PC Minutes 2004-02-031
1
CALL TO ORDER — The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with
Chair Guthrie presiding; also present were Commissioners Arnold, Brown, Keen and
Fowler. Staff members in attendance were Community Development Director, Rob Strong,
Associate Planner, Teresa McClish, Assistant Planners, Ryan Foster and Jim Bergman, and
Public Works Engineer, Victor Devens.
AGENDA REVIEW: Item III.E was scheduled to be heard at 8:00 p.m. so was taken out of
order; Item IV.A was heard before item III.E. due to the public waiting to make comment.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of December 16, 2004 were unanimously
approved as written on a 5/0 voice vote.
A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None.
B. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None.
111. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
MINUTES
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004 — 6:00 P.M.
11. MINOR USE PERMITS APPROVED SINCE NOVEMBER 18, 2003 - SUBJECT TO 10-
DAY APPEAL:
A.
aseNo
VSR 03 -014
PPR 04 -001
TUP 03 -010
Ap pl i c ant :
J. & C. Ponton
Village
Massage
K. Achadjian
dress
1236 Brighton
Ave
102 E Branch #D
1294 E. Grand
Ave
escriptio`n ;:.'
2nd story addition of 497 s.f. with roof deck of
283 s.f.
Therapeutic Massage Center
Soil & groundwater remediation system to
mitigate contamination associated with the site.
Planner
J. Bergman
A. Koch
A. Koch /K.
Krasnove)
After discussion the Commission had no concerns with approval of these items.
Mr. Strong reported that yesterday the ARC approved an application for architectural
alterations, and final color and materials for a 6,000 sq. ft. retail building, adjacent to the
Santa Lucia Bank building and under construction. Mr. Strong described the architecture of
the building. Chair Guthrie said he would like to see the plans before approval.
A. CONTINUED ITEM: RECONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS CASE
NOS. 98 -572, 98 -573 & 01 -005; APPLICANTS — RUSS SHEPPEL & KEVIN
KENNEDY; LOCATION —1299 JAMES WAY
Mr. Strong presented the staff report and recommended both permits be given a four month
time extension to June 3, 2004 to complete parking and access changes and interim period
management and monitoring programs prepared by a qualified traffic consultant. The
results to be reported at a June 1, 2004 continued public hearing to review findings and
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004
PAGE 2
recommendations based on March through May monitoring of operations; the City requires
a deposit of funds from both applicants in the amount of $5,750 for costs that will be
incurred.
Chair Guthrie opened the Public Comment.
John Belsher, Attorney for Russ Sheppel, made brief comments and distributed reductions
showing proposed revisions to the master plan including some mixed -use residential units
incorporated; proposed signage and striping both in the lot and on the street; opening the
entrance into the Kennedy property to provide better circulation; trash area relocation; all
these changes will be reviewed over the next few months.
In answer to Commission questions Mr. Belsher said they were optimistic that tenants were
happy with the changes and that the traffic study would demonstrate this and empty tenant
spaces will be filled.
Manager, Kennedy Club Fitness, agreed with Mr. Belsher and had a couple of suggestions
to improve some areas of the signage.
Steve Orosz, Traffic Engineer, in answer to Commission questions:
• The traffic report will include recommendations and implementation of signage,
driveways, striping, where people park and where they go, which buildings are
used and type of visitor.
• They will be doing driveway counts, which way they are turning to evaluate for
Public Works the best driveway solution.
• All factors will be taken into consideration to develop criteria; this time of the year
is the best time of year to monitor the parking.
Russ Sheppel, owner, thanked the City for their help in rectifying the situation; within days of
the news signage being placed tenant interest has already improved; the remaining property
showing the proposed residential, suggested by the City, will make maximum use of the
parking.
Chair Guthrie closed the Public Comment.
Commission Comments:
• They were in favor of the four -month extension for review of the parking and access.
• Re the mixed -use residential they were in favor of this; would like to see parking in
front of the garages; some type of patio space, but would prefer not to comment
further as it is premature.
