PC Minutes 2002-10-011
1
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 1, 2002
CALL TO ORDER - The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session
with Chair Costello presiding. Also present were Commissioners Brown, Fowler,
Guthrie, and Keen. Staff members in attendance were Community Development
Director, Rob Strong and Associate Planner Kelly Heffernon.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - The minutes of August 20 and September 3, 2002
were unanimously approved as written.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS — None.
AGENDA REVIEW — No changes in the Agenda.
PUBLIC HEARING — CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 00 -017; APPLICANT —
NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS; LOCATION — 200 HILLCREST DRIVE (CITY
RESERVOIR NO. 2) Staff report prepared and presented by Kelly Heffernon,
Associate Planner.
Ms. Heffernon explained that the Planning Commission reviewed this project in
June of 2001, at which time Nextel was proposing an 80 -foot tall monopole facility
and was proposed at this height in part to accommodate co- location of future
communication carriers. Nextel has since reduced the height of the monopole from
80 feet to 62 feet and proposes to:
• Replace the existing lattice structure that currently supports the City's
communication antennas with the 62 -foot tall monopole.
• Install Nextel's communication system, which consists of 12 panel antennas, roughly
4 feet long and configured in 3 sectors of 4 panels each, and placed 4 feet from the
top of the pole.
• Purchase a new Fire Department antenna and place it and all other City antennas
on the new structure.
• Purchase new communication - related cables for the Fire and Public Works
Departments;
• Extend the existing communications building to include an additional 175 square feet
to accommodate Nextel's equipment;
• Pay the cost to relocate the existing water line affected by the extended
communications building; and
• Pay the cost to relocate the existing propane line affected by the installation of the
monopole.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 1, 2002
PAGE 2
• The expanded equipment shelter will match the existing in scale and design, and
the monopole would be camouflaged as a pine tree to blend with the existing
pine trees on the site (half of which are the same height or taller than the
proposed monopine).
Commissioner Brown asked if another applicant requested to co- locate given the
reduction in height would this be possible? Ms. Heffernon explained that the consensus
had been that co- location would make the monopole too tall.
PUBLIC COMMENT OPENED
Carver Chiu, representative for Nextel, explained why the project was put on hold, why
they preferred this specific location and why they needed the height. In addition, he
stated that another company may still be able to co- locate below their antenna.
Planning Commission questions:
• Would the building or equipment shelter blend in with the existing building?
• Had Nextel considered locating at several different locations instead of one and
get the same coverage?
• What is the life expectancy of these facilities?
• Why did the height requirement for the monopole change from 80 — 62 feet?
• As the trees grow will they effect the signal and if the trees die could we change
the camouphlage?
Mr. Chiu answered:
• The construction to the extension of the existing equipment building /shelter will
be consistent with the existing design.
• It would be the least impact to the City and the best long term to locate at one
facility. In addition, it would also provide the City an opportunity to upgrade at
this location.
• Typically these antenna are in place from 5 -15 years.
• The drawings initially did not reflect the correct height of the trees and after the
initial hearings Nextel did a survey and were then able to reduce the height of the
monopine.
• The trees are not so dense that the signal will not permeate the trees. It could be
conditioned to change the tree branches if required.
Carrie Randolph, 310 Sierra Drive comments:
• Since we have been assured that there would be no health risk to children could
the school site at Ocean view be used to locate an antenna as they could benefit
from the extra money?
• Will other monopines be located at this same site?
1
1
1
1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 1, 2002
PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED
PAGE 3
• She would prefer these antenna to be located at the shopping centers on West
branch to keep them out of residential areas.
Terry Fibich, Director of Building and Fire and Fire Chief for the City explained the
advantages that the City will realize from this project. Police, Fire and Public Works
antennas will be relocated on the Nextel monopine giving an increase of elevation of
about 20 feet which will give a substantial increase in performance and coverage. In
addition, the Building and Fire Department are using the Nextel system, which is unique
in that it is a cell phone and an encrypted two -way radio system. He further stated that
allowing this installation would increase public safety.
