PC Minutes 1990-02-06134
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
February 6, 1990
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman
Carr presiding. Present are Commissioners Moore, Gallagher and Flores.
Commissioners Soto, Brandy and Fischer are absent. Also in attendance are
Planning Director Liberto- Blanck, Long Range Planner Bierdzinski, Public Works
Director Karp, City Attorney Skousen, and Kent Norton, Senior Planner for
Planning Network.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - UPDATE AND REVISION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE LAND
USE, HOUSING, OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENTS AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE)
City Attorney Skousen outlined the procedure dealing with conflict of
interests for the Commissioners in making their decisions relative to voting or
abstaining from voting on specific areas.
Long Range Planner Sandra Bierdzinski briefly reviewed specific material
handed out to the Commission, which included a memo written by Doreen Liberto-
Blanck and Paul Karp regarding the water situation, a memo from Lloyd Zola of
Planning Network regarding non -prime Agricultural Water Rights and the conversion
of those rights, and a copy of the Agricultural Viability Report for the Valley
View Project. Ms. Bierdzinski also reviewed the staff report, dated February
6, 1990.
Planning Director Liberto - Blanck stated that the Public Works Department
has been working on a detailed water study, and she asked that the Public Work
Director go through that report and explain some of the findings to the
Commission.
Public Works Director Paul Karp reviewed the report entitled "Water
Availability ", stating it is a culmination of a review of the city's land
inventory. Each and every parcel deemed vacant or within agriculture at this
time was looked at. Staff has also reviewed all of the building permits that
have been issued over the last year and a half. A projection of the demand on
an annual basis of the amount of water for domestic purposes which will be
required to meet the needs of all of the existing city, plus all of the permits
that have been issued through December 31, 1989 was generated. We have created
these estimates based on actual usages within the City for similarly sized lots.
He stated the City will need 3126 acre feet to serve the existing development
and all of those under construction for permits issued through December 31, 1989.
The City has available through Lopez and the gentlemen's agreement 3492 acre feet
of domestic water. In subtracting the two, we have 366 acre feet of water which
can be allocated under the Resource Management Plan, which is proposed to be a
part of the General Plan process. He stated the final demand number for all
vacant lots in the City is 953 additional acre feet required. By adding the 953
acre feet to the previously mentioned 3126, subtracting the amount of water that
we have allocated to us, we are going to require, without subdivision, 4,074 acre
feet; a shortfall of 582 acre feet as estimated. Mr. Karp pointed out that there
is a significant amount of water demand applied to existing agriculture which
is currently zoned commercial or industrial, such as the PM District located on
Oak Park Boulevard between Grand Avenue and Ash Street, etc.
COMMISSIONER FISCHER ENTERED THE MEETING DURING THE ABOVE DISCUSSION.
Planning Director Liberto - Blanck referred to the second page of the report,
stating that there are several alternatives that the Planning Commission may want
to consider tonight while reviewing the General Plan Land Use and the General
Plan elements. She briefly reviewed the various options.
After considerable discussion regarding water availability and the
alternatives outlined by Mr. Karp, Chairman Carr stated it is his feeling that
the Commission look at Alternative 2, and Alternative 3, being a combination of
incorporating water conservation program and the other items, and a
recommendation for adjudication of the water in the Arroyo Grande water basin.
Commissioner Fischer stated she would like to see the Planning Commission,
as a planning body, make a recommendation for what the Commission feels would
be good policy for the City and take a lead position. Commissioner Moore pointed
out that the City is limited to some 366 acre feet and that could be used up in
a year or two, and we better start doing something before that two years is gone,
such as conservation, retrofitting, education, and get serious about sewer water
for irrigation, lawns, etc.
Planning Director Liberto - Blanck suggested the Commission consider going
through the comments received from the public and determine if it is appropriate
to change some of the designations that the public has asked for and find out
what type of plan the Commission wants to approve, and after we have that
information, we can give it to Mr. Karp and he can then respond to that and
possibly tell us what the water demand will be on that.
Chairman Carr asked for a consensus of the Commission which of the
presented alternatives the Commission feels most comfortable with using as a base
alternative to work from so when we start dealing with the issues, we know where
we started from. Planning Director Liberto - Blanck stated there are five
different alternatives that have presented which were discussed at a joint
Planning Commission /City Council meeting in June and then again in November.
What the Planning Commission needs to do right now is determine which alternative
they would like to consider. In the Environmental Impact Report on Page 60 and
61, the build -out of each one of the alternatives is discussed. The consultant
has recommended the proposed alternative which would allow a population of about
19,500. The other alternative that was included was a lower density alternative.
