Loading...
PC Minutes 1988-04-05422 Arroyo Grande April 5, 1988 Ccandssion The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman Carr presiding. Present are Carmissioners Olsen, Flores, Moore, Boggess and Soto. Carmissioner Gerrish is absent. Current Planner Lanning is also in attendance. : - MINUTE APPROVAL Upon hearing no additions or corrections, the minutes of the regular meeting of March 3, 1988 were approved on motion by Commissioner Olsen, seconded by Chairman Carr, and unanimously carried. PUBLIC HEARING (CONTINUED) - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 88-435/ REVIEW CASE NO. 87-395, OAK PARK BOULEVARD AND JAMIE WAY, "OAK PARK HEALTH PLAZA." (THE WARING GROUP, REPRESENTING KEVIN KENNEDY/RUSSELL SHFPPEL). Current Planner Lanning reviewed that this it was originally brought before the Planning Carmisslon at their meeting of March 1, 1988 and, at that time, the Planning Commission directed the applicants prepare a focused EIR on the potential traffic impacts from the proposed project on the Oak Park Boulevard and Highway 101 interchange. The appliccutts appealed this decision to the City Council. The Council determined that a focused EIR .would not provide any new Information regarding the situation at the intersection, and that the conmercial property in Oak Park Acres had been examined by previous studies and they did not feel that the proposed arse would have a significant impact on traffic. The Council suggested conditioning the project so that canpletion of the project was somehow tied into a signed agreement existing between all the cities regarding the Oak Park/Highway 101 interchange. He stated that the Council also expressed concerns regarding paring and access issues. Mr. Lanning advised that the applicants' request remains the same as when this item was first presented to the Planning Commission, commenting that the Planning Commission needs to review the proposed project for Architectural Review and the Conditional Use Permit for exceeding the 30 -foot height limit. He stated that the Staff Advisory Cc ranittee felt that this development provided for reasonable development of the property and provided a canprehensive development scheme for this cormmercial area. Mr. Lanning stated that in addition to the conditions of approval. previously included in the resolution of • approval, the Planning Commission may wish to consider a condition regarding the relationship of the project to the Oak Park Boulevard/Highway 101 interchange, as follows: No building permit shall be issued for this project until a signed agreement or other similar document, as determined by the Public Works Director and the Planning and Building Director, exists regarding improvements to the Oak Park Boulevard/Highway 101, Interchange." • Chaim.an Carr continued the public hearing, suggesting that since this project has already undergone considerable review, the Carrnission consider the use permit and architectural review simultaneously. Mr. John Eklund, Project Engineer with the Waring Group representing the applicants, referred to .his letter responding to the staff report. He addressed the matter • of building height, stating that the actual peak of the roof exceeds the height limit, and was designed as an architectural feature which takes advantage of what is already established in the neighborhood. Mr. Eklund pointed out that the site is considerably below Oak Park Boulevard; the finished floor. elevation of the Nautilus building is actually 14 feet below the grade, so the actual visual impact will not be noticed that much. With regard to the parking, Mr. Eklund referred to the Zoning. Ordinance which gives the Planning Commission the latitude to grant shared parking allowances up to 30 %. He referred to a traffic analysis they prepared which was a statistical analysis of the existing Kennedy - Nautilus facility in Atascadero which utilizes the shared parking ratio. He camiented that the shared parking at this facility works out quite well. He pointed out on the site plan the location where some of the parking was going to be provided, noting that by grading and paving the area, they were able to provide ten additional paricing spaces to the original design, which would cut down the required parking adjustment to approximately 1 %. With further reference to the conditions of the staff report, Mr. Eklund referred to the requirement for 24" box trees, stating that box trees do not establish well, and they would like to plant mature trees. He stated they would like to work this requirement out at the staff level. He also referred to the condition of restricting Issuance of a building. permit tied to three cities and Columns reaching an agreement on the interchange. He stated if this particular project is conditioned on this basis, then probably all of the houses that are being built around there should also be conditioned exactly the same way. Arroyo Ari1 5, 1 9r 88 a Plarwgg won Greg