Loading...
PC Minutes 1984-03-20ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION March 20, 1984 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman Gerrish presiding. Present are Commissioners Benhardt, Carr, Fischer, Moore, Moots and Olsen. Planning Director Eisner is also in attendance. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 84 -304, RESTAURANT, WEST BRANCH STREET (OAK PARK PLAZA). (OAK PARK RESTAURANT ASSOCIATES). Planning Director Eisner advised that this matter is being continued to the next meeting of April 3, 1984. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 84 -306, (MICHAEL McDOUGAL). Planning Director Eisner advised the request for architectural review is for a 9,270 sq. ft. professional office building in the Highway Service District. The proposal is a two story building with parking at the ground level. The first floor contains 4,959 sq. ft. of office space, while the second floor contains 4,311 sq. ft. The parking requirement is 5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft., requiring 46 spaces for a building of this size. Mr. Eisner advised that the project has been reviewed by the Staff Advisory Committee and the Architectural Review Committee, and is recommended for approval subject to the Standard Conditions of the City of Arroyo Grande, and the following modifications to the specifications: 1. Minimum height of vertical clearance shall be 13'6" rather than the. 10. ft. indicated on the building plans. This standard is set forth . in the Uniform Fire Code, Sec. 10.207(a). PROFESSIONAL BUILDING, 1118 GRAND AVE. 2. That a decorative or architectural treatment be given to the westerly wall facing the Pizza Hut. There was some discussion regarding the architectural treatment for the west wall. Planning Director Eisner suggested that Condition #2 be amended by adding the words "to be approved by the Planning Director and /or Planning Commission ". After a brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Carr, and unanimously carried, Architectural Review Case No. 84 -306 was approved subject to Standard Conditions and the special conditions, with Condition #2 modified as follows: 2. That a decorative or architectural treatment be given to the westerly wall facing the Pizza Hut to be approved by the Planning Director and /or Planning Commission. PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 84 -364, OUTDOOR FLOWER SALES, 1166 GRAND AVE. (TED GIBBS) Planning Director Eisner advised that the request is for a hexagon shaped structure to be used for the sale of flowers during daylight hours. He further advised that this is a marginal application, and the Building Department had advised him that because of the size of the building, it would not require a building permit. He pointed out that in recommending the project, the Staff Advisory Committee felt that the request, if approved, should be for a limited period of time and subject to the Commission's review. Upon being assured by Planning Director Eisner that public hearing for Use Permit Case No. 84 -364 had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing open. Ted Gibbs, applicant, spoke in favor of the Use Permit being granted. Upon hearing no further comments for or against the proposed Use Permit, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed, and the following action was taken: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing RESOLUTION NO. 84 -979 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING A USE PERMIT, CASE NO. 84 -364 APPLIED FOR BY TED GIBBS TO PERMIT OUTDOOR FLOWER SALES IN THE HIGHWAY SERVICE DISTRICT. On motion by Commissioner Benhardt, seconded by Commissioner Moore, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: Commissioners Benhardt, Carr, Fischer, Moore, Moots, and Chairman Gerrish None None Resolution was adopted this 20th day of March 1984. Olsen 69 70 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 3 -20 -84 Page 2 With regard to architectural review of the proposed structure, on motion by Commissioner Benhardt, seconded by Commissioner Moore, and unanimously carried, Architectural Review Case No. 84 -305 was approved as submitted. Planning Director Eisner advised that this matter is finaled with the Planning Commission unless appealed to the City Council within 10 days. PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ZONING DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE NO. 221 C.S., OAK KNOLL DEVELOPMENT (FORMERLY "KNOLLWOOD "), PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTHERLY OF SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL CENTER. (OAK KNOLLS VENTURES). Planning Director Eisner commented that there were 2 items relative to the project noticed and advertised. He recommended that only the modification to the Ordinance be heard this evening; the reason being that the second item is a request for a lot split and should the ordinance not be modified, there would be no purpose in hearing the second item. Mr. Eisner briefly reviewed the staff report, dated March 15, 1984. He stated the applicants indicated that the project is divided into four parts. The most important part of the project design over and above the change in density