Loading...
PC Minutes 1993-11-161 1 1 ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 16, 1993 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman Carr presiding. Present are Commissioners Tappan, Reilly, and Deviny. Absent are Commissioners Soto, Hatchett, and Keen. Planning Director Doreen Liberto- Blanck and Current Planner Scott Spierling are in attendance. Commissioner Keen arrived at 7:35 P.M. APPROVAL OF MINUTES On motion by Commissioner Tappan, seconded by Cornrnissioner Reilly and unanimously carried, the minutes of the regular meeting of November 2, 1993 were approved. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None The Planning Commission changed the order of the agenda by taking the following item first. PUBLIC HEARING - CASE NO. 93 -108 FOR A PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM FOR BUSINESSES LOCATED AT 415 E. BRANCH. APPLICANT IS E.C. LOOMIS & SONS Planning Director Liberto - Blanck reported on various aspects of this item to the Commissioners. Chairman Carr opened the public hearing. Joan Wells of Ed's Signs, representing the applicant, spoke briefly requesting approval. Chairman Carr asked if she was in agreement with the proposed conditions and she answered in the affirmative. With no further comments from the audience, Chairman Carr closed the public hearing. The following action was taken by the Commissioners: RESOLUTION NO. 93 -1441 A RESOLUTION OF TIIE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TIIE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM CASE NO. 93 -108, FOR E.C. LOOMIS & SON AT 415 EAST BRANCH STREET On motion by Commissioner Reilly, seconded by Commissioner Deviny, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Tappan, Reilly, Deviny, Keen, and Chairman Carr NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Soto and Hatchett Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 2 November 16, 1993 PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 93 -511, LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT CASE NO. 93 -509, VARIANCE CASE NO. 93 -180, VARIANCE CASE NO. 93 -181, VARIANCE CASE NO. 93 -179, AND PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM CASE NO. 93 -109 AT 1650 GRAND AVENUE, APPLICANT IS THE VONS COMPANY Current Planner Spierling, using the overhead projector, made the presentation on this item, pointing out the main issues. Among these were: 1. The bus turnout and proposed right turn lane. Current Planner Spierling recommended a revision of Mitigation Measure No. 9 and deletion of Condition No. 43 for clarity, and stated that the Public Works Director might wish to discuss this item. He then discussed the setback that would have to be changed due to the right turn lane and indicated that Condition No. 20 would affect this change. 2. The next item he brought out was Mitigation Measure No. 29 which the Public Works Director suggested deleting. This issue involved driveway relocation on Oak Park Boulevard, and Current Planner Spierling informed the Commission that Marty Inouye of Omni- Means, the traffic consultant on this project, would be presenting the potential problems from his viewpoint and the Public Works Director would also be addressing this issue. In addition, he stated that the project representative and engineer were also present to discuss this issue. 3. Current Planner Spierling stated then that Mitigation Measure No. 30 was covered by normal City review and deletion was recommended. 4. Current Planner Spierling pointed out the recommendation of the Public Works Director regarding credit of impact fees to the applicant, for widening of Oak Park Boulevard at Grand Avenue. He informed them that Mitigation Measure No. 27 would have to be revised to affect this recommendation. 5. He then explained the Courtland Street right of way widening requirement, pointing out Condition No. 19 and identifying the options available to the applicant. 6. The next item he mentioned was the letter from the City of Grover Beach. He stated that he discussed the various items in the letter with the Sandra Bierdzinski, the Assistant Community Development Director for Grover Beach. The City's major concern was street improvements and they requested that a condition be added to include Grover Beach in the approval process. Mr. Spierling stated that the Public Works Director was planning to coordinate with Grover Beach, but not necessarily through a condition. 7. Mr. Spierling then expanded upon items within the Question and Answer sheets. He noted Conditions No. 31 and 32 regarding the trees; he stated that one item which was not addressed therein was the idling of diesel trucks, indicating there was not a real good answer on this; he also expanded on item No. H, the landscaping issues. The last issue that he briefly addressed was regarding the affect of the views from Peace Lutheran Church, answering the questions previously asked by the Commissioners. 