PC Minutes 1999-08-171
1
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 1 of 16
CALL TO ORDER
Vice -Chair Parker 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 Costello
X Commissioner Keen
X Commissioner London
X Vice -Chair Parker
Chair Greene
MINUTE APPROVAL
The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of July 6, 1999 were
unanimously approved on a motion of Commissioner London, seconded by Vice -
Chair Parker with the following corrections:
• The word "asked" should be inserted in the first paragraph on page 5.
• The word "why" should be inserted in the last paragraph on page 1 1 .
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
1. Correspondence between Dave Crockett, City of Arroyo Grande Code
Enforcement Officer and Don Rita, Castlerock Development.
2. Memorandum from Robert L. Hunt, City Manager to John Keen concerning
requested information on recycling facilities, dated August 16, 1999.
3. Notes of the City of Arroyo Grande Architectural Review Committee, Monday,
August 2, 1999.
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
The special presentation to Henry Engen was postponed until September 7, 1999
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
None
NON - PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
A. PRE- APPLICATION CASE NO. 99 -008; PROJECT LOCATION: CAMINO
MERCADO; APPLICANT: PHIL AND CHRISTY KOLBO; THE APPLICANT IS
PROPOSING A SINGLE STORY, 7,690 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE /PROFESSIONAL
BUILDING.
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 2 of 16
Kelly Heffernon, Associate Planner, presented the staff report to the Planning
Commission. The project includes the construction of a single. story, 7,690 square
foot office /professional building for a research and development facility on a 1.34
acre parcel. The property is located on Camino Mercado in the Professional
Commercial District. The property is currently vacant and contains several large
Coast Live Oak trees, five (5) of which are proposed to be removed, and two (2) of
which are proposed to be relocated on the project site. Ms. Heffernon stated that
all required tree replacement could be accommodated on the site.
The building design includes natural materials as much as possible including wood
siding, smooth stucco and stone as the primary accent. The project also includes a
deck that wraps around the back of the building using terraced gravity walls. The
deck is approximately seven (7) feet above grade at the highest point.
Ms. Heffernon stated that the project meets all the development standards outlined
in the professional commercial district in the Development Code. However, an
issue for discussion is the parking. The project includes a total of thirty -four (34)
parking spaces, which is three (3) spaces more than the Development Code
requires. Fourteen of the parking spaces are compact spaces, which the
Development Code does not allow. The applicant is requesting that a compromise
be met whereby the majority of parking spaces are left as compact so as not to
jeopardize the root zone of some of the Oak trees.
Finally, Ms. Heffernon stated that the proposed access is from Camino Mercado.
The access has been designed to avoid excessive cuts into the steep slopes by
aligning the driveway as parallel to Camino Mercado as possible. Staff initially had
discussed a joint access easement with the adjoining property to the east but
because of the steep access staff decided this was not an option.
Commissioner London asked if the curvature of the street at the access point
would create a hazardous condition going in and out of the driveway.
Kim Romano, Public Works, stated that they could condition the project to have
curb returns at the driveway, which would provide a radius rather than regular
driveway. She stated that the sight distance was not determined to be a problem.
Commissioner Costello asked if any of the healthy Oak trees were going to be
removed?
Ms.. Heffernon replied that, as far as she could remember, two of the trees slated
for removal were unhealthy. The Parks and Recreation Director has stated that any
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 3 of 16
Mr. Keith replied that to his knowledge it had not.
Oak tree that is removed, healthy or unhealthy, has to be replaced with the three to
one ratio.
Vice -Chair Parker opened the hearing to the Public.
Tonv Keith, RRM Design Group, spoke to the Planning Commission. He pointed out
to the Commission that the plans address the Oak tree removal and replacement.
He stated that there are three (3) trees in the building footprint that are scheduled
to be removed. There are two (2) trees at the edge of the parking area, one is to
be removed and one is to be relocated. Two of the trees to be removed have been
reported to be unhealthy by an arborist.
