PC Minutes 1989-12-0510'6
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission
December 5, 1989
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman
Carr presiding. Present are Commissioners Fischer, Moore, Brandy and Gallagher.
Commissioners Flores and Soto are absent. Also in attendance are Planning
Director Liberto - Blanck, Current Planner Spierling and Long Range Planner
Bierdzinski.
PUBLIC HEARING - ADOPTION OF CITY RULES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT PER SECTION 15022 OF THE CEQA
GUIDELINES (CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE.)
Long Range Planner Bierdzinski reviewed the staff report dated December
5, 1989, noting that the revision to the City's environmental review procedures
are necessary in order to bring them in line with current California
Environmental Quality Act statutes and guidelines and to provide adequate
direction to City staff, commissions, and the City Council. She stated the
state law requires that each local agency adopt objectives, criteria, and
specific procedures consistent with CEQA and the guidelines for administering
its responsibilities, including the orderly evaluation of projects and
preparation of environmental documents.
Ms. Bierdzinski advised that the revised rules and procedures were reviewed
by the Staff Advisory Committee, the City Clerk, and the City Attorney, and their
comments are incorporated in the draft document. In addition, staff has included
revisions made by the State legislature to CEQA that become effective on January
1, 1990. She briefly discussed the mitigation monitoring procedures, the appeal
process, public notification process and environmental thresholds.
COMMISSIONER SOTO ENTERED THE MEETING AND IS NOW PRESENT
Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Secretary that public hearing
for the proposed CEQA Guidelines had been duly published and posted, Chairman
Carr opened the hearing for public testimony. Hearing no comments from the
audience, Chairman Carr declared the hearing closed.
After a brief question and answer period, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -1260
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION
OF THE AMENDED RULES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
On motion by Commissioner Soto, seconded by Commissioner Fischer, and by
the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Soto, Fischer, Moore, Brandy, Gallagher and
Chairman Carr
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Flores
the foregoing resolution was adopted this 5th day of December 1989.
DUE TO A POSSIBLE CONFLICT OF INTEREST ON THE FOLLOWING TWO AGENDA ITEMS,
COMMISSIONER SOTO LEFT THE MEETING AND IS NOW ABSENT.
PUBLIC HEARING - LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT CASE NO. 89 -486, 417 TRAFFIC WAY (TONY
HEACOCK)
Current Planner Spierling reviewed the staff report dated December 5, 1989.
He stated that this application proposes a lot line adjustment between a portion
of Lot 27 of Wood's addition to the Town of Arroyo Grande and Parcel C of Parcel
Map AG 86 -229. The Parcel Map was approved on October 21, 1986 by the Planning
Commission and created four single family residential lots from two existing
lots. Parcel C of that parcel map shares a side with the applicant's property
and has a 12 foot wide "tail" that extends about 82 feet down the north side of
the applicant's property. This "tail" is essentially unusable for the
residential property, but could be used by the applicant. He stated that the
applicant is proposing to trade the 12 foot wide "tail" for an equal area where
the two parcels share boundaries. If approved, this lot line adjustment would
increase the size of the residential parcel by 0.5 feet while decreasing the
commercial parcel by the same amount. Both parcels would still be above the
minimum lot sizes required by the zoning ordinance and all setbacks and lot
coverage requirements can be met.
Mr. Spierling noted that currently, the tail of the residential lot is
zoned C -3, therefore, approving the lot line adjustment will bring existing land
use and zoning into conformance. Mr. Spierling advised that the Staff Advisory
Committee reviewed the proposal and recommends that the Planning Commission adopt
the draft resolution included in the Planning Commission packets approving the
proposed lot line adjustment, adopt a negative declaration and instruct the clerk
to file a notice of determination.
Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Secretary that public hearing
for Lot Line Adjustment Case No. 89 -486 had been duly published and property
owners notified, Chairman Carr declared the hearing open. Hearing no comments
for or against the proposed lot line adjustment, Chairman Carr declared the
hearing closed.
After a brief discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -1261
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT CASE NO.
