Loading...
PC Minutes 1988-12-06498 ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 1988 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commissioners met in regular session with Chairman Soto presiding. Present are Commissions Flores, Olsen, Moore and Gerrish. Absent are Commissioners Boggess and Scott. Also in attendance are Planning Director Liberto - Blanck, and Long Range Planner Bierdzinski. MINUTE APPROVAL Hearing no additions or corrections, the minutes of the Planning Commission meetings of September 6, 1988, September 20, 1988 and October 4, 1988 were approved as submitted, on motion by Commissioner Gerrish, seconded by Commissioner Flores, and unanimously carried. ELECTION OF OFFICERS WAS CONTINUED This item was continued by the Chairman until a full Commission is present. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 88 -445, J SCOLARI /E. C. LOOMIS, PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM FOR SCOLARI'S BROOKSIDE MARKETPLACE, ARROYO GRANDE VILLAGE Commissioners Boggess and Scott entered the meeting at 7:40 P.M. Planning Director Liberto - Blanck requested that this item be continued for two weeks, the applicants are still working on the sign program. On a motion by Commissioner Flores, seconded by Commissioner Gerrish, and unanimously carried, Use Permit Case No. 88 -445 was continued for two weeks as requested by the applicant. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - PARCEL MAP CASE NO. 88 -468, DIVISION OF (REDESIGN) 3 LOTS TO CREATE 3 LOTS USING OPTIONAL DESIGN STANDARDS, MAY STREET AND CROWN TERRACE, MERILEE PECK, SAN LUIS ENGINEERING Planning Director Liberto - Blanck, explained that the applicant currently has three lots - 32, 33 and 34 of the Le Point Addition. The applicant has provided 3 different alternatives and they are requesting Optional Design Standards in order to deviate from the zoning ordinance. They want to merge and re- subdivide. City standards require that Crown Terrace connect to May Street. The applicant prefers not to make the connection, thus, the use of Optional Design Standards. Using the over -head projector Mrs. Liberto - Blanck presented illustrations of what the applicant is proposing on the project. Alternative A - This alternative would create three lots; two lots, parcels 1 and 2 consisting of 6,000 net square feet each, and parcel 3 consisting of 9,000 net square feet. A portion of Crown Terrace /May Street would need to be abandoned. The applicant proposes a 30 foot right -of -way, 24 feet of paving and a 6 foot public utilities easement. The Public Works Department has requested an additional 8 feet which would then have to be taken off of parcel 3. Because of the deep slope in back of parcel 3 it is questionable whether a house or building could be placed there. A condition was placed on this project that it must be illustrated that a house can be developed with the appropriate setbacks. The Staff Advisory Committee recommends approval of this alternative, and Planning staff recommends a negative declaration. Alternative B - This would provide a one - way road that would go through the project. Three lots and only one -way traffic from Crown Terrace to May Street. A 20 foot wide right -of --way, 12 foot wide one--way road, and a 6 foot sidewalk. Staff Advisory Committee (SAC) feels that there is a safety problem associated with this, and therefore, recommended denial of this alternative. Additionally, because of the safety problem staff could not recommend a negative declaration. No conditions of approval or findings of fact were made on this Alternative by SAC. Alternative C - On this alternative there would be no linkage between May and Crown Terrace; it would remain as it is now. The Staff Advisory Committee (SAC) recommends denial-of this alternative because of potential health and safety issues in providing a substandard road. Due to the potential health and safety issues, it would be difficult for staff to recommend a negative declaration. No conditions of approval or findings of fact were made on this Alternative by SAC. ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION, 12/06/88 Page 2 Mrs. Liberto - Blanck advised that John Keisler, Parks and Recreation Director, discovered today that an oak tree is on the site that could be significant. He requested that staff include an additional condition, which states that the owner should preserve oak trees and take measures to protect them. Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Clerk that Parcel Map Case No. 88 -468, had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Soto declared the hearing open. Jim McGillis, Surveyor for San Luis Engineering, stated that Alternative C was actually the original proposed project. Major reason for the optional design standard is because the applicant does not want to put the road through. The lot sizes, width, slope meet the zoning ordinance standards. Mr. McGillis states that the applicant is not creating any substandard lots. Leonard Lenger, representing his client (Jeff Carrithers), who owns abandoned railroad right of way that is adjacent to May Street; Don and Dee Morse, 508 May Street; Brian Davidson, owner of lot 30 next to the Morse residence; Carol Fulmer, 437 Le Point; Heather Jensen, 569 May Street; Steve Holton, 520 May Street, and Jim Schomer, 525 May Street, all spoke in favor of Alternative "C ". The neighbors indicated that they did not want Crown Terrace to