Commissioner Keen had questions concerning the Oak trees and the Parking. He
asked Mr. Keith to explain where the parking spaces are that will interfere with the
tree roots.
Mr. Keen noted that tree #2, a forty -inch Oak tree is not scheduled to be removed
and he sees that there is a very large area there that was left free. He does not
understand why the parking spaces could not be extended into this "free" area. He
is interested in finding a way to preserve the trees and not have compact spaces.
Mr. Keith explained that the issue was two -fold with this property. The issue is
not only the horizontal layout of the parking but also the vertical lay of the land.
To get the driveway in they have to make a certain amount of a cut that has to be
made and by going to the standard spaces physically more area will be required
than what is shown on the plans. They can take another look at the plans and see
what can be done to make a change from compact to standard spaces. He further
explained that there are also some turning radii issues from the Fire Department's
standpoint that they need to maintain, however he hears the direction of the
Planning Commission and they will reconfigure and see how they can
accommodate the parking.
Mr. Keen asked if the lot line on the East boundary had been changed at some
time?
Mr. Keen stated that in the ARC minutes, where the project had been discussed,
there was a discussion about relocating trees. One of the RRM people made a
comment that in Rancho Grande II that a bunch of Oak trees had been relocated.
He wanted to state that only ten Oak trees were moved and only four of them have
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 4 of .16
survived. He did not feel that this was a "bunch" of trees and furthermore, only
four trees have survived.
Mr. Keith explained to Commissioner Keen that the developer was not going to
receive any credits for the trees they were relocating. Even if they are relocating
some trees, they are still replacing at the ratio used for replacing trees that have
been removed. They were doing the relocation primarily because, aesthetically the
project would look better if they were able to use the trees.
Commissioner Keen asked if this would mean that the developer would not be as
near as concerned about moving them because they would not be receiving any
credit for them.
Mr. Keith replied that this was not at all true. He explained that his client was
incurring the cost of relocating them.
Mr. Keen stated that on page 6 of the applicant's handout it shows a schematic
site section with a dotted line. Mr. Keen asked if this was where the grading for
this project would occur; was the parking lot going to be level; and would the
drainage go down the hill to the west side of the property?
Mr. Keith stated that this showed the natural grade; the parking lot has a 5%
slope; and the project will drain into two catch basins then taken underground and
out at the bottom of the driveway.
Commissioner Keen asked specifically where the wood siding would be on the
building? He noted that the ARC had dealt with this extensively but he was
concerned about the safety issue of this. He felt this siding should be made of
composite material that was fire proof yet looked like wood siding. He asked if the
ARC had been concerned about this?
Ms. Heffernon recalled that the only comment about this that the ARC had was the
staining from moisture.
Commissioner Keen finished by stating that he liked the elevations and thought the
building was an attractive one. He would like to see the applicant save as many
Oaks as possible. He had walked the site and looked at the Oak trees and realized
that many of them were in bad condition. Normally he objects to the removal of
Oak trees, but with the condition of the trees he did not have the same objection
as usual.
1
1
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 5 of 16
Commissioner Costello commented that he had recounted the spaces and felt the
applicant had shown thirty -five spaces on the plans so there might be more room
for parking than was previously thought. He wanted the applicant to know that he
looks very unfavorably on compact spaces.
Vice -Chair Parker asked what the applicant was referring to when they stated that
they would be doing "light assembly" at this location?
Phil Kolbo, answered Vice -Chair Parker's question by stating that their company
manufactures high tech rubber stamps. The company takes four different
components from four different manufacturers and assembles them into a complete
unit that they then sell. Most of their facility is for customer service. The light
assembly is nothing that is fabricated on site.
Ms. Parker asked if they would be making the rubber pieces on the site?
Mr. Kolbo replied that within six months to a year, the production of the rubber
that they use would be done on site with a laser. They would like to use this in the
future. If the Commission would like more information about this system, he would
be happy to provide them with it.
