PC Minutes 1983-09-20ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
September 20, 1983
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Vice
Chairman Moots presiding. Present are Commissioners Carr, Fischer and Moore.
Commissioners Benhardt, Olsen and Chairman Gerrish are absent. Planning
Director Eisner and Public Works Director Karp are also in attendance.
MINUTE APPROVAL
The minutes of the regular meeting of September 6, 1983 were approved
as submitted on motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Carr,
and unanimously carried.
CONTINUATION . - .ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 83 -286, NEW. BANK OF AMERICA BUILDING,
WESLEY AVENUE AND EAST AND WEST BRANCH STREETS. (ROSS, LEVIN & MC INTYRE, ARCH.)
Planning Director Eisner advised that the original design of the buildinghad been
referred back to the architects after review by the Architectural Review Corr
mittee, the Planning Commission and the Village Merchants Association. It was
the consensus that the design did not seem to be consistent with the theme of
the Village area. The architects, being aware of the concerns of the Village
Merchants, the Architectural Review Committee and the Planning Commission, have
revised their design so as to incorporate as many of the recommendations as
possible into the desigrn,of -the new bank building and, therefore, it is staff's
recommendation that the design be approved as submitted.
Ken McIntyre, of Ross, Levin & McIntyre, advised the Commission that the
footprint of the building, basically, is the same with the exception of the
fact that they have broken up the window areas with columns. He briefly
described various materials to be used on the building. Mr. McIntyre noted
that in the previous presentation to the Commission, the Special Conditions
had been discussed.. He made reference to Item No. 29 on the last page, stating
they have responded to this requirement and - have limited the driveway access to
only one driveway off of West Branch Street. With regard to Item 30, Mr. McIntyre
stated they are proposing to improve three frontages of the property; they do not
propose. to improve Larchmont Drive and have written a letter to the City Council
appealing the requirement for improvements to Larchmont Drive. He commented
that they are in agreement with the staff on Item 31 and plan to provide the
lighting that staff is asking for. With regard to Item 32, Mr. McIntyre ex-
plained that there is an existing easement across the property for the purpose
of utilities, and the applicant would like to maintain the easement and leave
the utilities there instead of relocating public utilities to the street right
of way as required in special condition No. 32.
Public Works Director Karp stated that staff strongly recommends re-
design of the parking lot to close off access to West Branch Street in this
area here and parking in the area of Wesley Street and Branch Street be re-
oriented to 90 degree stalls with two way traffic circulation. With regard
to the utilities, Mr. Karp stated if the Commission wishes to waive the re-
quirement for relocation from the easement, requirements should be placed on
the developer to assure the staff through engineering calculations that
connection to the existing sewer and drainage facilities by the Bank will not
result in backup of flows into the new bank building or adversely affect
public improvements in that vicinity.
Mr. McIntyre commented that the parking layout was discussed extensively
the last time they were before the Commission, and the bank has found over a
number of years that the recommended layout has not been a good set up for
them. They would like to think, with a site this large, that they could have
two accesses and, even having two driveways is a little bit of a problem for
them but they are willing to live with that. Mr. Eisner commented, from the
staff's point of view, the issue of the sight plan was brought to the Com-
mission's attention at the time of the initial hearing, however, the emphasis
of discussion has continued to be related to the architecture of the building;
the issue of the right of way across the property, the layout of the parking
lot itself, and the issue of the improvements on the street have not gone away,
they simply have been de- emphasized during the discussion of the design of the
facade.
After considerable discussion, the Commission indicated they felt the
re- design of the building was much more in character with the Village area
than the original submission and, on by Commissioner Fischer, seconded
by Commissioner Carr, and unanimously carried, Architectural Review Case No.
83 -286 was approved including General Conditions 1 through 28, and Special
Conditions 30 and 31, and that Special Conditions 29 and 32 to be resolved
by staff with the applicant, subject to the final approval of the Public
Works Director.
Planning Director Eisner advised that this matter is finaled with the
Planning Commission; the specific items will be dealt with as described in
the motion, with the exception of the matter that has already been appealed
to the City Council, whichis, Special Condition No '10
25
26
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9 -20 -83
PUBLIC HEARING - Tentative Subdivision Map, Tract No. 1132, "Rancho Grande -
Lot Split. Case No. 83- 383, "Rancho Grande" -
Proposed Development Agreement - "Rancho Grande ".