• If there is a problem with parking at the Kennedy Fitness for the weekday classes
from 9:00 am to 12 noon then this needs to be addressed by operational changes or
restrictions.
• Staff has been extremely patient with the applicants and has worked very hard to
reach this point.
1
1
1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004
• It is confusing to have two entrances and one exit so this needs to be looked at; it
may be better to create separate entry and exit as requested by both owners.
• If the proposed residential units were moved to the right could the exit drive be
moved to the right also?
• In the future this may still not be enough parking for the Kennedy Fitness Club.
• They were hopeful that the shared parking would succeed and the parking study
would help.
Commissioner Arnold made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to request the
applicants to place a deposit for the traffic and parking monitoring program to commence
and to continue consideration of the parking to the June 1, 2004 Commission meeting.
The motion was approved on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Arnold, Fowler, Brown, Keen and Chair Guthrie
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
PAGE 3
B. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 03 -005; APPLICANT — RICHARD
SHARP; LOCATION — S. ELM & THE PIKE
Assistant Planner, Ryan Foster presented the staff report giving an overview of the project:
• The Commission previously considered approval of this project at the November 18,
2003 meeting.
• The applicant had met with area neighbors at a workshop on January 28, 2004.
• The applicant is requesting waiver of the undergrounding of utilities and the following
revisions had been made to the project:
1. An indoor community space had been provided;
2. An elevator had been provided next to the community room;
3. The parking garage had been brought up to grade and now includes sixty -one
parking spaces;
4. The age restriction has been raised to sixty -two and over;
5. The second story units have been re- designed to maximize privacy; and
6. The project will include a bus shelter.
7. Consistency with the Housing Element; this project is entitled to the density
bonus and four units will be dedicated to affordable housing.
• Parking has been expanded from the previous plan, but is still below what the
Development Code requires; deviation from these standards can be approved as part
of the PUD process; adjacent jurisdictions require similar parking.
• ARC reviewed this and requested the applicant submit a revised landscape plan and
change the shingle types on some of the units.
In conclusion, Mr. Foster recommended the Commission adopt the Resolution approving
Tentative Tract Map 03 -005 and Planned Unit Development 03 -005 to subdivide three
parcels totaling 1.27 -acres in size, located at the corner of the Pike and Elm Street into forty
senior condominium units.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004
PAGE 4
In answer to Commission Comments and questions Mr. Foster stated that the distance from
the project to the County Agricultural field was approximately 100 feet; there were no
examples of senior housing with reduced parking in other jurisdictions.
Chair Guthrie opened the Public Comment.
Richard Sharp, Owner, stated at the neighborhood meeting it was requested that there only
be one entry in and out; the Temple of the People, owner of the Agricultural land, are
intending to have all organic gardening and requested that no building take place on their
side of the street; he requested that the Commission allow the moderate housing.
Commission Comments:
Arnold:
• He pointed out inconsistencies in the elevations of the site plans and had concern
that the design would interfere with privacy of the neighbors and would reduce the
amount of landscape for buffering.
• Assigned parking for units: he would like to see some sort of restriction to allow only
one vehicle due to parking restriction. Mr. Sharp said the traffic study was done
before the age restriction and was still showing less parking required; some people
may want two cars and some none.
Brown:
• With respect to moderate housing that the City is not getting low or very low built and
suggested a mixture of moderate and low. Mr. Sharp said the project was already
very tight.
Anne McMullen, 7321 S Elm Street, stated she was not able to attend the workshop but she
was in favor of the project. Her concerns were privacy for the neighbors that the project
may be underparked and could cause people to be parking in front of her house; the
driveway exit as proposed was too close to Seven Eleven and would be dangerous. Mr.
Sharp answered that all windows, except one on the corner (not allowed by code) have
been raised; he agreed that there should only be one driveway in and out.
Chair Guthrie closed the Public Comment.