is the indication by the project engineer that the Oak trees will be saved as much as it is feasible to do so, and staff recommends that a tree preservation plan be sub- mitted for approval by the Planning Commission. and Council. The street system as sub - mitted on the plan has been reviewed by the Public Works Department and their notations are on the map. All streets are identified as public streets and will meet the standards set forth in the City ordinance. He pointed out that, under the requirements of CEQA, an update to the environmental document has been pre- pared and, under those same requirements, no separate public hearing is required on the environmental document and it is subject to only inclusion in the file. The targeted environmental document is focused on increased density and its effect on traffic, circulation, schools and grading; there was nothing ofa' truly substantive nature in the document. On motion by Commissioner Olsen, seconded by Commissioner Carr, and unanimously carried, the. Planning Director's recommendation that the two items be separated was. approved. Commissioner Carr inquired. who decided what would be included in the environ- mental document. Planning Director Eisner stated it was his decision as Environmental Coordinator for the City, and the basis for the update was the original EIR itself. Commissioner Moore stated he is concerned about the Oak trees. He commented that the arrangement on Wildwood was not very good. Upon being assured by Planning Director Eisner that public hearing for amendment to Ordinance 221 C.S. had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing open. Howard Anderson, one of the developers of the project, introduced Mr. Ed Ramseyer, Project Engineer. Mr. Anderson briefly discussed the changes between the two plans. He commented that rural densities cannot be supported by full urban improvements; the assessment district needed a 3 -1 ratio of land value to cover the cost of improvements. He further noted that the assessments against the project amounted to 2.3 million dollars. He also noted that the City decided to take part of the old school site on the Rancho Grande property, and the 15 acres. that this project was dedicating for a park site is now available for use, and this is where most of the density will be relocated; most of the density is on the new land. He pointed out that there are a lot of large lots on this plan, and on the previous plan there were large belts of open space. He stated in speaking with staff regarding who is going to maintain the open space, it was decided to go to the large lot situation and, with deed restrictions and through C.C. &R.'s, a private owner will maintain that area. Mr. Ramseyer reviewed the proposed development plan with regard to grading, drainage and road alignment. He pointed out that the major density increase is in the northwest section where the park was originally designated and, basically, what the developer is asking for is the same density as previously approved. Mr. Rarnseyer requested consideration to modifying some of the recommended conditions because they are very restrictive to the developer. Regarding Public Works Condition #2, Mr. Rarnseyer stated it speaks to starting the project at the southwest corner and building the road to its extension with James Way. He commented that would be fine if the developer could afford to do that costwise. He stated he had talked to Public Works Director Karp and he had indicated that property ownee.rs east of Miller wanted James Way connected. Mr. Karp agreed that if the developer submitted a phasing map to the Commission that if, in fact,James Way goes through, then we could turn around and extend Miller Way for the public. He stated, basically, what they are asking for is the condition be changed to Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 3 -20 -84 Page 3 71 read that a phasing map shall be submitted for further approval and conditions as required by the Public Works Department and the Planning Commission. Planning Director Eisner commented that if the Commission agreed, he feels that would be a reasonable modification to the condition. Mr. Ramseyer stated the other condition he is concerned about is the sidewalk condition. All of the conditions require that all of the streets have sidewalks 6 ft. wide. He stated from a planning standpoint, he does not agree with 6 ft. sidewalks on both sides of the street on estate sized lots, and he felt there should be a plan of walks for consideration by the Commission as to whether or not the schools and the public would like to have conditions 5, 6, 8 and 9 modified requiring walking plans to be submitted to the Planning Commission for review. Planning Director Eisner commented that the applicants had discussed this matter with Mr. Karp, and his position was that while he might sympathize . with the position, the standards for sidewalks are adopted Council requirements, and the only way they can be relieved is by the City Council. Mr. Ramseyer stated another condition he has a problem with is the wording in 10c. Mr. Eisner stated he is reluctant to interfere with the wording, and sooner or later that issue is going to have to be worked