Loading...
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