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