion due to concern regarding the size of home in relation to the lot size (mansionization). The staff recommendation is to deny the appeal and approve the architectural review. The Commission had no questions regarding the staff report. Chair Ray opened the public hearing for public comment. Jennifer Martin, architect, LGA, gave a brief description and the history of the proposed project. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 18, 2007 Commission Comments: PAGE 2 Bill Cockshott, applicant, stated he grew up in the Village and always lived in the area and had really studied the Spanish style architecture and thought they had followed the Village Design Guidelines. At this time the Commission had no questions. Mike Brogno, 308 Whiteley Street, feels this proposal is too big no matter how it looks architecturally as a very large house (he called it Costco) has already been built on the corner near his house and it looks awful. Barneich: • The Spanish style totally fits the neighborhood; the architect did a good job, so did the ARC; she loves all the details; however, if it was on a larger lot it would work beautifully; the scale and mass is a problem; she does not think this can be fixed without reducing the square footage. • She cannot make finding No. 4 (which requires the general appearance of the proposal to be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood). The lot is smaller than a standard lot, it's on a prominent corner, it's 2800 sq. ft.; two -story and has the minimum setback. About a year ago I made the mistake of approving the large Pace Brothers built homes on Whiteley Street whilst I was on the ARC and cannot live that down. • She disagrees with Commissioner Marshall's memo, Item No. 3, where it states, ... "if this project fully complies with the rules that the City has established for building on this property, then it would be difficult to not approve it..." This project does comply with the Development Code, but not with the Village Design Guidelines and Standards for Historic Districts and these go hand -in -hand. The Planning Commission has discretion due to the fact that the proposed project is in the Village D -2.4 Overlay District and is subject to the Design Guidelines, reference page 6, one of the objectives states "to ensure that new construction and renovation of existing buildings are compatible with the historic character of the Village area and surrounding neighborhood ". • I hope that there will be a redesign and the Commission will be able to review this proposal again. Keen: • He thought Commissioner Barneich's comments were well made, but disagreed with most of them - this is a legitimate project and meets all the building standards, codes, setbacks and the Design Guidelines. • If the City wants to stop large houses being built in the Village the Guidelines need to be revised and not tell an applicant they cannot build when their project meets the Guidelines. Regarding the Pace built house on Whiteley Street, at the time that was approved the City was encouraging second units on a property, that opinion has now changed and the houses are too big after the City encouraged more building on smaller Tots. 11 1 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 18, 2007 PAGE 3 • He is not willing to deny this house being built when it meets the Design Guidelines and Standards. Ray: • I appealed the project due to the exact reasons contained in the three letters received today that basically stated, 1) "The subject project is too large and is too massive for the character of the Village Residential... ". 2) "If we don't like this type of product in this location, then we need to take another look at the rules which allow it before the next project comes along. We can't get in the habit of changing the rules on people after they are in the system." 3) "To see an example of what the outcome could be regarding scale, you only have to look next door to Shell Beach area..." • She had been hoping to have the full Commission present tonight to discuss this proposal; however, she can approve the proposal the way it is now as the architect did a fantastic job - they met the Guidelines. The ARC did a great job also. • Because she had been conflicted she looked to the Creek Moratorium to enable her to approve this even though she does not believe that this is the right mass and scale for the Village. • She would like to give specific directions to staff to go ahead and start the process of revising the Village Design Guidelines & Standards and have a community discussion as there is increasing pressure to build houses in the Village that approach mansionization and not what she wants to see in the Village. Chair Ray asked for any further discussion before making a motion. Discussion: Commissioner Barneich stated that the Planning Commission has discretion to review the project. It does fit with the Development Code, but the Design Guidelines talks about fitting with the character of the Village. Why should the Guidelines be revised when it already includes language we can pull from to decide if something like this fits. Mr. Strong agreed that the Design Guidelines do include a case -by -case consideration of compatibility with the historic character, but scale and mass have only recently emerged as a basic dilemma. The reason staff feels that the Design Guidelines and standards should specifically address mass and scale with more clarity is to provide more guidance up front - that is the purpose of the Design Guidelines and Standards. If it fits the FAR, setbacks and the coverage it's difficult to say this does not conform; it would be easy to say it does not conform if it were architecturally incompatible (and Spanish Eclectic is one of the specifically recommended styles). The staff's recommendation reflects that this was supported by the ARC after full design review and it was only because of concern of possible precedent setting that the Commission Chair appealed it. If this is a concern we need to make it a priority to adopt new guidelines that would prevent mansionization as other communities in the County have already done so. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 18, 2007 Ray: • If we decide as a neighborhood and City and start discussion in areas where we have concern, such as mass and scale, then we take out some of the subjectivity or randomness of what can get approved. Keen: • Guidelines can be interpreted in different ways for different people. • He agreed that ideas need to be tied down. Barneich: • Thought it was the job of the Commission to have a feel for the neighborhood and the people who live in the Village, why they live here, and what makes it attractive and she is disappointed. She does not feel that this project is right for the Village and that this needs to be fixed before another proposal comes forward. Mr. Strong stated with regard to the Pace Brothers houses, it was a City advisory body that bought this project forward for reconsideration, as was this proposal, and after notification no neighbors came forward. If it is of such concern to the Village neighborhood when we discuss size and scale hopefully they will come to the meetings to help establish the appropriate standards and it will not be left to the City advisory bodies alone. Commissioner Barneich stated that this is a beautiful house and there was nothing she would change about it except the scale and the mass; just picture this size house on every lot in the Village. Chair Ray made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Keen, to deny the appeal and approve the Architectural Review with the modifications that the ARC had recommended. and adopt: RESOLUTION 07 -2051 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 07 -007, APPLIED FOR BY BILL AND VIOLA COCKSHOTT, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WHITELEY AND IDE The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Chair Ray and Commissioner Keen NOES: Commissioner Barneich ABSENT: Commissioners Tait & Marshall The foregoing Resolution was adopted this 18 day of December 2007. PAGE 4 1 II II 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 18, 2007 III. NON - PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: None. IV. NOTICES OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS: SINCE DECEMBER 4, 2007: None. PAGE 5 V. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1. Preliminary Revisions to Non - residential Parking Standards: Mr. Strong presented the discussion and stated that generally most zoning ordinances are outdated and provide many times the actual need for parking and are many times counter- productive to the compact character of the community we hope to achieve in Arroyo Grande. The only critical issues of concern at this time, within the parking standards, are the three items stated in my memo to you: 1) Allowing for Conditional Use Permit rather than Variance process when it is not feasible or desirable to provide all or part of required parking on the same site as new development (Change 16.56.020 A.3.). 2) Correcting or clarifying incomplete, obsolete, or incorrect graphics such as ADA space dimensions and outlining Village Mixed Use parking alternatives (Amend 16.56.020 C.2 and 16.56.070 regarding access for off - street parking facilities, and 16.56.140. 3.C.) regarding off - street parking structure design standards. 3) The only significant change suggested by staff would be to simplify and reduce the Village Core and Village Mixed -Use parking requirement for restaurants and bars (including cafes, coffee shops and specialty food facilities) to the same standard of one space per 300 sq. ft. of gross floor area, as general retail and office uses in the Village. Mr. Strong requested the Commission to discuss the suggested changes to the parking standards and either initiate the recommended changes or refer to the Downtown Parking Advisory Board and City Council for their comment before a Public Hearing is initiated. In reply to a question from Commissioner Keen, Mr. Strong explained that it would be preferable to delete the graphics shown in the Development Code regarding ADA parking spaces and just refer to the UBC adopted by the City. Commissioner Barneich, stated she agrees with the intent of Item No. 3, but she has some concerns with such a drastic reduction in the parking requirement and asked if it would be better to go to one space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. Mr. Strong clarified that changes for only being recommended for the Village Downtown Core; he is aware that some businesses have a lot less parking requirement, but in the Village when there is a "change in use" that can change too. Commissioner Barneich stated that she would like to encourage more restaurants in the Village so she could agree to this recommended change. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 18, 2007 PAGE 6 Commissioner Keen stated he agreed with the suggested changes as they would encourage more business in the Village. Chair Ray also agreed with Commissioner Keen and Barneich that was a good idea as it would encourage more business in the Village and that it would really in line with parking for mixed use. Chair Ray made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Barneich, to initiate consideration of an ordinance to change the parking standards; the motion was approved on a 3/0 voice vote. 2. Tentative Schedule for Conservation and Open Space Element: Mr. Strong discussed the proposed preliminary work program outlining the content of the proposed tentative Conservation element, stating that it was an ambitious schedule which would take about a year to complete; due to budget constraints this year any of the Elements that would require consultant assistance are being modified to the minimum and have staff take care of criteria. In reply to a question from Commissioner Keen, Mr. Strong stated that although the Agriculture element is one of the most important the City has undertaken it is optional so we may set it aside and concentrate on the Conservation and Open Space elements. Commissioner Keen if the Ag Element was separated out when would this take place? Mr. Strong replied that the Ag Element is optional so this may be dealt with at a later date and concentrate on Conservation and Open Space. VI. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS: Chair Ray stated she would like to make a specific request to require a joint meeting of the Planning Commission /ARC to discuss the matter of mass and scale in the Village in the very near future. She does not want this to be delayed after what she has listened to this evening. Mr. Strong stated that he expected some major projects to be coming forward for consideration early next year, but agreed with Chair Ray that a discussion should take place in a joint meeting with the Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Committee to be scheduled in February. Commissioner Keen agreed that a joint Planning /ARC meeting be arranged, but the agenda should be concentrated on a discussion on the size and scale of buildings as related to the Village district to give all parties time to address the concerns expressed. Chair Ray agreed that the meeting should specifically address size and scale as related to the Village Design Guidelines and Standards. 1 II II 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 18, 2007 VII. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW -UP: None. VIII. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m. on a motion by Chair Ray, seconded by Commissioner Keen. ATTEST: w l. // LYN REARDON- SMITH, SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION AS TO C •,; TENT: ROB STRO COMMUNITY DEVEL • PMENT DIRECTOR (Minutes approved at the PC meeting of January 15, 2008) PAGE 7 1 1