Loading...
PC Minutes 2003-08-191 1 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING - PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 2003 CALL TO ORDER: The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chair Guthrie presiding; also present were Commissioners Arnold, Brown, Fowler and Keen. Staff members in attendance were Community Development Director, Rob Strong, Associate Planners, Kelly Heffernon and Teresa McClish, and Assistant Planner, Jim Bergman. AGENDA REVIEW - The Commission agreed to hear Item II.B. first. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - The minutes of July 1, 2003 were unanimously approved with a correction to the "motion to adjourn ", on a 5 /0voice vote. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: 1. Letter from Patrick Kennedy and Public Works, re Variance Case No. 03 -003, sidewalk requirement. 2. Fax and attached letter from Kathy Ann Spencer re Amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 03 -004 Coastal Christian School. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM II.B. - TIME EXTENSION CASE NO. 03 -003; APPLICANT — STEPHEN N. COOL; LOCATION — CAMINO MERCADO AND WEST BRANCH ST. Staff report prepared and presented by Planning Intern, Jim Bergman. Mr. Bergman gave an overview of the proposal, stating that this was the first request for a Time Extension for the previously approved Conditional Use Permit Case No. 99 -013 and Variance Case No. 2001 -001 for the office project located at the intersection of Camino Mercado and West Branch Street. Chair Guthrie opened the Public Hearing. Stephen Cool, applicant, said their project was moving ahead, their plans were already in the City and they agreed with the Conditions of Approval of the Time Extension. Chair Guthrie closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Keen made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Arnold, to recommend that the City Council approve the one -year Time Extension for Conditional Use Permit 99- 013 and Variance 01 -001, and adopt: RESOLUTION NO. 03 -1894 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ONE - YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 99 -013 AND VARIANCE CASE NO. 01 -001, APPLIED FOR BY STEPHEN N. COOL The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 2003 AYES: Commissioners Keen, Arnold, Brown, Fowler, and Chair Guthrie NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19 day of August 2003. up. PAGE 2 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM II.A. - AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (ACUP) CASE NO. 03 -006 & PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM (PSP) CASE NO. 03 -005; APPLICANT — TED MOORE; LOCATION — 1401 E. GRAND AVE. (SOUTHEAST CORNER OF COURTLAND ST. & E. GRAND AVE.). Staff report prepared and presented by Associate Planner, Kelly Heffernon. Ms. Heffernon gave a detailed report on the previously approved proposal stating that the applicant was seeking approval of two site plan modifications, a drive -thru pharmacy kiosk for Long's Drug Store and the inclusion of two outdoor patio areas within the 15 foot front setback along Grand Ave, and a Planned Sign Program for the entire shopping center. The site plan modifications will result in a reduction of onsite parking of 16 spaces (or 16 %) total, which is within the reduction allowed by the Development Code. Ms. Heffernon then described the proposed signage included in the PSP for the entire shopping center (now called the Court land and Grand Plaza). The Commission asked that the ACUP and PSP be considered separately. Commissioner Keen asked for clarification on the parking calculations including the ATM. Commissioner Brown had a concern with the grade from Court land approaching the Kiosk and the traffic circulation from Court land out to Grand Avenue. Chair Guthrie opened the Public Hearing. Ted Moore, applicant, explained that the grade would be 8 -9% and designed to fit large delivery trucks so we know cars will work. The traffic going to the Kiosk would only average 1 -2 cars an hour so there should be no stacking problem and traffic would not be queuing Commissioner Arnold said he was not on the Commission when the project was first approved, however he could not approve this unless the pad on the project is lowered. Ted Moore explained that he would like to see it lower, but stated that it was not possible due to the depths of the utility lines on Court land, the required street grade of Grand Avenue and ADA regulations. The contractor has said it will come down somewhat due to compaction. However, he will have his engineer redo the calculations one more time in an effort to lower the pad. Mr. Strong stated staff had investigated the pad height and when grading is done it will be within 6" of the established approved grade height. It is already approved by the City and the ACUP does not change anything. 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 2003 In reply to Commissioner Guthrie, Mr. Moore said there is no arbored walkway, just landscaping trellises against the building, along the back of Long's. In reply to Commissioner Keen, Mr. Moore said the grading on the front corner might come down about 6 ". Commissioner Fowler stated she approved of the proposed changes. Commissioner Brown stated he had approved of the project, but was not happy with the pad height and the reduced parking. Mr. Moore said since this project was first proposed three years ago Long's Corporation now has an entirely new management team. The present chairman will not go forward with the project without the pharmacy kiosk, but is satisfied with the reduced parking. Chair Guthrie closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Keen made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fowler to approve Amended Conditional Use Permit 03 -006, and adopt: RESOLUTION NO. 03 -1895 