Vice -Chair Parker told the applicant that it would be a good idea for them to
research this and make sure this type of production would be allowed by the
Planned Development zoning. She stated that it would be a shame for them to
build their building and then find out that the things that they had planned for were
not allowed. She suggested that they talk to staff and make sure this was
allowed. She then asked if they were going to have a lot of large trucks in and out
of the area.
Mr. Kolbo stated that ninety -five percent of everything that is shipped in or out of
their business is done by UPS.
Commissioner Keen suggested that when they come back to the Commission they
might want to provide as much information as possible concerning such things as
the air quality control of any machinery, etc.
Mr. Kolbo replied that he would be happy to do that. The industry that he is
connected with, almost all the companies provide this information.
Commissioner London asked Mr. Kolbo who he anticipated the other tenants of this
building would be.
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 6of16
Mr. Kolbo replied that he anticipated it would be some type of high end
professional, architecture or legal, however he is looking to attract a high end
internet service provider for local businesses.
Vice -Chair Parker closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Keen commented that he felt this was a very good project and he
had already spoken to the issues he felt needed to be addressed.
Commissioner Costello stated that he had also addressed the issues he was
concerned with.
Commissioner London felt this was a very good project with a good design.
Vice -Chair Parker stated that she also liked the design of the building. She was
glad to see this kind of use in the City of Arroyo Grande and this seemed like a
good location for them. The only thing she would be concerned about was the
business changing into a manufacturing business and creating some problems
within the zoning that the Commission is not anticipating at this time. Again she
stated that the applicant should check with Staff about this.
She went on to say that the General Plan and the Development Code are very
specific about parking spaces. She realizes that the applicant is trying to save
some of the Oak trees on the site, however if the Commission allows compact
parking spaces for the preservation of the Oak trees this may set a very bad
precedent. She would like to see the applicant change their parking rather than to
allow any compact spaces.
B. REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CLARIFICATION OF AMBIGUITIES IN
DEVELOPMENT CODE PURSUANT TO SECTION 9- 01.050 B. STAFF IS
REQUESTING CLARIFICATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR THE
FOLLOWING ISSUE: IS A PUBLIC OFFICE ALLOWED IN THE GENERAL
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT? THE ISSUE ARISES IN CONNECTION WITH CUP 98-
565 FOR THE VILLAGE CREEK PROMENADE, 200 STATION WAY.
Mr. Buford, Interim Community Development Director, presented the staff report
to the Commission. He stated that the Village Creek Promenade was approved in
March 1999. The applicant has come forward asking for an exception to the
Conditional Use Permit to allow public office space within this shopping center. In
reviewing the Development Code there was a reference to office type uses in the
1
1
1
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 7 of 16
General Commercial zoning district. He went on to say that there was not any
specific reference to public offices of the type proposed. There is a public facility
zoning district with specific references to public offices. There have been letters
from the applicant and the County of San Luis Obispo that give specific details
regarding the potential use of the buildings.
Mr. Buford explained that the issue relates to any property in the General
Commercial District. When the Community Development Department received this
request they felt that there was some question to the issue. If a decision was
made at the staff level and staff directed the applicant that this was not an
acceptable use, the issue would not be resolved and may come up again. Staff
also felt that with the parking concerns of the Village Creek Promenade and the
fact that public offices have a parking requirement that is greater than General
Commercial usage, the likelihood that property owners and tenants of the Village
Creek Promenade would raise their concerns with regards to the plan.
Mr. Buford stated that there is a provision in the Development Code that assigns to
the Planning Commission the authority to interrupt.>the Development Code when
there are ambiguities. Staff felt this was the - appropriate way to handle this issue
so they brought it before the Planning Commission.
The parking requirements are one aspect of the difference between Public Facility
and General Commercial zoning. The Development Code and the General Plan, as
referenced in the staff report, speak to a desire in the Community to promote retail
and commercial areas that are healthy and vibrant. The Village Commercial /101
Corridor and Grand Avenue have been specifically identified in the General Plan as
being areas that the City is seeking to promote as commercial areas. Staff felt
there were enough issues with this that merited bringing it to the Planning
Commission for their guidance.