That would be taking the same map that the consultant has proposed, but reducing
certain densities.
After reviewing the alternatives presented, the Commission felt that the
lower density alternative as presented in the EIR reducing the densities in
several residential land use categories would be more appropriate to use as the
basis for making decisions on the General Plan.
Kent Norton, Senior Planner with Planning Network, briefly reviewed some
of the major issues that were discussed at the last meeting. The first is
agricultural issues. With regard to the RA -B3 zone, Mr. Norton pointed three
major areas where the zone is inconsistent with the General Plan designation,
and presented the staff's preliminary recommendations to the Commission on
changes for those areas.
After discussing each area, the Commission made the following
recommendations:
(1) The properties along Myrtle and Cherry Avenue that extend to the
creek were designated for a density of 1 dwelling unit per acre,
which is equivalent to the hillside residential category.
(2) The property at East Cherry Avenue and Branch Mill (Coker Ellsworth's
property) to remain designated for general agriculture.
(3) The Wilma Pacific property south of the High School and Mr.
Frederick's property along Traffic Way is to be designated for
residential uses with a density of 1 dwelling per 1.5 acres. The
requirement on the Wilma Pacific property would be submittal of a
development plan, and the Frederick's property on Traffic Way would
require a specific plan.
Ms. Bierdzinski referred to the strawberry fields off of Grand Avenue and
Oak Park Boulevard, stating that two letters and public comments were received
and the owners do not want to see those lands designated for agriculture; they
would prefer they either stay the existing designation, which is part commercial
and part industrial, or be designated all commercial, or part commercial and part
residential. She stated that the staff recommendation is to keep the proposed
agriculture designation for those properties. She pointed out that at the joint
meeting in June with the Planning Commission and City Council, staff was
instructed to identify the strawberry fields for agriculture, but allow their
future development to urban uses in the future. The lands have been shown on
the map for agriculture, and there is a policy in the plan (Policy 1.5),
permitting the transition of those properties to urban uses when farming is no
longer feasible, subject to the preparation of a specific plan. After
discussion, the Planning Commission agreed with the staff recommendations on
these properties.
With regard to the area near Popular and Juniper Street, Ms. Bierdzinski
stated staff is recommending redesignating the properties from general
agriculture to a residential category.
Regarding the question of economic viability of agriculture lands, Planning
2
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 2/6/90
Director Liberto -Blank referred to Issue No. 1 under the Land Use section under
Agricultural Areas, stating that the information was taken from Santa Barbara
County and it is the information they look at relative to viability. She further
stated that staff needs something from the Planning Commission, if they agree
they want something on economic viability, staff would have to come back and put
a policy together with what they would compare with this information.
Commissioner Fischer stated her feeling that it would be desirable to see an
example of where this has been used successfully. Mr. Norton advised that the
Wilma Pacific project submitted an economic viability report for their project.
They quantified other kinds of physical limitations, such as soil types, access
and other reasons other than economic that might contribute to the viability of
the site. The Commission agreed that staff put a some criteria together for a
policy on economic viability of agriculture lards for their review.
Mr. Norton stated that the last agricultural item was touched on in a
couple of other locations, but this particular discussion will center on the
actual philosophy of the potential for conversion of non -prime agricultural
water rights. He referred to a memo from Mr. Zola on a recommended addition to
Policy 1.4 in the Open Space and Conservation Element. Mr. Norton stated the
Commission needs time to review the proposal, and it is being presented to the
Commission tonight because, in going through the General Plan process, it is
evident that there is a strong desire on most elements in the City to somehow
preserve agricultural lands, and the discussion has been, should urban
development be allowed to use agricultural water rights. This is a way to
protect the entire ground water basin and also preserve prime agricultural land,
while allowing development of non -prime land.
Chairman Carr stated he feels this is something the Commission needs to
look at. There were no further comments from the Commission at this time.
Ms. Bierdzinski advised that a letter was received today from Wesley and
Donna Carlson regarding their property which is surrounded by the Rancho Grande
development. Since the letter was just received today, staff is suggesting that
at the next meeting staff come back with a recommendation, along with other minor
agricultural issues that have not been touched on today.
She asked if there were any comments from the Planning Commission on the
agricultural policies in the General Plan. Ms. Liberto - Blanck advised that those
policies and objectives are on Pages 2, 3, and 4 in the General Plan document.
There were no comments from the Commissioners at this time.
time.