1 1 1 1 1 1 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 3 November 16, 1993 Mr. Spierling indicated that several corrections may be made to the Resolutions before the Commission and encouraged them to discuss the traffic issues with the Public Works Director and the Traffic Consultant for further clarification of the issues. The Commissioners then queried Current Planner Spierling on several items. Chairman Carr then suggested that Public Works Director Van Laurn discuss issues of concern to him. Commissioner Tappan asked if the Traffic Commission had any response to the circulation issue. Mr. Laurn responded stated that "it did not get to us in a manner in which we could present it to the Traffic Commission. I discussed it with only the Chairman and he thought that there was no time to really consider it." The Public Works Director then discussed the dedication on Courtland, saying the need for encumbrances was not necessary because the City could reject the offer without preudice. Regarding the bus turnout, he stated that either the way Current Planner Spierling presented it or the way he himself did would work, but did suggest that the Mitigation Measure deleted with respect to the bus turnout, because if it is conditioned, then it is locked in. He then addressed what he said he considered "the big one ", which was the driveway relocation on Oak Park and he suggested deleting Mitigation Measure No. 29 which would require a relocation of the driveway; which would allow the driveway to remain as proposed by the applicant. The finding he further suggested, with possible changing of wording, was as follows: "Inasmuch as the parameters of the traffic study did not include an analysis of turning movements at Ramona Avenue or at the opposing driveways in Grover Beach, the Traffic Consultant and the Director of Public Works agree that judgment as to the prevailing conditions which should control are best made through the Director's firsthand knowledge of the area. As such, the Director finds that the driveway location proposed by the applicant be approved, as it provides greater distance from the Grand Avenue intersection and allows less conflict with turning movements at the highly used Burger King driveway. Likewise, Grover Beach's City Engineer has expressed the opinion that turning movements at Ramona Avenue should not govern the design." Chairman Carr then inquired about the construction question that Grover Beach raised. Mr. Laurn stated that he had talked with them informally and believed that it was agreed it would be handled informally. He did state that if it was conditioned to widen Oak Park Boulevard, then they would need an encroachment permit from Grover Beach. He said if there was any concern that they would delay it, then Arroyo Grande would just have to wait until they allowed them to do it. Chairman Carr asked if he felt the need for a condition to cover this and Mr. Laurn said he was satisfied that a condition was not needed. Commissioner Tappan then asked if Arroyo Grande was consulted regarding Grover Beach's Smith's Food Market project and Mr. Laurn stated Public Works was not. Commissioner Carr then requested clarification from the Director of Public Works on the traffic mitigation fee credit for construction. Mr. Laurn answered by saying that anything which would be a cost incurred through the widening of Oak Park Boulevard or the construction of the right turn lane on Grand Avenue would be basically a regional improvement and they would look toward that as being credited against the traffic mitigation fees. Commissioner Keen brought out the necessity of moving the mast arm and the controller of the traffic lights and Mr. Laurn advised him this would be considered as part of the widening. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 4 November 16, 1993 Chairman Carr then asked the Traffic Consultant, Marty Inouye of Omni - Means, to give his findings. Mr. Inouye discussed the driveway issue and expressed his concern for the safety factor of having the location close to Ramona and gave his reasons for coming to this conclusion. He used the overhead to present these points to the Commission. Mr. Inouye stated that although he felt he had given his best professional opinion on this issue, he also would defer to the Public Works Director as he felt the person in this position would have a better handle on the situation, living with it each day as part of his job. The Commissioners then queried Mr. Inouye on various aspects of this item. Tom Courtney, architect and representative of Vons, addressed some of the issues in the packet of Resolutions. He stated that while they concurred with most of the recommendations and findings, they did have concerns with some of the conditions and mitigation measures and he would proceed to discuss these in that order. He then advised the Commission that Dan Lloyd of Engineering Development Associates was present to respond to traffic and engineering issues and Marshall Ochylski of Land Plans was also present to respond to issues pertinent to the landscaping issues. Going through the pages 1 through 8 of the Conditional Use Permit resolution, he stated that Marshall Ochylski would be discussing Items 12a, 13c(3) and 19 under Planning Department Conditions and items 29 through 34 under Parks and Recreation. Dan Lloyd, he further stated, would be covering 12g under the Planning Department and items 35 through 46 under Public Works. Mr. Courtney then said that afterward he would discuss item 5 on page 3 under General Conditions and some of the Mitigation Measures. Marshall Ochylski then gave his comments beginning with 13c(3) requesting a clarification that the crib walls would be considered as equivalent material and that they would not be required to put jute mesh over the