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 03 -006, LOCATED AT 1401 EAST GRAND AVENUE, APPLIED FOR BY E.F. MOORE & CO. The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Keen, Fowler, Brown and Chair Guthrie NOES: Commissioner Arnold ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19 day of August, 2003. The Planned Sign Program was then discussed. Chair Guthrie opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Moore described the signage. Commission Comments: • The Long's sign on the face of the store was too large and they would like to see it at 70 square feet with a 10% variance (not to exceed 77 sq. ft.). • They were impressed with the sign program and suggested that Conditions 1 and 4 be included in the City's Conditions of Approval for PSP's in general. • They liked the other signs, including the monument sign. Mr. Moore agreed with the requested changes in the size of the Long's sign. PAGE 3 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 2003 Commissioner Fowler made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Brown to approve Planned Sign Program 03 -005, with the condition that the Long's sign be no larger than 70 square feet (plus 10 %), and adopt: RESOLUTION NO. 03 -1896 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM CASE NO. 03 -005, LOCATED AT 1401 EAST GRAND AVENUE, APPLIED FOR BY E.F. MOORE & CO. The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Fowler, Brown, Arnold, Keen and Chair Guthrie NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19 day of August 2003. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM II.C. - STAFF PROJECT CASE NO. 03 -010 PARKING /STREET YARD; APPLICANT — CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE. Staff report prepared and presented by Planning Intern, Jim Bergman. Mr. Bergman gave an overview of the proposed resolution recommending amending the Municipal Code to prohibit the parking of vehicles in front (street) yards of residential districts. Commission Questions: • Would this include parking on grass covered parking areas? • What if the parking is necessary for handicap persons? • How would this be enforced? PAGE 4 Staff replied: • The code amendment states "except for lawfully established driveways ". • The handicap situation was not included, but it could be handled by Code Enforcement. • Enforcement mechanism would be by Code Enforcement Officer unless blocking the sidewalk which can be ticketed by the police. • It would be acceptable to park in an unpaved or paved driveway, legally established. Chair Guthrie opened the Public Hearing for comment and hearing no public comment closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Keen to recommend to the City Council to amend Municipal Code 10.16.010.B in Chapter 10.16 of Title 10 and section 16.56.030 in Chapter 16.56 of Title 16 to prohibit parking in front (street) yards, and adopt: 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 2003 RESOLUTION NO. 03 -1897 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIOKN 10.16.010.b IN CHAPTER 10.16 OF TITLE 10 AND SECTION 16.56.030 IN CHAPTER 16.56 OF TITLE 16 TO PROHIBIT PARKING IN FRONT (STREET) YARDS The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Brown, Keen, Arnold, Fowler and Chair Guthrie NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing Resolution was adopted on the 19 day of August 2003. PAGE 5 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM II.D. - AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 03- 004; APPLICANT — COASTAL CHRISTIAN SCHOOL; LOCATION — 1220 FARROLL AVE. Staff report prepared and presented by Planning Intern, Jim Bergman. Mr. Bergman gave an overview of the request to extend the use of temporary buildings on a yearly basis and explaining that for the last ten years they have been trying to move the school to property they own that is currently in the process of being annexed to Pismo Beach. When the Staff Advisory Committee reviewed the proposal the applicant was advised that two fire hydrants should be installed for protection of life and property and the fact they the new school building may not be ready for 2 -3 years. Commission Questions: • Asked for clarification of where the proposed on -site location of the fire hydrants would be. Mr. Bergman clarified where the hydrants would be located explaining that all portions of the building need to be within 300 feet of a fire hydrant. Chair Guthrie opened the Public Hearing. Lance Tullis, 236 Garden Street, representative, stated the history, explaining why it would probably be 18 —24 months before they would be able to move. He further stated that they did not want to jeopardize public safety, but explained why they were requesting that they only be required to install one fire hydrant in the Farroll Road area and that their CUP be reviewed on an annual basis. Commissioner Brown asked if one fire hydrant was acceptable to the Fire Chief? Mr. Strong explained why two hydrants were needed. Mr. Tullis said because of the cost this is a dilemma and that the school opens in two weeks. Chair Guthrie closed the Public Hearing. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 2003 After further discussion with staff and Commission the following motion was made: Commissioner Keen made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Arnold to recommend approval of the Amended Conditional Use Permit with the following conditions: 1. The Conditional Use Permit to be reviewed each year. 2. Conditions No. 7 & 8: Language added to reflect that the applicant shall install two fire hydrants or other solution acceptable to the Fire Chief... and posting of a performance bond.... and adopt: RESOLUTION 03 -1898 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 03 -004 LOCATED AT 1220 FARROLL AVENUE, APPLIED FOR BY COASTAL CHRISTIAN SCHOOL The motion was approved on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Keen, Arnold, Brown, Fowler and Chair Guthrie NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19 day of August, 2003. The Commission took a 5- minute break. PAGE 6 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM II.E. - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CASE NO. 03 -002, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT CASE NO. 03 -003 AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 03 -005. Staff report prepared and presented by Teresa McClish. Ms. McClish gave her presentation and update from the staff report, stating that as a first priority staff is bringing forward the General Plan Amendment concerning the redesignation of the four concerned properties and the amendment regarding the mitigation requirements prior to bringing forward the implementing Ordinances; as a second priority, staff is proposing that these ordinances be continued and heard at the Planning Commission October 7, and the City Council November 25, and staff may recommend further continuation. Ms. McClish then gave more detail regarding the redesignated parcels considered by the City as prime agricultural properties and stated that as such and in accordance with the General Plan, an EIR would have to be prepared and overriding considerations would have to be adopted prior to future conversions if proposed. Additionally, in respect to three of the properties proposed to be redesignated, Land Use Element policy LU 5 -13 is proposed to be deleted in its entirety. The 2001 General Plan Mitigation Policy is proposed to be revised to require permanent protection in the form of a dedication of a perpetual agricultural conservation easement or other effective mechanism for conversion of areas having prime farmland soils, at a ratio of up to 2:1 instead of 1:1 with regard to the acreage of land removed from the capability for agricultural uses. 1 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 2003 PAGE 7 Commission Comments: Commissioner Arnold: An example mitigation ordinance in the Ag Conservation Study had 2:1 conversion ratio in the City: Why was this deleted? Ms. McClish said it had been changed and now reads "up to 2:1" (done at the request of the City Attorney after reviewing what other agencies have adopted or have pending. Commissioner Arnold - stated he did not like the vagueness of the language. Mr. Strong said to clarify the language could state "at least 1:1 and up to 2:1" (could be established by the City consistent with the policy) and the evaluation would be all case -by -case in any conversion. Commissioner Guthrie — re environmental sphere of influence - where will the nexus for the preservation of prime Ag soils be dealt with? Mr. Strong replied it would be dealt with primarily in the Ordinance and is already contained in the General Plan. Commissioner Guthrie asked how would the value be established? Mr. Strong explained that the question would be what would be economically feasible and productively equivalent to the land proposed for conversion. The Planning Commission agreed to consider General Plan Amendment Case No. 03 -002 to redesignate four parcels to Agriculture and modify policy text for mitigation of converted agricultural lands, but take testimony and continue General Plan Amendment Case No. 03- 003 and Development Code Amendment Case No. 03 -005 to the October 7, 2003. Chair Guthrie opened the Public Hearing. John Hyashi, 2626 Sevada Lane: • City annexed Rancho Grande and built out - that was the ground that should have been used for trade out, but it 's too late and everything is being done backwards. • Re 1.6 -acre prime farm property on Cherry Lane, that the City wants to change to prime Ag land — he then gave history of the Japanese Welfare Assn who purchased this property. • Twice the City hired professional consultants who advised property be zoned for residential use. Planning Commission and City Council should follow recommendations of consultants. • It was first purchased with buildings and has never been farmed. • Down zoning to Ag will leave us with property with no value. • The proposed zoning will hurt many homeowners in the City that adjoin this property since the proposed new buffer zone in the City would allow no new residential construction in proximity. • Is this fair? Gary Kubara, 2595 Gracia Way: • The Japanese Assn. pooled their money to obtain the property and there were existing buildings on the property at that time. He then gave further history. • Always zoned residential until 1991 General Plan Update and they were never notified of the change and were shocked to find this out years later it was rezoned Agriculture. • Never been farmed in 70+ years owned. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 2003 • Rezone to Ag with most houses surrounding unfair. • Assn does not want this land zoned Ag and he stated plans they have for this land in the future. Don Gullickson, 513 E. Cherry Lane: • Two years ago had neighborhood meeting and it was a unanimous decision that this land be converted to houses - not logical for farmland with houses on four sides. • Consider this change a down zone. Wayne King, representing Bruce Vanderveen on his property: • Vanderveen property cannot be considered prime — it has no water and is not being used as Agriculture. The USDA says it is not prime Ag land and the State says it is not prime. Ed Dorfman, 285 La Cresta: • Decision on Cherry Ave made years ago - neighborhood wants houses — developing Cherry Ave smart growth —it's infill, stops trips • General Plan calls it widowed farmland • Putting buffer on neighbor's homes will make them non - conforming. • Soil is good — whole City was ag land at one time • Housing crisis is a huge social issue • Most of the best farmland is outside the City Steven Ross, 211 Garden Street: • Concern if Cherry Ave is continued as farmland as