Loading...
PC Minutes 1986-12-16ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION December 16, 1986 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman Carr presiding. Present are Commissioners Moore, Soto, Olsen, Flores and Boggess. Commissioner Gerrish is absent. Planning Director Eisner is also in attendance. MINUTE APPROVAL Planning Director Eisner stated there is a correction to the minutes of the Commission meeting of December 2, 1986 regarding approval of Lot Split Case No. 86 -439. He commented that the language on Page 2, 7th paragraph, should be amended to approve the lot split subject ° 16/8 7 to the 7 conditions listed in the staff report, as modified (deleting the worms "to be completed prior to recordation"). Chairman Carr stated he has reviewed the staff report and agrees with ,x the recommendation. On motion by Commissioner Soto, seconded by Commssioner Olsen, and unanimously carried, the minutes of the regular meeting of December 2, 1986 were approved as corrected. COMMUNICATIONS Planning Director Eisner referred to Architectural Review Case No. 85 -347, approved for an office condominium at 717 Grand Avenue. He advised that as a part of the architectural approval the specification submitted called for brick on the facade of the building. In the course of construction, rather than using brick, a method to produce a brick appearance was used without it actually being brick. He asked that a minute motion be made to accept the alternate technique in lieu of the brick face that was approved as a part of the architectural review. After a brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Soto, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and unanimously carried, the technique used was approved as a visually acceptable substitute for what was originally proposed. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 86 -379, IMPROVEMENT TO A LEGAL NON - CONFORMING USE, 211 AND 211 -1/2 SO. HALCYON ROAD IN THE "P-C" PROFESSIONAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. (DAVID AND DIANE BOLDUAN). Planning Director Eisner advised the request is for architectural and site plan approval for a presently non - conforming two -home development at 211 and 211 -1/2 So. Halcyon Road. The purpose of the request is to carry out structural improvements to bring the structures and site plan into conformance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. He pointed out that the site contains two dwelling units. The second unit, containing 562 sq. ft., was illegally converted to a dwelling unit sometime ago. The second unit is within 3 ft. of the property line and has no off - street parking. The applicant proposes to provide a new two car garage and two parking spaces. They also propose to construct a one hour fire wall ° along the north side of the second dwelling for the purpose of compensating for the substandard side yard setback. Mr. Eisner reviewed that this is considered a legal non - conformity but one that can be mitigated with the one hour fire wall. He stated that the proposal has been reviewed by the Staff Advisory Committee and is submitted with a recommendation for approval with the condition listed in the staff report dated December 16, 1986. After discussion, Architectural Review Case No. 86 -379 was approved subject to the condition in the staff report, on motion by Commissioner Soto, seconded by Commissioner Boggess, and carried with one "no" vote. PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 86 -416, REQUEST FOR SECOND RESIDENTIAL UNIT, 160 SPRUCE STREET IN THE "R -1" SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. (MYRNA DUNHAM). Planning Director Eisner advised he had met with the applicants and reviewed the items that the Staff Advisory Con nittee found to be inadequate. The applicants agreed to redesign the project. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - ROYAL OAKS ESTATES (FORMERLY OAK KNOLLS). PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 221 C. S AND 317 C. S., AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 1390. (ROYAL OAKS ASSOCIATES). Chairman Carr advised that the Commission has completed one of the 'three actions necessary on this application; the EIR and addendum were certified at the last regular Commission meeting. He noted that a field trip of this property was conducted on December 12th and specific areas of concern were identified. He stated that the other items now before the Commission is the proposed amendment to Ordinances 221 C.S. and 317 C.S., and action on the tentative tract map. He commented that he had listed several items that, in his opinion, the Commission needs to give sane consideration to before forwarding the matter on to the City Council. With regard to the density of the project, he stated the density is greatly reduced as compared to some of the other projects proposed for this property. Regarding interfacing with the surrounding properties, he questioned if the tract is designed to 313 314 Arroyo Grande Planning Com is lion, 12 -16 -86 Page 2 have little or no impact on the adjoining properties. He also noted there is a concern about the method of tree protection; either private or City protection. He stated that grading and drainage is another issue. The school site, in his opinion, should be reviewed as to whether it is an adequate school site, and is the School District satisfied with it? Also,' he has the same kind of concerns with the YMCA site. There are questions as to what impact the project may have on adjacent properties relative to view shed; specific responsibilities for outside improvements; wildlife protection and the extension of Miller Way. - Mr. Rob Strong, acting as staff on the Royal Oaks project, reviewed the staff report, dated November 25th, which was previously distributed to the Commission. Mr. Strong noted that the staff report covers some of the zoning and subdivision considerations dealing with Planned Development. He stated that starting