crib walls. Director of Parks and Recreation, John Keisler, responded that jute mesh would not be required on the crib walls. Mr. Ochylski then spoke regarding the oak trees on the property and the one to the north and how Vons was planning to meet the requirements, and even go beyond them. During this part of the discussion regarding the acorns Chairman Carr suggested that the acorns not be given to only the public, but to professional landscaping agencies as well. Mr. Ochylski assured him that this had already been decided and that Mr. Keisler, Director of Parks and Recreation would be one of the agencies to plant some of these acorns, as well as Cal Poly. He then discussed the Courtland situation and the proximity of their wall, depending on whether or not some of their area would need to be dedicated. He also said they planned to use a combination of wall (where the cars would be parked) and then landscaping between these areas. Current Planner Spierling responded that Condition No. 12a was directly out of the Development Code, but that the Planning Commission could include the wording, "berm, landscaping, or combination wall, berm and landscaping" to clarify that a continuous wall was not necessary, especially along Courtland. Dan Lloyd then spoke discussed Condition No. 12g regarding the drainage and Mitigation Measures Nos. 29 and 30 involving the driveway, stating that Condition No. 5 would need to be modified, suggesting the following: "Attachment "A ", shall be implemented as conditions 1 1 1 1 1 1 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 5 November 16, 1993 of approval with the overriding finding regarding Mitigation Measure No. 29 and deletion of Mitigation No. 30, and shall be monitored by the appropriate City department... ". Mr. Lloyd then questioned Chairman Carr as to what was considered standard practice regarding Mitigation Measure No. 7 on page 2. Chairman Carr responded that items such as engines being tuned by a certified mechanic, ignition timing retards, standard dust control practices, etc. He advised him there was a list in the Air Pollution Control District office and if he would call the office, they would see that he received a copy. Mr. Lloyd then answered questions by the Commissioners. Planning Director Liberto - Blanck stated that Staff wanted to respond to Mr. Lloyd regarding the additional language suggestion on Condition No. 5. She felt that if Mitigation Measures No. 29 and 30 were deleted, this language would not be necessary. Mr. Lloyd agreed. Tom Courtney then returned to the podium and said they were in agreement with all items except for Item 19, page 5, of the Mitigation Measures requesting the time be extended to 5 a.m. to midnight. Regarding the idling, he stated that they had three unloading dock areas to get the trucks in and out as quickly as possible and pointed out the fact that the trucks were about 20 feet below the residential properties and were well buffered from sound by the crib wall and landscaping. Commissioner Reilly said that 6 A.M. was early enough, if not too early, and did not agree that the morning hour should be extended 5 A.M. She also asked Mr. Courtney the average idling time of the trucks and he responded with 20 to 30 minutes. Current Planner Spierling stated that Staff recommended that the 6 A.M. not be changed, but that an extension of the evening hours could be considered. Walt Whitman of Peace Lutheran Church spoke regarding the safety concern with the driveway if it was to be put more to the north. Raymond MacKenzie of 1911 Moss Beach Court in Grover Beach spoke of his concerns about the driveway on Oak Park Boulevard, the bus stop area, the views being impaired and the tree planting and suggested some flyers that might be procured. He suggested a more permanent information sign on the Vons property rather than the one -time distributing of oak seedlings. Mr. Ochylski stated that Vons had already planned to do this. With no further comments from the audience, Chairman Carr closed the public hearing. He then inquired of the Commissioners if they felt they could bring this item to a conclusion or would it be necessary to continue it. It was agreed that a conclusion could be made. He then asked if Current Planner Spierling was prepared to discuss these issues and he answered in the affirmative. Mr. Spierling presented these various issues one by one to the Commissioners, who presented their views on each item. One of the items that was suggested at this time by Chairman Carr was a review in a year on the Conditional Use Permit regarding the hours being changed for unloading. During this time Planning Director Liberto - Blanck informed the Commission that at present there was not a Noise Ordinance, though one would be presented in the future. The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 6 November 16, 1993 consensus of the Commissioners was that 6 A.M. to midnight with a review would be best. Current Planner Spierling suggested that the applicant be asked his opinion. Mr. Courtney responded that they would prefer a review with a midnight allowance in preference to 10:00 P.M. with no review. Current Planner Spierling pointed out that Mitigation Measure No. 30 was really redundant as the City has the option through standard procedures to change any access and leaving it in could present problems. The Public