Loading...
PC Minutes 2003-02-041 1 1 MINUTES CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 CALL TO ORDER - The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Vice Chair Keen presiding. Also present were Commissioners Arnold, Brown, Fowler, and Guthrie. Staff members in attendance were Community Development Director, Rob Strong and Associate Planner Teresa McClish. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — No minutes to approve. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS — None. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS — None. AGENDA REVIEW — The Commission agreed to change the Agenda to hear item II.B. - Development Code Amendment 01 -003 — Design Guidelines for Historic Districts last. PUBLIC HEARING — ITEM II.A. — DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 01 -003 — DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS; APPLICANT — CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE; LOCATION — VILLAGE OF ARROYO GRANDE. Prepared and presented by Teresa McClish. This item was continued from the January 21, 2003 meeting. Teresa McClish provided an alternative definition of Historic Resource. Commissioner Brown • Based on City Council's determinations, is the new definition appropriate for the guidelines? • Why can't we keep the current definition? The Council and Commission may prefer Alternative 9B or 9C. Teresa McClish • The current definition could be an interim one that could be used until the definition is further refined. • The existing definition in the guidelines results in arbitrary determinations of which structures would require CEQA. Staff has two considerations: 1. Potential demolitions 2. Structure alterations Commissioner Fowler • Concern about inclusion of the Vanderveer property in the overlay district. Mrs. Vanderveer feels strongly about not wanting to be included. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 Rob Strong • Mrs. Vanderveer may not understand the difference between being included in the historic overlay district versus being designated a "Historic Structure ". • Staff was asked to include the Vanderveer property in the historic overlay district recommendation. • Planning Commission and /or City Council can recommend exclusion of the Vanderveer property and any other structures proposed on the historic district overlay map. Commissioner Arnold • What percentage of homes would and would not qualify as historic (50+ years old)? Teresa McClish • Staff does not have that statistic. Research could be done. Commissioner Guthrie • What criteria did staff use for the "windshield survey "? Rob Strong • Visual survey was a quick view of structures that appeared to have historic features /character (early 1900's through 1939). Some homes were build more recently than 50 years with historic character. • Interspersing of old and new in the district makes a clear boundary definition difficult. Staff took a broad view, which can be scaled back. Commissioner Guthrie • Does the current definition trigger CEQA? Open Public Hearing PAGE 2 Rob Strong • The current definition is not substantially different from what CEQA would use as a trigger for historic survey. Nancy Underwood of 142 Short Street • Concerned about how the Village Design Guidelines /zoning changes will affect her as a resident. • Doesn't want to be required to demolish or remodel her home. • Will neighborhood commercial structures (Mixed Use district) be problematic to residential neighborhoods? (late night hours, noise, traffic, etc.). • For several years her family was inconvenienced by very early morning meetings and late night meetings across the street from her home. 1 1 1 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 • She called the Police and other City agencies and the problem was not eliminated. Public Hearing Closed Planning Commission agreed to review each of the Alternatives and reach consensus. Issue 1: Change "Guidelines" to "Guidelines and Standards" The Commission unanimously agreed to approve Alternative 1A as amended on a 5/0 voice vote. Issue 2: Exceptions Commissioner Brown • What triggers an exception? Teresa McClish • Project received by Staff that are not consistent with guidelines and standards (minor exception result in Planning Commission notification). Commissioner Guthrie • What is the difference between "variance" and "exception "? Vice -chair Keen wants an extra fee schedule for exceptions. Commissioner Arnold believes Alternative 2B is too restrictive. PAGE 3 Teresa McClish • Variance — applicant wants more than a little deviation (over 10 %). • Minor Exception — 10% or less deviation. • Minor Exception would be required for deviation from standards in the guidelines versus current Variance requirements for deviation from zoning requirements in the Development Code. The Commission unanimously agreed to approve Alternative 2A as is on a 5/0 voice vote. The Commission unanimously agreed to approve Alternative 2B as is on a 4/1 voice vote. