PC Minutes 1996-08-20ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 20, 1996
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairperson Tappan
presiding. Present were Commissioners Deviny, Keen, Titus 'and Lubin. Community
Development Director Doreen Liberto -Blanck and Associate Planner Lori Rosenstein were in
attendance.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
PUBLIC HEARING - RUSSELL AND PAMELA SHEPPEL, APPLICANT;
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 88 -435, AMENDMENT #2 - TO APPROVED
MASTER PLAN TO CHANGE THE LOCATION OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
BUILDINGS; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP CASE NO. 96-530 - SUBDIVIDE AN
EXISTING 1.59 ACRE COMMERCIAL PARCEL INTO THREE LOTS; VARIANCE
CASE NO. 96-195 - TO REDUCE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH OF LOT 1 FROM 100 FEET
TO 70 FEET; LOCATION 880 OAK PARK BOULEVARD
Associate Planner Lori Rosenstein presented the staff report. She discussed the previously
approved master plan for the site; the proposed amendment to the Master Plan revising the
locations of the previously approved buildings; the proposed subdivision of the property owned
by Dr. Sheppel; the existing easements and access; the revised building locations meet the
Development Code requirements; why the revision was requested; the increased parking that will
be provided; the request for a variance and the justification; that a Negative Declaration has been
drafted for review; and that the Staff Advisory Committee had reviewed the project and
recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the resolutions as presented.
Chairperson Tappan opened the public hearing.
Jack Hunter, Central Coast Engineering, applicant representative - stated that they concur
with the staff report and that this adjustment was a refinement and update of the master plan for
the project.
With no further comments from the audience, Chairperson Tappan closed the public hearing.
There was discussion regarding the proposed increase in parking; Planning Commissioners
concern with approving a project and then having several changes; the change to the parcel lines;
retaining courtyard access for both buildings; the change in topography on the site; and, the
access to the site.
Mr. Hunter replied that the courtyard easement was an integral part of the buildings and was
recorded with the tentative map and that there is no reason to change the access easements, the
physical access is off James Way.
Community Development Director Liberto -Blanck reviewed the three (3) resolutions in the
packet.
The following action was taken, to adopt the Resolution with attachment A:
1
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 2
August 20, 1996
RESOLUTION NO. 96 -1575
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMIVIISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, INSTRUCT THE SECRETARY
TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, AND APPROVE
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP CASE NO. 96 -530, LOCATED AT 880 OAK
PARK BOULEVARD, APPLIED FOR BY RUSSELL AND PAMELA
SHEPPEL
On a motion by Commissioner Keen, seconded by Commissioner Lubin, and by the following
roll call, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Keen, Lubin, Deviny, Titus and Tappan
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The following action was taken, to adopt the Resolution with attachment A:
RESOLUTION NO. 96 -1576
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, INSTRUCT THE SECRETARY
TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, AND APPROVE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 88 -435, AMENDMENT #2,
APPLIED FOR BY RUSSELL AND PAMELA SHEPPEL, AT 880 OAK
PARK BOULEVARD
On a motion by Commissioner Keen, seconded by Commissioner Deviny, and by the following
roll call, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Keen, Deviny, Lubin, Titus and Tappan
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The following action was taken, to adopt the Resolution with attachment A:
RESOLUTION NO. 96 -1577
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, INSTRUCT THE SECRETARY
TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, AND APPROVE VARIANCE
CASE NO. 96-195, APPLIED FOR BY RUSSELL AND PAMELA SHEPPEL
AT 880 OAK PARK BOULEVARD
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission
August 20, 1996
Page 3
On a motion by Commissioner Keen, seconded by Commissioner Lubin, and by the following
roll call, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Keen, Lubin, Deviny, Titus and Tappan
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
NON - PUBLIC HEARING - REVIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RULES AND
REGULATIONS
Community Development Director Liberto -Blanck presented the staff report. She
stated that the City Council is in the process of determining the size of the Planning Commission
and that decision would affect the Rules and Regulations of the Commission. She suggested that
the Commission wait until the decision was made to review their Rules and Regulations.
