Loading...
PC Minutes 1997-02-181 1 ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 18, 1997 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met with Chair Tappan presiding. Present were Commissioners Keen, Titus, Lubin and Deviny. Community Development Director Doreen Liberto- Blanck, Associate Planner Helen Elder was in attendance. Chair Tappan introduced new Associate Planner, Bruce Buckingham to the Planning Commission. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None PUBLIC HEARING - REVIEW OF: A) DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 96 -004 TO ELIMINATE DEFINITION OF A "DWELLING UNIT" AS "ONE BED "; B) REVERSION TO ACREAGE CASE NO. 96-533 TO CONSOLIDATE TWO (2) PARCELS; C) VARIANCE CASE NO. 96 -201 FROM THE PARKING REQUIREMENT TO REDUCE NUMBER OF OFF- STREET PARKING SPACES FROM 30 TO 24; AND, D) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 96 -548 AND ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FOR DEMOLITION OF AN 18 ROOM RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 2- STORY, 37 SUITE ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY; APPLICANT - HORIZON MULTI-HOUSING LLC; LOCATION - 222 AND 224 SOUTH ELM STREET Associate Planner Helen Elder presented the staff report. As explained in the staff report, the project is for demolition of an existing facility; construction of a two (2) story facility surrounding a courtyard which will contain 37 suites and 72 beds; correction to Page 4 of the staff report to show that fifteen of the units will be on the ground floor and the remaining 22 on the second floor; this is a four -fold application which includes a recommendation to the City Council for a Development Code amendment and a variance from the parking requirement, if these are granted, the project with be in conformance with the General Plan and Development Code, Staff Advisory Committee (SAC) and Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC) have reviewed the project and recommend approval with the attached conditions. A color elevation was presented for Planning Commission review. Chair Tappan questioned Condition of Approval (COA) #9; staff agreed that it should be changed to read (C 1 -3) and Section 9- 06.020 i should also be referenced. Chair Tappan opened the public hearing. Chris Skiff. applicant - described the project as a much needed residential care facility and expressed willingness to answer any questions from Commissioners. With no further comments from the audience, Chair Tappan closed the public hearing. Commissioner Deviny stated that the project appears to be an attractive facility; expressed concern with the increased density within an existing residential neighborhood; asked about the number of parking spaces that staff would use; and, questioned the amount of visitors expected at any one time. Chair Tappan asked for clarification regarding "independent" and "assisted" living. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 2 February 18, 1997 Chris Skiff stated that between "skilled nursing" and "independent living" is "assisted living" which is licensed personal care to provide assistance with bathing, grooming, medication, etc. He stated that the patients do not drive; the maximum staff at one time is 8 to 9; the majority of visitors come on a Saturday morning with approximately 10% of the residents having family visitors; the current Development Code says that in the Senior Residential Zone, "1 bed" equals "1 dwelling unit "; there will be a central kitchen in the project; and, they will be restricted to 72 beds and 37 suites. Commissioner Deviny noted that this use is a more hospital type density and that this is more a business use than senior housing. Commissioner Titus expressed her support of the project; noted need in the County for this type of facility; noted that driveway does not go through; and, from her experience in the field stated that there are enough state and federal regulations to assure a quality project. Commissioner Lubin asked about the need for a reversion to acreage since the existing facility appears to be on the lot line; Associate Planner Elder explained that the existing structure is non- conforming and not consistent with the Subdivision Map Act. There was discussion regarding the driveway not going through to Aspen Street; the SAC & AAC both agreed the driveway should be closed to through access; both the Fire Department and Police Department would prefer open space; and the Aspen Village Homeowners Association asked for a gate adjacent to their property. Commissioner Keen stated that he had no problem with the reversion to acreage and Development Code amendment but was concerned with the question of the through driveway; suggested that the Fire Chief take a second look at the project; noted the difficulty in emergency response vehicles accessing the site; and, stated that he would not favor lessening the parking requirement below 24 spaces. Chair Tappan expressed concern with the idea