Loading...
PC Minutes 2001-04-17ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 17, 2001 PAGE 1 CALL TO ORDER Chair Costello called the regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL X Commissioner Brown X Commissioner Fowler X Commissioner Guthrie X Vice -Chair Keen X Chair Costello APPROVAL OF MINUTES None ITEM I. I.A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Rob Strong, General Plan Consultant, spoke to the Planning Commission, and explained the process with the Long Range Planning Committee review of the General Plan documents, the EIR and CEQA regulations. He informed the Commission of the projected dates for the distribution of the General Plan documents. He suggested that the Planning Commission schedule a study session to review the documents, which he would attend to answer any questions they had before the Commission held a hearing for public review. Chair Costello stated that the Planning Commission should wait until the City Council had held its review of the documents and then the Commission could schedule a study session at its next meeting. 1.13. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ITEM II. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS II. A. PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM CASE NO. 01-001; LOCATION - 850 OAK PARK BOULEVARD; APPLICANT - RAY BUNNELL; REPRESENTATIVE - JIM CRAVENS, ASIGNCO Associate Planner, Kelly Heffernon, presented the staff report to the Planning Commission. Ms. Heffernon stated that in September of 1998, the City Council approved a Planned Sign Program for the Casa Grande Inn, which updated the "Best Western" logo and increased the size of two existing signs. Because a building permit was never issued for the new signs, the Planned Sign Program expired and the applicant was required to resubmit the sign package. The proposed signage is identical to what the City approved in 1998 except for the pole sign, which is one foot taller, allowing both the "Best Western" and "Casa Grande Inn" signs to be updated and contained in one cabinet instead of two. Commissioner Brown and Ms. Heffernon discussed the "pole" sign. Mr. Brown asked if a Variance was necessary since this was a new sign and it was going to be one (1) foot taller than originally approved. Ms. Heffernon explained that a Variance was not necessary because ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 17, 2001 PAGE 2 the "pole" sign was an existing sign and this was essentially viewed as a change in the "copy" of the existing sign. Chair Costello asked if the signs for the restaurant and the hotel were separate? Ms. Heffernon stated that the applicant could best answer the question. Chair Costello opened the public hearing. Ray Bunnell, applicant for the project and owner of Casa Grande Inn, spoke to the Commission stating that he owned the adjoining restaurant however, they were operated separately. He stated that currently the restaurant was closed and he was in the process of finding a tenant for it. Chair Costello closed the public hearing. Commissioner Fowler moved that the Planning Commission adopt: RESOLUTION NO. 01-1784 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING .THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM CASE NO. 01- 001 FOR THE BEST WESTERN CASA GRANDE INN, APPLIED FOR BY RAY BUNNELL, LOCATED AT 850 OAK PARK BOULEVARD Commissioner Guthrie seconded the motion. The motion was approved by the following roll call vote: ROLL CALL VOTE YES Commissioner Brown YES Commissioner Fowler YES Commissioner Guthrie YES Commissioner Keen YES Chair Costello II B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 00-017; LOCATION - 200 HILLCREST DRIVE; APPLICANT - NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS Associate Planner, Kelly Heffernon, informed the Planning Commission that because of unresolved issues related to project access, staff was requesting that this item be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of May 1, 2001. Commissioner Guthrie moved that the Planning Commission continue Item II. B. to the May 1, 2001 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. The motion was approved by the following roll call vote: ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION II. C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 99-013 AND VARIANCE CASE NO. 01-001; LOCATION — NORTHWEST CORNER OF WEST BRANCH STREET AND CAMINO MERCADO; APPLICANT — STEPHEN COOL; REPRESENTATIVE — GARY WHITE (Continued from April 3, 2001) Associate Planner, Kelly Heffernon, presented the staff report stating that the Planning Commission had reviewed this project at its April 3, 2001 meeting and in response to the Planning Commission's concerns the applicant has submitted a revised grading plan that shows building No. 3 two (2) feet lower, and a revised landscape plan to clarify tree impacts and correlate tree identifications with the arborist's tree report. Ms. Heffernon stated that additional plans had also been submitted detailing wall elevations and modifications to the exterior wall materials such as cultured