89 -486 LOCATED AT 417 TRAFFIC WAY, APPLIED FOR BY TONY
HEACOCK AND ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
On motion by Commissioner Gallagher, seconded by Commissioner Fischer, and
by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Fischer, Moore, Brandy, Gallagher and Chairman
Carr
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Soto and Flores
the foregoing resolution was adopted this 5th day of December 1989.
PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE CASE NO. 89- 141 /SIGN PERMIT CASE NO. 89 -92, 100 TRAFFIC
WAY (VILLAGE CREEK PLAZA III /MID COAST LAND COMPANY)
Current Planner Spierling reviewed the staff report dated December 5, 1989.
He advised that the project consists of two commercial buildings. The larger
of the two will house the Lemos Ranch western apparel, feed, tack and pet
supplies. The smaller building is expected to be used as offices.
Mr. Spierling noted that the proposed planned sign program consists of wall
signs mounted to the two buildings and a monument sign along the Traffic Way
frontage. A variance is required because the applicant wishes to list tenants
on the monument sign as well as identifying the center as Village Creek Plaza.
He pointed out that the sign ordinance explicitly states that monument signs
(ground signs) are for identification of the center or complex only. Ground
signs are not permitted for individual uses." He advised that, in order to
approve the variance, the Planning Commission will have to make the findings for
approval contained in the staff report. He stated that the Staff Advisory
Committee reviewed the application and does not feel that the required findings
can be made for approval.
Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Secretary that public hearing
for Variance Case No. 89 -141 and Sign Permit Case No. 89 -92 had been duly
published and property owners notified, Chairman Carr declared the hearing open.
Steve Wise, M Group Architects, representing the applicants, spoke in favor of
the variance and sign permit. He stated that the site is set lower than Grand
Avenue and visibility is critical to the project, and it is important that there
is proper identification. Mr. Wise referred to the staff report, stating they
would like to remove the sign on the east side to conform to the continuity of
signs, and lower the 2 "A" signs to be within the opening where the lattice work
is. He stated they feel they can incorporate the signs in with the design of
the building and it will fit quite nicely. With regard to the monument sign,
he stated that the whole idea of signs is identification, and there is a definite
advantage to having the tenants name on the monument sign.
Mike Lemos, applicant, spoke in favor of the variance and sign permit.
He stated that they are at a disadvantage to a certain degree because to get into
the facility, you have to be travelling east and make a right -hand turn into the
parking lot, and without the proper identification, they are going to be in
trouble.
Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed variance and sign
permit, Chairman Carr declared the hearing closed.
107
108
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 12/5/89 3
Chairman Carr questioned the possibility of approving a planned sign
program which is totally different than what they have. He stated he is hesitant
to have a brand new development start out with a sign program that is a
substantial variance to what the ordinance requires. Commissioner Fischer stated
that white plastic signs are not what she would like to see for signage in the
Central Business District and, in her opinion, there are other materials that
would be more compatible with the Village area.
After a brief discussion, the following action was taken on the variance
request:
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -1262
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE DENYING A VARIANCE, CASE NO. 89 -141,
APPLIED FOR BY MID COAST LAND COMPANY (VILLAGE CREEK
PLAZA III) LOCATED AT 100 TRAFFIC WAY TO ALLOW LISTING
MULTIPLE TENANTS ON MONUMENT SIGN, IN THE C -2 ZONE.
On motion by Commissioner Gallagher, seconded by Commissioner Fischer, and
by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Fischer, Moore, Brandy, Gallagher and Chairman
Carr
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Soto and Flores
the foregoing resolution was adopted this 5th day of December 1989.
On motion by Commissioner Gallagher, seconded by Commissioner Fischer, and
unanimously carried, Sign Permit Case No. 89 -141 was continued to January 16,
1990 to allow the applicant and City staff to work out a sign program that is
consistent with the City ordinances and more compatible with the design of the
Village area.
COMMISSIONER SOTO ENTERED THE MEETING AND IS NOW PRESENT
PUBLIC HEARING - VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 1742, 1131 FARROLL AVENUE (STAN
BELL /RON ABELOE.)