of a crash gate; requested that the Fire Chief review this issue; stated that 24 is the minimum number of parking spaces he could agree to; expressed concern that the parking spaces be as wide as possible for ease of access; asked about the specific floor plans; and, staff presented an overhead. Commissioner Keen expressed concern with the size of the exhibits presented, he could not review the parking dimensions due to the small size; asked about Special COA #44 and the need for further Planning Commission review of the back up power; the applicant noted that they had emergency plans in place and would prefer not to put in the back up power; the Police and Fire Chiefs specifically want the back up power; and, there was confusion over rather the State requires it or not. COA #9 to read: The development shall be restricted to senior citizens to the extent permitted by State Law in compliance with Development Code Section 9 -06. 050.: 1 1 1 1 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission February 18, 1997 COA #22 to read: All parking spaces adjacent to a wall, fence, or property line shall have a minimum width of 11 feet. This does not apply to garage or carport spaces which shall each have a minimum clear dimension of 10 feet wide by 20 feet deep. asa''te> ..:mv:ri4W: -0is is ii' l iiw-: 4J: 4iT ifJ' ri�i} �i �j:wwir �-iv:•j COA #46 to read: All grading shall be done in accordance with Ordinance 346 I C.S. There was discussion regarding State requirements for back up power; the applicant request that the project receive approval this evening and not be continued; the process for the Development Code Amendment and need for City Council approval; the undergrounding of utilities; Public Works requirements; existing utilities and required easements; applicant willingness to work with Public Works to resolve any unclear COA; how water usage was calculated; and, size of elevator required. The following action was taken: Then the following action was then taken: RESOLUTION NO. 97 -1603 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, INSTRUCT THE CITY CLERK TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERIVIINATION, AND ADOPT MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 9 CHAPTER 10, ENTITLED "GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS" AND TITLE 9 CHAPTER 18 ENTITLED "DEFINITIONS" On a motion by Commissioner Lubin, seconded by Commissioner Titus, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Lubin, Titus, Keen and Tappan NOES: Commissioner Deviny ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 97 -1604 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 96-548 AND THE ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW; REVERSION TO ACREAGE CASE NO. 96-533, AT 222/224 SOUTH ELM STREET, APPLIED FOR BY HORIZON MULTI - HOUSING LLC; ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WITH MITIGATION MEASURES AND INSTRUCTING THAT THE SECRETARY FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION Page 3 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 4 February 18, 1997 To approve the Resolution with Attachments "A" and "B" as amended. On a motion by Commissioner Lubin, seconded by Commissioner Titus, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Lubin, Titus, Keen, Deviny and Tappan NOES: None ABSENT: None Then the following action was then taken: RESOLUTION NO. 97 -1605 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMIVIISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A VARIANCE, CASE NO. 96 -201, APPLIED FOR BY HORIZON MULTI- HOUSING, LLC, AT 222/224 SOUTH ELM STREET, VARIANCE REDUCTION OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES On a motion by Commissioner Lubin, seconded by Commissioner Titus, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Lubin, Titus, Deviny, Keen and Chair Tappan NOES: None ABSENT: None Then the following action was then taken: RESOLUTION NO. 97 -1606 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL: ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, INSTRUCT THE CITY CLERK TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION; AND APPROVE DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 96 -004 On a motion by Commissioner Lubin, seconded by Commissioner Titus, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Lubin, Titus, Keen and Chair Tappan NOES: Commissioner Deviny ABSENT: None NON - PUBLIC HEARING - PRE - APPLICATION REVIEW OF PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, REZONE, SPECIFIC PLAN AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT FOR 157 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, 12 DUPLEXES, 2 CONDOS ON 36 ACRES; APPLICANT CHARLES BAKER - BERRY GARDENS (KAWAOKA PROPERTY); LOCATION - EAST OF OAK PARK BLVD., SOUTH OF GRAND AVENUE, NORTH OF ASH STREET 1 1 1 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 5 February 18, 1997 Associate Planner Helen Elder presented the staff report. She noted that this is a pre - application review and