Loading...
PC Minutes 1985-04-02170 ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION April 2, 1985 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Vice Chairran Carr presiding. Present are Commissioners Moore, Olsen and Boggess. Commissioners Fischer, Soto and Chairman Gerrish are absent. Planning Director Eisner is also in attendance. PUBLIC HEARING - REVIEW OF ORDINANCE 140 C.S. - DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH OAK PARK ACRES. Planning Director Eisner reviewed that the Planning Commission requested this item be set on the agenda for discussion relative to density provisions and a general review of the Ordinance. There was also a request for a resources update, however, the Public Works Director has been out due to illness and, therefore, staff was unable to obtain the information. Commissioner Olsen commented the Commission is interested in the water and sewer situation, and also traffic generation figures. Mr. Eisner advised he has requested the consultant who is working with the City on a couple of projects to submit some generation factors based on the ITE Standards. He noted that the residential factors have been submitted, however, staff is still waiting for the commercial factors. After a brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Boggess, and unanimously carried, the matter was continued to the next regular meeting of April 16, 1985. CONTINUATION- (PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED) - USh PERMIT CASE NO. 85 -387, ELDERLY PROJECT INCLUDING REST HOME, GROUP HOME, CONVALESCENT HOME AND MEDICAL OFFICES, LOT 3, PARCELS B, C AND D, OAK PARK ACRES, IN THE "P -D PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. (DR. AND MRS. FULBRIGHT). - Vice Chairman Carr pointed out that this matter was continued pending review of Ordinance 140 C.S. and, because of that continuation, Use Permit Case No. 85 -387 will also be continued to the meeting of April 16, 1985. PUBLIC HEARING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 1186, A SIX LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION DPI THE "R -1" SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, NORTHEAST CORNER OF WHITELEY AND NELSON STREETS. (GARING, TAYLOR & ASSOC., INC., AGENTS FOR MERILEE PECK). Planning Director Eisner advised that the property in question was acquired from the County by the City of Arroyo Grande, and has recently been sold. He pointed out that the property is located on the northeast corner of Whiteley and Nelson Streets, containing approximately 80,000 sq. ft. The request is to divide the property into six lots of approximately 6,000 sq. ft. each, with the exception of the corner lot which will be 7,000 sq. ft. as required by Ordinance. The proposed subdivision has been reviewed by the Subdivision Review Board and the Staff Advisory Committee, and is recoiunended for approval subject to the 9 conditions listed in the staff report dated April 2, 1985. Upon being assured by the Planning Secretary that public hearing for Tentative Tract No. 1186 had been duly published and property owners notified, Vice Chairman Carr declared the he aring open. Merilee Peck, applicant, advised that the escrow on the property is due to close tomorrow morning at 8:00 A.M. With regard to the historical stone wall located on the property, Ms. Peck advised that the wall is beautiful and she does not intend to take it down. Mr. Weaver stated he lives adjacent to the property and was concerned about the drainage. Planning Director Eisner advised that the drainage will be to the streets and then to the creek. Mr. Weaver commented that the way the roofs are situated, with a good rain, that water will ahnost go over the curb. Planning Director Eisner stated that a grading and drainage plan must be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval prior to issuance of a building or grading permit. Ms. Peck advised that a drainage plan is being prepared. Vice Chairman Carr stated that possibly some consideration could be given to draining some of the houses to the creek rather than to the street. Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed subdivision map, Vice Chairman Carr declared the hearing closed. Commissioner Boggess stated he doesn't see where drainage is going to be any problem at all with this development. Commissioner Moore stated, in his opinion, the drainage can be solved if it is taken care of from the beginning of the planning. Vice Chairman Carr suggested an additional condition be considered as follows: "That no additional pipes be placed across the creek." He also disputed the way flag lots are done and, in his opinion, it is not Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -2 -85 Page 2 appropriate to include the driveway into the net size of the lots because this results with actual buildable area of less than 6,000 sq. ft. Planning Director Eisner pointed out that both lots in question appear to be 6,000 sq. ft. in size exclusive of the flag. There being no further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 85 -1034 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 1186 SUBMITTED BY MERILEE PECK, AND REFERRAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR INFOR- MATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. On motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: 'Commissioners Boggess, Olsen, Moore and Vice. Chairman Carr NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Fischer, Soto and Chairman Gerrish the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 2nd day of April 1985. PUBLIC HEARING - COMMUNITY TREE ORDINANCE Planning Director Eisner advised that the proposed ordinance has been reviewed at the staff level and it appears to deal with some of the questions that were raised with the last draft ordinance reviewed by the Commission. Commissioner Boggess commented the proposed ordinance seems to be standardized with most city tree ordinances. He questioned Item (g) under "Street Trees" relative to maintenance and irrigation of street trees on undeveloped land, stating it seems like that would be putting a burden on the owner of vacant land if there is no