PC Minutes 1997-08-191
1
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMIiSSION
AUGUST 19, 1997
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met with Chair Lubin presiding. Present were
Commissioners Greene, Haney, O'Donnell and Rondeau. Community Development Director
Doreen Liberto -Blanck and Associate Planner Helen Elder were in attendance.
Commissioner Rondeau stated that he had missed the last two meetings, however, he had
listened to the tapes and read the material and felt he was prepared to participate in the
discussions.
WORKSHOP ITEM: PLANNING COMIVIISSION TO REVIEW AND PROVIDE
RECOMMENDATIONS ON FOUR (4) ITEMS REFERRED BY CITY COUNCIL
REGARDING REVISED PLANS FOR THE CENTRAL COAST TOWN CENTER;
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 96-541, TENTATIVE TRACT 2220, PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 96-001; APPLICANT, AGRA,
INC. (CENTRAL COAST TOWN CENTER); LOCATION, WEST BRANCH STREET,
CAMINO MERCADO AND RANCHO PARKWAY (RANCHO GRANDE);
REPRESENTATIVE, HOWARD MANN
Chair Lubin invited the audience to make any public comment on item #1 under consideration.
Tom Talbert. 1015 Meadow Way - provided the Commission with a copy of a letter written by
Bud Laurent and published in the Five Cities Times Press Recorder on August 6 and in other
publications in the County.
There being no further comments from the audience, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Green asked if the applicant was going to make an additional presentation on item
#1.
Howard Mann. applicant representative - stated that they have provided all the necessary
information to make a decision on item #1; noted that their architect and landscape architect
were present and would appreciate the Commission allowing time for the presentation on parking
and landscape plans this evening.
Chair Lubin read item #1 into the record: Based on known tenants, are "statements of overriding
consideration" still valid.
Commissioner Haney discussed his understanding of the timeframe for the Crawford, Multari
and Starr (CMS) economic analysis; questioned the timing of the addition of the supermarket
and fast food restaurant; and addressed Director Liberto - Blanck's letter to the applicant dated
April 12th.
Community Development Director Doreen Liberto -Blanck responded that the CMS study had
analyzed the entire shopping center; noted that Condition of Approval No. 134 was included
between Planning Commission and City Council review of the project; and noted that plot plan
review would be required for analysis of a proposed drive -thru for any fast food restaurant.
Chair Lubin further questioned the drive -thru concept analyzed ' in the Environmental Impact
Report (EIR); referred to some comments, in Dan Villegas' correspondence, that were attributed
to CMS. Mr. Ferrara replied that they were comments he had noted in his personal journal.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 2
August 19, 1997
Commissioner Greene had questions for the Director regarding her concerns as expressed in the
April letter to the applicant; and asked if studies had been conducted to show if prospective new
jobs would occur at the loss of existing jobs.
Community Development Director Doreen Liberto -Blanck responded that she had received a
legal opinion and that asking for information about the large market could not be done in that
context.
Commissioner Haney questioned economic considerations of the project; stated that the City
Council made the findings based upon estimated tax benefits to the City resulting from the
project; remarked upon a conversation with Paul Crawford who indicated that the economic
study his firm performed was quite preliminary and he would have recommended further studies;
indicated that there was conflicting information regarding net sales tax benefit to be realized
which was very important; questioned additional cost of providing City services to this project;
and asked about using the CMS number's as a basis for approval.
Community Development Director Doreen Liberto -Blanck noted that the statement of overriding
consideration was based upon a generic project proposal; noted that there was no requirement
for economic study in the EIR process but the study was done to answer questions which arose
during the public hearing process; noted that the City could not have certified the EIR without
the statement of overriding consideration; and indicated that the CMS numbers are reasonable
for the project.
The Commission discussed the differences between regional, local and neighborhood commercial
centers; was advised that both Target and Wal -Mart were identified in the EIR as tenants of the
center.