Finally, Mr. Buford explained if the Planning Commission determines that public
offices are allowed or not allowed within General Commercial Districts, staff would
advise the applicant of the Commission's decision. The provision in the
Development Code with regard to this procedure calls for the Planning Commission
to make its findings known by resolution. Staff has proposed draft resolutions both
"for" and "against" the finding. If the Commission finds that such use is
appropriate, the applicant would submit a Conditional Use Permit which would
require noticing all property owners and the normal development review process
would take place. Mr. Buford reiterated that this request from staff was brought to
the Planning Commission as a result of the request by the applicant and owner at
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 8 of 16
Village Creek Promenade, however the determination by the Planning Commission
would relate to all General Commercial districts.
Commissioner London asked what it was exactly that Social Services did? Will
Welfare Services be offered at this location?
Mr. Buford stated that he couldn't specify with certainty all of the activities of the
Social Services Department. He would rely on their letter in terms of their general
activities. He also said that he was not sure of what kinds of services they were
planning on offering at this location.
Mr. London asked how many employees they were proposing to have there? Mr.
London stated that conceivably there could be more employees than parking
spaces.
Mr. Buford explained how the parking ratios were figured out for this kind of an
area. He also stated that the expected number of employees at this location would
be approximately eighty.
Commissioner London asked how many "visitors " they would have each day?
Mr. Buford stated that Social Services would need to do some surveys to
determine this and that certain times of the month there are more people than at
other times.
Commissioner Costello stated that he was confused about the number of parking
spaces that will be needed for this type of public facility. He has some real
concerns about the parking. He also wondered what kind of traffic pattern that
would be created. The intersection of Fair Oaks and Station is extremely busy
because of the high school. He would want to know what additional traffic
impacts would be created at that intersection. Also, how would this type of public
office use mesh with the other businesses in the area?
Mr. Buford stated that staff was somewhat torn when preparing the staff report for
the Commission with regard to the level of detail with regard to this site that might
be provided. He stated that he did not think there was any question when the
Village Creek project first came through the department that parking was a critical
issue as well as access and circulation generally. Other issues relate to the
compatibility of public office uses with the general commercial area, the fact that
the Development Code clearly authorizes and permits commercial offices and is
there a difference between commercial offices and public offices and the way they
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 9 of 16
operate and in the manner in which other commercial tenants might be effected by
those operations. The kind of detail that staff would go into in the event that the
Planning Commission were to determine that public offices were allowed in General
Commercial zoning for this site would be significant, both in terms of trying to
compute and decide what the specific use was going to be, what kind of
requirements they would have for parking and the manner in which this would
integrate with existing businesses.
Commissioner Keen stated that one of the facilities that may be moved into this
area by Social Services is on Grand Avenue now which is in a commercial area. He
asked if Mr. Buford knew if at the time Social Services moved in the Grand Avenue
location, was this an allowable use?
Mr. Buford replied that he was not aware if this was - brought to the City as a
project for review.
Commissioner Keen stated that the Social Services office on Grand Avenue seems
to generate a lot of traffic and possibly the Commission could look at that facility
as an example.
Commissioner London asked if making a decision that a public facility can be in a
commercial district as a policy fits with the differences between density that the
public building is going to create with regards to parking, traffic etc. Can we .say
that this is permissible but the project before them tonight is too dense of a project
in that particular area?
Mr. Buford stated that the Planning Commission could find that public offices are
permitted within a General Commercial District. The project would then be subject
to a Conditional Use Permit and as part of the Conditional Use Permit, if the site
were not conducive to having a public facility, the use permit could be denied.