Chairman Carr announced that a ten minute break would be taken at this
Chairman Carr called the meeting to order at 9:30 P.M. and opened the
meeting for any public comments on agricultural issues.
Carl Alfono, Senior Vice President of Wilma Pacific, addressed the issues
of the property south of the high school. He reviewed that they had submitted
a project with 207 units, which has been put on "hold" because of the planning
process. He stated they are in the EIR process now, and have resubmitted a
project with 150 units that has approximately 30 affordable housing units
integrated into the development in various locations. He stated that the
development is clustered out of the viewshed; it is on the lower portion of the
site. Aside from the affordable issue, he stated that the project would solve
drainage issues for the school, for the church and for the farmland below. It
would also solve a major traffic problem by re -doing an intersection on Fair Oaks
Avenue and Valley Road. He urged the Planning Commission to reconsider their
designation of 1 unit per 1 -1/2 acres, and suggested a density of 2 -1 /2 dwelling
units per acre.
Haythem Dawlett, representative of Wilma Pacific, spoke regarding the
proposed density and the proposed 25% affordable housing.
After further discussion on the property located south of the Arroyo Grande
High School, staff was requested to review the testimony given tonight and submit
comments and recommendations at the next meeting.
Craig Kawoka, spoke regarding the strawberry fields. He stated he does
not agree with the staff's recommendation on the strawberry farm; why should they
have to prove to the City what is economically feasible to farm? He stated they
are already in light industry, and the City now wants to put them in agriculture,
3
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 2/6/90
and they then have to prove that it is'not economically feasible in order to get
out of agriculture. He cited some of the pressures from everybody, such as
pesticide use, water usage, etc. He asked that the land not be designated
agriculture.
Tom Runnels, Valley Road, stated he owns prime farmland, commenting maybe
they made a mistake by not developing ten years ago. He suggested the Commission
take into consideration, when they do put together a committee of agricultural
people or experts to determine whether a piece of land is farmable or not, they
should get some input from the local people who are farming the land. He
concluded that each parcel of land has to be judged on its own, depending on what
it can be used for and what it can produce.
Hearing no further comments on the agricultural issues, Chairman Carr asked
Ms. Bierdzinski to review the residential issues.
With regard to the Alder House, Ms. Bierdzinski advised that staff's
recommendation for the Alder House is for Senior Housing, and the rest of the
block is being shown for single family residential. The corner properties at
Alder and Fair Oaks are being shown for multiple family. She stated that
McMullen's on Elm Street could also be designated for a Senior Housing, and then
allow senior housing in any Multiple Family category and Commercial category.
Ms. Bierdzinski stated that if the Commission is in agreement with staff's
recommendation to change the designation of those parcels north of the multi-
family parcels, the two larger parcels and the four smaller parcels, would be
single family designation, Alder House would be Senior Housing, and the two on
the corner fronting Fair Oaks Avenue would be designated multiple family.
Planning Director Liberto - Blanck advised that staff would come back after
consulting with the legal staff.
Ms. Bierdzinski referred to the Ridgeview Way area, stating it is being
shown for residential estate, 1 unit per 2 -1/2 acres. There are three property
owners on Ridgeview Way and one property owner on Tally Ho Road who object to
that density designation. The existing zoning now is RA -B3 which would allow
40,000 square foot lots. She pointed out that the whole area from north of the
Methodist Campground all the way up to Corbett Canyon Road west of Tally Ho Road
has been designated for residential estate. She stated the reason for this
designation is that there are some larger parcels in there, and designating it
2 -1/2 acres would prevent additional subdivisions in that area, which is being
recommended on the basis of water constraints.
Commissioner Fischer stated she feels that the parcels on the Village side
should be considered different than those parcels on the other side because they
are different types of parcels. After discussion, the staff was instructed to
take a look at the area and come back with a recommendation. The Commission's
direction was to find a lot size more consistent with what is existing without
allowing a lot of subdivision.
Ms. Bierdzinski stated the next area to be discussed is the Poplar and
Juniper area, which is currently zoned R -2 and staff is recommending it for
single family. She stated additional input was received from Helen Sturges
regarding property on Juniper Street, which is currently designated for -
commercial. She advised there is an existing single family home on the property,
and staff has designated it for single family designation, however, the
Commission may want to retain the commercial designation for that site. The
owner is protesting the single family designation. If the other properties on
Juniper are changed to multiple family, the Commission may want to include this
property as multiple family also. After discussion, the Commission indicated
their feeling that the multiple family designation is appropriate for this site,
which would be Condominium /Townhouse, 9 dwelling units per acre.