Chairperson Tappan concurred and stated that he would like to see a discussion after the decision
was made.
On minute motion by Commissioner Keen, seconded by Commissioner Lubin, and by unanimous
consensus, the Planning Commission to review their Rules and Regulations after City Council
determination regarding Commission size had been reached.
NON - PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST TO FIND PROJECT MODIFICATIONS IN
SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE WITH APPROVED PLANS - CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT CASE NO. 96-542 AND ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW; JOSEPH
WAIS, APPLICANT; 1164 GRAND AVENUE
Associate Planner Lori Rosenstein presented the staff report. She stated that the Planning
Commission had approved this project in February of 1996. Subsequently, the applicant scaled
back the project and was requesting that the Commission find that the revised project was in
substantial conformance with the previously approved project. She reviewed the proposed
changes and stated that the Architectural Advisory Committee had reviewed the project on
August 19 and they recommended that the eaves remain consistent along the entire perimeter of
the building. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find the project in substantial
conformance and adopt the Resolution.
Although this was not a public hearing, Chairperson Tappan invited the applicant or his
representative to address the Commission.
Greg Soto, applicant representative - showed the Commission how the fence would be
addressed utilizing the revised plans and requested Planning Commission agreement that the
revised project was in substantial conformance with the previous approval.
The Planning Commission discussed the fact that this is another project being revised after
approval had been granted; the fact that the applicant would have to begin the process again if
the project were not in conformance; the fence that had been an issue during the previous
approval of the project; their surprise with such a substantial change to the project; reduced
parking as a reduced impact; and, the ability of the applicant to split the parcel at a later date.
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 4
August 20, 1996
Planning Director Liberto -Blanck stated that when determining "substantial conformance" the
Commission could look at the impacts of size, relocation and reducing the scale of projects.
The following action was taken, to adopt Resolution #2:
RESOLUTION NO. 96 -1578
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE PROVIDING AN INTERPRETATION OF
SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
CASE NO. 96-542, VARIANCE CASE NO. 96-193, VARIANCE CASE NO.
96 -194, AND PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM CASE NO. 96 -119 FOR 1164
GRAND AVENUE
Commissioner Keen asked about the Planned Sign Program, he noted that the previous
monument sign had room for the office tenants but now that the office was eliminated, how
would that be handled. Mr. Soto replied that the area would be part of the decoration on the
sign with no additional verbiage.
On a motion by Commissioner Deviny, seconded by Commissioner Lubin, the Planning
Commission, by the following roll call, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Deviny, Lubin, Keen, Titus and Tappan
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Staff advised the audience of their right to appeal this decision to the City Council.
NON - PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION ON FLOOR AREA
RATIO (FAR) REQUIREMENT; LARRY GIN, APPLICANT; 543 SOUTH ELM STREET
Associate Planner Lori Rosenstein presented the staff report. The applicant has requested an
interpretation to footnote (d) at the bottom of Table 9- 06.050 -B (FAR Development Standards).
Staff has interpreted that the footnote applies to all residential lots, irrespective of whether the
setbacks and lot coverage standards for the previous zone or current zone are applied. The
Building Division concurs as does the City Attorney. Two resolutions have been prepared for
the Commission's review, staff recommends that the Commission adopt Resolution #1 which
reflects staff's position on the issue.
Although this was not a public hearing, Chairperson Tappan invited the applicant to address the
Commission.
Steve Cool, applicant attorney - stated that he represents Larry Gin and Peter Keith, the
applicants. He reviewed the applicants' request; stated that his clients are reducing a subdivision
to 33 lots which they intend to develop themselves; stated that the Commission could make their
determination in a variety of ways:
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 5
August 20, 1996
(1) a strict interpretation of what the words say - he feels that footnote (d) is an
outgrowth of line 9 of Table 9- 06.050 -B and that when pre -1991 lots were exempted
from lot coverage they were additionally exempted from FAR;
(2) what is the practical affect of the words - on a 3,000 sq. ft. lot, the largest house
would be a two bedroom approximately 1,050 sq. ft., but without FAR standards and
only utilizing lot coverage an approximately 1,500 sq. ft. or three bedroom affordable
starter house could be built; or
(3) what sort of precedent is being set - not a big problem in this instance since this is
one of the last antiquated subdivisions in the city. He requests Planning Commission
adoption of Resolution #2.