Works Director wanted this deleted, as well as the applicant. During Mr. Spierling's addressing of these issues, the Commissioners spent time considering the various pros and cons regarding the driveway being concerned primarily with the safety factors. Mr. Inouye again reiterated his position and gave reasons why. He did suggest that if the Commission decided to go with the suggestion of Mr. Laurn that curbs above Ramona should be painted to prohibit parking. Current Planner Spierling suggested if that Mitigation Measure No. 29 was deleted, it should be replaced with a Mitigation Measure to add the red curb suggestion. It was agreed by the Chairman and the Commission that Current Planner Spierling should read the title of each Resolution and list the amendments; they would then act on that Resolution, one by one. RESOLUTION NO. 93 -1442 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 93 -511 AND THE ASSOCIATED ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW, FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A 64,363 SQUARE FOOT MARKET AND APPURTENANT IMPROVEMENTS AT 1650 GRAND AVENUE, APPLIED FOR BY THE VONS COMPANIES, 1NC.; ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WITII MITIGATION MEASURES AND INSTRUCTION THAT THE SECRETARY FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION Current Planner Spierling stated that the Resolution would be amended as follows: 1. Add finding No. 6 which states, "Inasmuch as the parameters of the traffic study did not include an analysis of turning movements at Ramona Avenue or at the opposing driveways in Grover Beach, the Traffic Consultant and the Director of Public Works agree the judgment as to the prevailing conditions which should control are best made through the Director's firsthand knowledge of the area. As such, based upon the recommendation of the Public Works Director, the Planning Commission finds that the driveway location proposed by the applicant be approved as it provides greater distance from Grand Avenue intersection and allows less conflict with turning movement at the highly -used Burger King driveway. Likewise, Grover Beach's City Engineer has expressed the opinion that turning movements at Ramona Avenue should not govern the design." 1 1 1 1 1 1 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 7 November 16, 1993 2. Modify Condition of Approval No 12a as follows: "A three foot (3') high wall, berm, landscaping or combination wall, berm and landscaping shall be provided along all streets between the sidewalk and the street to screen parking areas. The Commission comrnented that the intent of this condition would be to provide an intermittent wall along Courtland Street, but simply to have berrns and landscaping along Grand Avenue. 3. Condition No. 43 would be deleted in its entirety. 4. Mitigation Measure No. 9 would be modified by adding the term: "The applicant shall construct a bus turnout as part of the right -turn lane required in Condition No. 38" and then continuing on with the rest of the condition. 5. Mitigation Measure No. 19 would then be modified to "limit access to the loading dock area at the North side of the store to between 6:00 A.M. and 12 P.M. ", with the additional language that, "If within one year of the store's opening there are significant complaints regarding noise due to access to the loading dock area, a public hearing shall be held before the Planning Commission. The applicant shall pay for the cost of the public hearing. If it is found that there are significant noise concerns, the Planning Commission may amend the hours of operation, require additional noise mitigation measures, and /or require an additional noise study to be paid for by the applicant. This annual review may be extended beyond one year." 6 Mitigation Measure No. 27 would be revised adding the sentence "The cost of constructing additional lanes and related construction costs in Oak Park Boulevard and Grand Avenue shall be credited against any traffic impact fees which may be imposed." 7. Mitigation Measure No. 29 would be deleted in its entirety and replaced with: "The applicant and the Director of Public Works shall request of Grover Beach and work with Grover Beach to red curb the property North of Ramona Avenue on the West side of Oak Park Boulevard prior to issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy. The monitoring program would be to work with Grover Beach to red curb property North of Ramona Avenue. The time frame would prior to issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy. The responsible agency would be the Public Works Department. 