Ravatt, Designer with the Waring.Group, reviewed the building elevations, commenting the design is spanish theme, using plaster, tile roofarid wood accents : He noted that the public access is off of James Way between two buildings. Kevin Kennedy, one of applicants, spoke in favor of the proposed project. He briefly explained the reasons they chose this particular site for their project. He also reviewed the proposed phasing of the project, stating they have been working on this facility since last July and it is their feeling they will have a very nice facility on a prime comer in Arroyo Grande. Russell Sheppel, 121 W. Branch Street, one of the applicants, stated he has a practice now in Arroyo Grande and he would like to stay here; however, he is getting the impression that the City of Piano Beach is dictating what Arroyo Grande is doing, rather than Arroyo Grande determining what is going to go in and what kind of businesses are going to go in and what those businesses have to do. He further stated that when the City Council reviewed the requirement for an EIR, they declined that as being an unnecessary thing, as they determined that there would be no significant effect on the overpass. After considerable review and discussion of the proposed project, Chairman Carr declared the hearing closed. Commissioner Soto stated he likes the proposal and, in his opinion, it is going to be a good project. He further stated he agrees with Mr. Kennedy in that projects within the City of Arroyo Grande cannot be conditioned based on the problems of Oak Park Boulevard. He also stated that he agrees with their parking plan. Comndssioner Flores stated he agrees with Can:is:ioner Soto, and he feels this is a real quality project. Commissioner Boggess stated he likes the project and he doesn't have a problem with the height of the building. His problem is with Oak Park and 101; however, he doesn't feel the applicants should be penalized for what Pismo Beach is doing and, in his opinion, this is not the type of project that is going to generate a lot of traffic. Cam» ssioner Soto noted that this parcel has been approved for sane type of development, and by approving this project and the church on the other comer, it is his opinion that the traffic is . already being reduced. Chairman Carr stated that at some Point in time consideration has to be given not only to what is being done for people who would go to the medical center or health center, but also everybody else using Oak Park Boulevard, and it is his feeling that we can't keep saying we are going to allow development to take place, even if it is approved in Ordinance 140 C.S. He stated maybe the Carmission should consider asking the staff to review what action the Carmission could take or could reearmend to the Council to assure that the Oak Park Boulevard/Highway 101 interchange is being corrected before we continue with any further development in that area. Commissioner Olsen stated that approving one development after another in that area is just canpounding the problem and, even though she has nothing against the project, she cannot vote for it because of the traffic problem. After further discussion the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 88 -1161 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF USE PERMIT CASE NO. 88 -435, APPLIED FOR BY KEVIN KENNEDY AND RURRELL SHEPPEL, AT JAMES WAY AND OAK PARK BOULEVARD. On motion by Canmissioner Soto, seconded by Commissioner Flores, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Flores, Boggess, Soto and Chairman Carr NOES: Camdssioners Olsen and Moore ABSENT: Canrrissioner Gerrish the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 5th day of April 1988. In Commissioner Soto's motion to approve the Use Permit, he referred to the draft resolution included with the staff report and eliminated the last sentence in Condition #7, which required that "Thirty percent (30 %) of the trees shown on the landscape plans shall be 24 -inch box minimum," with the understanding that this item be resolved between the applicants and the staff. Also, he excluded the suggested added condition rec armended in the staff report regarding the signed agreement relative to improvements to the Oak Park Boulevard/Highway 101 interchange. C Soto also suggested the Commission request guidance fran the City Council as to what developmental plans should be considered in the Oak Park Interchange area. 423 424 Arroyo Grande Planning won April 5, 1988 Page 3 Ard dteet ral Review Case No. 87-395. On motion by Commissioner Flores, seconded by Commissioner Soto, and carried with one "no" vote, Architectural Review Case No. 87 -395 was recommended to the City Council for approval PUBLIC HEARING - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 88-453, 704 BRANCH MILL ROAD. (MILTON AND MARY HAYES). Current Planner Lanning briefly reviewed that the applicants previously requested a subdivision of the subject property into 2 lots, which was heard, by the Planning Con mission in February, 1986. He stated that the Planning Carrnission denied the lot split due to concerns regarding the terrain and potential drainage problems. At that time, the applicants appealed the Planning Cam fission decision to the City Council, and the Council upheld the denial, citing various "environmental" concerns and the need for further studies in this area. Mr. Lansing advised that the applicants are now requesting a subdivision of the existing 4.24 acre parcel into 2 parcels of 2.7 and 1.5 acres, respectively. 