Tony Ferrara addressed the Commission regarding consideration of existing and prospective
jobs; discussed his understanding of the employment practices of Wal -Mart and other large
retailers; indicated that a study will soon be published with a California focus which discusses
jobs and sales tax benefit created by large retailers.
Commissioner Haney asked the applicant if he would be presenting additional information
regarding the economic questions and noted his contact with HdL regarding net sales tax benefit
to the City.
Mr. Mann indicated that the material submitted spoke for itself, he stated that when the project
was purchased it was on the basis of the entitlements which were in place.
Chair Lubin open the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission at 7:30 p.m. and
welcomed the public.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - On a motion by Commissioner Greene; seconded by
Commissioner Haney; and by unanimous vote; the minutes of the Planning Commission
meetings of May 6, May 20, June 3, July 1 and July 15, 1997 were approved as presented.
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 3
August 19, 1997
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
Chair Lubin stated that he intends to close the meeting at 11:00 p.m.; and will open the public
hearing on item #2 after presentations by the applicant and CCRD; other comments will be
limited to five (5) minutes and should not repeat what has already been stated.
Chair Lubin returned to the Commission discussion of item #1.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - TO REVIEW AND PROVIDE
RECOMMENDATIONS ON FOUR (4) ITEMS REFERRED BY CITY COUNCIL
REGARDING REVISED PLANS FOR THE CENTRAL COAST TOWN CENTER;
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 96-541, TENTATIVE TRACT 2220, PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 96-001; APPLICANT, AGRA,
INC. (CENTRAL COAST TOWN CENTER); LOCATION, WEST BRANCH STREET,
CAMINO MERCADO AND RANCHO PARKWAY (RANCHO GRANDE);
REPRESENTATIVE, HOWARD MANN
Commissioner O'Donnell indicated that a great deal of information had been presented which
he had reviewed; stated that he could understand the concern regarding job loss and felt it had
not been properly addressed; expressed concern with Lucky leaving Grand Avenue; expressed
concern with K -Mart and Wal -Mart being located in such close proximity; and stated he felt the
City Council should direct that further study be done regarding the project.
Commissioner Rondeau expressed concern with the fact that there was an existing Wal -Mart in
Paso Robles and one soon to be built in Santa Maria so if any of them were to be closed for low
sales it would be Arroyo Grande and then there would be a large vacant store on the freeway;
felt that the project was too large for the population of the City; and noted that the cost of the
project for residents would be more than just dollars.
The Commission took a five (5) minute recess.
Commissioner Greene stated that he had made his findings based upon a preponderance of the
evidence presented; indicated that the City had expected to receive three substantial benefits from
the project: 1) new local shopping; 2) new jobs; and 3) net economic benefit. He noted that
there will be new shopping opportunities for the community; expressed his concern that while
there would be an increased number of jobs they would not be high paying, head of family jobs
that the City was interested in attracting new jobs, but instead would be part-time, minimum
wage jobs; felt that the estimate of the number of jobs was flawed; expressed concern with the
determinations being based upon the CMS economic study which he felt was flawed and
unreliable; commented upon the other economic studies that had been prepared; felt that the sales
would mainly shift from existing businesses and not be a net increase to the City; expressed
concern with a larger vacancy rate on Grand Avenue caused by the move of the commercial
center to the freeway area; and stated that with the information of whom the major tenants would
be, the statement of overriding considerations was not longer accurate. He made specific
recommendations including: that a study should be conducted by an independent qualified
consultant (with the cost not borne by the developer) to determine: estimate of the actual gross
sales tax that could be expected and the projected impact on the existing business community.
