PC Minutes 2002-03-19MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 19, 2002
CALL TO ORDER
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chair Costello
presiding. Present were Commissioners Brown, Fowler, Guthrie, and Keen. Also in
attendance were Community Development Director Rob Strong, Associate Planner
Kelly Heffernon, Associate Planner Teresa McClish, and Public Works Engineering
Assistant Rodger Olds.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES — The minutes of February 19, 2002 were approved as
submitted, with a unanimous 5/0 voice vote.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
1. Letter dated March 13, 2002 from Gregory and Judith Quitoriano, 1165 Maple
Street, regarding the Conditional Use Permit for 01 -013 Calvary Chapel.
2. Letter dated March 15, 2002 from Chuck Fellows, Preserve the Village, regarding
the Amended Conditional Use Permit 02 -001 for DeBlauw Builders.
3. A plan depicting undergrounding requirements from PG &E, regarding Amended
Conditional Use Permit 01 -001 for DeBlauw Builders.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM — CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 01 -013;
APPLICANT — CALVARY CHAPEL; LOCATION — 1133 MAPLE STREET. Staff
report by Kelly Heffernon.
Ms. Heffernon presented the staff report describing the highlights of the project
and stating that because adequate parking has been a problem in the past, the
church proposes to provide 15 spaces in excess of what the Development Code
requires.
Ms. Heffernon further stated that the site contains a total of nine trees, five of
which are oak trees. Although three of the oaks were proposed to be removed, the
applicant revised the plans to save one of the larger oak trees. In compliance with
the City's Tree Ordinance, nine replacement oaks are shown on the site plan. A
neighbor who lives southwest of the project site has submitted a written request to
relocate one of the replacement oak trees to avoid obstructing their existing views
when this tree matures. The applicant is willing to move the tree and staff
suggests that Condition of Approval No. 18 be amended to show this tree
relocated on the final landscape plan. With regard to the avocado . tree, the
applicant requests that Condition of Approval No. 18 (a) be amended to eliminate
reference to saving this tree, and let the applicant decide if it should be removed or
saved. Because the Tree Ordinance does not specifically protect non - native trees,
this would be a discretionary decision by the Planning Commission.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 19, 2002
PUBLIC COMMENT
PAGE 2
During construction, the church has permission to use the William's Center parking
lot located on the corner of Elm and Grand, and shuttle people from there to church
services. In addition because Condition of Approval No. 15 reads as being too
stringent and is difficult to enforce, staff suggests that the language regarding no
street parking be stricken.
The project meets all of the required Development Code standards for the Public
Facilities zoning district, including parking, landscaping, building setbacks, height,
and lot coverage. The project is also subject to the undergrounding requirements
of the Development Code, which involves the removal of seven utility poles and
associated overhead utility lines. The applicant has submitted a written request
that this requirement be modified to allow two of the poles located along the
eastern property line to remain in order to protect the root system of existing oak
trees. Staff suggests that an arborist report might be warranted in this case
regarding potential tree impacts and the feasibility of undergrounding.
In answer to Commissioner Guthrie's question Ms. Heffernon said that she did not
know the number of people that could occupy the assembly room; the number she
had from the Fire Department was for the whole facility.
Steve Carr, Pastor, Calvary Chapel-
• During construction the church would meet at another location and not at the
William's Center parking lot as originally proposed.
• They requested that the Avocado tree be removed because it would be too
close to the new building.
• A setback of about 20 feet from the frontage area is proposed and required per
the Architect.
• They requested exemption from the traffic signalization fees as the project
would not significantly impact the intersection.
Mr. Whittle, the contractor, described the location of the utility poles and what
their function was with regard to the undergrounding of overhead utilities. He also
requested that they be allowed to forego the requested arborist report because the
trees would have tree protection installed before construction anyway.
Greg Soto, the Architect, questioned language in 18 (d) of the Resolution
regarding the three -foot berm (landscaping area) in front of the parking lot and
asked how this should be constructed. Ms. Heffernon said a small wall to
accommodate the berm would be acceptable. Mr. Soto further asked if
mechanical equipment could be placed on the roof of Building 'B' if a parapet was
provided to screen it. It was confirmed that this would be acceptable.
1
1
1
1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 19, 2002
Five members of the public spoke in favor of the new church.