Vice -Chair Parker stated that as she understood it, the Planning Commission was
supposed to make a decision on this particular usage and if it is allowed and
secondly, if the Commission decides it is allowed, the Village Creek Promenade
would come back for a Conditional Use Permit. The only reason that the
Commission has, the Village Creek project information at this time was to give them
an overview of what the applicant is requesting. So, the Planning Commission is
really looking at the overall General Commercial areas of the City and making a
determination for the entire General Commercial zoning. She went on to say, that
when she looked at her General Plan map for other Public Facility zoning and saw
Office Professional zoning, is this what Public Facility zoning is?
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 10 of 16
Mr. Buford told Ms. Parker that Office Professional is not the same as Public
Facility and explained the zoning to her.
Vice -Chair Parker then asked that if the Planning Commission approved this request
would they be making a blanket statement that all General Commercial can now
have the use of public facility, or would each individual parcel would be looked at
and then required to get a Conditional Use Permit?
Mr. Buford explained that the use could be allowed in General Commercial zoning,
but when examined on an individual basis, it could fail in the Conditional Use
Permit process. This type of change may require a Development Code amendment
to make sure the Planning Commission's decision is very clear.
Commissioner Costello asked if the Planning Commission determined that the
quasi - public use was appropriate, were they establishing a precedent that would
rearrange the requirements for parking?
Mr. Buford replied that the parking requirements that were set forth in the
Development Code, as he read them, did not relate to the specific zoning districts,
though they could be read that way. He stated that he felt that if a public facility
such as this were located in a General Commercial area the parking ratio would be
1 to 150 square feet. However, he felt that Mr. Costello was making a good point
because it could also be interpreted that the parking ratio was 1 to 250 square
feet. Mr. Buford felt this could be taken care of by dealing with the issue ahead of
time.
Caren Maddelena, Department of General Services Property Manager, spoke to the
Commission to answer some of their questions. She stated that the information
that she has is from the Department of Social Services and if she does not know
the answer to any question, she can find out for the Commission.
She said that currently the Department in Grover Beach has fifty -seven employees
that are working in the Grover Beach facility. Her understanding is that at the
Village Creek location there would be eighty employees. The client count in Grover
Beach for June, July and August averaged 70 to 80 people a day.
Commissioner Keen asked what facilities Social Services were going to consolidate
in the Village Creek area.
1
1
1
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 11of16
Ms. Maddelena replied that the facilities at 1 106 Grand Avenue are the ones they
would be moving to the Village Creek area.
Commissioner London asked if, in the data of the daily numbers of clients, there
was any indication of the number of people at the facility at any given time?
Because if the issue is one of parking it would be significant to know how many
clients might be there at one time to compete with the employees for parking.
Ms. Maddalena replied that she was not sure of the exact figures however, a
consultant had been hired to study this issue and she would try to find the exact
figures for the Commission.
Commissioner Keen stated that he has observed the Social Services Department
that is located on 16` Street in Grover Beach on several occasions and many of the
clients ride the bus to that facility. He wondered how close the bus in Arroyo
Grande comes to the Village Creek Promenade area? He also asked if there were
certain days during the month that would have a higher than average number of
clients visiting the facility?
Ms. Maddalena told Mr. Keen that she could provide copies of the reports that
show daily totals. However, it doesn't show what times during the day that the
clients are at the facility.
Mr. Keen wondered how difficult it would be to get the bus lines moved if they
needed to be closer to the proposed facility.
Commissioner Costello asked if the client base would increase as the different
programs are consolidated into one area?
Ms. Maddalena said that she couldn't say for sure but she felt that would be a fair
assumption.
Vice -Chair Parker asked Ms. Maddalena about "one stop facility" and if this was
what the County was trying to accomplish with this facility building?
Ms. Maddalena replied that Ms. Parker was correct. What the County would like to
have is a "seamless" service, in other words they would like to have the clients
come to one location rather than four different locations.
Chair Parker asked if the Department of Social Services would be providing rooms
for training and teaching their clients?
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 12 of 16
Ms. Maddalena replied that they could possibly have some training facilities on site.
Ms. Parker asked if the Department of Social Services were aware that the facility
they were looking at was not going to have adequate parking, would they still be
interested in the facility?