Charles Cebulla, project architect - presented sample designs to the Commission of how the
lots would be affected and noted that approximately half the of the lots are about 3,000 sq. ft.
The samples indicated how the 35 % FAR would limit the size of a home on the 3,000 sq. ft.
lot to 1,050 or a two bedroom home, but with the total lot coverage calculation instead a 1,600
sq. ft. home would work.
Commissioner Keen asked how many of the lots are 2,189 sq. ft. as listed in the staff report.
Mr. Cebulla indicated that the smallest lot was proposed to be 3,000 sq. ft. and Mr. Keith added
that the smaller lots had been eliminated.
The Commission discussed lot coverage vs. FAR; their previous interpretation; their concern
that larger homes would have an increased number of occupants therefore the quality of life is
better served with the FAR; when the Development Code was updated; whether the " *" at the
bottom of Table 9- 06.050 -B is directly tied to the footnote in the table; and the options available
to the applicant to develop the subdivision.
Commissioner Lubin expressed his interpretation that footnote (d) and the " *" are not tied
together in a straight - forward manner. He also stated that he could see the larger home
providing a better living space for the occupants. He expressed hesitation in supporting the staff
position on this issue.
After further discussion by the Commission regarding the above issues, the following action was
taken, to adopt Resolution #1:
RESOLUTION NO. 96 -1579
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMLSSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE PROVIDING AN INTERPRETATION REGARDING
FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR) STANDARDS
On a motion by Commissioner Keen, seconded by Commissioner Deviny, and by the following
roll call, to wit:
1
1
1
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 6
August 20, 1996
AYES: Commissioners Keen, Deviny, Titus and Tappan
NOES: Commissioner Lubin
ABSENT: None
Staff advised the audience of their right to appeal this decision to the City Council.
NON - PUBLIC HEARING - REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION OF CONDITION NO. 14
REGARDING SALE AND /OR RENT OF LOW INCOME HOUSING UNIT -
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 95 -539; ARLOMA CORPORATION,
APPLICANT; 266 ASPEN STREET
Community Development Director Doreen Liberto -Blanck presented the staff report. She
discussed the previous approval and the density bonus granted at that time. The low income unit
was called out in Condition of Approval No. 14 of Resolution No. 95 -1539. After review of
the information, staff interpreted the intent of the Commission to allow the unit to be either sold
or rented, but to remain as a low cost unit for thirty (30) years. A resolution has been presented
reflecting this interpretation and staff recommends adoption.
Although this was not a public hearing, Chairperson Tappan invited the applicant to address the
Commission.
Tony Orefice, project architect - stated the applicant had always intended to sell the unit but
would like to maintain the option of either sale or rental.
The Commission discussed the issue of the unit reverting to market value after a specific time
has passed; how other jurisdictions handled similar problems; the history of the project; the
problem of qualifying people for low- income housing; the 30 year limit for low- income housing;
and the required deed restriction.
The following action was taken, to adopt:
RESOLUTION NO. 96 -1580
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE PROVIDING A CLARIFICATION TO THE
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE
NO. 95 -539 FOR 266 ASPEN STREET
With the following addition:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Arroyo Grande hereby makes the interpretation that Condition of Approval No. 14 of Resolution
No 95 -1539 allows the sale or rental of the designated low income housing unit €a
............. ............................... ... w::: �. v. � v :.:: �. w::: • :•: w:;: .:::: •:::•:::::::• : v •: • :n:v. :• wn :}; ?.•. } }'fi:^ v .: �; };n}:nv..:Lq�i %K ^K•;.y.y; }} •.y }}}}Y.rnY•} }x }Y. ^ii'r$i: ivi:L:..v....