stone as a veneer over the block walls. Ms. Heffernon further explained that because the project included walls that exceeded the six (6) foot maximum height limit, the applicant has submitted a Variance. The applicant is requesting walls that are 14 -feet in height with the primary purpose of retaining the sloped property. Ms. Heffernon explained the 6 findings that must be made to approve the Variance. Ms. Heffernon stated that the project had been property noticed and that the Community Development Department had received a letter from Premier Inns expressing their concerns of the proposed project. Chair Costello opened the public hearing. Steven Cool, applicant for the project, stated that the architect for the project had not yet arrived and asked if the Planning Commission would agree to a brief recess. Chair Costello stated that the Planning Commission would take a ten (10) minute break. Chair Costello called the meeting to order. Steve Orosz, Traffic Engineer, spoke to the Planning Commission about the traffic study he had prepared for the project. Commissioner Brown stated that he believed that there was a contradiction in the traffic study regarding the LOS at the Brisco Road interchange. Mr. Brown pointed out that on Page 3 of the report it stated that the intersection operated at LOS A during peak periods, then later the report states that it operates at LOS C during weekday afternoons. MINUTES APRIL 17, 2001 PAGE 3 ROLL CALL VOTE YES Commissioner Brown YES Commissioner Fowler YES Commissioner Guthrie YES Commissioner Keen YES Chair Costello II. C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 99-013 AND VARIANCE CASE NO. 01-001; LOCATION — NORTHWEST CORNER OF WEST BRANCH STREET AND CAMINO MERCADO; APPLICANT — STEPHEN COOL; REPRESENTATIVE — GARY WHITE (Continued from April 3, 2001) Associate Planner, Kelly Heffernon, presented the staff report stating that the Planning Commission had reviewed this project at its April 3, 2001 meeting and in response to the Planning Commission's concerns the applicant has submitted a revised grading plan that shows building No. 3 two (2) feet lower, and a revised landscape plan to clarify tree impacts and correlate tree identifications with the arborist's tree report. Ms. Heffernon stated that additional plans had also been submitted detailing wall elevations and modifications to the exterior wall materials such as cultured stone as a veneer over the block walls. Ms. Heffernon further explained that because the project included walls that exceeded the six (6) foot maximum height limit, the applicant has submitted a Variance. The applicant is requesting walls that are 14 -feet in height with the primary purpose of retaining the sloped property. Ms. Heffernon explained the 6 findings that must be made to approve the Variance. Ms. Heffernon stated that the project had been property noticed and that the Community Development Department had received a letter from Premier Inns expressing their concerns of the proposed project. Chair Costello opened the public hearing. Steven Cool, applicant for the project, stated that the architect for the project had not yet arrived and asked if the Planning Commission would agree to a brief recess. Chair Costello stated that the Planning Commission would take a ten (10) minute break. Chair Costello called the meeting to order. Steve Orosz, Traffic Engineer, spoke to the Planning Commission about the traffic study he had prepared for the project. Commissioner Brown stated that he believed that there was a contradiction in the traffic study regarding the LOS at the Brisco Road interchange. Mr. Brown pointed out that on Page 3 of the report it stated that the intersection operated at LOS A during peak periods, then later the report states that it operates at LOS C during weekday afternoons. ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 17, 2001 PAGE 4 Ms. Orosz explained this difference in the report. He then explained how the traffic report was prepared and how the traffic engineer had arrived at the conclusions for the study. The Planning Commission and Mr. Orosz then discussed the traffic study and its conclusions. Les Crouch, owner of Premier Inns, spoke to the Planning Commission of his concerns about the project and its potential impact on the motel. He stated that he was not opposed to this project, rather, he stated that he felt the new project would block the view of the motel from the freeway because of its excessive height. The Planning Commission and Mr. Crouch discussed his concerns and how the motel was seen from the freeway. Mr. Crouch stated that he did not feel there had been enough of a study done on the impact to the property and he suggested that the applicant stake the property with poles, which would help determine just what the impact on the motel would be. Mr. Couch also stated that he was not concerned about the Variance, however, he was concerned that there would a 14 -foot cut in the hillside and only a ten (10) foot setback from the wall in the motel parking lot. He felt that this may be a serious engineering