He also remarked that in response to Councilmember Lady's memo he finds that summary
impacts on small business would be significant based upon the knowledge of the proposed
tenants of the center.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 4
August 19, 1997
Commissioner Haney indicated that as a result of his technical training as a CPA he has spoken
with principals of CMS and HdL and has prepared his own analysis; he prepared a typed version
of his findings for the overhead and read through them; discussed the methodology of the
economic reports that .were presented, and read his list of proposed recommendations: 1) City
Council find that proposed project does not meet requirements in statement of overriding
considerations upon which the project was approved in 1996; 2) Prior to issuing further project
approvals or permits, the City Council require that the currently proposed project clearly and
conclusively demonstrate, using conservative estimates, that it meets the previous findings of
overriding consideration in tax benefit to the City and possible increased jobs; 3) that the City
Council require a separate economic analysis by qualified professional; 4) that the cost be borne
by the developer; and 5) that City Council direct the Planning Commission to develop
Substantial Conformance guidelines for future projects.
Chair Lubin thanked everyone who had submitted information on item #1; noted need for
complete information to make good decision; indicated that the entire Commission has spent a
considerable amount of time reviewing the project; expressed his concern with the quality of the
studies that were presented and their lack of validity; noted that he was on the Planning
Commission when the original project was approved and stated that a great deal of work was
done on that project; expressed concern if any major tenant will change project as designed,
actual tenant is not the issue but must look at the project to see how it benefits the City of
Arroyo Grande; and noted that the store atmosphere is largely dependent on the local manager.
The Commission discussed Councilmember Lady's memo requesting information from the
Planning Commission and how they should respond to same.
Councilmember Lady addressed the Commission regarding the letter under his signature and
explained that the entire Council had discussed the issues as outlined and concurred.
The Commission had further discussion on how they should provide their findings to the City
Council.
The following action was taken:
MOTION: That the Planning Commission create a subcommittee (consisting of
Commissioners Haney and Greene) to produce a report, following the request in
the Lady memo, which would be presented to the entire Commission, and when
adopted would address the recommendations and findings made by the Planning
Commission regarding the statement of overriding considerations, otherwise
known as issue #1
There was discussion regarding the date that the report would be made available to the
Commission for review.
AMEND: The motion was amended to include the fact that the report would be completed
and distributed to the Commission as soon as possible for their consideration and
possible acceptance on September 2, 1997.
On a motion by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, and by the
following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Greene, O'Donnell, Haney, Rondeau and Lubin
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
1
1
1
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 5
August 19, 1997
Chair Lubin read item #2 into the record: Based on known tenants, a recalculation of the trip
generation numbers and traffic impact fees based on our current General Plan Circulation
Element.
Howard Mann. applicant representative - stated that they have provided all the necessary
information to make a decision on item #2 and they have no further information to add.
Tony Ferrara. Citizens Committee for Responsible Development (CCRD) - discussed the
community standard for traffic based upon the City's General Plan; quoted sections from the
General Plan; discussed the project that was originally approved in 1996 and stated that the
developer had increased the intensity of the project; identified additional impacts they felt would
occur; discussed current conditions at key intersections throughout the City; presented a
discussion of the suggested ITE manual methodology for traffic studies; discussed the EIR traffic
consultant comments; noted the Penfield and Smith study; challenged the circulation studies that
had been presented; discussed potential air pollution problems; suggested that parking plan
should not be reviewed until the City Council decides on the Planning Commission findings;
presents recommendations including: that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council
uphold the appeal as to traffic aspects; that the City follow the Higgins study recommendation
and obtain a consultant who will sit down with staff and do a thorough system wide analysis;
utilize the sum of individual uses method and request resolution of questions; that the City
Council re- evaluate the statement of overriding considerations based on a change to the project;
that the Planning Commission not approve the parking and landscaping plans until after the City
Council determination is made.
The Planning Commission took a ten (10) minute break.
Chair Lubin noted that a question had arisen regarding a two person subcommittee and the
possibility of a Brown Act violation if the meeting were not noticed and open to the public.
Community Development Director Liberto - Blanck stated that she understood it was not a Brown
Act violation as long as it was not a standing committee, but she would obtain a City Attorney
interpretation prior to the subcommittee meeting.
AMEND: The motion was amended to include the fact that staff would consult with the City
Attorney and if necessary, would notice the subcommittee meeting to assure that
no violation of the Brown Act would occur.