on Page 6 he has outlined the valuation of the P -D amendment, pointing out that a major concern that staff has is the magnitude and character of site grading. He stated that although the proposed development concentrates most of the lots on about half of the site, and avoids or minimizes grading on the remaining half, in staff's opinion, other alternatives should be considered. Mr. Strong stated that the other issues discussed in the staff report are essentially design issues. He referred to the various draft ordinances attached to the original staff report for the Planning Commission's consideration for amendment to the P -D ordinance, and pointed out that Exhibit D was primarily a list of recommended conditions for approval. Before the Commission this evening are replacements Exhibits B, C, D and E. Mr. Strong noted that Exhibit D, starting on Page 25, identifies specific items from the EIR addendum requiring address and then offers either a reference to a previous condition or reference to mitigate a previous concern. There was general discussion regarding drainage and grading alternatives. Chairman Carr reopened the public hearing. Dan Lloyd, Engineering Development Associates, engineers for the project, spoke_ regarding the northerly area of the project. He advised they reduced it from 11 to 10 lots, and .Provided a revised plan with a 3 to 1 slope. He pointed out that by providing the pads, there is less apparent massing of buildings, better drainage control, less slope and less erosion. He stated they are trying to provide a padded site for the average home builder. The slopes will be controlled during the grading operation to prevent erosion. Elizabeth Scott Graham, 312 Miller Way, stated she is concerned about the drainage and people draining off onto other properties. She further stated she is concerned about property owners doing individual landscaping and, in her opinion, as- much as possible should be done in native plants. She felt that landscaping of the slopes should be controlled by the City. Gary Harmon, Manager of the United Methodist Campgrounds, stated he had met with the developer and looked over the benching plans for that area. He stated, in his opinion, it will actually benefit them because it keeps the houses away from the property line. Kirsten Hinderschott, 333 Miller Way, stated she is concerned about the grading and the drainage, and unless the City takes real tight control, they are going to have all kinds of drainage problems. Jim Hinderschott, 333 Miller Way, _stated that the grading is entirely too excessive given the location and the type of soil involved. This type of soil is primarily clay base over shell, and you have a soil that tends to expand and contract. However, the biggest issue is once you have water on the top of the soil, you never get rid of it, and the soil is very erosion prone, and steeper grading is going to aggravate that. He commented that one of the big difficulties on this project has been drainage and grading, and one of the biggest problems is the density. Terry Boe, 234 Tally Ho Road, commented on the proposed greenbelt system referred to in the Open Space Element, and inquired as to how Rancho Grande and Royal Oaks will address this issue. Chairman Carr commented that there are areas in this development that are planned to be left in a natural state, but under private ownership. Wes Carlson, stated he is Rancho Grande's only resident at this time, and he is concerned about West Branch Street. He commented that the West Branch Street that is there now is two lanes with a turning lane in the center and, in his opinion, it is quite narrow. He pointed out that with the theaters, the library and the school in that area there is already a traffic problem, and with the development of this project, there will be a lot more traffic problems. Mr. Strong advised that widening of West Branch Street is identified in the EIR as an off -site concern. The segment of West Branch Street that we are dealing with between Oak Park and Grand Avenue or East Branch Street is designed to be 3 lanes, with the third lane being a turn lane for left turn movements. He commented that if the Commission believes that section is inadequate, then there should be some further traffic study. Dan Lloyd commented in answer to Mr. Hinderschott's concerns regarding the grading, stating there is a comprehensive plan for addressing the grading in this subdivision and, in his opinion, there has been an adequate and concentrated effort to control the drainage on this site. 1 Arroyo Grande Plating Cams ion, 12 -16 -86 Page 3 Commissioner Moore stated without mixed grading there are going to be some problems. He noted that there are 7 different kinds of soil on this particular site; when it gets wet it swells up and when it is dry it cracks. Chairman Carr commented that the.. grading will provide some mixing of the different soils. Commissioner Moore stated that if it is left as it currently exists, there would be a lot of problems. He referred to the March 1978 EIR stating there is a good summary of the soils included in the document. Chairman Carr inquired if there were any other general comments regarding grading. Hearing no further comments, Mr. Strong was asked to review the Conditions of Approval, Exhibit "D ". Mr. Strong reviewed Items 1 through 13, requesting comments from, the applicant and Conanission on each item. Due to the late hour, it was suggested that review of Exhibit ",D" be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of January 6, 1987. Mr. Strong stated he feels the Con nission could resolve Exhibit "D" at the next meeting. He pointed out that the Planned Development amendment is essentially a refinement of a previously approved P -D, and Exhibit "E" is a draft ordinance modifying Ordinances 221 CS and 317 C. S. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Coon, the meeting was adjourned by the Chairman at 11:15 P.M. ATTEST: Secretary /ftelv Chairman 315