it is completely surrounded by housing, unless organic. • Exposure to potentially harmful pesticides and fertilizer. Chair Guthrie closed the Public Hearing. PAGE 8 Commissioner Brown: Stated the fact that the Japanese Welfare Association is not farming does not change the fact that the land is prime farm soils. There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding that we are not allowing conversion by doing this. If converted it would be considered and mitigated. These properties need to be redesignated Agriculture to be consistent with the policies of the General Plan. He stated he was in favor of this amendment. Commissioner Fowler disagreed with Commissioner Brown, stating the 2001 General Plan is consistent and asked why not leave it the way it is and let property owners have the option. It is unfair for the Japanese Welfare Assn. to have to change designation and loose value. All Cherry Ave property is completely surrounded by homes and businesses and she could never support redesignation as Agriculture. Commissioner Keen agreed with Commissioner Fowler. It is consistent with the current General Plan and he was not in favor of changing it. Why not have the Farroll Road property remain Ag if this is the case as it is just as productive. Commissioner Arnold stated the zoning on these properties is Ag right now and we are changing the land use designation to correspond to that. Eventually these properties will probably go to houses, but it will be more expensive to convert the land with mitigation. The reality is that mitigation probably will not be done in the City. He stated he could support this redesignation. 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 2003 Commissioner Guthrie said this program is needed to avoid inconsistency. The General Plan was inconsistent when passed by the previous Council and returning these properties to their previous Agriculture designation is appropriate. Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Arnold recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment 03 -002; amending the Land Use map to change the land use designation for four properties to Agriculture and modifying corresponding language in the Land Use Element, and amending the Agricultural Conservation and Open Space Element to revise implementation policy for mitigation of converted agricultural lands. Ms. McClish interjected stating that the language of the Resolution and implementation policy AG14.2 should read "a ratio of at least 1:1 and up to 2:1," with regard to the acreage. Commission Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Arnold, recommending that City Council approve General Plan Amendment Case No. 03 -002, and adopt: RESOLUTION 03 -1899 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 03 -002; AMENDING THE LAND USE MAP TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR FOUR PROPERTIES TO AGRICULTURE AND MODIFYING CORRESPONDING LANGUAGE IN THE LAND USE ELEMENT, AND AMENDING THE AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT TO REVISE IMPLEMENTATION POLICY FOR MITIGATION OF CONVERTED AGRICULTURAL LANDS The motion was approved on the following roll call: AYES: Commissioners Brown, Arnold and Chair Guthrie NOES: Commissioners Fowler and Keen ABSENT: None PAGE 9 Commissioner Brown asked if the buffer overlays would cause problems with non- conforming lots? Ms. McClish said staff would propose bringing forward the overlays in draft form including non - conforming use provisions to allow alterations and additions, but no new residences. Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Arnold to continue the General Plan Amendment 03 -003 and Development Code Amendment 03 -005 to the October 7, 2003 meeting. The motion was approved on a 5/0 voice vote. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1. Letter from Patrick Kennedy and Public Works, re Variance Case No. 03 -003, sidewalk requirement. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 19, 2003 Mr. Strong gave an update on the project, explaining why the applicant was requesting that he be allowed to pay in -lieu fees in place of installing sidewalk on the north side of Le Point Street. Chair Guthrie opened the discussion to the public. Mr. Kennedy, applicant, stated the reasons for his request. Chair Guthrie closed the Public Hearing. Commission Comments: • Commissioner Keen said Public Works did not require the sidewalk because it would not be advantageous in this case, but he was concerned that other property owners had to pay for sidewalk installation. • They would like to see any fees collected go towards improving Le Point Street. • Curb and gutter would still be required. The Commission unanimously accepted the alternative of in -lieu fee for sidewalk waiver on- site: To be spent on Le Point south side at parking lot if possible. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS: Commissioner Brown asked for an update on the Christianson lot on Allen Street? Mr. Strong said he had requested they apply for TUP or CUP for use of the property. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW - UP: Mr. Strong said: • Amendments to the Bylaws for the Planning Commission would be on the agenda in September. • Phil Zeidman's application was continued to tonight's meeting, but plans did not come in, so it was now scheduled for September 2, meeting. • Creekside Center EIR will probably come back to CC for contract amendment consideration and the consultant will be asked to attend to clarify scope. • Gave an update on the Farroll Road proposed project. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. on a motion by Commissioner Arnold, seconded by Commissioner Brown and unanimously approved. ATTEST: eetz4, L'YN REARDON- SMITH, COMMISSION CLERK AS TO CONT NT: ROB T ONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOP' ENT DIRECTOR PAGE 10 AMES UTHRIE, CHAIR 1