Ms. Maddalena replied that the County would consider all their options. They
certainly would not put a facility in a place where there were problems and where it
would not be compatible with the surrounding area.
Mike Minor, _Co-owner of Miner's Hardware, spoke to the Commission and stated
that he had several concerns about putting the Department of Social Services in
this area. He felt that the first question the Planning Commission had to answer
was if the Welfare office was compatible with the General Commercial District. He
had had several conversations with Betsey Alloway, an employee with the
Department and they had discussed the number of people the. Department serves
and the number of employees that they will need to have there. In the end he felt
that with a 2,300 square foot building, and given the number of people employed
there will only be thirteen parking spaces left for the 80 or so clients they serve
each day. Taking into consideration that there is no parking allowed north of
Station Way, this would just not work.
Mike Mullahev, owner of Mullahey Ford asked the Planning Commission to consider
the parking and traffic issues. He had questions about their agenda and what they
wanted the office space for. Although it was clear at this time what they were
going to do with the office space, what is to say that they would, out of need,
have to change their agenda later on. Finally, on page six of the staff report it
talked about the synergy of the area on Station Way. He would hope that people
would perceive that mall area as a destination spot where they can go and do their
shopping in several different stores.
Mark Hughes, representing Brad Anderson stated that his only comment was that
he felt it would be an ideal situation to have the County come in and occupy that
office building because the eighty or so employees that work there would come in
the morning and leave in the late afternoon, they would not be there on Saturday
or Sunday when the parking lot would be full of people shopping at the different
stores.
Commissioner Costello stated that he had to go back to the basic question, which
was whether public or quasi - public office spaces were consistent and fit within the
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 13 of 16
General Commercial district. Without evaluating this project, or its merits, he
would like to take two elements, parking and general usage, and apply them to the
principle. He stated that looking back at what the Planning Commission had to go
on the primary purpose of areas designated as General Commercial is to provide
appropriately located areas of general shopping and commercial service needs of
area residents and workers. In going to the next point for this particular project,
the project site is located in an area that is committed to maintaining the small
town rural character of the City. The proposed use would generate intensive
vehicular activity that would be inconsistent with such a commitment. He stated
that when he looked at the area, which is located close to the high school, being
part of the Village, he does not feel that this is a consistent application with the
General Commercial area. Public or quasi - public offices belong in an area that is
zoned for such a use.
Commissioner London stated that the parking issue for this proposal cannot be
overcome. He felt that irrespective of whether or not the Planning Commission
could allow or permit this use, and maybe under certain circumstances the
Commission could do that, this is far too ambitious of a project for this small area.
So, under these circumstances he does not feel they could allow this project. From
the standpoint of whether or not a public entity could be in a General Commercial
space, he feels that it could be allowed but not in this particular space.
Commissioner Keen stated that he was not sure whether or not a public facility
could be located in a commercial area. If this was going to be a problem in the
future, he would like to look at it as an individual problem. As far as looking at it
at this particular location, it doesn't work. It doesn't fit with traffic, and there are
not enough parking spaces.
If the Commission wants to look at this for other parts of the City he would be
willing to do that. As far as he knows there is only one place in the City that is
vacant and that is zoned Public Facility. So, since the City does not provide any
such zoning, he wondered if the Commission should visit this issue.
Vice -Chair Parker stated that she had several issues with this project.
• The first issue is the parking at this location. She felt that the Development
Code stated clearly that there is not enough parking in this area.
• The second problem for her with this project is one that Mr. Mulhehay stated
and that is what is going to happen in the future with this space. Once this use
is approved the Commission just doesn't know what will happen in the future
and would they have any control over it. They have to be very careful with
what they approve.
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 14 of 16
She would like to see the County find a spot in Arroyo Grande because she feels
that it would be a very good location for this type of facility. As far as this type of
facility is concerned she agrees with Mr. Keen when he stated that there was no
place in Arroyo Grande for this kind of office space. She would like to see space
provided for public offices. She thought that perhaps the answer would be that
public facilities could fit in the General Commercial zoning. She did not feel this
should be a blanket opening, but it could be taken on a case by case scenario.