::::.} :::.i::.ii:v }) }?Y•i }i:::.i }i:. ' . }i: :�' : . .. :.: :. :. �: ::! { :.:; : : :: ..:: :::: :.. :; ............ ..... ... ;..,
ppr : . . >T cfton It w moem . ousi r >` `<t :: ; .: >;
On a motion by Commissioner Lubin, seconded by Commissioner Keen, and by the following
roll call, to wit:
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 7
August 20, 1996
AYES: Commissioners Lubin, Keen, Deviny, Titus and Tappan
'NOES: None
ABSENT: None
NON - PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING THE EXTENSION OF
TIME FOR CERTAIN PARCEL AND TRACT MAPS; CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE,
APPLICANT; CITYWIDE
Community Development Director Doreen Liberto -Blanck presented the staff report. She
advised the Commission that this was an Assembly Bill adopted in May of 1996 which
automatically extended existing tentative parcel and tract maps for twelve additional months.
There are approximately ten (10) projects in the city that will be affected by this bill. She
requested that the Planning Commission adopt the Resolution acknowledging this.
The Commission discussed the projects that would be affected and the fact that this had been
done before.
The following action was taken, to adopt:
RESOLUTION NO. 96 -1581
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A ONE YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR
PENDING TENTATIVE TRACT AND PARCEL MAPS
On a motion by Commissioner Titus, seconded by Commissioner Deviny, and by the following
roll call, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Titus, Deviny, Keen, Lubin, and Tappan
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
PLANNING COMMISSION /COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ITEMS AND
COMMENTS
A. Long Range Traffic Study (adjusted alignment for SR 227)
Community Development Director Doreen Liberto -Blanck requested direction from the
Commission. The Public Works Director has gone to City Council and requested
additional funds to adjust the proposed bypass along Clarence, staff is requesting
consensus that the adjusted route does not have to return to the Commission prior to City
Council review. Chairperson Tappan replied that the Commission had discussed a 200'
swath for the circulation not a specific street. Commissioner Keen interjected that
offsetting the bypass will defeat the purpose. The Commission concurred with staff.
B. Letters of appreciation for John Soto and Bob Carr
The Commission accepted the letters as presented for signature.
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 8
August 20, 1996
C. Award of Two Community Development Block Grants (Information)
• A half a million dollar grant to work with People's Self Help Housing to purchase
land behind the McDonalds on Grand for 14 small units.
• An Economic Development Grant for $35,000 for Marketing Strategy.
D. Planning Commission Meetings
• Tuesday, September 17, 1996 - Long Range Traffic Study - staff recommends starting
the meeting at 7:00 p.m.; people on Brisco will be noticed even though it is a
continued meeting; and the item will be placed at the end of the agenda.
• Joint City Council /Planning Commission Meeting - Schedule Meeting for Thursday,
September 19) - staff recommends starting the meeting at 6:30 p.m. and asks the
Commission for agenda topics, the Commission concurs.
E. Update of Projects
• the Redevelopment Agency Study is moving forward;
• the City Council will be reviewing the Short Range Traffic Study on August 27,
1996;
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
1. Route 227 Realignment and Brisco Road /Highway 101 Interchange Improvements Studies
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, on a motion by Commissioner Keen,
seconded by Commissioner Lubin, and unanimously carried , the meeting was adjourned at 9:15
p.m. to the regular meeting on September 3, 1996.
ATTEST:
• Commission Lubin suggested that some of the individual mail, regarding routine
approvals, that the Commission receives be included in the regular packet to save on
postage. The balance of the Commission concurred but agreed that they needed to
receive information that was time sensitive as they are now.
Breese, Commission Clerk
AS TO CONTENT:
Doreen Liberto- Blanck, Community Development Director
PiLivq)aPP
William Tappan, Chairperson