8. Mitigation Measure No. 30 is deleted. Chairman Carr stated that he would propose an understanding between the Planning Commission and the Staff regarding revised Condition No. 29 that if the effort fails to provide red curbing, that somehow there be a report back to the appropriate body, the Planning Commission, or the City Council to see if there is anything else that can or should be done to try to accomplish that. Staff was in agreement and the wording added: "Staff to report back on the results of said work to the Planning Commission." On motion by Commissioner Tappan, seconded by Commissioner Deviny, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 8 November 16, 1993 AYES: Commissioners Tappan, Reilly, Deviny, Keen and Chairman Carr NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Soto and Hatchett the foregoing Resolution with the amendments outlined by Staff was passed and adopted this 16th day of November 1993. Current Planner Spierling then presented the next Resolution, advising the Commission that there were no modifications to the conditions, and that the modifications to the Mitigation Measures would be as previously stated. The following action was then taken: RESOLUTION NO: 93 -1443 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A VARIANCE, CASE NO. 93 -181, APPLIED FOR BY THE VONS COMPANIES, INC., AT 1650 GRAND AVENUE, VARIANCE TO ALLOW PORTIONS OF A BUILDING TO EXCEED THE 30 FOOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT STIPULATED BY THE DEVELOPMENT CODE; ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WITH MITIGATION MEASURES AND INSTRUCTION TIIAT TIIE SECRETARY FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION On motion by Commissioner Keen, seconded by Commissioner Tappan, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Tappan, Reilly, Deviny, Keen and Chairman Carr NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Soto and Hatchett the foregoing Resolution with the amendments listed by Staff was passed and adopted this 16th day of November 1993. Current Planner Spierling presented the next Resolution and that it would be with the conditions as stated in the Resolution and the modifications to the Mitigation Measures as previously stated. The following action was then taken: RESOLUTION NO. 93 -1444 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A VARIANCE, CASE NO. 93 -180, APPLIED FOR BY THE VONS COMPANIES, INC. AT 1650 GRAND AVENUE, VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIREMENT FOR A 15 FOOT LANDSCAPED STREET SETBACK On motion by Commissioner Tappan, seconded by Commissioner Keen, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: 1 1 1 1 1 1 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 9 November 16, 1993 AYES: Commissioners Tappan, Reilly, Deviny, Keen and Chairman Carr NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Soto and Hatchett the foregoing Resolution with the amendments presented by Staff was passed and adopted this 16th day of November 1993. The next Resolution was presented by Current Planner Spierling, stating that this is for signs that exceed the number, area, and height of signs allowed by the Development Code within the General Commercial district, and that it may be adopted in its entirety with no revisions. The following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 93 -1445 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF TIIE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A VARIANCE, CASE NO. 93 -179, APPLIED FOR BY THE VONS COMPANIES INC., AT 1650 GRAND AVENUE On motion by Commissioner Tappan, seconded by Commissioner Keen, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Tappan, Reilly, Deviny, Keen and Chairman Carr NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Soto and Hatchett the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 16th day of November 1993. Current Planner Spierling introduced the next Resolution and that it may be adopted with no modifications. The following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 93 -1446 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM CASE NO. 93 -109, APPLIED FOR BY THE VONS COMPANIES, INC., AT 1650 GRAND AVENUE On motion by Commissioner Reilly, seconded by Commissioner Keen, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Tappan, Reilly, Deviny, Keen and Chairman Carr NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Soto and Hatchett the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 16th day of November 1993. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Page 10 November 16, 1993 This last Resolution was presented by Current Planner Spierling, advising the Commission that it could be adopted as written. The following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 93 -1447 A RESOLUTION OF TIIE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT CASE NO. 93 -509 LOCATED AT 1650 GRAND AVENUE APPLIED FOR BY THE VONS COMPANIES, INC. On motion by Commissioner Tappan, seconded by Commissioner Deviny, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Tappan, Reilly, Deviny, Keen and Chairman Carr NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Soto and Hatchett the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 16th day of November 1993. Commissioner Keen then addressed the applicant stating that since the unemployment rate of the construction workers in this County and general area is so high and they are all good customers of Von's, he suggested that they set a policy to hire local people to construct their new facility. The applicant responded that it was their policy to hire lcoals and they intended to do so on this project as well. NON - PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS - None PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS AND COMMENTS - None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission, on a motion by Commissioner Keen, seconded by Commissioner Reilly, and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M. to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission. ATTEST: Nancy Brow * Commission Clerk Robert W. Carr, Chairman 1 1 1