Planning Director Eisner reviewed the staff report regarding Lot Split Case
No. 83 -383. He advised that application is consistent with the General Plan,
and is consistent with the EIR prepared in accordance with the requirements of
CEQA. The applicants are requesting a division of property in accordance with
the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act to further the implementation of an
overall development plan previously submitted and approved. Mr. Eisner further
advised that this matter has been reviewed by the Subdivision Review Committee
and the Staff Advisory Committee, and is recommended to the Commission for approval
subject to the 10 Special Conditions dated 7- 28 -83, amended 9- 12 -83.
Mr. Eisner advised that the second portion of this application is a tentative
tract map involving 92 acres and the existing zoning is Planned Development. The
zoning came into effect with Ordinance 186 C.S. which was approved and adopted by
the City Council. The existing land use is vacant and the General Plan designatio:u
is low density residential, and the tract map is felt to be consistent with the
General Plan. The environmental materials are also included in the previously
referenced environmental document, and mitigating measures of those items found
in the EIR are included in Ordinance No. 186 C.S. The project would create 134
approximate one half acre lots. He noted that the tentative tract map has been
reviewed by the Subdivision Review Committee and the Staff Advisory Committee
and is found to be consistent with the design principals,_ goals and objectives of the
City. Mr. Eisner stated staff recommends approval of the matter with the specific
findings noted in the staff report, dated September 16, 1983, and subject to the
modified set of General Provisions to the tentative tract and Special Conditions
attached thereto.
Mr. Eisner stated that the third portion of the request is a development
agreement by and between the City of Arroyo Grande and OTSEE,::Inc. The agreement
covers the area included in the tentative tract. He noted that the Draft included
in the Agenda packet has been negotiated between the staff and the applicants,
their attorneys and their engineers, and has been submitted to the city attorney
as to form and substance and has been returned to us with comments, which have
been incorporated into the draft before the Commission. He stated that there are
specific references that staff has incorporated in the staff report and they have
also been included into the draft, with one exception. He referred to the letter
dated September 14, 1983 from the law firm of Lyon, Miller and Walter, dealing
with Condition No. 14 in the development agreement. Mr. Eisner advised that
public notice has been given of this item in keeping with the California Planning
and Zoning law and the Subdivision Map. Act of the State of California. In response
to the public notice of this hearing, a communication has been received from the
Southern California Gas Company, dated September 19, 1983, making specific
reference to the relocation of a 16" high pressure gas line located in the area
of the tract. He advised the Commission that this is a matter to be resolved
by the applicant and his representatives and the Southern California Gas Company.
We are entering this correspondence into the public record, however, from the
City's standpoint, the condition as stated covers the breadth of the City's
concern. Public Works Director Karp pointed out that the requested lot split
would allow three parcels in Rancho'Grande to develop independently from the
rest of the property.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Eisner that public hearings for
Tentative Subdivision Map Tract No. 1132, Lot Split Case No. 83 -383 and the
Development Agreement between OTTSE and the City of Arroyo Grande, had been
duly published and property owners,notified, Vice Chairman Moots declared the
hearing open.
Page 2
Jim Garing, Garing, Taylor & Assoc., Inc., Project Engineer, presented a
copy of the approved conceptual master plan for Rancho Grande. He pointed out
that the subdivision map matches the master plan as close as can be done. With
regard to the commercial lot split, Mr. Garing advised that even though
Rancho Parkway is shown to go through the middle of that piece of property, it is
all one piece of property right now, which is almost 40 acres, and it is too large
of a commercial site to sell. The proposal is to divide it into more manageable
and salable properties.
Public Works Director Karp noted that the development agreement refers to
Arroyo Grande Assessment District No. 81 -1. He briefly described the proposed
assessment district pointing out that it would include construction of all of
James Way down between Oak Park Acres and Tally Ho Road with a minimum of two
lanes; it would include construction of all of West Branch Street, and would
include all of the inside tract improvements. Other improvements would be
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9 -20 -83 Page 3
construction of a reservoir, transmission lines, pump station, etc.
Ella Honeycutt, 560 Oak Hill Road, questioned what would happen to all of
the Oak trees. Mr. Karp stated there is a section in the Ordinance requiring
that all of the Oak trees that are going to be cut are subject to the approval
of the Planning Director, however, the roads have been set to avoid grading.
Upon hearing no further comments from the audience, Vice Chairman Moots
declared the hearings closed.
Mr. Pete Miller) Attorney for the applicant, commented that they have
spent a lot of time with the staff working out a lot of concerns on both the
part of the applicant and the City, and they are very pleased with the results.
In answer to Commissioner Carr's question regarding Mr. Miller's letter
relative to Condition #14, Planning Director Eisner advised the suggested
condition would be a replacement for Condition #54 under "Parks, Trees and Land-
scaping". He pointed out that the wording has been negotiated among a number
of members of the City staff, including Parks and Recreation Director Keisler,
Mr. Karp and himself, as well as representatives of the applicants. He suggested
that Item #54 be deleted and #14 be added as a Special Condition.