out between Mr. Ramseyer, Paul and the City Council. John McGrath, 273 Miller Way, spoke in favor of the plan, stating it is a great improvement over the last ones submitted. He also stated he is opposed to the plan, and one of the reasons is because he lives on Miller Way. He inquired as to what street they are going to use for construction equipment. Planning Director Eisner stated there is a condition that prohibits the use of Miller Way during construction of the development. Al Spierling, 299 Miller Way, stated he can appreciate the applicants' desire to protect and preserve the Oak trees and he is in agreement with the applicants comments regarding the grove of Oaks in the area on the extreme right, however, he is concerned that setting these Oaks aside and placing them in individual lots is going to deprive the citizens of this community of a very valuable resource and, in his opinion, that open space should be preserved. Una Scheideck, 268 Miller Way, stated she is concerned about the safety of the school children and the increased traffic. Upon hearing no further comments from the audience, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed. In answer to Commissioner Moots' question relative to increase in density, Mr. Anderson pointed out that the density increase is to make the project economically work, and also they would like to get back into the assessment district. Commissioner Olsen stated she is concerned about the increase in density, the water situation and the access problems from the freeway and Miller Heights to James Way. Commissioner Fischer stated she is concerned about the Oak trees and the street alignment. She commented, in her opinion, making Miller Way the junction between James Way and Halcyon Road will make people use Miller Way more so than the previous plan. She stated she is not opposed to increasing the density along James Way; her basic concern is about the trees and the increased traffic on Miller Way. Commissioner Carr commented that there is a lot of items to cover all at one time. He pointed out that his concerns are the Oak trees, the traffic and circulation, and the problem of providing an increase in density when there is already a traffic problem in the area. He stated he is concerned about the.environmenta: documents. Planning Director Eisner stated with regard to the environmental document, staff acted clearly within the requirements of CEQA. Chairman Gerrish stated, in his opinion, the Commission would like to see the document that has been prepared. Planning Director Eisner advised that copies will be available for the Commission's review next week. After considerable discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission to continue the matter to the next meeting to give them an opportunity to review the environmental document that was prepared for the proposed development. On motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Benhardt, and unanimously carried, the public hearing on proposed Amendment to Zoning Development Ordinance No. 221 C.S., and Lot Split Case No. 84 -391 was continued to the next meeting of April 3, 1984. PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84 -1, LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM AGRICULTURE (5 ACRE MIN.) TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, FAIR OAKS AVENUE. (GARING, TAYLOR & ASSOCIATES, INC., AGENTS FOR THE GRIEB FAMILY). Planning Director Eisner advised that continuance of this matter to the meeting of April 3, 1984 has been requested by the applicants 72 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 3 -20 -84 FURTHER REVIEW - ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CREATING STANDARDS FOR SECOND RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS ON EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. Planning Director Eisner stated that a draft supplement was prepared and included in the Commissioners' agenda packets incorporating the Commission's suggested changes to the proposed ordinance. Linda Stonier, Associate Planner, briefly reviewed the changes, stating they are basically self - explanatory. She further stated there seemed to be some confusion in the definition section, and she had attempted to clarify that particular section. Chairman Gerrish pointed out that the Commission had voted on the amendment at the last meeting and the matter is now set for public hearing for the City Council. Planning Director Eisner recommended that there be a minute motion adding this supplement to the materials that have already been prepared for the Council. On motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and unanimously carried, the supplement to the materials was added to the draft that had already been prepared for the City Council. Planning Director Eisner complimented Ms. Stonier on the work she has done on the ordinance. Chairman Gerrish stated he felt she did an excellent job on compiling the information and submitting it in a way that the Commission could make a decision. CONTINUATION (PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED) - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 84 -361, FREE STANDING SIGN, 20 W. BRANCH STREET IN THE "H -S" DISTRICT. (MINA -TREE SIGNS, INC., AGENTS FOR BANK OF AMERICA). Planning Director Eisner advised that the applicant's representative, Mina - Tree Signs, indicated they were willing to re- design the sign in a fashion that reflected the materials in the building. However, they did feel that, on the basis set forth in the Ordinance constituting the guidelines that they were interested in working with, they felt their option was to design in accordance with the standards in the ordinance. He presented a photograph of a low profile free standing sign proposed by Mina -Tree Signs. Chairman Gerrish commented that the Commission had indicated their desires for a monument sign in this location. Commissioner Moots stated he has no problem with the colors and the textures of the sign, but his concern is the height of the sign. After a brief discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 84 -980 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING A USE PERMIT, CASE NO. 84 -361, APPLIED FOR BY MINA -TREE SIGNS, INC., AGENTS FOR BANK OF AMERICA AT 200 W. BRANCH STREET IN THE HIGHWAY SERVICE DISTRICT. On motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Benhardt, Carr, Fischer, Moore, Moots, Olsen and Chairman Gerrish NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 20th day of March 1984. Planning Director Eisner requested the Commission adopt a Resolution of Intention to re- define or change the ordinances relative to maximum allowable heights. Chairman Gerrish suggested that the Commission, in the near future, discuss the types of signs they would like to see in the various districts. REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION Page 4 1 1 Planning Director Eisner reviewed that the Case Grande development submitted a Variance application which was approved by the Commission. At the time the Variance was submitted, the Planning Department wrote a memo stat- ing that there would be a specific number of parking spaces relating to the motel and restaurant. He advised that the working plans for the restaurant have been submitted and there is a variation of what was approved. He noted that the restaurant floor plan has decreased, however, in calculating the floor area, it has gone from 6,000 to 6,275 sq. ft_, which includes the trash bin. He stated that,.. basically, what he would like from the Commission is a minute motion acknowledging the addition of 275 sq. ft. and the decrease in the restaurant floor area. There being no discussion, on motion by Commissioner Carr, seconded by Com- missioner Benhardt, and unanimously carried, the Commission found that the changes do Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 3- 20 -84 Page 5 not increase the intensity of the use and the parking is found to be consistent. Planning Director Eisner stated a request has been received for in interpretation that a laundromat is a consistent use in the Highway Service District. On motion by Commissioner Benhardt, seconded by Commissioner Moore, and unanimously carried, it was determined that a laundromat is consistent with other uses in the Highway Service District, Mr. Eisner stated another request was received to find that a stationery store is consistent with other uses in the Highway Service District. On motion by Commissioner Benhardt, seconded by Commissioner Moore, and unanimously carried, it was determined that a stationery store is consistent with other uses in the Highway Service District. After a brief discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Benhardt, seconded by Commissioner Moore, and unanimously carried, to review for possible modification uses listed under the Highway Service District of the Zoning Ordinance. PROPOSED RESTAURANT IN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. Planning Director Eisner advised that staff has received a request for a restaurant in the "P -D" zone. He noted that a restaurant is a permitted use on the parcel and, therefore, under normal circumstances the matter would require only a finding of architectural review. He pointed out what staff feels is a mis -print in the Zoning Ordinance regarding the parking requirements for a restaurant, which requires'L space for each 3 seats, but not less than 1 space for each 30 sq. ft." Mr. Eisner stated his interpretation of the Ordinance is that it should be 1 space for every 3 seats or 1 space for 300 sq. ft. of floor area if there are no fixed seats. He stated if there is an agreement among the Commissioners that this is a typographical error, he would like a minute motion by the Commission so that he can either process the application for the restaurant, be directed by the Commission to draft a correction to the Ordinance, or process the restaurant under a: Use Permit application. After a brief discussion, Planning Director Eisner was requested to prepare a draft amendment to the ordinance relating to parking requirements for restaurants and bars. Staff was also directed to have the applicant for the restaurant proceed with a Use Permit application for public hearing by the Commission at the next meeting. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned by the Chairman at 10:30 P.M. ATTEST: subject to obtaining a Use Permit. Secretary 73