will be going to City Council for comments as well; this project has been reviewed by Staff Advisory Committee (SAC) and Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC); noted required changes to Feb 3 minutes of AAC on page 2 #2 comments by Committee Member Detweiler; SAC comments indicated that street improvements and drainage will be major issues for the re -zone; maintenance of existing residential character also key in Environmental Review (EIR) process and public participation may identify other components; likely concerns are traffic and circulation; and, the project proposes reduced width for streets which is a concern for the Fire and Police departments. Rob Strong. applicant representative — presented a summary of the proposal; discussed current zoning designation and why requested change fit with existing character of area; discussed General Plan designation; requirement for a Specific Plan and why they propose to do a plan for their project only; proposed re- zoning and vesting tentative map to cover 36 acres; intention to incorporate neo- traditional concepts with diverse housing types; proposal intends for all development to be individually owned; average proposed size of lots is 6,000 square feet; 6.2 dwelling units per acre over entire 36 acres; proposed density subject to a General Plan amendment; noted unusual features of the open space; proposed ponding basins were discussed; indicated that there is a potential for phasing of the project; negotiations continue with adjacent property owners regarding inclusion in Specific Plan; meeting with SAC could produce changes to proposed street width and layouts; proposing cooperative project with Grover Beach to maintain the existing landmark eucalyptus trees on Oak Park Boulevard; intention is to utilize craftsman architecture for different look than modern subdivisions; notes there are four access points for the subdivision; discussed traffic impacts which will be more fully covered in environmental study; and, emphasizes pedestrian access is of concern. Although not a public hearing, Chair Tappan invited public comment. Frank Allen. 1305 Poplar -- lives in adjoining neighborhood and expressed concern with existing drainage pond and lift station. Commissioner Titus expressed concern with the density of the project; concerned that no school site is proposed; noted that existing schools are overcrowded at this time; and, stated that proposed lot size appears too small. Commissioner Lubin was encouraged that this could be first real neo-traditional project in the city; favors garage not being focal point of development; agreed that pond and lift station are a problem; concerned with lack of school site, which is a regional concern; mixed emotions regarding number of units; supported affordable housing concept interested in proposed architecture; concerned with traffic and circulation on Court land and surrounding neighborhoods; and, expressed support for narrow streets. Commissioner Keen asked where the western City limits were at this time; staff indicated how the City limits work in relation to this project and indicated that a small portion of the project is currently in the City of Grover Beach but would be annexed into Arroyo Grande during the process; and, expressed interest in maintaining the existing trees. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 6 February 18, 1997 Rob Strong. applicant representative - noted that the applicant intended to remove the existing lift station; stated that existing ponding area is not attractive but Park & Recreation Director not willing to allow improvements to count against the park and recreation fees; on -site basin to be maintained by a homeowners association; concern had been expressed due to history of farming on the site; and, if there was interest perhaps a school could be developed on an adjoining site. The Commission noted that it would not be acceptable for the lift station to be in an area of potential flooding; there was discussion regarding a secondary access in conjunction with phase 1 development; need for alternative access and potential to require fire sprinklers in some of the homes; discussion of the layout of the duplex units; requirement for 25 % of the units to be low /moderate income housing as the basis for diversity of housing; discussion of 6,000 sq. ft. lots vs. 5,400 sq. ft. lots; potential for second units on some of the lots; and, stressed need for storage in small units. Commissioner Deviny noted that he would encourage the development of Courtland with Phase 1 of the development; expressed concern with the placement of the open space, would like to see in a more central area; expressed unwillingness to approve lots smaller than 6,000 sq. ft; noted need for school site; supported parkway concept; and would like to see pedestrian access in southeast corner of project remain permanently. Chair Tappan expressed agreement with the need to develop Courtland in conjunction with Phase 1 of the project; supported entire project in the neo-traditional theme; viewed narrow streets as a means of slowing traffic; agreed with need for open space to be more usable and central; noted that there is concern regarding the health of the eucalyptus trees; noted that ponding basin does not lend itself to recreational uses; would like to see conceptual development of entire area; expressed no objection to utilizing alleys to keep automobiles from being main focus of development; and, noted that 6,000 square foot lots were the smallest he could support. Mr. Strong noted that the developer intended to conduct voluntary public meetings with the neighbors prior to bringing a final plan back to the Planning Commission. Don Selvey. 