On a motion by Commissioner Greene, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, and by the
following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Greene, O'Donnell, Haney, Rondeau and Lubin
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Tony Ferrara, Citizens Committee for Responsible Development (CCRD) - discussed his
understanding of the traffic mitigation fees that would be paid by the developer for this project
and introduced his traffic consultant, Steve Orosz, Penfield & Smith.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 6
August 19, 1997
Steve Orosz, Penfield & Smith, Senior Traffic Engineer - presented a brief summary of his
background and qualifications; explained how different experts could obtain different results;
explained that there are two ways to prepare a traffic estimate for shopping centers, both are
acceptable: 1) take the square footage for the entire center and use a generic estimate; and 2)
refine by using "sum of parts" if the individual tenants are known, this will usually provide a
higher estimate; discussed how SANDAG had developed their own rates; explained "daily traffic
numbers" vs. "peak hour trips ", "pass -by factor ", ITE manual use; noted he felt "sum of parts"
more accurate when possible; and in summary, stated that there is an art to calculating traffic
analysis and the City should have a guideline to determine substantial conformance, he would
suggest the City obtain a part time consultant to assist in setting standards for future projects.
Tony Ferrara, Concerned Citizens for Responsible Development (CCRD) - stated that the
General Plan Circulation Element requires the SANDAG studies be used to calculate traffic and
they weren't.
Chair Lubin opened the public hearing on item #2.
Tony Detweiler. 202 Avenida de Diamante - suggested a "common sense" approach to traffic;
was involved with draft and final EIR; indicated that original EIR severely understates average
daily trips; and noted his opinion that there is a significant difference in traffic numbers.
John Harper, 1660 Brighton Avenue - discussed existing traffic problems on Oak Park Blvd.
Howard Mankins, 200 Hillcrest Drive - noted that as a property owner, across from the
proposed project, he felt the City Council approval was in conflict with the General Plan;
discussed the need to follow the adopted General Plan; quoted sections from the General Plan;
noted that the developer was attempting to increase the intensity of the approved plan; and stated
that the City's traffic problems should be solved not added to.
Orrin Cocks., 1457 Deer Canyon Road - addressed the need for meaningful jobs; noted that the
proposed center requires extensive infrastructure costs; and stated that the developer should be
responsible for the cost not the citizens.
Howard Mann - noted that the proposed plan is in substantial conformance with the approved
plan as the footprint is exactly the same and has not been revised.
Fred Flannel. 550 Via Vaquero - asked if there is no change, why is this being reviewed.
Maurice Phillips 158 Avenida de Diamante - discussed his wife's shopping habits.
With no further comments from the audience, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rondeau had no additional questions.
Commissioner O'Donnell asked about calculation of the traffic mitigation fees; and questioned
staff regarding the 150% fee determination.
Community Development Director Doreen Liberto -Blanck explained the City Ordinance on
traffic mitigation fees; and replied that since traffic studies were not completed the 150% fee
was placed on this project.
Jill Peterson, Public Works Department clarified the fee calculation and explained the fee tables
located in various documents.
1
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 7
August 19, 1997
The Commission discussed the SANDAG studies with Steve Orosz of Penfield & Smith;
discussed the likelihood of the City monitoring the traffic after a use commences; discussed
internal capture rate of the project; noted the individual characteristics of each shopping center;
asked about the ah, direction provided for shopping center studies; discussed the impacts of a
supermarket use; noted that whether stores are local or regional the access question remains;
discussed items from Higgins study regarding driveway entrance; discussed methodology of
traffic calculation; discussed level of service (LOS) concepts; regional as opposed to community
shopping center designation; discussed the different numbers presented in different reports and
how this would affect the traffic mitigation fee paid by the developer; discussed the likelihood
of the City's AB 1600 fee being increased; discussed how General Plan addressed traffic
impacts; noted that City Council found the use was consistent with the General Plan; discussed
the need for the developer to pay his fair share of costs regarding city infrastructure.
