Loading...
PC Minutes 1989-05-02Arroyo Grande Planning Commission May 2, 1989 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman Gerrish presiding. Present are Commissioners McCann, Gallagher, Soto, Moore, Scott and Flores. Current Planner Spierling is also in attendance. MINUTE APPROVAL Upon hearing no additions or corrections, the minutes of the regular meeting of March 21, 1989 were approved by the Chairman as submitted. PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 89 -446, REVISION TO SIGN PLAN, 1450 W. BRANCH STREET (OAK PARK DFSIGN CENTER) Current Planner Spierling reviewed the staff report dated May 2, 1989. He reviewed that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the subject planned sign program on August 2, 1988, and the City Council approved the application on August 23, 1988. The sign program included three "can" type signs on the front of the building facing West Branch Street, and three "can" type signs on the west side of the building facing the K -Mart shopping center. He stated that when the center was approved, it was proposed that the building would house three tenants and each tenant would have two signs. However, as it worked out, Amador's Fine Furniture leased two sections of the building. The owners of Amador's had a sign constructed and installed to take the place of two of the permitted signs on the west side of the building, and they are now requesting that the Planned sign program be revised to allow the new sign. Mr. Spierling described the new sign, stating it is a channel letter style sign that is about 82 square feet in size, and the two signs that were permitted were 35 square feet each for a total of 70 square feet. The new sign exceeds the square footage originally permitted for this building, however, the total signage is still less than the maximum allowed under the sign ordinance. Mr. Spierling noted that the plans presented do not accurately reflect the permitted size of the originally approved signs. Mr. Spierling stated that the Staff Advisory Comrmnittee, after reviewing the application, recommends that the Planning Cantu fission recommend denial of the proposed sign based on failure to display common design elements with the existing, approved signage per the requirements of the sign ordinance. Upon being assured by the Planning Canmmission Secretary that public hearing for amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 88-446 had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing open. Trini Amador, 1450 W. Branch Street, applicant, spoke in favor of the amendment to the use permit. He stated that the signage is within the maximum allowed under the sign ordinance and, apparently, what this commes down to is the channel type sign vs. the "can" type sign. Steve Havens, representing Sign Tech, stated when Mr. Amador decided to take more footage in the building, he requested Sign Tech to make a larger sign and, in order to find out the criteria, he called the City and talked to a lady in the Planning Department who informed him that as long as they stayed within the square footage criteria, they could change the sign. Based on that conversation, they proceeded with the sign. In answer to Chairman Gerrish's canment that it was his understanding that the square footage was exceeded, Mr. Havens stated it was his understanding that the larger sign would go on the larger portion of the building. Mr. Amador presented a picture of the proposed channel sign, explaining that when you have the confines of a can, the lettering has to be condensed and that means the readability is adversely affected. Chairman Gerrish stated that it is his understanding there were three can signs approved; each one was 35 square feet. Phillips' sign is 35 square feet and Amador's new sign is 82 square feet. He advised the applicant that, regardless of what the Planning Commission decides, the request must still go to the City Council because of the PD zone. Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed amendment, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed. Canmissioners Soto stated that the sign is not offensive but it is not consistent with the type of signs approved for the project. He stated, however, he is offended by the truck with the large sign on it that is parked there on weekends. Commissioner Gallagher stated his concern that the sign is inconsistent with the approved sign plan. Commissioner McCann stated her feelings that they should have conformed with what was originally set forth, however, she thinks the sign itself is fine. Commissioner Flores stated he feels that an honest mistake was made and it was his feeling that he could go ahead and approve the request at this time. Commissioner Moore stated he has no objection to the sign. Chairman Gerrish commented that one of the problems as he sees it is that Amador's sign is not compatible with Phillips' sign. Arroyo Grande Plannhig won, 5-2 -89 After further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 89 -1235 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AMENDED USE PERMIT CASE NO. 88-446, APPLIED FOR BY OAK PARK HOME DESIGN CENTER,, 1450 W. BRANCH STREET, FOR A - REVISED PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM On motion by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Flores, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: NOES: Commissioners SidaralnalcCallaglEiores, Scott and Chairman Gerrish ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 2nd clay of May 1989. PUBLIC NEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 89 -451, CONSTRUCTION OF A SECOND RESIDENTIAL UNIT, 189 DEER TRAIL CIRCLE (BETH AND WAYNE PIERCE). current Planner Spierling reviewed the staff report dated May 2, 1989. He stated