Current Planner Spierling reviewed the staff report dated December 5,
1989. He stated that the subject property is currently developed with a
single family home and several outbuildings. In the past, the parcel was used
as a Christmas Tree farm, and the Monterey Pines on the site are a remnant of
that operation. He stated that, according to the Subdivision Map Act, "When a
local agency approves or conditionally approves a vesting tentative map,...
that approval shall confer a vested right to proceed with development in
substantial compliance with the ordinances, polices, and standards in effect
at the time the vesting tentative map is approved or conditionally approved ".
He pointed out that the proposal is to subdivide the existing five (5)
acre parcel into 25 single family residential lots. The lot sizes would range
from 6000 square feet net, to 9000 square feet net. Project density is five
units per acre, and the allowable density is 11 units per acre. He stated
that several lot widths and frontages do not appear to meet the standards of
the Subdivision Ordinance.
Mr. Spierling advised that the subdivision is designed with a cul -de-
sac which terminates into a private street serving 6 lots. The private street
was included in an effort to reduce the number of trees that would be removed.
The Subdivision Ordinance limits the length of cul -de -sacs to 600 feet. The
proposed City maintained street is within this limit, however, the private
street exceeds the 600 foot length. The Planning Commission may determine
that a variance is necessary to approve the street configuration as shown.
He stated that the applicants will construct all improvements shown on the
tentative map including relocating an existing 14 inch sewer main and
constructing a storm drain from the project to connect with an existing storm
drain at the intersection of Elm Street and Farroll Avenue.
With regard to the environmental determination, Mr. Spierling advised
that on November 17, 1989 the Planning Department made the determination that
a Focused Environmental Impact Report was required for this project in order
to comply with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). This determination was made as a result of completion of an Initial
Study form, which is required by CEQA to identify any potential environmental
impacts. The Initial Study identified several environmental impacts, for
which no mitigation measures may be available. It also identified several
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 12/5/89 4
impacts for which mitigation measures may be available and several impacts for
which mitigation measures were readily apparent and, upon further study, it
may be found that some of the identified environmental impacts may not be
significant. Mr. Spierling reviewed the specific environmental impacts.
He stated it is staff's recommendation that before a decision is made on the
project, that a focused EIR be prepared on the following items:
1. Biological Resources;
2. Traffic and Circulation; and
3. Public Services.
Mr. Spierling noted that the Subdivision Map Act requires that the
Planning Commission either approve or deny this project within 50 days of the
date of completeness of the application, unless an EIR is required or unless
the applicant requests in writing that this time limit be waived. The
application was complete on 10- 17 -89, therefore, the 50 day period ends on 12-
06-89.
Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Secretary that public
hearing for Vesting Tentative Tract No. 1742 had been duly published and
property owners notified, Chairman Carr declared the hearing open.
Dan Lloyd, EDA, representing the applicants, stated they do not agree
with staff that a Focused EIR should be required for this project, however,
they do feel that additional studies would be beneficial to the Planning
Commission. With respect to some of the other concerns regarding subdivision
requirements, Mr. Lloyd stated it is their feeling that these items, such as
the cul -de -sac length, could be resolved by the time the project is back
before the Commission. In summary, he stated they do not feel that public
services is an issue at this time for the reason that the City Council has
directed further studies and this should be before the Council in January. He
recommended that the Commission choose option number 2, listed in the staff
report, and continue the project with the written consent of the applicant,
and require preparation of additional environmental studies that could lead to
the adoption of a negative declaration.
Lynette Warren, Pacific Point Way, stated her property borders on the
stand of Monterey Pines on the subject property. She stated her concerns
about the noise during and after construction of the project and her loss of
privacy, and the biological loss of wildlife habitat. Also, if there is a
disruption of the natural ground cover, there could be some soil erosion
problems. Mrs. Warren also cited concerns such as increased traffic, water
and the problems of growing population in the area.
Clyde Howland spoke, stating he is representing his mother, the property
owner. Mr. Howland spoke in favor of the tract map being approved, stating he
feels the engineers have done very well with the project. Ron Abeloe, 1259
Poplar Street, one of the applicants, spoke in favor of the vesting tentative
tract map, and outlined some of the improvements being proposed. He stated it
is their feeling that they can address all of the concerns that have been
noted. Darla Brown, 1131 Farroll Avenue, stated she is a tenant on the
property and she supports the proposed project. Lily Durea stated her
property is just south of the subject property, and she is in favor of
approval of the project. Keith Howland, grandson of the property owner, spoke
in favor of the project. He stated he feels it is a good project, and it will
save the trees and improve the land.
Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed tentative tract
map, Chairman Carr declared the hearing closed.
In answer to Commissioner Fischer's question relative to preserving
trees that are not designated landmark trees, Current Planner Spierling
advised that the Parks and Recreation Department is developing a new tree
ordinance to protect other trees, and the Planning Commission could direct
staff to look into ways of preserving the trees on this particular site
through conditions of approval.
Commissioner Soto stated that the corner parcel is still in agriculture
and there doesn't seem to be a 50 foot barrier between the proposed project
and the agricultural land, and this causes health and safety concerns. He
stated his feelings that this should be one of the items to be looked at. He
cited another concern is where the street enters Farroll Avenue it is in the
middle of the block. Commissioner Gallagher commented he feels there are
significant unresolved problems, as well as cumulative impacts on City
services. He stated he agrees with City staff that this project would require
1:1.09
1 1.0
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 12/5/89 5
a Focused EIR. Commissioners Soto and Brandy agreed with Commissioner
Gallagher that a Focused EIR is required. Commissioner Moore stated he firmly
believes that a Focused EIR is necessary and, in his opinion, water, traffic,
drainage should be included, and 25 houses are going to make an impact on the
environment.
Chairman Carr stated he is concerned about the neighboring agricultural
property. He also stated he would be satisfied with going with additional
studies, and he is not sure anything could be done in a Focused EIR that could
not be accomplished by additional studies. He commented that until we have a
water policy or program in place, he would have a difficult time looking at
final approval of this project. He further commented that, in his opinion,
water and solid waste is a problem that the City has to deal with and he
doesn't feel it should be part of a Focused EIR. Commissioner Soto referred
to traffic and circulation, stating he is concerned about sidewalks not being
provided on one side of the street.
After further discussion, on motion by Commissioner Gallagher, seconded
by Commissioner Soto, and unanimously carried, the project was continued and
it was determined that a Focused EIR would be required on the following items
of concern: Biological resources; traffic and circulation (including, but not
limited to, vehicular and pedestrian impacts); public services (including, but
not limited to, solid waste, water and sewer); health and safety (including,
but not limited to, soil report to test for potential soil contamination);
land use compatibility (including, but not limited to, buffering from adjacent
agricultural land); and drainage.
Planning Director Liberto - Blanck advised the applicants that the
Commission's action can be appealed to the City Council.
PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 89 -1 (EXTENSION OF JAMES WAY) AND FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE.)
Long Range Planner Bierdzinski reviewed that the proposed general plan
amendment to the Circulation Element to extend James Way is in response to
recommendations from the Long Range Planning Committee. It was believed that
such a construction would improve circulation in the City by providing an
alternate route to East Branch Street for vehicular trips between US 101 and
areas easterly of the Village area. This improvement has been discussed at the
City Council level on numerous occasions throughout the last 10 to 15 years.
The project was suggested in a traffic report prepared for the Brookside
Marketplace (Scolari /Loomis project) general plan amendment approved last year.
A secondary positive impact of the general plan amendment was the potential for
reduction in vehicular trips through the Tally Ho - LePoint Street "S -" curve
between James Way and Mason Street.
Ms. Bierdzinski advised that the Parking and Traffic Commission reviewed
the project and EIR on October 16, 1989 and recommends that the "no project"
alternative be selected. The Parks and Recreation Commission discussed the
project on November 15, 1989 and agreed that the oak habitat located between
Tally Ho Road and James Way should be preserved.
Ms. Bierdzinski introduced Duane Vanderkline, McClelland Engineers, to the
Commission. Mr. Vanderkline briefly reviewed some of the significant issues and
how the various alternatives were developed and what the impacts would be.
Ms. Bierdzinski advised that a "no project" alternative would eliminate
the impacts associated with the proposed extension and would have minor, but not
significant traffic safety and circulation impacts. She commented that,
according to the traffic consultant, there would be little difference in the
effect of future traffic volumes on Tally Ho Road with and without the James Way
extension.
Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Secretary that public hearing
for General Plan Amendment 89 -1 had been duly published and posted, Chairman Carr
declared the hearing open.