problem. Terry Randall, was concerned about the number of Oak trees that would be removed. She did not feel that tree numbers two and three needed to be removed even though the arborist's report stated that these trees were not healthy. She also stated that she was concerned about the amount of traffic this project would create. Peggy Harmet, spoke to the Planning Commission stating that she was concerned about the oak trees that were being removed and about the traffic. She stated that she felt that the traffic should be taken care of first and then the project could be approved. Steven Cool, applicant for the project, commented on some of the issues that had been raised at tonight's meeting. He stated that he had signed an agreement to install a signal at Camino Mercado and West Branch Street. Although he agreed that the project would cause some additional traffic, however, the City had to allow some use of the properties within the City. To say that he could not use the property because it causes traffic, then the City's answer should be to condemn the property and turn it into a park. He felt that the proposed use of this property would be less intense because of the hours of operation this type of project would offer. Mr. Cool stated that he was not insensitive to the concerns of the E -Z Eight Motel owners, he has walked and driven around the site and he was convinced that this project would not significantly block views of the Motel. He did not feel that tree Number 2 could be saved and still have a workable project. Commissioner Brown stated that he felt that the structures for this project were too tall. He asked Mr. Cool if there was any way the project could be changed and still keep the same square footage? He did not want to see the project show above the ridgeline. ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 17, 2001 PAGE 5 Mr. Cool stated that they would prefer to leave the elevations where they were because there was a view of the ocean from the upper floors, which is a valuable amenity for the project. Chair Costello stated that the arborist's report was two years old. He asked if the report would show anything different if it were updated? Mr. Cool stated that he felt it would be the same. Chair Costello asked Economic Development Director Diane Sheeley if there was a way to verify the economic impact to the motel? Diane Sheeley, Economic Development Director, stated that she had not had time to review the project so that she could not address this issue tonight, however, she could possibly have an answer by next meeting. The Planning Commission and Ms. Sheeley discussed this project and the Economic Development Strategy. Commissioner Keen stated that when he reviewed the amount of bed tax that was collected from the motel, he did not believe it was an economically sound idea to jeopardize the motel to gain office space. Chair Costello closed the public hearing. Commissioner Brown stated that he would reiterate for the record the comments he had concerning the project at the previous meeting. However, first he wanted to say that he would like Ms. Sheeley to come up with some type of figures on the possible impacts on the motel. His comments were: 1. He felt that the project could be approved if Buildings Nos. 3 and 4 were dealt with and the circulation on the property was changed in such a way to accommodate the square footage. 2. He would like to see the building height kept below the ridgeline. This goes beyond his concern for the economic impact to the motel but addresses the standards in the General Plan. 3. He still felt that there were contradictions in the Traffic Study and he does not feel that the cumulative impacts of traffic are really known. 4. The intensity of use for this project, while well within the Development Code standards, is not acceptable given the topography. 5. The General Plan discourages high-rise construction and encourages horizontal designs. 6. He felt that cutting 50% of the mature Oak trees and replanting them with younger trees was not an act of preservation. He would like to see trees 2, 9 and 12 saved. 7. The project falls short in three (3) of the five (5) findings. Findings one (1), two (2) and three (3) cannot be met. ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 17, 2001 PAGE 6 He stated that currently he could not support this project, however if all traffic mitigations were done prior to a building permit, if the intensity of use was greatly reduced, some of the trees were not removed, and some of the concerns of the motel were dealt with, he could support the project. Commissioner Fowler stated that: 1. The signage for the motel, to make this business viable, is very important. 2. A traffic light is needed at the corner of Camino Mercado and West Branch. Other than these issues, Ms. Fowler stated that the project met the Development Code standards and economically the City needs this project. Commissioner Keen commented that: 1. He did have a problem with the height of the buildings. 