END OF PUBLIC COMMENT
PAGE 3
Commissioner Brown asked for clarification on the arborist report and the traffic
signalization fees. Ms. Heffernon said the arborist report had been included
because of the requirement for undergrounding of the overhead poles. Rob Strong
said with regard to the waiver of signalization fees, the applicant is required to pay
the fee, but can then request a fee waiver from the Council.
Commissioner Keen suggested that the language on condition number 17 of the
resolution, with respect to the height of fence or wall, be amended for future
projects to reflect the Development Code height requirement of six feet. Ms.
Heffernon agreed to amend this for future resolutions.
The Planning Commission asked for further clarification on which poles were
required to be removed.
Rodger Olds, Public Works, gave a short presentation on which poles were required
to be removed per City requirements.
A lengthy discussion then took place with regard to the undergrounding of
overhead utilities and it was decided that it would be acceptable to leave poles 7
and 4 in place as requested by the applicant, but there was indecision on pole 8
without more information.
Commissioner Guthrie questioned the number of people attending church compared
to the parking spaces.
Commissioner Keen said even though the situation with the undergrounding of the
poles had not been completely clarified he would like to go forward with the project
and offered to meet with Public Works and a representative of the church at the
site to work out a plan agreeable to everyone.
The Planning Commission expressed their desire for this project to go forward and
addressed the following:
• They would like to see the request for the exemption of the traffic signalization
granted, but this would be a City Council decision.
• Regarding the undergrounding of the utilities, pole 8 may be too expensive to
remove because of the transformer.
• Condition No. 15, addressing street parking, would be difficult to enforce and
should be deleted.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 19, 2002
• Condition No. 18 (regarding landscaping), they would like to see the Avocado
tree saved if possible.
• Agreed that the location of the replacement oak tree be revised to avoid
possible obstruction of view, as requested in a letter from Mr. & Mrs.
Quitoriano.
• The church should honor the request by Mr. & Mrs. Quitariono to limit the
number of occasions of overnight guests visiting the church, as this is a
residential area.
Finally, after further discussion on the overhead utilities, the Planning Commission
agreed that Condition No. 61 should be amended to clarify which poles would be
required to be removed.
Commissioner Guthrie made a motion, seconded by Commission Fowler, approving
Conditional Use Permit 01 -013, with the following changes to the Conditions of
Approval:
1. Delete Condition No. 1 g`and 16 regarding parking °during construction.
2. Amend Condition No. 61 to state "All existing public overhead utilities which
are onsite, except those along the side and rear lines, shall be removed and
those on the side and rear lines shall be subject to Public Works approval after
consultation with PG &E ".
3. Amend Condition No. 18 regarding the trees, and adopting:
RESOLUTION NO. 02 -1831
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, INSTRUCTING THE SECRETARY TO FILE A
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, AND APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 01 -013, LOCATED
AT 1133 MAPLE STREET, APPLIED FOR BY CALVARY
CHAPEL OF ARROYO GRANDE
PAGE 4
AYES: Commissioner's Brown, Fowler, Keen, Guthrie and Chair Costello
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
1
1
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19 day of March 2002.
1
1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 19, 2002
PAGE 5
PUBLIC HEARING — AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 02 -001;
APPLICANT — DEBLAUW BUILDERS; LOCATION — 1070 EAST GRAND AVENUE.
Staff report by Kelly Heffernon.
Ms. Heffernon said the Planning Commission originally approved a Conditional Use
Permit to construct a two -story office building in June of 2000 with a condition
that all overhead utility lines be placed underground, and allowing the poles along
the Grand Avenue frontage to remain.
Based on recent information from PG &E, the applicant is requesting that overhead
utilities as well as power poles be allowed to remain instead of adding two
additional power poles to adjacent property frontages which would result if lines
must be removed. Specifically, PG &E requires two poles for safety and mechanical
reasons for high voltage lines and has suggested that the overhead utilities remain
until a larger segment of utility lines can be placed underground at one time, as
intended with East Grand Avenue undergrounding districts.
Rodger Olds, Public Works, spoke at length giving an update on the City's
undergrounding requirements and explained the procedures for undergrounding
districts under Rule 20A. He said the funds for this specific project area have been
applied for, but have not been allocated at this time.
Commissioner Keen suggested that it would look a lot better if PG &E could design
the transformer to be put on a pad in the back for this project as had been done
with another property in the area.