water there. Vice Chairman Carr stated, in his opinion, there would be very few cases where street trees would be planted on undeveloped parcels. Planning Director Eisner pointed out that usually street trees are planted at the time of development. Upon being assured by the Planning Secretary that public hearing for the proposed Community Tree Ordinance had been duly published and posted, Vice Chairman Carr declared the hearing open. Elmer Kirk and F. J. Kirkpatrick, Printz Road, spoke regarding their concerns with wording and some of the definitions listed in the proposed ordinance. Marie Cattoir, 195 Orchid Lane, stated the re- evaluation of the tree ordinance came about because of citizens' complaints and because of the Planned Development enforcement not being made, such as in the Oak Park Acres development. She stated, in her opinion, the proposed ordinance is totally unnecessary because it is like "big brother" or government coming into your backyard. She further stated that one thing that really concerns her is that the world may close in around you but at least when you go home; your home is your castle and it is a person's discretion to do as they please within their property, and now with this proposed ordinance, the City is removing every last vestage of that right. She stated she is appauled that the City would go this far; and she feels this is an encroachment on everybody's right to pursue their veiw of the enviornment as they see it. She commented that most people are doing a good job in this town and have an incentive to make it beautiful and they want to retain some right of choice of their own. She pointed out that the problem that the ordinance was re- written to correct was not done; and that is placing enforcement on Planned Developments. Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed ordinance, Vice Chairman Carr declared the hearing closed. Commissioner Moore stated what we need is a good information and education program. With regard to "Penalties" on Page 4, Commissioner Moore stated he doubts if the Parks and Recreation Director is going to be a judge and determine what the penalties will be, and that the same Parks and Recreation Director is going to police all of these trees. With regard to Page 6, Item (f) regarding "inventory ", he stated that would be a lot of work to keep all of that information up to date. He also stated he agrees with Marie Cattoir that this proposed ordinance was brought up because of the failure of Arroyo Grande to enforce their Planned Development. He commented that, in its present condition, the ordinance is not ready for adoption. Commissioner Olsen stated she agrees with Commissioner Moore and Mrs. Cattoir. Corrgnissioner Boggess stated he doesn't feel the ordinance is meant to dictate to the public what they can and can't do but, in his opinion, the ordinance is something to turn to as a guide. He further stated he does have some problems with the ordinance in some places, but generally he is in favor of a good tree ordinance for the protection of the community. Commissioner Olsen stated she doesn't feel this ordinance is going to protect the community, and most of the complaints about trees was the destruction of oak trees and other trees by development. Vice Chairman Carr stated he agrees that enforcement of the Planned Development has been too lax and suggested that any recommendation sent on to the City Council regarding the ordinance should speak to that concern regarding enforcement in the Planned Development districts. 171 172 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -2 -85 Page 3 Commissioner Moore stated he feels the proposed ordinance is not complete; he feels a public information and education program should be a part of the ordinance. After considerable discussion on changes to the ordinance, Vice Chairman Carr stated the Corarission could either send it back for additional work, or send it on to the City Council with a recommendation for approval or denial. Planning Director Eisner suggested that since the matter goes on to the City Council for final adoption, the Coui,ission could take a conditional action to approve the ordinance subject to the recommended changes. After further discussion, on motion by Vice Chairman Carr, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and carried with Commissioner Moore voting "no ", that the proposed Ordinance be recoisa,ended to the City Council for approval, subject to changes as follows: Sections 10- 3.03(f), 10- 3.03(a), (c) and (g) - revised and clarified. "Street Trees ", subsection (m) - a time limit be added whereby if the Director has not taken action by a specified time, the property owner may deem the permit granted. Section 10 -3.03, Subsection (n), Para. 2 - revised and clarified. Section 10 -3.06 "Landmark Trees ", Subsection (b), last sentence - Amend to read as follows: "The Director shall sign as owners for all City -owned landmark trees." Commissioner Olsen stated her feelings that the Planning Commission should make it dear that enforcement of the ordinance in the Planned Development should have priority. Planning Director Eisner pointed. out that the Wildwood tree removal portion of the plan was reviewed by the Planning Cocimxission and the City Council and, in fact, the developer took out less trees than they were permitted to do. REVIEW - ORDINANCE REVISIONS TO COMMERCIAL ZONES - MOTELS AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL. Planning Director Eisner briefly reviewed the proposed ordinances. He noted that the City Council passed an emergency ordinance on motel permits for a period of 45 days. After a brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and unanimously carried, a public hearing on the proposed "Motel" ordinance amendment was set for April 16, 1985. After discussion regarding the General Commercial zones, on motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and unanimously carried, a public hearing on the proposed Highway Commercial zones was set for May 7, 1985. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by the Vice Chairman at 9:30 P.M. AVIEST: Secretary Vice Chairman R eAt z./4,„,_