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 Issue 3: Village Core Mixed Use Commissioner Guthrie • Why stop Mixed Use district in mid -block — prefer it to continue down the block. • Are there zero setback conflicts? Village Mixed Use setbacks are 0' -15'. Commissioner Arnold • Page 8 — last paragraph: Add "within adjacent development" to the verbiage. Commissioner Brown • Page 6 — top of page: Strike "However, some lots have been aggregated for development on a larger scale." Planning Commission discussed Downtown Core area and Village Mixed Use area boundaries — extension of Village Mixed Use down E. Branch Street to Crown Hill. • Commissioner Guthrie — believes more intense use is what the City wants and the City can provide Staff with more clear direction for Village Mixed Use zone. • Commissioner Fowler — wants to see commercial character along E. Branch, but is wary of 0' setbacks all along Branch. • Commissioner Keen — likes core as presented. Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Guthrie, recommending extending the Village Core Downtown along E. Branch to Crown Hill. The motion failed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Brown and Guthrie. NOES: Commissioners Arnold, Fowler and Vice -chair Keen. ABSENT: None. The Commission approved Alternative 3A as amended on a 4/1 voice vote, with Commissioner Brown voting against. Issue 4: Mixed Use Projects within the Village Core Downtown PAGE 4 The Commission unanimously agreed to approve Alternative 4A as is on a 5/0 voice vote. 1 1 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 Issue 5: Signs Commissioner Arnold • Signs painted on walls is sometimes appropriate. Issue 6: Painting of Buildings Commissioner Fowler • Concerned about paint color restrictions in the residential district. Commissioner Arnold prefers 6B. Issue 7: Design Overlay Boundary PAGE 5 Planning Commissioners discussed the intent and language of the guidelines related to painting of signs directly on walls. Commissioner Fowler • Wants the following language used in the guidelines: "Wall signs painted on finished wood and /or painted brick, stone or stucco are allowed subject to ARC recommendation. Signs painted directly on walls are not appropriate for the Village Mixed Use district." Vice -chair Keen (and Commissioner Guthrie) • Remove "predominant" from the wording under materials. • Wants the following language used in the guidelines: "High gloss, shiny or reflective surfaces are generally not appropriate and may not be allowed." The Commission unanimously agreed to approve Alternative 5A as is on a 5/0 voice vote. Commissioner Arnold • In favor of 6B and believes it is beneficial for protecting the character of the Village. The Commission approved Alternative 6A as is on a 4/1 voice vote with Commissioner Arnold against. Commissioner Guthrie • We're casting a large net if we extend the district to the furthest boundaries indicated. Islands of new residential tracts within the district are a bit awkward. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 The motion was approved with the following roll call vote: Issue 8: Checklist of Building Elements PAGE 6 Commissioner Fowler • Concerned about including properties whose owners don't want to be included (Vanderveen). Even though the intent is to include the two historic homes and not the entire properties owned by Stillwell's and Vanderveen's properties. • Questions inclusion of east portion of Allen Street. Commissioner Guthrie • Inclined to include as much district as possible. Since the process of establishing historic buildings is so vague, this overlay district provides some protection and could trip a process to establish historic structures. • We need to make our intentions as clear as possible. Commissioner Guthrie made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Arnold, recommending approval of Alternative 7A as is. AYES: Commissioners Arnold, Brown, Guthrie and Vice -chair Keen. NOES: Commissioner Fowler. ABSENT: None. Commissioner Fowler would accept 7B, which does not include Vanderveer and Stillwell properties. The Commission unanimously agreed to approve Alternative 8A with a 5/0 voice vote. Issue 9: Historic Structure Definition Commissioner Brown • Leave as is for now — use 9B. So far it has not triggered CEQA and doesn't anticipate it being tripped based on how it is written. Commissioner Fowler • A bit concerned about triggering CEQA, even though it hasn't already happened. Commissioner Arnold • Would go with 9B or 9C — will vote with consensus. Commissioner Guthrie • Prefer leaving as is. What tripped CEQA on Loomis complex? 