Commission Comments:
Arnold:
• It was difficult to approve the project because of inconsistencies in the plans; thought
the project underparked unless conditioned for one car; suggested no parking on the
street for safety; agree with waiving of undergrounding of utilities, but would like to
see in -lieu fees; possible rental of the affordable four units. Mr. Strong explained that
for home ownership, low income or very low income would not be feasible for this
project, but they could be restricted to rental.
Fowler:
• She commended the applicant for his efforts to meet with the neighbors; she did not
have problem with having only one driveway, but would be preferable away from Elm
Street; agreed with waiving of undergrounding of utilities; like to have one of the units
1
1
1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004
PAGE 5
low income; suggested the bus stop be on Elm near the front of the units; many
families of over 62 do have only one car so does not think this project is underparked.
Brown:
• He agreed with undergrounding of utilities; has serious reservations on parking, but
there are no examples to see so this will be test case; he was distressed that the
plans did not reflect what is going forward; with respect to affordability he agreed with
Mr. Strong, but felt the City is not meeting State requirements for low and very low
income housing, it's just not happening; he would like to see a mix of low and
moderate income units.
Keen:
• He agreed with the other Commissioners that the applicant had made a good effort to
make all the revisions requested by City; he agreed with waiving of the
undergrounding of utilities; he had no problem with exits in and out; the fire chief has
asked that this project be conditioned to meet with him to discuss where the utility
rooms (gas and electric) are situated.
Guthrie:
• He thought the parking would be sufficient because of the increase in the age; stated
there may be an access problem for visitors; a single entrance and exit was great if it
could be conditioned. Mr. Strong explained that with a PUD it could be conditioned
to have an exception. Chair Guthrie further stated that undergrounding should be
waived; rentals within this project would not work and that it would not be feasible to
require low or very low- income units; he would like to see the four units as moderate -
income. The bus stop should be on the Pike as this is the bus route; he asked if the
concerns with the plans could be addressed in the conditions.
Mr. Foster said the landscape plans are to be revised for the ARC and a complete set of
revised plans could be requested for review. Commissioner Arnold said he would attend the
ARC and review the plans.
Anne McMullen, spoke again, requesting two more parking spaces be required and said
there had been considerable rejection to the units being rented out.
Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Arnold to approve the
Tentative Tract Map 03 -005 and Planned Unit Development 03 -005, with the following
amendment to conditions:
1. Condition No. 57 (undergrounding of utilities) be removed.
2. Addition of a condition that placement of utilities be approved by the Fire chief.
3. Four units be considered for moderate income.
4. Location of the exit to be determined by Public Works based on safety and
engineering issues.
5. A complete set of plans to be submitted, fully reflecting any changes to ARC, prior to
approval.
6. The bus stop to be located on The Pike.
7. The western unit lower patios be moved to the side and additional landscaping
(trees) be added as a buffer between the western units.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004
The Commission adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 04 -1914
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 03 -005 AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 03 -005
LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF THE PIKE AND ELM STREET,
APPLIED FOR BY RICHARD SHARP
The Motion was approved on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Brown, Arnold, Fowler, Keen and Chair Guthrie
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 3rd day of February 2004.
The Commission took a five - minute break.
PAGE 6
8:15 p.m.
E. STAFF PROJECT CASE NO. 03 -022 - CITY HALL STUDY; APPLICANT — CITY OF
ARRYO GRANDE; LOCATION — CITYWIDE
Mr. Strong introduced Architect Mr. Fred Sweeney Jr. of Phillips, Metsch, Sweeney and
Moore (PMSM) who is preparing a study on City facility needs and alternative solutions and
locations for a future City Hall complex development.
Mr. Sweeney then gave a status report and presentation explaining alternatives for City Hall
complex needs, showing site locations, explaining criteria's and the advantages and
disadvantages for the alternative sites. Mr. Sweeney stated that after study they had
reduced the ten initial alternative sites to five or six and proceeded to give a detailed
description of these sites. He would like to hear Commission suggestions, observations and
comments.