Commissioner Fowler asked if the undergrounding for the project could be bonded
so the applicant would not have to bear the cost at this time.
Commissioner Guthrie asked if the conduit could be put in place now, but not
underground at this time?
Commissioner Brown stated that at a minimum the conduit should be put in place
before he could approve the amendment to the Conditional Use Permit.
In answer to all three questions Rodger Olds said if the applicant would be
agreeable this could be done. He also suggested that just the low voltage phone
and cable could be undergrounded and not the high voltage power.
Richard DeBlauw, the applicant, agreed that the short section of wires does look
ugly, but thought it would be better to wait until the City gets funding to do all the
undergrounding at once.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 19, 2002
Commissioner Guthrie said he would be in favor of waiving the requirement for
undergounding if the conduit for both the high voltage, low voltage and other lines
were put in at this time.
Finally, it was agreed that if after further consideration by Public Works and the
applicant is not satisfied, he could come back to the Planning Commission for
additional clarification.
The Planning Commission took the following action:
Commissioner Guthrie made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Brown to
approve the Amended Conditional Use Permit 02 -001, revising Condition of
Approval No. 51, to state "Existing overhead utility lines and poles shall be allowed
to remain along the East Grand Avenue property frontage subject to approval of the
Public Works Department after consultation with PG &E, to maximize the
undergrounding of utilities without the addition of any poles" and adopting:
RESOLUTION NO. 02 -1832
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING AMENDED
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 02 -001, LOCATED
AT 1070 GRAND AVENUE, APPLIED FOR BY DEBLAUW
BUILDERS, INC.
AYES: Commissioner's Brown, Fowler, Keen, Guthrie and Chair Costello
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19 day of March 2002
PAGE 6
NON - PUBLIC HEARING - PRE - APPLICATION REVIEW 02 -001; APPLICANT -
YONEJI & MASAKO MATSUMOTO; LOCATION - 1595 EAST GRAND AVENUE.
Staff Report by Kelly Heffernon.
Ms. Heffernon said Subarea 3 of the Berry Gardens Specific Plan is 4.6 acres in
size and has two underlying zoning designations. The applicant is proposing to
change the zoning of the 1.6 -acre portion of the property, located immediately
north of the Berry Gardens development, from Residential Rural to Single - Family,
and to subdivide this property into nine lots. The lot sizes would be consistent
with the approved Berry Gardens subdivision, ranging from 6,000 to roughly 8,300
square feet. Strawberry Ave. would be extended and terminate in a cul -de -sac,
and drainage would be accommodated by drainage the Berry Gardens Ponding
1
1
1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 19, 2002
PAGE 7
Basin. She further stated that the remaining 3 -acre area zoned General Commercial
fronting on East Grand Avenue is not included in this proposal and would be
subject to a separate future Specific Plan Amendment.
The Planning Commission had the following questions and concerns:
• Would the smaller lots really reflect more affordable housing and if not should
the lot sizes be consistent with the Development Code?
• Will there be drainage capacity for this project?
• What was the original plan for this site when Berry Gardens was approved?
Ms. Heffernon said the property owner did not wish to be included in the Berry
Gardens Specific Plan at the time so it was an undefined subarea. Rob Strong
explained the history of the Berry Gardens project and tract approval.
Terry Orton, representative with Westland Engineering, provided highlights of the
proposed project. In answer to the drainage question he said the Berry Gardens
drainage basin was sized to take care of the residential portion of the property only.
Commissioner Fowler stated the size of the lots could provide very desirable
homes, as many people do not want a large lot to take care of.
Commissioner Guthrie stated the layout for the project makes sense. He also said
he did not think there was a substantial relationship between lot size and
affordability affected more by other market factors such as house size and location.
Commissioner Costello had concerns with traffic. He also had concerns with
available resources stating that it is the accumulation of development that affects
on resources, not the individual developments themselves.
Commissioner Keen expressed concern that many of the houses being built are for
young families with children, but when lot size is reduced lot coverage goes up
excessively and the park area is reduced, there is inadequate room for play area for
children. In this scenario he would like to see the park area increased to
accommodate the reduced yards on small Tots.
The Planning Commission thought the project was overall a good fit for this site
and had no further comments.