103 Oro Drive - noted his agreement with the Commission regarding the variety of homes proposed and expressed concern with the project not being integrated into the existing neighborhoods. NON - PUBLIC HEARING - PRE - APPLICATION REVIEW TO AMEND AN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE AND PROVIDE NEW SIGNAGE; APPLICANT: CARL KARCHER ENTERPRISES (CARL'S JR.); LOCATION - 1590 WEST BRANCH STREET Associate Planner Helen Elder presented the staff report; she stated the project needed Planning Commission and City Council review because it is located in a Planned Development (PD) Zone; presented the proposal of Carl's Jr. request for the addition of "Green Burrito" as an additional business to be included on the sign; noted that this is within an existing center, but is a stand- alone building; and, stated that applicant requested variance from requirements for roof signs. Andy Watson and Pete Simons of Urban Planning Concepts (UPC) in Santa Maria represented Carl's Jr. and discussed their proposal. 1 1 1 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 7 February 18, 1997 Commissioner Lubin discussed with the applicant the Architectural Advisory Committee (AAC) concerns; noted that he was not opposed to better signage for the business; but, felt that the project could be made to better blend with the existing center. Commissioner Keen asked if the "Green Burrito" sign was back lit; expressed concern with the sign content; agreed that the signage needed improvement but not supportive of allowing it to extend beyond the parapet; asked if the playground would remain; and, noted that the white was too stark in relation to the rest of the center. Mr. Simons replied that the "Green Burrito" was a complementary business being included with Carl's Jr. and stated that the playground was to remain. Commissioner Deviny expressed support for changing the parapet; agreed that the proposed larger sign was too much for the site, although the signage does need improvement; and, stated that he could not support the white color. Commissioner Titus agreed that the signage needed to be improved but doesn't agree with proposed signage. Chair Tappan noted that corporate management templates do not necessarily fit in with City guidelines; noted that even though the building is a stand alone, it is still part of the center and must be a part of it; agreed that the signage needed improvement; expressed support for raised parapet; noted that the playground detracts from the appearance of the project; and noted he would not be in favor of the new color scheme. Commissioner Lubin noted that he could not support the white color scheme but noted that he liked the two (2) level parapet which is shown as part of the Santa Maria store, which incorporates the sign as part of the architecture. PLANNING COMNIISSION /CO1VTY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ITEMS AND COMMENTS A. Response to comment regarding State Codes regarding historic buildings - information presented, Commission had no comments B. Update of Projects - • City Council review of the new Sign Ordinance is scheduled at their next meeting; • Staff is attempting to include the pre - application review on the City Council agenda as well; • Community Development Director Liberto -Blanck asked the Commission to call staff with any questions, if during their review of the project, they had a concern with Conditions of Approval. The Commission concurred that on major projects a representative of the Public Works Department, the Parks Department and possibly the Fire Department should attend the Planning Commission meetings when they had COA that were unusual or needed clarification; Arroyo Grande Planning. Commission Page 8 February 18, 1997 • Chair Tappan asked about the timing of the Countywide Planning Commissioners' dinner in Paso Robles; and • Staff reminded the Commission about the Planners Institute in Monterey in March. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission, on a motion by Commissioner Lubin, seconded by Commissioner Deviny, and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m. ATTEST: I gh\A“ uc ► - Breese, Commission Clerk AS TO CONTENT: Doreen Liberto- : anck, Community Development Director William Tappan, Chair 1