Loading...
PC Minutes 1984-01-17ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION January 17, 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. MINUTE APPROVAL Chairman Gerrish pointed out errors in the minutes of the meeting of January 3, 1984. On motion by Commissioner Benhardt, seconded by Commissioner Fischer, and unanimously carried, the minutes of the regular meeting of January 3, 1984 were approved as corrected. PUBLIC HEARING - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 83 -388, CANYON WAY (SCHAFER). Planning Director Eisner pointed out that this application was before the Commission in May of 1981 and, at that time, was reviewed and approved by the Commission with conditions. The submission at this time is substantially the same as originally submitted. He noted there was one item that was brought to the attention of the staff, and that was the width of the driveway access of Lots 2 and 3. The Public Works Director felt that 12 ft. would be necessary, and the revised submittal does show 12 ft. Staff recommends to the Planning Commission that this matter be approved subject to the 10 conditions originally required. Upon being assured by Planning Director Eisner that public hearing for Lot Split Case No. 83 -388 had been duly published and property owners notified, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing open. Rob Plumb, 291 James Way, asked :how two houses were permitted to be built on one parcel? Planning Director Eisner stated he did not know the answer but would check into it. Upon hearing no further discussion for or against the proposed Lot Split, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed. Chairman Gerrish commented that this lot split is back before the Commission because the previously approved map has expired. Commissioner Carr asked what the square footage of the two houses is. Planning Director Eisner stated he had looked at the site and he didn't feel they exceeded the maximum lot coverage, and the Staff Advisory Committee didn't feel there were any particular problems with the coverage. Commissioner Olsen requested that the Planning Director check and see how they were able to build the two houses on one lot and report back to the Commission. Commissioner Carr inquired as to which is the front yard and which is the side yard? He stated he feels this should be established before approval is given. Planning Director Eisner commented that a condition could be added defining which direction would be the front. Mr. Plumb inquired if the Schafers received a Variance to include the dedicated part of the street to use in these parcels. Planning Director Eisner stated the split was originally approved in 1981 and apparently was deemed acceptable at that time. After further discussion, on motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and unanimously carried, Lot Split Case No. 83 -388 was continued pending determination of lot coverage on Parcel 1. PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 83 - 357, 17 UNIT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, 182 BRISCO ROAD IN THE "R -3" MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. (G. GOMES, AGENT FOR DENNIS LINTNER). Planning Director Eisner advised the request is for a 17 unit Planned Unit Development in the "R -3" District; the size of the site is 43,556 sq. ft.; the project has been reviewed and deemed to be consistent with the General Plan and the environmental documents associated with it, and is in compliance_w &th exiisting zoning. Mr. Eisner stated when the project was reviewed by the Staff Advisory Committee and Architectural Review Committee, there were concerns regarding the elevations of the building,in that the end wall of the building was lacking in architectural style and it was recommended that some window treatment or other design be used to break it up. Another concern was that the roof was of a dark material and the Architectural Review Committee felt that it was not a satisfactory color combination to be used in that area. He stated there was spine concern for garage doors to close off the garage area. 53 54 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 1 -17 -84 Page 2 Upon being assured by Planning Director Eisner that public hearing for Use Permit Case No. 83 -357 had been duly published and property owners noti- fied, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing open. Gary Gomes, 198 Loma Bonita, San Luis Obispo, representing the applicant,, presented a model of the proposed duplex units and showed some slides of various projects in the area, pointing out some of the features they wanted to have included in their project. Upon hearing no further comments for or against the proposed Use Permit, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed. Commissioner Fischer stated she would only approve a Use Permit in this type of situation if she was satisfied with the way the project is'going to be developed and, in her opinion, the proposal is more like apartments and not condominiums; they should have attached garage:da :ors;. and should have some kind of recreational _facility on the site. Also, she felt the style is very un- attractive. Commissioner Olsen indicated her agreement with Commissioner Fischer's opinion. Commissioner Moots stated he would like to see garage doors added and a recreational area. Commissioners Carr, Benhardt and Moore expressed their agreemen with the foregoing comments. Planning Director Eisner advised that the use permit could either be continued pending revision of the plans by the architect, or the Commission could deny the use permit without prejudice. He commented that the Commission's discussion should provide the architect with what they would like to see. He recommended that the Commission continue the public hearing and request that revised plans be referred back to the Architectural Review Committee for approval. After further discussion, on motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Olsen, and unanimously carried, the public hearing was reopened and continued pending resubmittal of plans by the applicant. CONTINUATION (PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED) - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 1149, A 72 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION IN THE "P -D" PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, LOT 11, TRACT 604, OAK PARK ACRES. (LOS PADRES ENGINEERS, AGENTS FOR REUBEN KVIDT). Planning Director Eisner advised that this matter was reviewed in full at the public hearing and at the conclusion, the applicant asked that the matter be continued until such time as final action was taken on the assessment district being proposed for the area on January 10th. At that time, the City Council opened the public hearing on the improvement district and continued the matter until February 28, 1984. Since the improvement district matter has been con- tinued, Mr. Kvidt has asked that this matter be placed back on the Commission's agenda for consideration. He recommended that if the Commission chooses to approve the tentative map, that all of the conditions be included as recommended in the staff report dated November 15, 1983. Reuben Kvidt, applicant, stated that since we do not know the outcome of the proposed assessment district, he may request that he be permitted to construct a water storage tank and pumping