Loading...
PC Minutes 2007-07-171 1 1 CALL TO ORDER - The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chair Ray presiding; also present were Commissioners Keen, Marshall and Tait; Commissioner Barneich was absent. Staff members in attendance were Community Development Director, Rob Strong, Associate Planners, Kelly Heffernon and Ryan Foster, Assistant Planner, Jim Bergman, Planning Intern, Tyler Montgomery, and Public Works Engineer, Victor Devens. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. AGENDA REVIEW: Item II.C. was moved before Item II.A., due to the number of people in the audience present to discuss it. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Marshall made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Keen to approve the minutes of June 19, 2007 as written. The motion was approved on a 4/0 voice vote, Commissioner Barneich being absent this meeting. A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 17, 2007 6:00 P.M. B. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 1. Memo dated July 17, 2007 from Community Development Director Rob Strong regarding Viewshed Review Case No. 07 -007, Agenda Item II.C. 2. Agenda for Historical Resources Committee Meeting on July 18, 2007. II. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: C. VIEWSHED REVIEW CASE NO. 07 -007; APPLICANT — CLARENCE CABREROS; LOCATION — 508 CORNWALL AVENUE Community Development Director, Rob Strong, read his memo dated July 17, 2007 (on file in Community Development Department). Per the City Attorney's instructions, the application fee for Viewshed Review 07 -007 should be refunded, and the applicant may proceed with building permits, as the City does not have discretionary review for this project. Planning Commission may consider making recommendations to the City Council in regards to the Western Addition to 1) add a Design Overlay, 2) reconsider the viewshed review revisions as previously proposed in February 2007, and /or 3) recommend Council initiate a parcel merger ordinance and process to address similar situations. It's not possible under current City regulations to regulate future similar development of narrow lots in the Western Addition. In response to Commissioner Marshall, Mr. Strong explained that the February 2007 viewshed revisions would have made empty Tots subject to Viewshed Review if there was a project involving 2 -story construction, making it more consistent with the purpose and intent section of the code. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 17, 2007 In response to Commissioner Keen, Mr. Strong affirmed that City Council would be reviewing the Viewshed Review process in September. If they propose to do away with the Viewshed Review process, it will be subject to Planning Commission recommendation and the public hearing process, but Planning Commission may want to offer some suggestions based on this case to aid in Council's September discussions. Chair Ray opened the public hearing for public comment. PAGE 2 Clarence Cabreros, applicant, invited neighbors to a meeting last Saturday, and 11 of them signed a petition opposing lot mergers, because they would take away property rights and cause loss of property values. Kimberly Dohle, 515 Cornwall Ave., spoke in support of the narrow houses. When she purchased her home, she felt that part of the price included the ability to later utilize underlying lots. If the City has sewer and water issues, they should be addressed by the City without penalizing homeowners. Patty Quinlan, 511 and 517 Cornwall Ave., also spoke in support of narrow Tots and against lot mergers, which would take away property rights. The City needs to address current parking problems of nearby business employees parking on residential streets. Public Works has said that water lines are scheduled for replacement, and if cost is an issue, this could possibly be mitigated with an assessment fee on Tots where owners want to build two narrow houses. Kristen Hunstad, realtor for Michael and Steve Madsen (who are selling 508 Cornwall Ave. to Mr. Cabreros), read aloud a letter from them in support of "skinny homes" (on file at Community Development Department). Bill Ward, 616 Cornwall Ave., spoke in favor of "skinny homes ". He hasn't had a problem with neighboring narrow lots, and Mr. Cabreros' plan will enhance the neighborhood. He doesn't want mandates against property rights, and this seems like it would help in reaching the State's goal additional housing stock. He doesn't intend to develop his property. The texture of the neighborhood will take a hit with the planned hotel development on Faeh Street. Jim Bergman, 609 Faeh Ave., disclosed that he works for Community Development Department, but was speaking as a citizen tonight. There are many people interested in nearby developments such as the VCA, Police Department expansion, hotel, and suggested lot mergers. He suggests holding neighborhood workshops that go beyond initial reactions to an individual application and from which a comprehensive set of design guidelines and standards could be established for the Western Addition. Louis Brazil, 603 Cornwall Ave., spoke in opposition to doubling the density of structures. 