Commission Comments:
Fowler:
• The Nelson Green was bought for a new City Hall 15 years ago and asked if this was
discounted due to the feelings of the community. Mr. Sweeney explained that after
study they felt this site was out of the Village and would be within a neighborhood of
one -story residential buildings plus historic buildings now occupy this property.
Brown:
• Commended Mr. Sweeney on the presentation and asked how the needs
assessment was done. Mr. Sweeney explained how the assessment was done, and
thought they had come up with a fairly conservative figure for the square footage
needed and in fact the City Council suggested that additional space may be required.
The study had looked at a 10 -year projection. Commissioner Brown said he would
1
1
1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004
like to see the needs assessment. Mr. Sweeney said he would provide that
information.
In answer to a question from Chair Guthrie, Mr. Sweeney stated that the present three City
Buildings totaled 7,000 sq ft. (not including the Council Chambers), which is approximately
3,000 sq. ft.
Chair Guthrie opened the Public Comment.
PAGE 7
Chuck Fellows, Chairman of Preserve the Village, stated there had been low attendance at
previous workshops and he thought that this may be due to the fact that public notices for
the workshops stated that funds were not available to build at this time. In an attempt to
solicit more input he had mailed a letter to members of the Preserve the Village, a copy of
which the Commission had been given; he had received 48 written comments (he read
some of the comments); most of the comments favored keeping the City Hall in it's present
location, adaptively reusing it and keeping it consistent with the character of the Village and
that City property be used for any extension of parking.
Sherry Wilcox, Ash Street, stated she had attended the previous workshops and she would
not like to see the present City Hall dramatically altered; would like to see a parking
structure behind City Hall, but remodel and maintain the same flavor of present buildings.
Steve Ross, Garden Street, stated the needs of the City should be considered; would not
like to see Nelson Green change as it is the only park area in Village; the Loomis complex is
not an adequate area; the City Hall should remain in the Village; the old buildings could
come down and new ones be put up; he was not in favor of closing Crown Hill.
Eddie El Helou, owner Broadway Jewelers, stated in his view there is a great need for more
commercial space; he would like to see City Hall remain in the Village; he had worked on a
plan to replace the existing City Hall building with a two -story building and had submitted his
plan to Mr. Sweeney.
Bob Lund, 133 E. Branch and President of AGVIA, stated that the merchants have worked
very hard to improve the image of the Village; there is a need for more business
development in community. The City Hall is located on prime property and he thought
moving the City Hall to the Lucia Mar school property or the Loomis complex area would
allow valuable City property to become an enhanced business area for the Village and the
City of Arroyo Grande.
Chair Guthrie closed the Public Comment.
Commission Comments:
Fowler:
• Expressed disappointment that people found time to write their comments, but not to
attend the workshops and be heard.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004
PAGE 8
• Like to see City Hall remain in the Village, but would also like to see the Village
enhanced by more businesses; the City buildings may need to move to one end of
the Village or the other.
• There is a need for more space for the City and alternative locations may be cost
effective.
• Even though there is no funding now we need to start planning for the future.
Brown:
• He would like to see the needs assessment so the community could understand that
there is a need.
• Expect see more reaction when this proposal gets further along.
• Like to see City Hall remain where it is now.
• Respect fact that retail business sees the existing site as prime location.
Keen:
• He would like to see City Hall on property that would not be bounded in; it should be
in a place where it would have room to expand as the City changes.
• Utilizing the property where Council Chambers is and the property next to it is the
way to go and would free up the site across the street for commercial.
• Previously property has been given to the City for a new City Hall building, but as
time changes these sites (Nelson Green and West Branch) have become unsuitable.
• The Loomis property presents too many circulation problems because of the
Paulding School.
Arnold:
• The highest priority should be acquiring enough land to provide parking and could
provide option later for a parking structure and building expansion.
• The Council Chambers site could be suitable.
• He was not sure what should happen to the existing City Hall property.
• An alternative suggestion would be West Branch Street near the Community Center.
• He did not like the Loomis property for a new City Hall.