2. He would like to have wording in the Conditions of Approval that spell out specifically what kind of surface will be used on the retaining walls. 3. He did not want any free standing electrical switch gears standing outside of the buildings. 4. There needs to be a signal at the corner of Camino Mercado and West Branch. Commissioner Gutherie stated the following: 1. Because of the "massing" of the three buildings together on the property, it is perceived as a single building and he also feels that this breaks up the ridgeline. 2. He cannot approve the project with the building located where it is at this point. 3. He was not convinced that that the circulation was developed correctly. 4. He felt that, because of the massing of the buildings on the property, it would obscure the motel. 5. He also has a problem with the amount of traffic that will be generated and how it is being dealt with. Chair Costello stated the following: 1. He has a problem with the traffic and circulation. 2. He is concerned that the new project will block the view of the motel and kill that business. He would like a definitive answer about what may happen with this. He is concerned that this business may be eliminated which would be a detriment to the owner and the City. 3. He stated that he felt there was a question whether Finding No. 2 could be met if there was some reconfiguration of the buildings. 4. Finding No. 3 is acceptable to him. 5. With Finding No. 5, he feels that the if project were changed, it could possibly meet this finding. The Planning Commission discussed if this project should be continued. Commissioner Gutherie stated that he felt the Planning Commission should move this project forward to the City Council. ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 17, 2001 PAGE 7 Commissioner Keen moved that the Planning Commission adopt: RESOLUTION NO. 01-1783 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, INSTRUCT THE DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, AND APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 99-013, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF CAMINO MERCADO AND WEST BRANCH STREET, APPLIED FOR BY STEPHEN COOL AND GARY WHITE Including Exhibit A Commissioner Fowler seconded the motion. The motion was defeated by the following roll call vote: ROLL CALL VOTE NO Commissioner Brown YES Commissioner Fowler NO Commissioner Guthrie YES Commissioner Keen NO Chair Costello Commissioner Keen moved that the Planning Commission adopt: RESOLUTION NO. 01-1785 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE VARIANCE CASE NO. 01-001, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF CAMINO MERCADO AND WEST BRANCH STREET, APPLIED FOR BY STEPHEN COOL AND GARY WHITE Including Exhibits A and B with the added language that the Planning Commission adopt the recommendation of the ARC with regards to the facings on the retaining walls. Commissioner Fowler seconded the motion. The motion was defeated by the following roll call vote: ROLL CALL VOTE NO Commissioner Brown YES Commissioner Fowler NO Commissioner Guthrie YES Commissioner Keen NO Chair Costello ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 17, 2001 PAGE 8 Commissioner Brown wanted to note for the record that the Variance did not meet Finding No. 2. Commissioner Gutherie moved that the Planning Commission recommend denial of this project to the City Council based on the fact that the prosect does not meet Findings No. 2, "the proposed will not impair the integrity and character of the district"; No. 5 , "the proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health and safety". Commissioner Brown amended the motion stating the project did not meet Finding No. 1, because "the project does not meet the Goals and Objectives of the General Plan and development policies of the City". Commissioner Gutherie stated that he accepted the amendment to the motion. Commissioner Brown seconded the motion. The motion was approved by the following roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE YES Commissioner Brown YES Commissioner Fowler YES Commissioner Guthrie NO Commissioner Keen YES Chair Costello ITEM III. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS None ITEM. IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS None ITEM. V. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENT Commissioner Keen asked when the Planning Commission would receive the draft General Plan for review. Mr. McCants stated that the Planning Commission would get the documents when they were ready to be released to the public. The Planning Commission discussed the dates the Commission members would be gone on vacation during the summer. ITEM. VI. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW-UP REPORTS None ITEM. VII. ADJOURNMENT ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 17, 2001 PAGE 9 On motion of Commissioner Keen, seconded by Commissioner Brown, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. to the next scheduled meeting on May 1, 2001. ATTEST: Kathleen Fryer, Commissio lerk AS TO CONTENT: Kerry M6Gents Community Development Director 1 1 epff M. Costello, Chair 1 1 1