1 1 1 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 17, 2007 Chair Ray closed the public hearing for public comment. PAGE 3 Commission Comments: Tait: • It sounds like all the speakers oppose lot mergers and support skinny homes. • Since Mr. Strong's letter was just presented tonight, there wasn't enough time to think over options and come up with a policy opinion. Keen • When he was on the Commission several years ago, Commission opinion and City policy /State law was that if a dwelling was built over a property line, the underlying lots should be merged. This idea wasn't meant to take anyone's property or devalue it. It's meant to build a neighborhood that people want to live in. Owners bought the existing properties with homes built over the underlying lot lines, and it's meant to keep them happy with what they bought. • This needs to be reviewed and further discussed, before choosing one of the options from Mr. Strong's letter. • The property owners who are willing to sell naturally wouldn't want lot mergers, because that would cost money. However, those who plan to remain there want a neighborhood feel, which traditionally is not from small Tots. Marshall • Since staff has noted the project is off the table, and the public is in support of no action by the City, there's no conflict here. • He was surprised by the focus on lot mergers, as he didn't see much of a case being made for them, and it's not unusual to have 25' lots throughout the County (Cambria, Los Osos, etc.) • What caught his attention was that the proposed design is so similar to what's already been built and that there's not more variety proposed. • He doesn't support pursuit of City initiated lot mergers. • In regards to the need for infill housing, these can be built without concern about health and safety. • State law has more to do with much smaller, fragmented lots, which isn't the case here. • He has some support for the design review process, but it seems like an additional layer of regulation that's not needed here. If there are multiple neighborhood requests, he could consider it. Ray • She was surprised at the focus on the lot merger idea, and not the concept of the growth of this neighborhood, itself. • Arguments in favor of a lot merger would be to preserve the density and character of the neighborhood as is. Since so many people spoke in opposition to lot mergers because of loss of property rights, it should be noted there are other ways to accomplish the same end (such as a design overlay). However, it sounds like the pubic doesn't want anything done, other than parking and sewer improvements. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 17, 2007 PAGE 4 • In summation, she doesn't support lot mergers. There's a way to preserve neighborhood rights and if they want to regulate growth, they can do it in other ways. • There was a suggestion of neighborhood meetings, which she had thought would be a good idea before hearing public comment, but it sounds like the neighbors don't want any additional regulation. If that's the case, she's fine with it. If more narrow lots develop as this is and the neighborhood accepts that, then they get to have a say. Further discussion on Council recommendations: • Commissioner Marshall asked if other commissioners were interested in making a recommendation to Council about bringing the two sections of code regarding viewshed reviews together. o Chair Ray stated they already did in February, and it's in the pipeline, so nothing further is needed. It needs to be dealt with, because if public opinion wasn't in favor of this project, there's nothing they could have done to prevent it. • Commissioner Tait noted he liked the idea of further neighborhood meetings for additional discussion. o Chair Ray agreed that's fine if the public is interested, but it doesn't seem there's a majority in support of that. Commissioner Marshall agreed. Chair Ray noted no motion was appropriate for this project, other than recommending to City Council that they review Planning Commission's previous recommendations regarding viewshed reviews during their September meeting. (Rob congratulated Planning Intern Tyler Montgomery on accepting a position in the Los Angeles area as a professional planner.) A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 07 -003; APPLICANT — JOHN RUDA; LOCATION — 130 S. HALCYON, STE. C. Planning Intern Tyler Montgomery presented the staff report for consideration of a proposal to allow the operation of a small cat boarding facility on the second floor of an existing chiropractic office building. In response to Commissioner Marshall, Mr. Montgomery stated the reason for requiring a handicapped parking space when the upstairs is only accessible by stairway, is to at least bring the bottom floor into conformance with parking standards for the facility. In response to Commissioner Tait, Mr. Montgomery stated that the Fire Department requested it be noted for the record that there's a lack of legal access to the rear of the property due to the overhang, but they did not request a condition to fix it since the only way would be to demolish much of the second story. Chair Ray opened the public hearing for public comment, and seeing none, closed it. Commission Comments: The Commissioners had no problems with the project. 