'The property is designated Agriculture (1.5 acre minimun) on the General Plan, and is zoned "A" Agriculture. The proposed subdivision meets or exceeds the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance regarding parcel size and lot width and depth for property in the Agriculture zone. He stated that the Staff Advisory Committee has reviewed the proposed lot split and is recommending the conditions listed, in the staff report, should the Planning C annission agree to improve the requested property division. Upon being assured by the Planning Camdssion Clerk that public hearing for Lot Split Case No. 88 -453 had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Carr declared the hearing open. Jim McGillis, Surveyor with San Luis Engineering, representing the applicants, noted that at the time this matter was before the Planning Canmission about three years ago, there was sane concerns expressed about the drainage, a question about whether there had been illegal garding, and there was a power pole that was leaning and causing sane concerns. Since that time, the property has gone through three solid winters of rain and the hillside hasn't slid down; the driveway that was graded in is still there, and there has been a retaining wall put up between this property and the adjacent R -1 property. He stated that the other concerns have been addressed in the conditions of approval, which the applicants have agreed to. He stated that the proposal does meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and is consistent with the General Plan. Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed lot split, Chairman Carr declared the hearing closed. Mr. Lansing referred to the staff report dated April 5,1988, listing the required findings for granting the lot split. After further disctssion, a motion was made by Carmissioner Flores and seconded by Chairman Carr to approve Lot Split Case No. 88 -453 with the findings and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated April 5,.1988. Upon a roll call vote, no action was taken due to a split vote. Current Planner Lansing noted that the matter would automatically go to the City Council. PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE CASE NO. 88 -117, 1496 SIERRA DRIVE, VARIANCE FROM EMERGENCY HEIGHT RESTRICTION ,ORDINANCE. (BILL REINHART) Current Planner Lansing reviewed the staff report, commenting that the applicant is proposing to develop the subject property with a single- family residence with an average height of 23 - 1/2', as . measured by the zoning ordinance. The bane is approximately 27' high at its single highest point, as measured from the natural grade. The proposed hone is 2,052 square feet in size. The front yard setback is 20', which meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance. The side yard setbacks range from 20' to 33', which exceed the required 5 -foot setbacks. ; The rear yard setbacks range fran 15' to 95', which well exceed the 10 -foot setbacks required by the zoning ordinance. Mr. Lansing stated that the proposed residence is located in an area which is currently developed with existing single - family residences. The homes to the south and east are at a significantly higher elevation than the subject property. Due to the steep slope of the property in this area, these hares enjoy views which are well above the height of the proposed hare. A row of large pine trees along the southern boundary of the property will also shield most of the proposed development fran the hares to the south and east. The hares to the north of the subject property are approximately 10' below the proposed building site. He pointed out that, because of this difference in elevation, it does not appear that these banes' views will be impacted by the proposed residence. In addition, the views of homes to the north are generally not oriented in this direction. A single - family residence lies to the west of the proposed site and is separated by three large pine trees.' These trees and the slope of the hill to the east effectively block any view this have has. It does not appear that the proposed project, nestled next to trees which lie to the south and above hones to the north, will present any signficant barriers to neighboring views. Arroyo Apnl 5,1 Mr. Lanning noted that, given the fact that the applicant has, demonstrated a sensitivity to the preservation of views on the adjacent parcels, that the proposed structure has been designed as much as possible to keep within the intent of the ordinance while maintaining continuity and character with the surrounding banes, that the applicants have demonstrated alternatives are not as viable as the proposed development, and that the intent of the ordinance to preserve existing viewsheds has been addressed through the design of the proposed residence, staff believes the applicant's request represents a reasonable development of the property. Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Clerk that public hearing for Variance Case No. 88 -117 had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Carr declared the hearing open. Carmissioner Boggess stated he lives adjacent to the subject property and could not vote on the matter. Bill Tappan, 1525 Chilton, stated his home is located in front and on the north side of the proposed horn, and he is in favor of the project. Hearing no further canments for or against the proposed Variance, Chairman Carr declared the hearing closed. Camiissioner Boggess stated he has the hone to the left of Mr. Reinhart's and he has no objection to this project and, in his opinion, Mr. Reinhart shows great concern about the area, trees, etc. After further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 88- (1 1 Z A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A VARIANCE, CASE NO. 88 -117, APPLIED FOR BY BILL :REINHART AT 1496 SIERRA DRIVE. On motion by Canmissioner Soto, seconded by Canmissioner Olsen, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Olsen, Flores, Moore, Soto and Chairman Carr NOES: None ABSTAIN: Commissioner Boggess ABSENT: Cannissioner Gerrish the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 5th day of April 1988. Chairman Carr advised that the matter would automatically go to the City Council for their consideration. PUBLIC HEARING - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 88-456 (LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT), 1041 HUASNA ROAD. (DOROTHY BABCOCK). (current Planner Lanning advised that the applicant is proposing to adjust the line between Parcels 2 and 3 of Parcel Map AG 78 -113 (previous parcel map) by approximately 15 feet. This will increase the size of the lot adjacent to Fortuna Cotmrt (Parcel 1) by approximately 2,241 sq. ft., to 12,350 square feet. Parcel 2 will be reduced from approximately 80,564 square feet to 78,322 square feet. He pointed out that both of the reconfigured parcels will meet or exceed the minimun lot width, depth and area requirenents of the RA -B1 zone. Mr. Lanning noted that the proposed lot lie adjustment is categorically exempt from the requirenents of the California Environmental Quality , and that the Staff Advisory Committee has reviewed the proposal and recamiends that the Planning Carmission approve the proposed lot line adjustment by minute motion. Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Clerk that public hearing for Lot Split Case No. 88 -456 had been duly published and property owners notified, Chaimtian Carr declared the hearing open. Leonard Lenger, representing the applicants, stated he was present to answer any questions the Commission may have. Mr. Lenger explained the reason for the proposed lot line adjustment. There being no further comments from the audience regarding the request, Chairman Carr declared the hearing closed. After a brief discussion Lot Split Case No. 88 -456 was approved on motion by Camiissioner Olsen, seconded by Commissioner Soto, and unanimously carried. 425 426 Arroyo April 5, Grande 988 �ssian PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE, ARTICLE 26, "OFF - STREET • PARKING REQUIREM p a, (CI'T'Y OF 'ARROYO GRANDE) Current Planner Lanning reviewed that on March 15, 1988, the Planning Camrrdssion was presented.with information showing how other cities around, the State were adopting reduced parking stall sees in response to increasing use of smaller cart.: 'After of the information, the Commission directed the Planning staff to implement new standards which utilize , reduced parking stall sizes. Mr. Lanning noted that staff's initial request was.. to reduce standard parking stall sizes from 10' by 20' to 9' by 18', and canpact parting stall sizes frai 9' by 18 to 8' by a16'. He stated these standards would also incorporate the "Optional Parking Stall Design " ,which allows two. feet of the length of these. parking stalls to be in landscaping. The two f of landscaping allows cars to overhang into this area and increases the amount of landscaping In the parking lots. Mr. Lanning further stated the Carmission expressed an interest, in more information regarding a mixture of parking stall sizes. Based on staff's research and discussions with other jurisdicrticns,.staff few this type of mixture; would add . confusion to the implementation of the off - street parldng .requirements. The Commission can