connect to May Street because of safety reasons. Chairman Soto closed the public hearing. After considerable discussion, Commission Gerrish made a motion that Staff Advisory Committee come back with findings of fact, conditions of approval and a negative declaration to support Alternative "C ". The item was recommended to be continued for one month. Motion seconded by Commissioner Scott with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Gerrish, Moore, Flores, Scott and Chairman Soto NOES: Cohirnissioners Olsen and Boggess ABSENT: None CON'T'INUED PUBLIC HEARING - PARCEL MAP CASE NO. 88 -469, DIVISION CREATING THREE LOTS FROM TWO PARCELS 289 AND 297 TALLY 110 ROAD (TIM AND MARLENE SCHLOTMAN) Long Range Planner Bierdzinski reviewed the staff report using the overhead projector showing the existing parcel lines. The parcels are approximately 39,000 square feet and 38,500 square feet. The three new parcels to be created range in size from about 23,500 to 24,900. The proposal is consistent with the City General Plan and it meets the zoning standards. Also it is consistent with flag lots that have been created in the area. Staff is recommending the adoption of a negative declaration and the Staff Advisory Committee is recommending that you adopt the attached resolution approving the proposed subdivision with the finding and subject to the listed conditions. Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Clerk that public hearing for Parcel Map Case No. 88 -469, had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Soto declared the hearing open. Leonard Lenger, representative for the applicants, stated they do not have any problems with the staff report and that the applicants supported the findings. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Soto declared the hearing closed. After a brief discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 88 -1215 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING PARCEL MAP CASE NO. 88 -469, 289 AND 297 'PALLY HO ROAD (TIM & MARLENE SCHLOTMAN/BRUCE & MARGARET HENSLEY) On a motion by Commissioner Scott, seconded by Commissioner Boggess, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Gerrish, Olsen, Moore, Boggess, Flores, Scott and Chairman Soto NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 6th clay of December 1988. 499 500 ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION, 12/06/88 Page 3 PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 88 -447 PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM, UNOCAL CORP, 525 TRAFFIC WAY Long Range Planner Bierdzinski advised that the applicant is applying for a Planned Sign Program and feels that it falls under Section 9- 4.2407 of the Zoning Ordinance. This section of the Zoning Ordinance allows a planned sign program in order "to provide a means of flexible application of the sign regulations so as to encourage maximum incentive and latitude in the design and display of signs in order to achieve, not circumvent, the intent of the ordinance ". There are currently several signs on the property; several of them are illegal nonconforming signs. The attachment in the staff report outlines those signs. They include one _double-faced 12' x 12' pole sign (60 feet high), two banners attached to the pole sign, two wall signs attached to the building, three two - sided A- frame signs, two 3' x 4'8" price signs which are attached to light poles, and one Unocal banner that is attached to a flagpole. The applicant is proposing to eliminate most of the signs on the property, however, keep the existing pole sign and one of the wall signs (the one facing Traffic Way). They propose also to add two new 3' 10" x 5' illuminated price signs. State law requires that a gas station post gas prices so they are visible from the roadway. The applicant realizes that there are several signs on the property, especially the existing pole sign that is nonconforming. By strictly enforcing the sign ordinance, the applicant would have to reduce the height of the pole sign to 15 feet. The applicant also is in nonconformance with the Sign Ordinance in regards to square footage that is allowed. According to the Sign Ordinance the maximum sign area would be 89 square feet and the applicant is proposing 350 square feet. The Planning Commission is faced with the determination of deciding whether that section of the Sign Ordinance which discusses Planned Sign Program allows the flexibility to allow nonconforming signs to remain. If it does contain that flexibility, is the 60 foot high pole sign acceptable. The Planning Commission also needs to make a determination if the Sign Ordinance allows the flexibility to waive the maximum sign area requirement under the Planned Sign Program. The applicant has indicated that he will remove all of signs that would not be approved by the Planning Commission in order to clean up the appearance of the property. The applicant is offering that as a trade off for being allowed to keep the pole sign. The proposed sign program is exempt from the requirement of CEQA. Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Clerk that the public hearing for Conditional Use Permit Case No. 88 -447 had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Soto declared the hearing open. Since neither the applicant, his representative nor the station owner were preent, the public hearing was closed and comments were limited to the Commissioners. Commissioner Gerrish felt that the sign ordinance was being circumvented. Chairman Soto stated he was hoping that someone would be representing Unocal so ho could ask them about the existing signs at the station but not shown on the map. After more discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 88 -1216 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 88 -447, FOR A PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM APPLIED FOR BY UNOCAL CORP., 525 TRAFFIC WAY ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION, 12/06/88 Page 4 On motion by Commissioner Gerrish, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Gerrish, Olsen, Moore, Boggess, Flores, Scott and Chairman Soto NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 6th day of December 1988. INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE - R -3 ZONE AND MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREAS OF THE GENERAL PLAN Planning Director Liberto - Blanck advised that at the last Planning Commission meeting the Commission discussed a rezoning from R -3 to PD. At that time, the Planning Commission felt that they could not approve the change in the R -3 zone. Staff has received a number of telephone calls and have had people coming in with questions about the R -3 zoning, wanting to develop in the R -3 zone. At the last meeting the Commission discussed the possibility of not approving projects, in the R -3 zone and Medium -High general plan designation until the general plan and zoning ordinance were updated. The general plan and zoning ordinance proceed by looking at the R -3 zones and Medium -High general plan designation in the City and determine whether they were in appropriate locations. It is unfair for an applicant to spend the time and money not knowing what can be proposed and considered favorable in these areas. From the City's standpoint we need to be in a position to inform people what they can do with their property within areas and feel comfortable with that, and make sure the neighbors feel comfortable with it. Because of that, staff sat down with the City Attorney and prepared an urgency ordinance, per Government Code Section 65858, that allows cities to adopt an urgency measure, which would prohibit any uses which may conflict with a contemplated general plan or zoning proposal. An interim urgency ordinance remains effective for 45 days from the time it becomes adopted by the City Council. After public notice and public hearing, the Council may extend it for 10 months and 15 days, and after that, another year. Ms. Liberto - Blanck pointed out that ideally, every parcel zoned R -3 should have a general plan designation of Medium -High density. However, there are several locations where there are discrepancies. The discrepancies include parcels along Brisco Road zoned R -2 but with a general plan designation of medium -high density; a parcel adjacent to Allen Street is zoned C -3 and has a general plan designation of medium -high density; and parcels between Le Point Street and Crown Hill I.a.ve zoning of R -1 with a general plan designation of medium -high density. The ordinance that has been prepared covers the inconsistency, and would prohibit building permits, architectural review, conditional use permits, land divisions, zone changes and other discretionary actions. This would be a recommendation to the City Council After considerable discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 88 -1217 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAI' TUE CI'T'Y COUNCIL IMPOSE A MORATORIUM ON CER'T'AIN LAND DIVISIONS, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW, ZONE CHANGES, BUILDING PERMITS, OPTIONAL DESIGN STANDARD AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS WITHIN AREAS DESIGNATED ON THE GENERAL PLAN FOR MEDIUM -HIGH RESIDENTIAL (14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) AND AREAS ZONED FOR R -3 PURSUANT TO SECTION 65858 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE. On motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Olsen, Moore, Boggess and Chairman Soto. NOES: Commissioners Gerrish, Flores and Scott. ABSENT: None the foregoing resolution was adopted this 6th day of December, 1988. 5 a Z ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION, 12/06/88 Page 5 PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT /DISCUSSION Planning Director Liberto - Blanck presented the General Plan Update Newsletter, that will be sent out to all the community groups, Chamber of Commerce and interested parties. It describes the general plan process. Staff has indicated that we would be more than willing to go out and make a presentation, before groups regarding this update The Planning Commission discussed at length the General Plan Update. Ms. Liberto - Blanck referred to a letter included in the Planning Commission packets regarding the Gaskill- Sankoff item involving an addition to a residence on Cerro Vista Circle. The City Attorney has sat down and discussed the matter with Mr. and Mrs. Gaskill and it was determined not to do anything and that the addition was in conformance with the ordinance. Ms. Liberto - Blanck advised that the Robert Newdoll project is going to the City Council next'Tuesday, and Jeff Carrithers has appealed his project application on the second unit permit at James Way and Tally Ho Road, and it will go to the Council also. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by the Chairman at 9:20 P.M.