1 1 1 1 1 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 17, 2007 Commissioner Tait made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Keen, to approve Conditional Use Permit Case No. 07 -003 as presented, and adopt: RESOLUTION NO. 07 -2036 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 07 -003, APPLIED FOR BY JOHN RUDA, LOCATED AT 130 SOUTH HALCYON ROAD, SUITE "C" AYES: Commissioners Tait, Keen, Marshall and Chair Ray NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Barneich the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 17 day of July 2007. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 07 -004; APPLICANT — LADERA PLAZA, LLC; REPRESENTATIVE — MARK LONDON; LOCATION — 1200 E. GRAND AVENUE Commissioner Keen stepped down for this item, as he lives within 500' of the project. Planning Intern, Tyler Montgomery, presented the staff report for consideration of a proposal to allow the operation of periodic arts & crafts shows, including vendors in tents, food, and live amplified entertainment; a local farmers' market & coffee /tea bar from one (1) to seven (7) days a week; and periodic hosting during special events. The agenda mistakenly noticed an onsite microbrewery on site, but there would just be beer and wine tasting as described in the staff report. In response to commissioner questions, he stated: the dance studio will remain in existence as is (normally requiring a minor use permit, but falling under the umbrella of this CUP); in addition to the outdoor ADA restroom, there are plans to upgrade an interior restroom with ADA access; the proposed "farmers' market" is more a locally grown produce stand, but upon return for review after six months, the other two certified farmers' markets could be contacted for input in regards to competition; the owner of Rivera's confirmed there is no weekend storage of cars in their lot; some examples of "hosting activities" are fundraiser barbecues and special event exhibits; Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) would give the final approval for licensing, but this building is over 500' from the school buildings; and "live amplified entertainment" would mean using speakers for outdoor events. Chair Ray opened the public hearing for public comment. PAGE 5 Mark London, managing member of Ladera Plaza, LLC, spoke in support of the project. He further described ADA restroom accommodations, the farmers market vision to sell locally grown products, and hosting activities (such as allowing Christiansen Chevrolet to show current vehicles and antique cars during Cruise Night). There are current PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 17, 2007 PAGE 6 ongoing events, and he wanted to consolidate approval for all onsite activites. The amplified entertainment would be for one or two acoustic guitars — not entire bands. The distance from this building to the school structure is over 700 feet. Jeri Sharpe, local hand - crafted soap maker, spoke in support of the project. She spoke on behalf of other artists selling onsite, inviting the community to share the art experience in western Arroyo Grande Meg Johnson, local artist, spoke in support of the project. She's been selling at Hands Gallery in San Luis, and is excited to have a local place to sell her products. It's very important to create a place for artists to share their talents. Evelyn Adames, another business owner working from the building, clarified that the purpose for activities in the parking lot is to draw people in, especially since it's still considered the "Leisure Mart building" and is often unnoticed since it's set back so far from the street. Hopefully, both the art uses and farmers market will fill niches in the community that currently aren't being filled. For instance, many sellers at the two certified farmers markets are from the valley and local growers need an outlet for their products. Chair Ray closed the public hearing for public comment. Commission Comments: Marshall • He really likes this project and the combination of uses. He looks forward to the site potentially becoming a quasi - cultural hub for the western part of the community and is in full support. Tait • He agreed with Commissioner Marshall, particularly that art and music is needed in that part of the City and not just in the Village. He likes to hear the farmers market will fill a niche. Ray • She agreed with Commissioner Tait, and thanked the local artists who explained the vision of this site bringing art to the City. She's happy to give small business owners a chance. Commissioner Marshall made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Ray, to approve Conditional Use Permit Case No. 07 -004 as presented, and adopt: RESOLUTION NO. 07 -2037 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 07 -004, APPLIED FOR BY LADERA PLAZA, LLC (MARK LONDON, REPRESENTATIVE), LOCATED AT 1200 EAST GRAND AVENUE 1 1 1 1 1 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 17, 2007 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioner Marshall, Chair Ray, and Commissioner Tait None Commissioner Barneich Commissioner Keen the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 17 day of July 2007. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING LOT MERGER 07 -001; LOCATED AT 573 CROWN HILL; APPLIED FOR BY JERRY SANGER PAGE 7 D. LOT MERGER CASE NO. 07 -001; APPLICANT — JERRY SANGER; LOCATION — 573 CROWN HILL Commissioner Keen returned for this item and the rest of the meeting. Associate Planner, Ryan Foster, presented the staff report for consideration of a proposal to merge twelve (12) non - conforming lots into a total of three (3) lots in the Single - Family (SF) zoning district. Commissioner Tait thanked Mr. Foster for representing the City at the Board of Supervisors meeting regarding SLO GreenBuild. In response to his question if architectural and viewshed reviews are also being approved, Mr. Foster responded that those two would normally just be reported on the consent list, so yes. In response to Commissioner Keen, Mr. Foster replied that fire sprinkler condition #5 only applied to new construction (not existing buildings), hence the difference between that and condition #11. Chair Ray opened the public hearing for public comment. Jerry Sanger, applicant, clarified that the lot merger is from 8 (not 12) to 3 lots. Bill McCann, 575 Crown Hill, stated he has no objection to the lot merger. Chair Ray closed the public hearing for public comment. Commission Comments: All Commissioners commented that they had no concerns with the project. Commissioner Keen made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tait, to approve Lot Merger Case No. 07 -001, and adopt: RESOLUTION NO. 07 -2038 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 17, 2007 AYES: Commissioners Keen, Tait, Marshall, and Chair Ray NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Barneich the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 17 day of July 2007. 7:25 p.m. Commissioners took a 5- minute break. PAGE 8 III. NON - PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: A. PRE - APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. 07 -004; APPLICANT — ASPEN PROPERTIES, LLC; REPRESENTATIVE — PRAGNA PATEL; LOCATION — VACANT LOT ON SOUTHWEST CORNER OF CEDAR and ASPEN STREETS. Associate Planner, Kelly Heffernon, presented the staff report for a proposal for an affordable housing development, consisting of six houses, two secondary dwellings, and two open space parcels. Garage roofs will not be flat as shown. She noted that if this project moves forward, staff will update the affordable housing ordinance for consistency with the Certified Housing Element and recent state laws. In response to Commissioner questions, she stated that there are eight proposed dwelling units (including six lots, two of which have secondary units); the two units on Cedar Street will be sold at market rate and do not have secondary units; the secondary units would be rentals (to help the property owner make mortgage payments); concessions can be made, since this will come forward as a Planned Unit Development, and the affordable component is such a major factor in it; SAC did not have "major" concerns, but they requested an interior fire hydrant, parking improvements (some backout spaces and landscape areas need to be reconfigured), and reconfiguration of the corner house setback to aid with site distance; and some circulation issues will have to be cleaned up with submittal of the formal application. Chair Ray opened the public hearing for public comment. Pragna Patel, applicant, spoke in support of the project, giving history and reasons for doing it. She's owned the property for 3 -4 years, and bought it with the intent to provide affordable housing for her hotel employees, who are 70 -80% in the lower income bracket. Most employees live in the Five Cities area already. She described in further detail the open space amenities (like benches for "chit chat "), need for employee affordable housing due to retention issues, and willingness to make changes as already suggested by SAC and ARC. She is hoping employees can start off by renting, and then purchase units. The secondary units are like studio apartments (not three bedroom homes). They will reconsider parking and corner lot setback arrangements. She didn't want attached or stacked housing, and it doesn't have to be ugly just because it's affordable — she'd like to keep it green and a nice environment for employees to live in. She's learned about designing environmentally friendly projects from a recent one in Cambria and hopes to use similar techniques here. 1 1 1 1 1 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 17, 2007 Chair Ray closed the public hearing for public comment. PAGE 9 Commissioner comments: Marshall • He liked the sentiment that ARC expressed about this project "providing harmony to a disharmonious area ". • He had concerns about parking in the back corner, but is glad that will be fixed upon resubmittal. • It looks like a nice transition between MF and SF housing. Keen • He also noted the site distance issue identified by ARC. The corner house does need to be set back further. • He's glad the garages won't have flat roofs. • It's basically a good concept and he appreciates what they're doing. • He's glad