that the applicant is proposing construction of a 638 square foot second residential unit and single car garage. The second unit will consist of a living room, bedroom, kitchen and bathroom. It will be attached to the side of the existing garage and have access to the main house through the garage. The single car garage will be added to the existing garage in such a way as to make it appear to be a three car garage. He stated that the colors and materials used in the construction will match the existing house. Mr. Spierling advised that the Staff Advisory Committee reviewed the proposal and recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending approval of the second dwelling, subject to the findings and conditions listed in the staff report, dated May 2, 1989. Mr. Spierling stated there was some question about allowing a second unit in the PD zone since Article 40 of the Zoning Ordinance only references R -A and R -1 zones. It was the opinion of the City Attorney that since the underlying zone for this development was RA -B3, then Article 40 and State law would apply. Furthermore, the City Attorney felt that the State law allowing construction of second units took precedence over municipal laws, including Ordinance 140 C.S., which regulates the number of units allowed in the Oak Park Acres Planned Development and the City's General Plan Land Use Element. He read a paragraph from Sec. 65852.2 as follows: "A second unit which conforms to the requirements of this subdivision shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which it is located, and shall be deemed to be a residential use which is consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designations for the lot. The second units shall not be considered in the application of any local ordinance, policy, or program to limit residential growth ". Mr. Spierling stated that, basically, the State has, through this law, allowed a substantial density increase throughout the residential districts of the City. The only way that Gity's can limit or eliminate second units is for the City Council to make a finding that second units adversely affect the health and safety of the residents of the City. He pointed out two changes that should be made to the draft resolution that was included in the Canmissioners' packets. 1) the title of the resolution should "recommend" approval, since the property is in the PD zone; and 2) Addition of Condition #5 requiring Architectural Review by Oak Park Acres ARC Control Car mittee. Upon being assured by the Planning Cannission Secretary that public hearing for Conditional Use Permit Case No. 89-451 had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing open. Don Furtick, 183 Deer Trail Circle, stated he lives immediately next door and designed the project for the Pierce's. He stated, in his opinion this would be a credit to the neighborhood. Wayne Pierce, co- applicant, spoke in favor of the Use Permit being granted. He advised that there is a conflict within the community regarding the Architectural Review Control Committee. Mr. Spierling pointed out that the reference is made to the original Architectural Control Committee that was set up for Tract 604, Oak Park Acres; not the Tract 1149 Architectural Review Board. Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed use permit, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed. 39 40 Arroyo Grande Planning Caimission, 5 -2-89 Page 3 Cam lssioner Soto stated his feeling is that the City is in full canpliance in the R -1 and RA zone with the law, however, second residential units are not allowed in the PD zones because the Planned Development ordinance establishes densities. Doris Olsen, Councilperson, requested clarification of her understanding that in spite of the fact that the density is stipulated in the PD ordinance, a second residential unit does not count as one of those 265 units. Mr. Spierling explained that State law states that the second unit is not considered to determine whether an area exceeds the basic density. He-pointed out that if the findings were made that specific adverse impacts on health, safety and welfare would result, and the City Council could make those findings, then the City would be consistent with the State law. After further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 89 -1236 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 89 -451, APPLIED FOR BY BETH AND WAYNE PIERCE, LOCATED AT 189 DEER TRAIL CIRCLE AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION On motion by Carmissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner issioner McCann, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Moore, McCann, Flores, Scott and Chairman Gerrish NOES: Commissioners Soto and Galingher ABSENT: None the foregoing resolution was adopted this 2nd day of May 1989, Architectural Review Case No. 89 -422. Mr. Spier ling reviewed the sketches, elevations and color board for the proposed structure. After a brief discussion, Architectural Review Case No. 89 -422 was approved as proposed on motion by Carmissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Flores, and carried with two Commissioners voting "no ". ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 89-424, JAMES WAY AND TALLY HO ROAD, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (R AND R DIVESTMENTS) Current Planner Spierling reviewed the staff report dated May 2, 1989, noting that the architectural review is needed as a result of the RA -B1D zoning for . this parcel. The Canbining Design Development District, Sections 9- 4.1801 through 9- 4.1804 of the zoning ordinance, sets standards in order that "buildings, structures, signs and landscaping will be developed in an orderly and uniform manner and will be in harmony with other structures and improvements in the area ". He stated that the proposal is for construction of a three bedroom, 1,950 square foot residence on a 10,566 square foot lot. The proposed residence has an attached two car garage with driveway access, via a 20 foot drive to James Way. After a brief discussion, Architectural Review Case No. 89-424 was approved with the findings and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report, dated May 2, 1989, on motion by Commissioner Soto, seconded by Commissioner Fiore, and unanimously carried. REQUEST FOR REVISION - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 88 -411, 110 BRISOO ROAD (JOSE RIVERA/RIVERA'S BODY SHOP). Current Planner Spierling reviewed that on October 4, 1989 the Planning Ca nission approved the above referenced architectural review subject to ten conditions. The applicant, is now requesting a revision to that architectural review. Mr. Spierling pointed out that the original submittal included a canopy roof over the spray paint booth and a portion of the parking area. Mr. Rivera wanted the canopy so that custaners could view completed body work even in adverse weather conditions. He is now requesting permission to close in the rear of the canopy with a wall, enlarge the permitted front walls under the canopy and close in the side of the canopy with a new wall. With regard to the side wall, there are two alternate proposals. 1) The applicant's preferred alternative is to completely wall-in the side except for a 6 foot opening. He has currently framed the building according to this alternative but has ceased work under a building department "stop work" order since he was not following the approved plan. This particular alternative would delete one parking space, leaving only two spaces for the total project. 2) This alternative is to construct 13 feet of wall, leaving a 31 foot opening which will allow a minimum of two parking spaces under the canopy. The proposed walls would be stucco 1 1 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5-2-89 Page 4 and match the colors and textures of the existing building. Mr. Spierling pointed out that by constructing walls under the canopy, the applicant is increasing the floor area of his building and, therefore, must meet all of the requirements of the zoning ordinance and, among the requirements are lot- coverage and parking requirements. Mr. Spierling advised that the size of the existing building requires six parking spaces for this use. The new structure would require three spaces for a total of nine spaces. If complete walls are constructed for the new structure, only two spaces would be provided. If a partial wall or no wall is constructed, three spaces would be available. Mr. Spierling further advised that the. Staff Advisory Committee reviewed the proposed changes and recommends that the Planning Commission deny both revised alternatives based on lot coverage and lack of adequate parking, and direct the applicant to construct the improvements as originally approved. Another concern is that the Building Department found that the spray paint booth requires an exhaust duct, either roof mounted or coming through the roof, and facing Briseo Road. Ron Abeloe, 1259 Poplar Street, stated he is the builder for Rivera's Body Shop. He advised it was the recommendation of their engineer that the walls be put in to make the building much more structurally sound and, therefore, they are requesting approval to build it the way they have it framed now. With regard to parking, Mr. Abeloe stated there are three designated spaces, but there are four additional parking spaces in front of the existing building. With regard to the concern about the exhaust stack, Mr. Abeloe stated that it will come up through the roof but will be on the back side of that ridge. Jose Rivera, 568 So. Lynn, Nipomo, applicant, stated it is his intention to renovate the building, and he didn't feel the wall was enclosing the building. He stated his concern for safety reasons because of the flammable materials and during weekends people can come in right off the street and have easy access to the project. Also, the engineer has said that the wall structurally helps to make the building more sound. He stated he has created more parking than there was before, and they have improved the property by installing curb, gutter and sidwalks. After discussion by the O inissioners, it was agreed that further information was required, such as what the exhaust system will look like when it is on the building, input from the Fire Department regarding storage of flammable materials, designation of the parking spaces on the plans, and the security fencing. Mr. Abeloe requested that the "stop work" order be lifted to allow them to shingle the building and continue work on the project. On motion by Commissioner Soto, seconded by Comum issioner Flores, motion carried with Chairman Gerrish abstaining, the matter was continued for two weeks to give the applicant and staff time to work out the details requested by the Con nission. Also, the matter of the "stop work" order was to be worked out with staff. PLANNING DIRECTORS REPORT/DISCUSSION Appointment of two Planning Commissioners to informally net with Planning Conn nissioners of Adjacent Government Entities - Chairman Gerrish announced continuation of this item for two weeks pending notification and approval of the City Council. General Plan Update - There was a brief discussion regarding the Town Meetings held in April, and it was noted that the next step will be a joint meeting between the Planning Cammnssion and City Council. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Conmmission, the meeting was adjourned by the Chairman at 9:40 P.M. '41