1 1 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 Rob Strong • Community Development Director requested an opinion, the submittal indicated no historic structures on the property. That opinion was questioned. A critique opinion was submitted at peer review finding that there may be some qualified structures. • Subsequently, an EIR was required. Commissioner Guthrie • A Community Development Director could trigger a CEQA at any time. • All the guidelines do is state that the Community Development Director should pay attention to anything 50 years old or older. They are not a definition of whether the CEQA process should take place. They are only a flag. The Commission agreed to approve Alternative 8B as is on a 5/0 voice vote. Commissioner Guthrie made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Arnold, recommending adoption of: RESOLUTION 03 -1861 PAGE 7 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 01 -003 TO AMEND TITLE 16 CHAPTER 16.08 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE AND DESIGN OVERLAY 2.4 TO REVISE THE DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS The resolution was approved with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Guthrie, Arnold, Brown and Vice -chair Keen. NOES: Commissioner Fowler. ABSENT: None. The foregoing resolution was adopted this 4 day of February, 2003. PUBLIC HEARING — ITEM II.B. — DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE CASE NO. 02- 006 — REVISION OF THE ZONING MAP; APPLICANT — CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE; LOCATION — CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE. Prepared and presented by Teresa McClish. Staff presented proposed revisions to the Village Commercial and portions of the General Commercial core. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 PAGE 8 Commissioner Brown • Where does the building height of 35' come from? Is 3 stories allowed? Teresa McClish • The General Plan lists maximum building height not to exceed 35', and staff is evaluating if that maximum can be applied in the Village Downtown. Open Public Hearing Fred Baur — 212 Short Street • Nancy Underwood is concerned about the old mortuary on the corner of Nelson and Short. Her home is across the street and mine is also. • I am in favor of the guidelines and consider them to be disaster prevention. • I'm on the Local Housing Task Force and like the Mixed Use district concept, which will add vitality to the downtown area. The task force wonders why three stories is not allowed considering the cost of property. • What does the City intend to do around the Nelson green? Teresa McClish • The land use designation is residential and the zoning is to remain residential. Rob Strong • Current 2001 adopted General Plan anticipated blocks of Mason and Nelson facing Nelson green would be residential. • As the plan was being adopted, the doctor's office on Mason was issued permits under the existing zoning to convert to office use. It is a single, non - conforming use. • Currently properties along Mason and south side of Nelson are zoned non- residential. There is an inconsistency in the plan. Fred Baur • Are the uses for the Old Mortuary building going to change? Teresa McClish • A club, lodge or private meeting hall is still a permitted use with a Minor Use Permit. Nancy Underwood • Will I be notified if someone wants to change use of the meeting hall? • My concern is that the group that meets there is relatively quiet during meeting hours. However, for the first two years: 1) we were never notified and 2) no restriction on the hours they can conduct meetings. This dramatically affected our lives. — The official meeting time was 7:00 a.m., but they arrived earlier to set up. 1 1 1 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 Public Hearing Closed PAGE 9 — We were awakened every single morning for two years by the noise. — We were awakened late at night because meetings ran late (11:30 PM, 12:00 midinght, 1:00 AM). • Will this change in use benefit residents? • Will there be guidelines that determine the hours of operation? • Will residents be protected and not impacted by these guidelines? • Does the zero setback apply to the residential and Mixed Use area? mean someone can build right up to the front of the property? • If a neighbor on the street sold their property and the new owner rebuild, would they be able to do a 0' setback? Does this wanted to Teresa McClish • The current zoning has zero foot setback. • The proposed zoning has a 0' setback for the Branch street area and a 0' -15' setback for the Mixed Use area. Commissioner Guthrie • Under the current zoning the owner would be