they're saving the oak trees. • Parking needs to be redesigned, but he didn't have any suggested solutions. Tait • He's also glad about saving the oak trees. • They're on the right track and it's a good start. The suggestions regarding parking, circulation and the corner house setback need to be taken into account upon resubmittal. • Secondary units are another form of affordable housing and a great idea. They provide for a stable neighborhood and flexible household structures, by offering both community and privacy. • He likes the large common areas, open space, playground, pedestrian paths and porous pavers. • He thanked and commended the applicant for her affordable housing efforts. • He applauds the environmentally friendly landscaping and materials, and suggested the applicant discuss green building further with City staff. • Affordable units should not look much different from the market rate units, so as not to segregate them. • This should be an attractive project and he looks forward to seeing it again. Ray • She thanked SAC and ARC for doing the bulk of review. • She likes the idea of a built -in community concept and that it's gone way beyond traditional affordable housing projects with a fresh approach. • The parking obviously will need to be redesigned. • They may need to present a shared maintenance agreement for the property as a whole in the form of a HOA or other agreement.. B. PRE - APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. 06 -006; APPLICANT — GREG WOODARD; LOCATION — PIKE & ELM Associate Planner, Ryan Foster, presented the staff report for a proposal for a 25 -unit residential development on 1.27 acres. Some main points for Planning Commission PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 17, 2007 PAGE 10 discussion are appropriate density, parking, and the ag buffer. In response to commissioner questions, he stated that density is based on gross area; if a commercial component were added, it would depend on the design as to whether they could maintain a density of 20 units; the zoning was changed from General Commercial to Office Mixed Use (OMU) for General Plan consistency, but that doesn't mean it has to include "offices "; the ag buffer dimensions as presented were determined by the applicant and his licensed landscape architect, David Foote; the reasons for considering the 7 -11 as part of the commercial component for mixed use are that these parcels wrap around it and there are only four mixed use parcels in the area, and any commercial business would want street frontage which isn't possible with the ag buffer. Chair Ray opened the public hearing for public comment. Steve Puglisi, project architect, spoke in support of the project and shared plans with Commissioners (on file in Community Development Department). He took comments from last year's similar project, and tried to implement solutions to concerns, particularly the ag buffer, commercial aspect, and parking. They maintained similar Spanish character architecture and have provided more detailed plans for review. In response to Commissioner questions, Mr. Puglisi stated the distance between active ag land and the internal park is probably about 140'; the applicant does not own the 7 -11 property; the client probably would be willing to stripe bike lanes on Elm Street as part of concession negotiations for the added density; the client also would probably be willing to restrict left -hand turn lanes (but he would need further discussion on this); and they haven't discussed shared parking with 7 -11, as they didn't feel it was appropriate to continue discussion without a commercial component to this project. Chair Ray closed the public hearing for public comment. Commissioner comments: Marshall: • He's comfortable with the density assumption, since the 7 -11 serves as the neighborhood store, and it helps the City achieve additional housing needs. • The buffer is okay to meet some of the parking requirements, but he needs additional information to determine the appropriateness of the buffer distance. While it's probably necessary, he would rather not see the masonry wall on Elm Street, since he has a strong aversion to walled off communities. • He encourages completion of bike lanes. • The applicant should study the left turn issue onto The Pike. • Make sure the trash enclosure doesn't conflict with parking spaces. Keen: • He understands the mixed use rationale for this project, but wouldn't want to set a precedent for other applicants. At the same time, there may be other ways to justify the 20 du /acre density. • He's happy with the ag setback. • He's concerned about people in the smaller units finding a place to park. 1 1 1 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 17, 2007 Tait: Ray PAGE 11 • It's good the applicant retained David Foote, a well- respected landscape architect, to work on the ag buffer. It's appropriate that the playground is also over 100' away. • They may need to reconsider some parking locations. • Do consider the bike lane striping and left turn restriction onto The Pike. • Consider pedestrian access from the project to 7 -11. • Don't use the ag buffer for any additional parking, but do consider an agreement with 