still utilize this option on a case by case basis, if neces ry. Mr. Lanning stated that, upon further review of the off - street parking requitanents, staff found it necessary to make sane additional revisions which will bring the ordinance up- toadate, easier to implement, and eliminate sane ambiguities; He .suunmarized the proposed changes listed in the staff report dated April 5, 1988. He stated staff r that the Planning Ca rnission adopt the attached resolution recarmendLig to the City Councilapproval of the amendment revising the parking ordinance. Upon being assured by the Planning Commission Clerk that public hearing for the proposed parking ordinance amendment was duly published and posted, Chairman Carr declared the hearing open. Upon hearing no coam:ents from the audience, (Iairrnan Carr declared the hearing closed. After considerable disctssion regarding concerns expressed by the Cannission relative to elderly housing parking requirements, the larger width at 10'. instead of '9', smaller width for compact stalls, hairpin striping, shared parking maximum, trees, : "gross floor area" vs. other tens, and the possibility of increasing the maximum for compact cars up to 50%, staff. was requested to incorporate the Ccmnission's concerns and work than into, a revision to the proposed ordinance and bring the matter back to the Commission, PUBLIC HEARING - CDNDITIONAI. USE PIMMIT 88- 434/TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 1577, BROOKSIDE MARKEIPLACE, N. MASON AND EAST BRANCH STREETS. (J. �LAItT/D. LOOMIS) . Chairman Carr announced that because of tonight's long agenda, the applicants for the Brook ide Marketplace have indicated they would like to have their item heard at a special meeting, and it has been suggested that the meeting be held on the :7thi or the 14th of this month. CAarmissioner Flores stated he could not attend any Thursday meetings. After a brief discrssicn, the Commission agreed that Wednesday, April 13th would be a better time to hold the special meeting when more Carmussioners could attend. On motion by C.armissioner Boggers, seconded by Caimis loner Flores, and carried, with Carnnissioner Soto abstaining, a medal meeting to consider the Brookside Marketplace was scheduled for Wednesday, April 13, 1988a at 7:00 P.M. ARCHPrECrURAL REVIEW CAM NO. 87-401, CONS'TRI /C TION OF A MEDICAL OFFICE, 124 S. HALCYON ROAD. (GREGORY SOTi3 I EPRFSEN TLNG CaPI RAL COAST RESPIRATORY) Current Planner Lanning advised that the applicants are proposing to develop the property with a 3,817 sq. ft. medical office building with a showroan, and a significant amount (more than 50 %) devoted to storage space. There are a number of unresolved issues related to this project. However, the applicant requested that the item be brought before the Planning Camrission at this time. Mr. Lanning stated that the proposed project features the main building constructed on the north property line, utilizing a zero lot line concept. Access to the property is off Halcyon Road and utilizes a portion of the adjacent property to achieve the amount of access required by code. Access to the parking stalls is also from the adjacent property. The applicants have provided eight (8) parking spaces to serve the 3,800 sq. ft. building. The applicants calculated the amount of required parking by eliminating all storage areas, hallways, and restroarns fran the square footage of the building. Staff is of the opinion that parking should be calculated on gross floor area. - ;The zoning ordinance is also set up for this type of calculation, and Clty Council recently set a policy directive on.ealculatirg parking by gross floor area. At a minimum, the amount of parking far . this project should be based on utilizing the office parking ratio of one (1.) space for every 200 sq, ft. of gross floor circa for the office portion of the building, and the storage /warehouse ratio of one (1) space for every 800 sq. ft. of area devoted to storage. By this method, a minimum of eleven (11) . spaces would be required. If the entire building was parked at the office ratio, nineteen (19) spaces would be required. Future tenants may wish to utilize access currently designated as storage for office space. It should also be noted that the proposed design utilizes two (2) canpact spaces, and the zoning code does not allow for canpact spaces when there are less than ten (10) stalls. Arroyo Grande Planning April 5, 1988 Mr. Lamming further stated that staff also has concerns_regarding the issue of future access to the landlocked parcel located to the west of the proposed project,' Vehicles utilizing the parking for the existing building on Halcyon and for the proposed building would be backing into the main access route to the parcel to the west. Staff has strong concerns regarding the potential for traffic conflicts between vehicles accessing the future project to the rear and vehicles entering and exiting the parking for the proposed