required to build with a 0' setback. • If you tore down a building in Village Commercial, you would be required to build with 0' setback. Teresa McClish • The new zoning standards include a variable (0' -15') setback. The proposed guidelines further state that new structures fit within the range of the setbacks within the block. Nancy Underwood • Please consider that there are many long time residents. • Any Mixed Use zoning needs to take into account the lives of the people who live here and who want to live here. • Residents should not be "forced out" and turn their homes into rentals because of the impact of the Mixed Use district. Chuck Fellows — 507 Le Pointe • Concerned about the impact of Mixed Use zoning. Initially did not realize the impact of Mixed Use zoning on residents. • Proposed project at 125 Nelson seems large and imposing in the neighborhood. • Village Mixed Use combination of residential and commercial may not work well. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 PAGE 10 Commissioner Guthrie • Concept of transition district is that it has residential and commercial side -by- side. In the Mixed Use concept there is a potential for operational, policing process to make it work. A residential home in a Mixed Use area may never be afforded the same peace and quiet found in an exclusively residential neighborhood. • We may not be able to allow certain types of commercial in the Mixed Use area (for example a restaurant that opens very early in the morning and closes late at night). • Zero setbacks should extend down E. Branch and maybe Bridge Street and Traffic Way. • Three stories in Downtown Core all right, but difficult to fit with guidelines — two stories may be better scale. • Issue with 15 dwelling units per acre. More than 15 (max.25) too dense. • Tough to find a 30,000 sq. ft. building that fits within the rules. Commissioner Arnold • 35' height OK, but not in the Village. Would prefer 25' height limit. Not OK with 3 stories in the Village. • 25 units per acre are too dense for Village. • 30,000 sq. ft. too large for Village. Commissioner Fowler • Equipment rental not permitted in the Village Core — what about a Pharmacy that wants to rent inhaling units? • Recycling — thrift store? • Extended hour retail — would this affect stores that want to do it for the holidays? • Can farm supply rent or sell a tractors? Teresa McClish • Could consider it accessory use within the Use table. • Recycling — means cans, paper, plastic and other goods. • Extended hour retail — primarily for 24 hour stores. We can clarify. Commissioner Brown • OK with 15 dwelling units per acre. • OK with 35' height. • Strongly against 3 stories in Village Core. • Strongly against 30,000 sq. ft. in Village. Wants the number lowered. Vice -chair Keen • Park playground (new category). Would City need CUP process to build a park or playground? 1 1 1 e MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 • 35' is too high. C.2 forced redesign to 30', which is more to scale for the community. Teresa McClish • Any park or playground would get discretionary review with public hearing. Commissioner Guthrie • The following things need to be addressed fairly quickly to mitigate problems in the Mixed Use areas: o PUD process for Mixed Use projects. o Need to increase sound qualities (example, double pane windows). Teresa McClish • General Use standards in the code will address Mixed Use standards. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Conference: "It Takes a Region" — which commissioners will attend? Commissioner Brown: Concerned about the CUP for Tapatia Market. PAGE 11 Creekside EIR: Will arrive by end of the month and have a 45 -day public review period. Commissioner Guthrie — Is it typical for an EIR to evaluate whether a project meets the design guidelines? I've never seen reference to City code in other EIRs. Rob Strong: Depends on the EIR author. There are some interpretive problems. Rob Strong: Letter was written advising them they are out of compliance and asking them to submit application. They have not provided an application. We will write another letter regarding lack of submittal. Commissioner Brown: When can we elect a Chair? Rob Strong: Second Planning Commission meeting in March. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS — None. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW -UP — None. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 4, 2003 ADJOURNMENT — There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 10:57 p.m. on a motion by Vice -chair Keen, seconded by Commissioner Brown, and unanimously carried. ATTEST: VONNE BRADFO COMMISSION CLE - K AS O CONTENT ROB STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR PAGE 12 JO - ' KEEN, VI.' HAIR 1 1 1