plant on one of their lots as a backup water system. Commissioner Carr pointed out that at the last hearing on this matter there were several conditions that the staff and applicant were not in agree- ment on, and it was his understanding these would be resolved before it was discussed by the Commission again. Lou Caballero, engineer for the applicant, stated that these issues had been reviewed with Public Works Director Karp and he had explained basically what he wanted on the improvement of the storm drain, and he indicated that normally they design the facilities afterwards and not at this point in time. The access roads to the sewer were basically discussed and Mr. Karp had indicated to him that whatever was acceptable to the Maintenance Department would be acceptable to him. He commented that the most important issue was the water system. He stated they would like to move on to the City Council at this point because they are the only ones that can resolve these issues. Commissioner Olsen moved that the matter be continued until after the improvement district hearing by the Council on February 28th. Motion seconded by Commissioner Moots. Chairman Gerrish commented he doesn't see the necessity to wait until the 28th of February to vote on a tentative tract map.and, in his opinion, the Commission's options are to either approve the map with the con- ditions as they exist, send it back to the staff to work out the issues with the applicants, or deny the map. He stated he doesn't feel the assessment district is going to make that much difference. Commissioners Olsen and Moots withdrew their motion. After further discussion, the following action was taken: Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 1 -17 -84 Page 3 RESOLUTION NO. 84 -970 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP OF TRACT NO. 1149 FILED BY LOS PADRES ENGINEERS, AGENTS FOR REUBEN KVIDT, SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS. On motion by Commissioner Benhardt, seconded by Commissioner Carr, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Benhardt, Carr, Fischer, Moore and Chairman Gerrish NOES: Commissioners Moots and Olsen ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 17th day of January 1984. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 83- 302, 316 EAST BRANCH STREET, OFFICE BUILDING IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. (ELLSWORTH). Planning Director Eisner advised that there are three lots on the corner of Branch and Mason Streets. The corner lot and the one directly adjacent to it have been acquired by Production Credit Association and their plans have been approved by this Commission. The third lot is a single parcel and has been purchased by Mr. Ellsworth for development. He is asking for reinstatement of approval of an overall architectural design that was originally approved sometime ago that was prepared for the entire three lots, however he is asking for approval of only that portion of the project that corresponds with his lot. Mr. Eisner noted there were some concerns about locating the building on the site, the square footage of the building, and then providing the parking for it. He advised that whatever action the Commission takes tonight, there is going to have to be an action taken by the Downtown Parking Advisory Board, and eventually by the City Council, in response to Mr. Ellsworth request to reduce the parking requirements by 3 /5ths. Commissioner Fischer asked 'for complete elevations for the entire building. She stated th at,..she didn't think that a complete review was the Architectural Review Committee. Commissioner Moots stated that the submittal before the Commission is not complete. In answer to Mr. Ellsworth's question regarding the Commission's feeling about the elevations before them, Commissioner Olsen stated the design fits in with the architectural style of the Production Credit Association's building. After discussion, Architectural Review Case No. 83 -302 was continued pending resubmittal of complete elevations on motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Benhardt, and unanimously carried. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 83 -303, COUNTY SAVINGS BANK, 1350 GRAND AVENUE. Planning Director Eisner advised that this design has been reviewed by the Architectural Review Committee and the Staff Advisory Committee, and approval is recommended subject to the condition that the building be situated so as to eliminate the intrusion into the public right of way at the front (Grand-Avenue frontage). Commissioner Fischer stated that during the Architectural Review Committee, that portion that sticks out into the rear parking lot was discussed and it was recommended it be treated in a more acceptable manner. Don Pederson, Architect for the project, stated they are going to extend the wood siding all around the building. He further stated it is his under- standing that the existing building does not encroach into the right of way. Planning Director Eisner commented that the Public Works Director had indicated that the columns in the front were in the public right of way. Mr. Manny Freitas, owner of the property, stated that the posts are not on public property; the existing sidewalk is the property line, and the posts are set behind the sidewalk. He presented a photograph to the Commission showing the posts located behind the sidewalk. After a brief discussion, Architectural Review Case No. 83 -303 was approved on motion by Commissioner Benhardt, seconded by Commissioner Moote, and unanimously carried. 55 56 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 1 -17 -84 Page 4 INTERPRETATION OF USE - UPHOLSTERY SALES AND SERVICE IN THE "H -S" DISTRICT. (PARTEE). Planning Director Eisner advised that the request from Mr. Partee is that the Commission make a determination that an Upholstery Sales and Service Business is similar in character to other uses in the Highway Service District. He pointed out that the interpretation by staff is that there are uses in the H -S zone that are more intensive than the requested use, such as motor vehicle sales and service, tire recapping, etc. After discussion, on motion by Commissioner Olsen, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and unanimously carried, a determination was made that an Upholstery Sales and Service use is similar in character to other uses in the Highway Service District subject to Use Permit procedure. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 83 -297, PARKING LOT EXPANSION, 345 SO. HALCYON RD. (ARROYO GRANDE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL). Planning Director Eisner advised that he had received a request from the hospital to discuss the parking lot layout at tonight's meeting. After presentatio of the overall parking layout to the Commission, Chairman Gerrish commented that . since the Commission was not prepared to take action on the matter and has not had enough time to review the proposal, this item would be placed on the agenda for the meeting of February 7, 1984. ADJOURNMENT Planning Director Eisner requested that the meeting be adjourned to the study session scheduled for January 31st at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of reviewing the draft of the Housing Element. The meeting was adjourned by the Chairman at 9:30 P.M. to Tuesday, January 31, 1984 at 7:30 P.M. ATTEST: ■,74L , Secretary