Commissioner Fischer referred to the General Provisions for Tract No. 1132,
Item No. 34. She suggested that the wording be changed to read "All abandoned
wells be filled, capped, and abandoned in conformance with the San Luis Obispo
County Environmental Health Department's Standard requirements."
Planning Director Eisner advised that when the Commission is ready to
act on the subject matters that they be 3 separate actions; the Lot Split be by
minute motion; that the Tentative Tract be done by resolution with findings,
and that on the Development Agreement the Commission direct staff to prepare
an ordinance which would convey the development agreement to the City Council.
After further discussion, Lot Split Case No. 83 -383 was recommended for
approval on motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Carr,
and unanimously carried, subject to the Standard Conditions as amended; which
includes the deletion of Conditions Nos. 6, 59, 60, 62, the last sentence of
Condition No. 64, and amending Conditions 16, 28 and 29 to reflect similar
language in the Tentative Tract General Provisions. Lot Split approval is
recommended with the following findings:
1. The proposed lot split, is consistent with
the City's adopted comprehensive General Plan and all mandatory
elements thereof.
2. The proposed lot split is consistent with current zoning.
3. The proposed lot split is consistent with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and that mitigating
measures for all environmental impacts have been addressed in
Ordinance 186 C.S.
4. The conditions of Ordinance 186 C. S. shall apply unless modified
herein or in subsequent development agreements.
The following action was taken regarding Tract No. 1132:
RESOLUTION NO. 83 -955
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. 1132 FILED BY BOURDON & BURKART, AGENTS
FOR OTTSE, INC., SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS.
On motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Carr, and
by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Carr, Fischer, Moore and Vice Chairman Moots
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Benhardt, Olsen and Chairman Gerrish
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 20th day of September 1983.
27
28
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9 -20 -83
On motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded. by Commissioner Moore, and
unanimously carried, the Planning Commission recommended acceptance of the
proposed Development Agreement, as amended and including deletion of Item
#54 under General Provisions and adding Condition #14 ,under Special Conditions,
and amending Condition No. 34 as previously recommended by Commissioner Fischer.
Staff was directed by the Commission to prepare the necessary Ordinance for
transmittal to the City Council.
PUBLIC HEARING - .PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING A FLOOD HAZARD DISTRICT
( "F -H ") AND DELETING THE FLOOD PLAIN ( "P -F ") DISTRICT.
Public Works Director Karp referred to his memo dated June 22,1983 addressed
to the Planning Director regarding a proposed ordinance to establish a Flood
Hazard District. He advised that the text of the ordinance has been lifted
directly from a proposal by the Federal Flood Insurance Administration, most
of which is required in order to participate in the National Flood Insurance
program. He further advised that the maps referred to in the ordinance are
forthcoming, however, he would like to have the Commission conceptually
approve the ordinance and send it on to the City Council for adoption prior
to receiving the maps. Commissioner Moore commented he would be hesitant to
recommend adoption of the proposed ordinance until a map is available.
After a brief discussion, staff was directed to bring this matter back
to the Commission at a future date when the maps are received from the
Corps of Engineers.
PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, SECTION 9- 4.1022 AND SECTION
9- 4.3204 RELATING TO "LETTER OF COMPLETENESS ".
Planning Director Eisner briefly reviewed the purpose for the proposed
ordinance amendment, pointing out that the Subdivision Map Act and our
zoning provisions specify the amount of time within which the City has to
act on various requests. He advised that a procedure has been instituted
by the Planning Department informing the applicant that the application
is or is not complete. He noted that under SB 884, once an application is
received and deemed complete, the Planning Commission has 40 days to take action,
and, . under the new Ordinance, the application is not deemed complete until a
"Letter of Completeness" is issued.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Eisner that public hearing for
Proposed Ordinance Amendment had been duly published and posted, Vice Chairman
Moots declared the hearing open. There being no comments for or against the
proposed amendment, Vice Chairman Moots declared the hearing closed.
After a brief discussion, the following action was taken:
on motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Fischer, and
by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Carr, Fischer, Moore and Vice Chairman Moots
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Benhardt, Olsen and Chairman Gerrish
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 20th day of September 1983.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was
adjourned by Vice Chairman Moots at 10:00 P.M.
ATTEST:
Secretary
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SEC. 9- 4.1022
AND SEC. 9- 4.3204, RELATING TO "LETTER OF COMPLETENESS ".
RESOLUTION NO. 83 -956
Page 4