7 -11. • Don't segregate the housing plans by income. Look into distributing the affordable units within the market rate units, and make sure affordable units don't look different than market rate units. • He's not sure about whether density should be based on mixed use or not. It seems the only reason to lower density would be to add green space, but it's not a big deal right now. • This is a much better project than previously presented, easier to understand, and on the whole, she really likes this project. • Conceptually, it's fine without a commercial component. • The ag buffer distance is appropriate as is, except for the parking shouldn't be in the ag buffer and the park should be eliminated (so it functions as just a buffer). • She prefers higher density to additional open space, but doesn't have the magic number of appropriate du /ac. The issue isn't whether there's a commercial element, but why they would get a density bonus here. • Do consider pedestrian access to 7 -11. • Commissioner Keen made a good point about not setting a precedent here. • Parking for plan C needs to be redesigned, perhaps by re- working interior floorplans for B, C, and D. Also, there's a big change in density across the project, which could be worked on. • Take another look at the trash enclosure on South Elm Street. • She doesn't care either way about the masonry wall and trusts David Foote to come up with an appropriate plan. • Reconsider exit options onto The Pike — perhaps reconfigure where garages are so access gets wider rather than narrower. IV. REFERRAL ITEMS FOR COMMISSION ACTION/ NOTICES OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS SINCE JUNE 19, 2007. Cased 1. TUP 07 -009 2. TUP 07 -011 3. LFDC 07 -003 l 1pp. M. London T. Kelley Transitions Address 1200 E. Grand Ave. Village area 203 Bridge Street ) escrptiona Outdoor events, sales and activities during July 2007. Horse drawn carriage rides Operation of a Large Family Adult Day Care for Mentally ill Adults Action ;A A A. A. Planner T. Montgomery J. Paulding J. Bergman C aseNo App , Address ° ; A . __- Description Action �.. Planner 4. TUP 07 -010 G. Fick 701 North Parkcenter Drive Albertsons remodel A. J. Paulding 5. PPR 07 -007 & MEX 07 007 J. Tibbits 1173 Fair Oaks Ave. Minor Exception to allow four (4) fewer off- street parking spaces than normally required for apartment complex expansion A. T. Montgomery 6. MEX 07 -008 E.T. York 182 Tally Ho Road Allowance of illegally converted garage in existence when applicant purchased property A. T. Montgomery PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 17, 2007 PAGE 12 Planning Commissioners asked several detailed questions regarding the administrative items, but did not pull any of them for public hearing. V. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Assistant Planner, Jim Bergman, presented the staff report for discussion on Minor Exception Case No. 07 -009 (setback exception) for a proposed garage addition at 703 Cornwall Avenue. He explained that different options had explored, and this worked best for the applicant to continue the line of an existing legal nonconforming setback. In response to Commissioner questions, he discussed which was the rear versus sideyard setbacks. No public was left in the room to make any comments. Commission comments: Ray • It's compatible with surrounding uses, consistent with goals and objectives of the General Plan, and minor in scale. Looking at the site plan, it adds symmetry. Keen • He agreed with Chair Ray. Marshall • He expressed concern about maximum lot coverage, particularly impervious structures that would negatively affect drainage systems and the creek if the applicant later decided to add on to the house. At the same time, he didn't want to inflate the issue. Tait • Does this project meet or exceed maximum lot coverage requirements? Mr. Bergman replied they're right at the 40% limit, so any additions would have to be requested via a Variance, which requires very strict findings to be made. Commissioner Marshall made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Keen to approve Minor Exception Case No. 07 -009 as submitted. The motion was approved on a 4/0 voice vote. VI. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS: Commissioner Tait asked if there were any restrictions in the code regarding a large for sale banner in the Rancho Grande area. Mr. Strong replied yes - it should not be there. 1 1 1 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 17, 2007 VII. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW -UP: Mr. Strong reported that City Council recently approved striping of new bike lanes on Halcyon to 101, per the recommendation of Traffic Commission. Hopefully, Council will also approve bike lanes for the middle segment of East Grand Avenue. For the August 7 meeting, Chair Ray and Commissioner Keen will be absent. Commissioners Marshall and Tait confirmed they would be present. VIII. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. ATTEST: KATHY M DOZA for LYN 't • RDON -SMITH SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION AS TO CONTENT: R B STRONG COMMUNITY DEVELO MENT DIRECTOR (Minutes approved at the PC meeting of , 2007) PAGE 13 1 1