Guthrie:
• He was not sure that such a large building would be necessary, but if so then it would
need a lot more parking.
• He did not think Loomis complex would be big enough and did not like the idea of the
City owning another property even though he liked idea of co- location with the school
district because of size.
• He did not like the idea of being near the South County Regional Center, as it would
increase traffic.
• Combination of the two existing Village sites would be acceptable.
• Using the property where the Council Chambers is located would be okay with
additional parking.
Mr. Strong said the next scheduled public workshop is scheduled for March 25 and this will
return to the Planning Commission when site selection is identified. He thanked Mr.
Sweeney for volunteering his professional services for this important architectural and
planning study process.
1
1
1
1
1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004
PAGE 9
I Mr. Sweeney said as this proposal proceeds they would start to generate a three
dimensional model.
C. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP CASE NO. 03 -008 & VARIANCE CASE NO. 03 -007;
APPLICANT — ANDREA MCGOWAN; LOCATION — 330 TALLY HO RD.
Assistant Planner, Jim Bergman, presented the staff report the highlight being:
• The applicants are proposing to subdivide a 0.44 -acre into two residential lots;
• The lot is zoned Residential Suburban and currently contains a single - family
residence that was severely damaged as a result of the San Simeon earthquake of
December 22, 2003.
• The proposed project varies from the development standards in minimum building
site area and allowed density; the increase over the allowed density can be mitigated
with a six percent in -lieu fee for affordable housing.
• Four trees may have to be relocated depending on where the buildings are located.
• The applicants are requesting waiving of undergrounding requirements.
• All trees outside of the building envelope will be preserved.
• The applicants have requested some changes to the conditions:
1. No. 13, demolition permit: they would like the permit to state "a building permit
for the new house on parcel 2, and would like the word "garage" struck.
2. No. 36: they would like relief from the undergrounding of utilities because of
the extreme cost for this requirement.
In reply to a question from Commissioner Brown, Mr. Strong replied that it is the
Commission's judgment to make findings and in this case the lot is wider and bigger than
most of the neighboring lots.
Chair Guthrie opened the Public Comment:
Greg McGowan, applicant, spoke at length and stated:
• They intended to save the large Elm tree so the 10 -foot setback would be on new
property line.
• He thanked Public Works, Community Development and Building staff for their help
since they found out there house was uninhabitable after the earthquake.
• 74% RS lots in City non - conforming and our proposed lots would fit with
neighborhood character.
• All native trees will be preserved.
• Neighbors are in support for our project.
• $64,000 to underground utilities.
• Rather pay affordable housing fee than the density bonus fee.
Commissioner Keen asked if the house was repairable? Mr. McGowan, replied that it is
repairable, but because of the cost it makes more sense to tear it down.
Chair Guthrie closed the Public Commnet.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004
Commission Comments:
• They had no problem with waiving the undergrounding requirement and also waiving
of the density bonus.
• They did not want to set a precedent for waiving of density bonus, but this was a
hardship case.
• It would be preferable if the whole zoning of district were changed, as this was a
difficult Variance to make the findings.
Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fowler to approve
Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 03 -008 and Variance 03 -007 with the following conditions:
1. Strike conditions Nos. 36 and 8.
2. Make the requested changes to the demolition permit.
The Commission adopted:
RESOLUTION NO. 04 -1915
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
CASE NO. 03 -008 AND VARIANCE CASE NO. 03 -007, LOCATED AT
330 TALLY HO ROAD APPLIED FOR BY GREG AND ANDREA
MCGOWAN
The motion was approved on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Brown, Fowler, Arnold, Keen and Chair Guthrie
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 3rd day of February 2004.
IV. NON - PUBLIC HEARINGS:
PAGE 10
A. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP CASE NO. 01 -002 (TRACT MAP 2275); APPLICANT —
JAMES DOTSON; LOCATION 801 HUASNA RD.
Mr. Strong gave an overview of a request for modification of Condition No. 43 of Tentative
Tract Map No. 2275 regarding undergrounding of existing utilities and explained:
• The applicant had contacted the City to determine how to modify the condition
requiring undergrounding to leave one of the two poles.