Commissioner Keen asked who would remove the equipment if this site was
abandoned? Chair Costello confirmed that conditions were included in the lease
agreement that addresses this.
Chair Costello then asked if an antenna could be located at a school? Mr. Chui said in
general they did not target schools for this type of a project because the perception is
not good even though their equipment is very safe. In addition, an antenna would
normally be much more exposed on a school site.
After further discussion and questions the Commissioners agreed that they were in
favor of the project.
Commissioner Keen made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Guthrie, approving
Conditional Use Permit Case No. 00 -017 as amended and adopt:
RESOLUTION NO. 02 -1851
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, INSTRUCTING THE SECRETARY TO
FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, AND APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 00 -017, APPLIED FOR
BY NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
The motion was approved with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Keen, Guthrie, Brown, Fowler, and Chair Costello
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 1S day of October 2002.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 1, 2002
PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 02 -008 AND
VARIANCE CASE NO. 02 -006; APPLICANT — GINA GLASS; LOCATION — 407 EL
CAMINO. Staff report prepared by Ryan Foster.
Mr. Strong presented the staff report describing the project and saying the basic
changes include a 12 -foot wall adjacent to the DeBlauw office building which is exposed
to freeway noise, a balcony addition to the second -story deck (which is a sound wall
improvement), some additional on -site improvements and a trellis lattice screen -work
which would visually screen the tourist court.
Commissioner Guthrie asked why this is called a bed and breakfast and not a hotel?
Commissioner Costello stated that the Development Code definitions re Hotels and Bed
& Breakfasts are absent zoning. Mr. Strong replied that defining this is a matter of scale
and compatibility. This is a commercial district so in essence it is a hotel, but can be
called a bed and breakfast or inn if the owner so desires.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING
PAGE 4
Steven Soenke, Architect, explained that this project is driven by the need to deal with
the 24 -hour freeway noise problem at this site and to increase the number of units to
improve the revenue. A sound engineer had provided a report suggesting the wall
height, but unfortunately he was out of town and unable to attend the meeting. He
further explained the proposed changes.
Commissioner Guthrie asked how a person would get from the parking lot to the
proposed ADA unit? Mr. Soenke replied that the site plan has provision for ramping and
the slopes would have a 30" rise.
Commissioner Keen asked if there was more of a sound problem at the Arroyo Village
Inn than at the Econo -lodge just down the street? Mr. Soenke said the manager has
told him that people do complain about the noise, but at the Village Inn the guests are
paying more and do not expect to have to put up with the noise. Mr. Keen then asked if
the lattice wall screen was to help screen noise from the proposed weddings at the Inn
and did they have concern about blocking off the windows at the People's Self Help
Housing (PSHH) project. Mr. Soenke said there would be a space of 3 -feet between
the building and the screen and that that the PSHH site is expected to be torn down in
the near future.
Gina Glass, owner of the Inn, said the lattice screen will be temporary and landscaping
is proposed in front of it. In answer to a question of Commissioner Brown she stated
that she is not doing good business because of the location, but they are hoping to
offset the weddings and are hoping to rent to rooms for small parties or luncheons.
1
1
1
1
1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 1, 2002
PAGE 5
Commissioner Fowler expressed the following concerns:
• There was no 24 -hour manager on site.
• Had the emergency fire situation had been taken care of.
• A 12 -foot sound wall height was too high.
• The recently installed lighting was a problem to the neighbors.
• Would use of the Montessori School parking lot for overflow parking be
advisable?
She complimented Ms. Glass on the gazebo and other improvements and said she
would be in agreement with new signage as long as it complied with the ordinance.
Ms. Glass replied:
• At this time her son and his wife were living at the Inn as onsite managers.
• The emergency fire situation had been taken care of.
• She was intending to plant many flowers and trees to screen the whole wall.