project. Mr. Lamming described the proposed architecture for the building, consisting of stucco walls, vinyl bond siding, and metal roll-up doors. Colors will consist of a variety of blue -grey and greys. He noted that staff has sane concerns regarding the large blank wall space along the north side elevation of the building, and believes that additional architectural treatment should be added, such as additional reveals, screeds, pilasters or other treatments, which will provide some variation in wall plane, shadow lines and other forms of visual interest. Another concern expressed by staff was the proposed liquid oxygen tank located at the rear of the ply. The applicants have resolved the concerns of the Fire Chief; however, eight (8) to ten (10) feet of the tank will not be screened by the current proposal. Mr. Lanning coirmented it was staff's feeling that sane form of screening would be desirable. In surrrnary, Mr. Lanning stated that due to the number of outstanding concerns related to the project, the Staff Advisory Committee recommends that the Planning Commission deny the proposed request by minute motion. As a matter of information, Mr. Lanning pointed out that the Staff Advisory Committee consists of representatives Pram the Public Works, Planning and Building, Parks and Recreation, Fire and Police Departments. Gregory Soto, Architect on the project, referred to the staff report and discussed the parking requirements, access off of Halcyon Road and proposed easements. He stated he has no problem with the comments in the staff report regarding the necessity for additional architectural treatment. Jim Hoxter, one of the applicants for the project, pointed out that his company is a medical supply business, and would have a low impact on traffic because most the patients are seen in the home. He noted that the actual office space is only 1,406 square feet, but the storage of the medical equipment required a storage area of over 2,000 sq. ft, and, since there were no facilities available, the applicants are being forced to build . their own storage . facility. Commissioner Soto stated that his concerns included what happens to the building and parking issues when the business leaves and another moves into that building; the vacant lot behind the proposed project would be land - locked; and there would be a massive building on the minimum sized lot. He wanted to see more information presented on vehicular approach and cross - easements. Carmissioner Boggess did not like the building's design. CYnmissioner Flores stated that he felt the item had been poorly presented, and perhaps: a different rendering might make a better presentation, including scale drawings with cars and pedestrians represented. He was also concerned with the lack of detail on the building. Chairman Carr stated that either new renderings or a revised design might be more agreeable with the Ca mission. Cammissioner Soto pointed out that Halcyon Road is not designated for "C-2" warehousing/cmmercial uses. On motion by Commissioner Boggess, seconded by Qmnlssioner Soto and unanimously carried, Architectural Review Case No. 87 -401 was denied without prejudice. The Cormrission advised the applicants that it would accept a resul m ittal with a waiver of fees. PLANNING DIRRECTORS REPORT/DISCUSSION Planning Director Liberto-Blanck stated that staff recently received the attached letter regarding the Loomis property adjacent to Arryo Grande Creek. The Loanix Corporation is ro for storage. Zoning P pogng to fence in a portion of the Party orage. The Zonin Ordinance does not specifically permit storage as a permitted use; however, it does allow a nunber of more intensive uses by right. Additionally, the Loanix Corporation has been using the property for a number of years for different activities, and the proposed fence would most likely improve the aesthetics of the site. Additional landscape could also serve to screen the property and improve its appearance. Planning Director Liberto- Blanck stated that staff's intention is to allow the Loanix Corporation to install the fence after the request has been reviewed by the Commission. After a brief discussion among the Commission Members and David Loads, representative of the Loanix Corporation, regarding the particular types of equipment to be stored behind the fence and the fact that no contaminants would be stored on -site, it was the general eoncensus of the Cannission that the proposed fencing could be installed on the Loomis property. Planning Director Liberto-Blanck was questioned as to the legality of the sign posted on the roof of Curiosity Corner on W. Branch St. She stated that it appeared to be a non - conforming use,' but that t3taff would be investigating this item and taking appropriate action. Page 6 427 428 Arroyo Grande Omission April 5, 1988 ADJOURNMENT There being no further disctssion before the Com dssbon, the meeting was adjourned by the Chairman at 10:20 P.M. Chairman