Commissioner Costello commented that he understood what the Commissioner's
views had been but he would like to underscore a particular point. The basic point
is whether public facilities should be allowed in General Commercial zoning. He
stated that if you look at the parking requirements for public facilities they are very
different from commercial requirements, the traffic patterns are different than they
are for commercial. He is afraid that what the Commission will find is that the
standards for general commercial will be lessened. If there are no public or quasi -
public zonings then that should be done through the General Plan update and the
zonings should be created.
Commissioner Keen commented that if this use were allowed then it would have to
done under a Conditional Use Permit, which would allow the Commission to
address the issues of parking and traffic at that time. He does not feel that there
are any areas that could be set aside for the public facility zoning.
Mr. Buford stated that as he listened to the Commissioner's comments he felt they
had given a significant amount of guidance to the property owner and the proposed
user with regard to how the Commission might review this project if it were to
come before them again.
In the section of the Development Code for clarification of ambiguities it states that
the Planning Commission shall ascertain the facts so as he listened to the
Commission's comments and the conclusion they had come to, he thinks these are
the points that are leading to their consensus:
• They have agreed that the City should attempt to provide adequate and
appropriate space for public offices and buildings.
• The provisions of the Development Code do not provide adequate guidelines for
establishment of public office uses in General Commercial zoning.
• Sites proposed for public office uses should have adequate space for parking,
access and circulation.
• Public Offices would be permitted in a General Commercial district only with a
Conditional Use Permit.
1
1
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 15 of 16
• Public offices should be subject to the parking requirements applicable to public
buildings, administrative assembly, or other appropriate designation.
Vice Chair Parker asked Staff if the Commission needed to make a Resolution at
this point?
Mr. Buford stated that he did not believe that the Development Code could force
the Planning Commission to act on this issue. He felt that the Commission had the
discretion to state that they had had a discussion on this issue and do nothing else.
Commissioner Costello moved that the Planning Commission refer this issue to
staff for more information and come back to the Planning Commission to determine
whether or not public or quasi - public facilities are permitted under the General
Commercial zoning. Commissioner London seconded the motion.
The motion was approved on a voice vote with Vice -Chair Parker and
Commissioners London and Costello voting yes. Commissioner Keen voted no.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
None
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS
Commissioner Keen took a moment to explain the memorandum that he had
received from City Manager, Robert Hunt. He said that several years ago the state
mandated that all grocery stores have machines that the public could use to
redeem their recyclable items. The Lucky stores proceeded to put two, very large
and ugly recycling units in their store in the parking lot. When the recycling center
opened in Grover Beach and the grocery stores did not have to provide the service
any more, the containers disappeared. Now that the Grover Beach facility is closed
Mr. Keen is afraid that the containers will come back. Mr. Keen stated that he had
asked the City Manager to gather some information for him so the Commission
could reword the action that the Commission took to limit the recycling redemption
machines to something that will fit in front of the grocery store. He does not want
to see huge containers in the middle of the parking lot again. He would like this
put back on a future Planning Commission meeting.
Vice -Chair Parker commented on the latest developments for the Tract 1998
cleanup process. She had spoken to Mr. Shetler and he seemed very willing to go
ahead with whatever needed to be done about this.
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
AUGUST 17, 1999
Page 16 of 16
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR COMMENTS AND FOLLOW -UP REPORTS
Mr. Buford informed the Commission about upcoming projects on the Planning
Commission agenda. He also informed them that Kerry McCants would be the new
Community Development Director and would be starting on August 30, 1999.
ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. to its next
scheduled meeting on September 7,1999.
ATTEST:
&Atka
Kathleen Fryer, Commis 'ion' Clerk Laurence Greene, Chair
AS TO CpNTENT:
Henry En en AICP
Interim Community Development Director
1