• A timer had been installed for the lighting on the parking lot.
• She did not think she would ever need the extra parking space, but if it was used
it would be for staff.
• She would be replacing the signs.
Commissioner Guthrie had concerns with:
• The fact that there was no 24 -hour onsite manager (it should be treated as a
hotel which would require a 24 -hour manager to assist emergency personnel if
required).
• Re the wedding area, if it was tied to the bed and breakfast operation there may
be a parking problem.
Ms. Glass stated that her guests would be capable of handling any emergency as she
gives them explicit instructions in case of an emergency.
Doug Malen, 201 Oak Street complimented Ms. Glass on the improvements done to the
property, but complained that the new lights in the parking lot were too bright. In
addition, he said the noise from the freeway was really loud.
Richard DeBlauw, El Camino Real, said the remodel of the building looks really good,
but he objected to the massive height of the wall. He would like the wall to be no higher
than 6 -feet and asked on which side of the wall Ms. Glass intended to plant the trees.
In addition, he requested that the property line be surveyed to make sure that the
proposed wall is put in on the applicant's property.
Liz Cordoba, 211 Oak Street, complimented the applicant on the improvements and
stated that having a sound barrier would also be nice. She further stated that the new
lights have changed the atmosphere of the residential part of the neighborhood and said
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 1, 2002
she would be happy if timers were installed and turned off as early as possible and in
addition the number of lights could be reduced.
CLOSED PUBLIC COMMENT
PAGE 6
The Planning Commission gave their closing comments:
• The proposed 12 -foot sound wall was much too high and could set a
precedence.
• Having an 24 -hour onsite manager was essential.
• There was concern with the more intense use of the business and whether the
sharing of the Montessori school parking lot would be a legitimate use.
• The 3 -foot encroachment was acceptable.
• The requirement for overhead utility lines could be waived.
• Signage in the back is needed.
• The lights in the parking lot should be shielded as required by City ordinance.
Commissioner Brown stated that the findings for the variance had not been met and
agreed with Commissioner Guthrie that he also could not support a 12 -foot sound wall.
The issue of the Hotel /Motel should be clarified so the legal issue of an onsite manager
could be decided.
After consideration of the proposal to upgrade the Arroyo Village Inn the Planning
Commission said they could not support the project as presented and requested that
this project be continued to the December 3, 2002 meeting to give the applicant time to
work on problem areas and respond to their concerns.
NON - PUBLIC HEARING - PRE - APPLICATION CASE NO. 02 - 009; APPLICANT —
BOSCH TRUST; LOCATION - 125 NELSON STREET. Staff report prepared by Ryan
Foster.
The Planning Commission reviewed the request for five (5) ground floor
commercial /office retail units with six (6) apartments above (live /work units).
Rob Strong presented the staff report and said this is two Tots which are located on an
existing residence (building to be removed) and has been reviewed positively in terms
of the mixed -use by both SAC and ARC committees and has now evolved into an
office /retail ground floor and residence above. There are concerns about design details,
but the applicant would like to receive comment from the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Fowler questioned if the changes requested by the ARC were now on
the plans before them?
Mr. Strong said the plans had been revised to reflect suggestions from the ARC.
1
1
1
1
1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 1, 2002
PAGE 7
In answer to questions from Commissioner Keen and Commissioner Guthrie, Mr. Strong
described the two lots stating that one of the parcels is landlocked, the property is
zoned Village Commercial and there are no setbacks in this district.
Phil Ziedman, Architect, said they had redesigned the project so that the parking could
be behind the building, created a yard area away from the street for children to play and
each of the units is designed to have an internal stairway if desired. After the ARC
comments the facade was changed to break up the building so that it does not look like
six duplicate buildings, although internally they function identically. The commercial
zero lot line allows an exterior patio above. The residential has been stepped back from
the property line providing covered walkways on the driveway side where there is
access to the commercial units.