Chair Lubin asked if the SANDAG figures are required or just suggested; Community
Development Director Doreen Liberto -Blanck replied that the SANDAG tables are in the
appendix not in the text.
Chair Lubin discusses possible dates for a special meeting to continue the hearing.
On a motion by Commissioner O'Donnell; seconded by Commissioner Greene; and unanimously
agreed upon; it was determined to continue the hearing to August 27 at 6:30 pm.
NON - PUBLIC HEARING ITEM (CONTINUED FROM 7/15/97 MEETING) - REVIEW
AND CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF LANDSCAPING AND PARKING PLAN;
APPLICANT, AGRA, INC. (CENTRAL COAST TOWN CENTER); REPRESENTATIVE,
KEN KAMMEYER; LOCATION, WEST BRANCH STREET, CAMINO MERCADO AND
RANCHO PARKWAY (RANCHO GRANDE)
MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner O'Donnell to continue review of the
landscaping and parking plans to the September 2, 1997 meeting
Chair Lubin asked for discussion on approving these plans prior to the City Council action on
the proposed project.
Commissioner Greene noted that he considers the landscaping and parking plans as separate from
the four (4) issues referred by Council. He suggested a workshop setting and site visit, he
indicated that he was not comfortable approving the plan prior to walking the site.
Chair Lubin noted that everything was to be returned to the City Council by September 9 and
asked staff if there was a problem with delaying the landscaping and parking plans. Community
Development Director Doreen Liberto -Blanck indicated that this could delay the project if the
Council approved it on September 9.
Tom Winfield. AGRA Counsel - stated that the landscaping and parking plan were on the
Planning Commission agenda prior to City Council action and that the applicant would like to
have the issue resolved, he noted that Mr. Kammeyer would meet with individual
Commissioners as necessary to move the project forward.
Tony Ferrara. CCRD - stated that the development could change substantially pending City
Council action and it was not his group or the City that was causing delay to the project, but the
developer by proposing substantial changes.
SECOND: Chair Lubin seconded the motion made by Commissioner O'Donnell to continue
the landscaping and parking plan review to September 2, 1997.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 8
August 19, 1997
Commissioner Greene indicated that this was the first opportunity for this Planning Commission
to make a discretionary decision regarding the project and this would be the most visible aspects,
he would prefer to walk the site and discuss the plans further.
Commissioner Haney indicated that he would also like to participate in a site visit.
Community Development Director Doreen Liberto -Blanck noted that any site visit would have
to be noticed to avoid violation of the Brown Act.
The Commission discussed the fact that the landscaping and parking plans are separate from the
four (4) issues that they are reviewing at City Council request and should be considered in a
timely and complete manner.
Commissioner O'Donnell indicated that since the four (4) Council issues would be discussed on
the 27th, he felt that at least the beginning of the landscaping and parking review could begin
on the meeting of the 2nd.
The Commission concurred that this was reasonable.
VOTE: The Commission unanimously agreed to continue the review of the landscaping
and parking plans to September 2, 1997.
PLANNING COM IISSION /COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ITEMS AND
COMMENTS -
A. Due to the lateness of the hour, no report was given.
B. Chair Lubin noted that a letter had been received from Caltrans regarding traffic
implications and permission for the developer to encroach on the Caltrans ROW; staff
had drafted an answer for Chair Lubin's signature.
C. Planning Commission concurred with the draft response to the letter from Lynn Titus.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, on a motion by Commissioner
O'Donnell, seconded by Commissioner Haney, and unanimously carried, at 11:35 p.m. the
meeting was adjourned to a special meeting on August 27th at 6:30 p.m.
ATTEST:
AS TO CONTENT:
Lucill e Breese, Commission Clerk
uc.acA4
Doreen Li erto-Blanck, AICP
Community Development Director
Sandy "Lubin, Chai
1
1
1