• A letter had been received from the Wildwood Ranch Homeowners Association
explaining why they were opposed to a proposal to leave the existing power poles
within Tract 2275.
In conclusion Mr. Strong stated that staff recommends the Planning Commission deny the
request for change of Condition No. 43 of Tentative Tract Map 2275 and continue to require
removal of both existing poles and undergrounding of lines within the Tract.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004
Chair Guthrie gave the public an opportunity to speak even though this was not a Public
Hearing.
Vic Sterling, Wildwood Ranch HOA, stated reasons why both poles should be removed.
The Commission agreed that there was no reason to modify the Tentative Tract Map 01-
002, Tract Map 2275.
Commissioner Arnold made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Brown to deny the
request to modify the Condition No. 43 of TentativeTract Map 2275, for undergrounding of
utilities.
The motion was approved on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Arnold, Brown, Fowler, Keen and Chair Guthrie
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
PAGE 11
D. CONTINUED ITEM: AG 1 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND AG ENTERPRISE
AND CONSERVATION PROGRAMS; APPLICANT — CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE;
LOCATION — CITYWIDE
Associate Planner McClish presented the staff report, giving an overview and explaining
that:
Associate Planner McClish presented the staff report, giving an overview and explaining
that:
• The Commission will consider a General Plan Amendment initiated by City Council
Resolution 3699, to amend the Agricultural and Open Space Element; specifically
Objective Ag1 for language on the conservation of prime agricultural lands;
• Implementation Measures within Objective Ag3 to develop an Agricultural
Conservation Easement Program (ACEP); and
• Implementation Measures within Ag4 to develop an Agricultural Enterprise
Program (AEP).
• Ag3 -11 to allow density increases with Agricultural designations for farmworker
housing consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan.
Ms. McClish then discussed that if given direction by the Planning Commission, a resolution
will be drafted for the Commission to make a recommendation on GPA 03 -002 to the City
Council for the purposes of rewording Ag1. If the Commission desires to proceed with the
General Plan Amendment, the amendment should also include the Implementation
measures for the ACEP and AEP to formalize those programs within the General Plan.
Regardless, these programs were already initiated by City Council, are currently under
development, and will be adopted by separate resolutions. Additionally, if a General Plan
Amendment is brought forward at this time, clarification of allowed density would ensure
consistency within the General Plan given the recent adoption of the Housing Element
update which states farmworker housing should be allowed in Agricultural districts.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004
The Commission should consider:
1) Priority of policy language revisions for Agricultural and Open Space Element
Policy Statement AG1 relating to minimizing the loss of prime farmland soils. The
2001 General Plan Objective Ag1 provides: "Avoid, minimize and /or mitigate loss
of prime farmland soils and conserve non -prime Agriculture use and natural
resource lands." The word "minimize" was added during City Council adoption of
the plan when the term "no net loss" was eliminated. The use of the word
"minimize" in the policy objective indicates that the City could allow some
conversions provided a request is consistent with all other objectives and
associated policies of the General Plan and recent findings adopted within the
Development Code. Ms. McClish further explained that if the word "minimize is
removed than future proposals to re- designate prime farmland parcels must be
"avoided" or "mitigated" perhaps leaving some question about potential applications
including partial conversions. However, staff believes that such development
applications could come forward under either alternative; and
2) Policy language revisions for Policy A3 -11 relating to density exceptions for farm -
worker housing; and
3) The proposed direction for Agricultural Support and Enterprise Program and
Agricultural Conservation Easement program development and policy wording for
amending the General Plan for related Implementation Policies.