Billy Swaggert, 127 Nelson Street - Mr. Strong said he had received a telephone call
from this neighbor indicating that she has no objection to the project, but requesting that
a fence be installed on the east side of the property line adjacent to the driveway for
safety reasons.
Mr. Zeidman said he had already spoken to Mrs. Swaggert and told her they would be
willing to work with her.
Commissioner Brown stated that because this is the Village area he had a concern with
the mass of the building and that it should be broken up. The block wall on the west
elevation should be faced with a more natural looking material.
Commissioner Fowler said this is a good example of a mixed -use project, but she would
like to see a more attractive looking building.
Commissioner Keen agreed with Commissioner Brown that the facing on the wall
should not be finished in stucco and stated that the building looks stark and should
adhere to the Historic Village Design Guidelines.
Commissioner Guthrie said the overall concept was good. He had a concern that the
parking was 20% short. Mr. Strong said the parking could be adequate and with a
parking study the reduction could be allowed.
Chair Costello said this may be the first large Mixed -Use project in the Village area and
recommended the applicant adhere to the Historical Design Guidelines and said that
sharing of the parking should be carefully considered. More detail should be shown on
the plans and more creativity used to make a more attractive building.
Commissioner Keen thought that the freestanding carports should not be required
because with the mixed -use concept they would not work and they may just collect
trash.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 1, 2002
The Commission had no further concerns.
PAGE 8
Commissioner Fowler thought that covered parking spaces were good in bad weather
especially for people with families.
Commissioner Guthrie said that with freestanding carports you would still be exposed to
the weather once you leave the carport.
Mr. Zeidman thanked the Commission for their suggestions for improving the project.
DISCUSSION ITEMS -
1. Water consumption — Rob Strong said the integrated Program EIR for the 2001
General Plan projected that water resource allocations could accommodate a
maximum population of 20,000 if per capita average water consumption could be
reduced to 160 gallons per person per day. The report received from Shayne
Taylor, Public Works, reflects an increase instead of a decrease in per capita
consumption. Public Works is working on additional conservation programs to be
reported to City Council in the next few months.
Commissioner Fowler suggested public education /information to make people
more aware of the situation. Rob Strong agreed before conservations measures
are initiated that further education and further study of consumption estimates
based on various types of land uses should be undertaken. Commissioner
Guthrie said the effectiveness of the retrofit program should be reviewed and a
Cal Poly student Intern with the help of the Finance Department could probably
complete this quickly.
1. Multiple- family rental to condominium conversion — Mr. Strong said one of the
requirements for conversions is to determine that the vacancy factor of apartment
rental housing units in the City exceeds five percent of the total rental- housing
inventory. Existing rental units may be approved for conversion regardless of the
vacancy factor if Council determines that a new rental unit has or will be added to
the City's housing inventory for each rental unit removed through conversion.
The City has no method of determining the total rental- housing inventory nor
estimating the current vacancy factor.
Finally, Mr. Strong said the City does have a pending application for condo
conversion and the Commission or the Local Housing Task Force should make a
recommendation to Council as to whether conversions should be considered and
an easily quantifiable method used to determine the vacancy factor.
The Commission discussed this at length and could not agree on what method
should be used to calculate the vacancy factor. The Commission stated that in
their opinion the vacancy factor was under 5 %, but they would further review this.
1
1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 1, 2002
3. Upcoming audio conference — Mr. Strong gave the Commission information
regarding an upcoming conference on "Getting to Density ", which they were
invited to take part in.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS - None
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW -UP - None.
ADJOURNMENT -There being no further business before the Commission, the
meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. on a motion by Chair Costello, seconded by
Commissioner Brown, and unanimously carried.
ATTEST:
L.. • _4 .i../i - •
L REARDON- SMITH,
COMMISSION CLERK
AS TO ONTE
I 1 4
�•J � _ 4 pL
ROB STRONG,
COMMUNITY DEVELOP ENT DIRECTOR
PAGE 9
f SEPH M. COSTELLO, CHAIR