NON - PUBLIC HEARING — PRE - APPLICATION REVIEW 01 -003; APPLICANT —
CENTRAL COAST PET EMERGENCY CLINIC; LOCATION — HALCYON ROAD &
FAEH AVE. Staff report by Ryan Foster.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 19, 2002
PAGE 8
Ryan Foster presented the staff report giving the highlights of the project. He
stated that this project had been before the Staff Advisory Committee and the
Architectural Review Committee and he described their comments.
In answer to Commissioner Keen's question, Ryan Foster explained that this project
was in a General Commercial zone.
In answer to Commissioner Brown's question, Rob Strong said in his opinion the site
plan would be enhanced if the building was placed on the opposite end and the
parking on the Halcyon end. This would allow the building to screen the residential
street (Faeh Avenue) from Freeway 101 exposure and enable the commercial use to
be seen.
Commissioner Fowler questioned the size of the parking lot and number of exam
rooms compared to the number of proposed clients.
Commissioner Keen commented that this project does not reflect the future widening
of Halcyon.
Commissioner Guthrie had questions on the traffic safety with respect to the access
points going out onto Halcyon.
Rodger Olds, Public Works stated that all the accesses would have to be addressed
in the traffic report, and the easement for the sewer lines shown.
Ernie Kim. the Architect, clarified:
• There are four exam rooms because each room has a different use, three doctors
rotate on a 24 -hour shift and there might be two doctors present at the same
time.
• The applicant would coordinate with the widening of Halcyon when curb gutter
and sidewalk design are submitted to Public Works.
• The applicant is considering flipping the whole site plan over as suggested. An
added advantages would be to enable the building to be more visible from the
freeway.
• By creating a landscape buffer around the parking lot the applicant is trying to
give some relief to the residential neighborhood from a continuous set of
commercial buildings on El Camino.
• The applicant is' also trying to introduce a style of architecture that is more
residential in style and material.
Dr. Dan, one of the owners, explained:
• Animals are not boarded during the day; through an agreement we transfer
animals that need longer -term care to local veterinarians.
1
1
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 19, 2002
• The facility only sees dogs and cats.
PAGE 9
Commissioner Brown advised the applicant to meet with the neighbors to inform
them of the proposed project and address their concerns. He agreed with the idea
of flipping the project.
Commissioner Guthrie said by flipping the design it would mean that much of the
activity would take place on the El Camino side away from the residential area.
Chair Costello stated that this was a good mix and the location is right off the
freeway, but the applicant should look carefully at the design and entrances to
minimize the traffic impact at the intersections. He said he could support this
project.
Commissioner Keen suggested that the building could be made larger and the part
that faces residential could be rented out for more compatible uses.
There were no further comments.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
Commissioner Brown asked for an update on the Traffic Way bridge repair.
Rodger Olds said due to the fact that the whole bridge needs replacement and
Federal requirements are involved there were no bidders the first time, but the
project has now been put out to bid a second time.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS
Pismo Beach LAFCO Sphere of Influence study. Chair Costello said after reading
the report he questions the data that is being used for decisions on the impacts.
He further stated that the City of Arroyo Grande does need to look at the impacts
on the City in terms of traffic, drainage and public safety and we should have
discussions with the City of Pismo Beach and the of City Grover Beach. Rob
Strong further clarified what effect this proposal may have on the City of Arroyo
Grande, stating a follow -up letter could be sent in addition to the comment letter he
has already sent. He stated that Arroyo Grande is next in line to have it's Sphere
of Influence Update study by LAFCO.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW -UP
REPORTS.
Rob Strong gave details of the proposed workshop schedule for updating the
Village Design Guidelines, Streetscape Project and Development Code (April 11,
22, May 23 and 29). He further stated that the workshops in April will
concentrate on the Village Commercial area and the workshops in May on the
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 19, 2002
Village Residential area. He asked that at least one Commissioner attend each one
of the workshops.
In addition, the Traffic Way Strategic Plan is proposed to become a project for Cal
Poly students and the workshop is planned for mid -June.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned
at 10:25 p.m. on a motion by Chair Costello, seconded by Commissioner Guthrie, and
unanimously carried.
ATTEST:
n Reardon - Smith, Commission Clerk
AS TO CONTENT:
Rob Strong,
Community Development Director
PAGE 10
seph M. Costello, Chair
1
1
1