Jim Bergman, Assistant Planner, then gave a presentation on the Agricultural Support and
Enterprise Programs describing program goals, program attributes, that it would be based
on public participation and utilize resources from the entire region. This program stems out
of City Council Resolution 3699, and staff is directed to prepare a Resolution to develop this
program. Mr. Bergman then outlined the four basic requirements for this program. He then
introduced a Cal Poly student who would do a study for her senior project that would focus
on the viability of a single facility that would support local farms; survey local farm
communities to see if there is support for this; find information for processing local produce
and research State and County laws regulating these activities; look at potential sites;
evaluate funding sources and finally present a model based on her resources.
In addition Mr. Bergman included the following in his presentation:
• Small parcel workshop;
• Changes in sign provisions, agricultural directional sign program;
• Agricultural Conservation Easement workshop with AFT;
• Financial support for Buy Fresh, But Local; and
• Agricultural tourism group.
Commissioner Keen asked where the money was coming from to pay for this?
PAGE 12
Commissioner Arnold asked if farmers are interested in this and suggested some charges
could be made for some of the proposals.
1
1
1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004
Chair Guthrie opened the hearing for Public Comment.
PAGE 13
Debra Garrison, Nipomo, fifth generation farmer and student, who had volunteered to do the
study for her senior project stated that she would do the project even without the funding
requested of $500.00, and stated how she intended to proceed with the study and what it
would involve.
Chuck Fellows stated he was impressed with the presentation and it was a good idea to use
our assets to support the local businesses. He was not in favor of the design of the
directional signs presented by Mr. Bergman.
Chair Guthrie closed the hearing for Public Comment.
The Commission agreed that due to the late hour they would continue discussion of this
item at the meeting of March 2, 2004 and that it was to be the first item on the agenda.
Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Arnold, to continue the
hearing to the meeting of March 2, 2004. The motion was unanimously approved on a 5/0
voice vote.
V. DISCUSSION ITEMS :
1. Repeal of D -2.7 Overlay:
Mr. Strong suggested that this be deferred when other single - family residential
rezoning issues are reviewed as part of Development Code Update.
2. Draft EIR and Ag. Cluster Applications for County projects near the City:
i. Draft EIR for Busick Tract Map No. 1789 for 47.5 -acre parcel subdivision into
16 residential lots near El Campo Road and Falcon Crest Drive, southeast of
the City.
Mr. Strong said he would draft a response by the meeting of March 2, for the
Commission to review.
ii. Laetitia Agriculture Cluster Tract Map No. 2606 for 1910 -acre site into 100
residential lots with additional recreational facilities:
Mr. Strong said this is a County project that will have an EIR and can be
brought to the Commission for comment when the EIR is available. Chair
Guthrie asked Mr. Strong to supply the Commission with a couple of maps and
descriptions for their review.
VI. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS:
In reply to Commission questions Mr. Strong stated:
• Comment period for TTM & PUD 01 -001 is closed; replies have been voluminous and
the meeting of February 17 will be a status update and discussion of some of the
consultant's responses and the Final SEIR scheduled for March 2, 2004 for
continued discussion and a recommendation to City Council.
Commissioner Brown said he would be absent the meeting of February 17 and requested
that he receive a copy of the staff report.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 3, 2004
Mr. Strong recommended that SEIR discussion be set for 7:30 p.m. on the agenda for
March 2, 2004. Commissioner Fowler said she would be late arriving to this meeting, but
7:30 p.m. would be fine.
In answer to Commission Keen, Mr. Strong gave an update on the Pre - Application proposal
from Autozone to locate on a site on East Grand Avenue.
Chair Guthrie asked for an update on the East Grand Avenue mixed -use re- zoning. Mr.
Strong said this would be combined with other commercial Mixed Use zoning at one time,
also called Grand Avenue Plus Places and a public workshop is scheduled in early April
with hearings in May.
VII. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW -UP: None.
VIII. TENTATIVE AGENDA ITEMS FOR FEBRUARY 17, 2004: VTTM 01 -001 SEIR.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 11:20 p.m.
ATTEST:
LY REARDON- SMITH,
SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION
AS TO CONT
1
ROB
CO MUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
(Approved at PC meeting 2/17/04)
PAGE 14
MES GUTHRIE, CHAIR
1
1
1