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