Spencer Thomas, 141 Jaynes Way, stated he is in favor of the no project"
alternative, and submitted a petition to the Planning Commission with 150
signatures of property owners against the adoption of General Plan Amendment 89-
1. He stated he would like to see the City put its engineering effort toward
coordinating with CalTrans on Highway 227 realignment, Tally Ho Road, Printz Road
and Corbett Canyon Road. Terry Boe, 234 Tally Ho Road; John Guiterrez, 182 Tally
Ho Road; Sandy Fachetti, 248 Tally Ho Road, and Ron Abeloe, Poplar Street, stated
they are against the proposal and support the no project" alternative.
Upon hearing no further comments for or against the proposed amendment,
Chairman Carr declared the hearing closed.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 12/5/89 6
Long Range Planner Bierdzinski advised that staff is recommending
certification that the Final EIR for General Plan Amendment 89 -1 has been
prepared in compliance with CEQA; and that the Commission adopt a resolution
recommending to the City Council disapproval of General Plan Amendment 89 -1.
by
the
After a brief discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -1263
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY THAT THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 89 -1 (EXTENSION
OF JAMES WAY) HAS BEEN PREPARED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND CERTIFYING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
HAS REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
On motion by Commissioner Soto, seconded by Commissioner
the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Soto,
Chairman Carr
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Flores
foregoing resolution was adopted this 5th day of December
RESOLUTION NO. 89 -1264
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY
COUNCIL DISAPPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
89 -1 RELATING TO THE EXTENSION OF JAMES WAY
Gallagher, and
Fischer, Moore, Brandy, Gallagher and
1989.
On motion by Commissioner Soto, seconded by Commissioner Gallagher, and
by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Gallagher, Fischer, Brandy, Moore, Soto and
Chairman Carr
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Flores
the foregoing resolution was adopted this 5th day of December 1989.
Planning Director Items:
Modification of Retaining Wall - Tract 1669 -
As a matter of information, Planning Director Liberto - Blanck advised that
in March of 1989 the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract 1669 and,
although not a condition of approval, a 5 foot retaining wall was shown on the
map along the driveway easement off of Corbett Canyon Road, necessitating the
removal of a number of eucalyptus trees near the frontage road. The applicant
now wishes to retain the eucalyptus trees, and in order to do this, a 15 foot
crib wall must be built. He stated that the Parks & Recreation Director will
monitor the construction to guarantee that vegetation grows on the crib wall,
allowing it to eventually be hidden. Also, the Public Works Director feels that
due to potential public safety problems, either a 15 foot concrete retaining wall
or 15 foot crib wall is necessary, and staff feels that, given a choice, a crib
wall which is planted with vegetation is preferred.
Midas/Trans-King (Information) - Mr. Spierling advised that the
applicants have submitted plans for signs; one for the Trans -King building and
one for the Midas building. The signs as proposed meet the requirements of a
standard sign application and, therefore, they are not required to go through
a planned sign program.
Request determination of " minor " ..... _ architectural ...._ revisions, 495
Avenue .._ Jiffy Lube (Information) . Mr. Spierling advised that the owner of the
existing facility at 495 Grand Avenue would like to convert it to Jiffy Lube
facility. He has submitted colors of what he is proposing and, basically, we
are asking if staff can review this as an administrative review. After a brief
discussion, staff was instructed to review the project administratively, require
that the pole in the back be removed, and check with the Building Department
regarding oil separation devices.
Joint Planning ..... Commission ...... _ Meeting ...__, Update ..._... - . Planning Director Liberto-
112
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 12/5/89 7
Blanch advised that the joint Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for
Thursday, January 11, 1990 at 6 :30 P.M. at the Pismo Beach Vet's Hall.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Carr advised that the regular meeting of December 19, 1989 would
be cancelled and that CUP 89-455 (Chadwell) would be continued to the meeting
of January 2, 1990.
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was
adjourned by Chairman Carr to a special meeting to be held on Wednesday, December
13, 1989 at 6.00 P.M.
ATTEST: _4 in//
Pearl L. Phinney, Secretary /7 Robert W. Carr, Chairman