Ms. Bierdzinski referred to the Village area where there are R -3
conversions. The properties where specific requests have been received are two
properties on Poole Street, one on the north side and one on the south side.
Staff is showing both of those parcels in the General Commercial category, and
the property owners have requested that they be included in the multiple family
category. Another area is at the corner of Mason and Poole Streets. Staff's
4
F38
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 2/6/90
recommendation was that it remain single family. Other comments received
concerned Mason and Allen Streets, and staff's recommendation is to keep it
single family. She stated that the parcels shown as General Commercial adjacent
to the Multiple Family could be included with the multiple family or could remain
General Commercial. They are under the current general plan shown for multiple
family, medium high density residential, 14 dwelling units per acre.
In answer to Chairman Carr's question, Mr. Norton stated the primary
consideration for including these properties in the commercial area was generally
to augment the commercial corridor along Traffic Way, and limit as much as
possible the areas of multiple family; the low density areas that could convert
to multiple family. Commissioner Flores stated he would rather see this remain
Commercial because of problems with traffic problems and traffic circulation in
that area and making it a higher density residential area would add to the
problem. With regard to the other sites previously discussed, Commissioner
Flores stated he agreed with staff that they remain multiple family densities.
There were no objections or further discussion, and the Commission was in
agreement with Commissioner Flores' comments.
Chairman Carr opened the discussion on the residential categories for
public comment.
Ken Osti, stated he is the owner of the Stewart House at the corner of
Mason Street and Allen, which was build in 1902 and has been a multiple housing
unit for 45 years, as well as the adjacent duplex which has been in that use for
over 35 years. The properties are surrounded by either multiple unit or separate
multi dwellings on a variety of sites. He stated that any down zoning would
result in substantial losses to most of the owners of those property and, over
time, eventual losses of truly affordable rental housing.
Earl Patton, 121 Poole Street, inquired if it is possible, if his property
is zoned commercial /professional, if he could be left R -3 and leave him the
option of going either way. Ms. Bierdzinski responded commenting that the
property is being shown for general commercial and it is right at the boundary
of multiple family, and the Commission's direction was to keep it in general
commercial.
Jim McGillis spoke regarding Mr. Newdoll's property on Alder Street. He
stated it is his understanding that the consensus of the Commission is that there
are basically three of the larger lots that are going to remain single family.
One of those larger lots is broken into four single family lots on a collective
flag; it is a little difficult to evaluate, without seeing the design criteria
for the single family, what that would do to the large lot that Mr. Newdoll owns.
If you were proposing to give him four or five single families on a collective
flag, I'm sure he would be very happy about it, however, if you are going to
eliminate flag lots in the single family designation, then basically what you
are saying is he is going to have a one acre single family lot. He stated
regarding water, if you are doing your planning by water then with the
landscaping and lawn on a one acre single family lot, you are probably a lot
better off going into multiple family. He stated there are only two properties
there that could develop; Mr. Smith's and Mr. Newdoll's.
Ron Smith, 325 Alder Street, stated the staff's recommendation for Senior
Housing recommendation for his parcel makes a lot of sense to him, and he was
concerned because the Commission was not in favor of the recommended designation.
He urged the Commission to consider the Senior Housing designation for his parcel
as opposed to the single family designation.
Carl Hogan, Poplar Street, stated reduction of units affects him and his
family and he feels it is unfair. He stated if there is any legal cause or way
he can correct, then he will be forced to do it.
Ed Chadwell spoke regarding Ridgeview Way, stated the RE zoning designation
for their property is unfair, and would like the Commission to reconsider this
designation.
I
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 2/6/90
Ron Abeloe stated his feelings that the Commission should consider
recommendations made by the consultant. Also, he stated he feels it is poor long
range planning to plan around a resource that is changing all of the time,
Greg Rickford, owner of property at 1148 Fair Oaks Avenue, stated his
property is recommended for down - zoning from 14 units per acre to 9 units per
acre and, in his opinion, that is excessive. He stated that 11 units would be
acceptable, but 9 units per acre is extremely excessive and is not a good use
of the property.
ADJOURNMENT
After discussion, a continued public hearing was scheduled for Monday,
February 26, 1990 in the City Council Chambers.at 7:00 P.M.
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was
adjourned by Chairman Carr at 11:00 P.M.
ATTE
Pearl L. Phinney 1 Robert W. Carr
Planning Commission Secretary
6
Chairman
9