PC Minutes 1983-01-1868
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
January 18, 1983
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with
Chairman Gerrish presiding. Present are Commissioners Carr, Moots,
Pilkington and Moore. Commissioners Cole and Benhardt are absent. Plan-
ing Director Hay:, is also in attendance.
MINUTE :APPROVAL
Commissioner Moore requested that paragraph 3, page 3 of the
minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of January 4, 1983 be cor-
rected to show that he voted "no" on the motion to forward the Focus
Environmental Impact Report on the Shannon Ranch to the City Council.
Upon hearing no further additions or corrections, the minutes of the
regular meeting of January 4, 1983 were approved by the Chairman as
corrected.
REQUEST FOR EXTENSION - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 1009, MOUNTAIN VIEW
CONDOMINIUM, 830 HUASNA ROAD. (ADR CORPORATION).
Planning Director Hays advised that, as per the Subdivision
Ordinance, the applicant is allowed to request up to two 1 year ex-
tensions on his map. He noted that the map will now expire on August
18, 1983, not February 13, 1983 as indicated in the applicant's letter,
because of the amended Subdivision Ordinance.
After a brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Pilkington,
seconded by Commissioner Moots, and unanimously carried, a one year
time extension was granted on Tract No. 1009 with a new expiration date
of August 18, 1984.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING -- REZONING CASE NO. 82 -165. ZONE CHANGE
FROM "RA -B3" RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO "P -D" PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, MAY AND PASEO STREETS. (JEFFREY CARRITHERS).
Planning _Director Hays advised that the proposal is to rezone
an area approximately 1 -1/4 acres in size to "P -D" Planned Development
to allow the applicant to submit a proposal consisting of 10 units. He
noted that the project is located on the old Pacific Coast Railroad
right of way immediately adjacent to the Tally Ho Creek. He reviewed
that at the Commission's September 21st meeting they considered this
request and the environmental determination. He stated that, at that
time, he had mentioned several items of environmental concern that he
thought the Commission should be aware of and look at in more detail.
The applicant felt he could mitigate these concerns, which were sewage,
water, streets, drainage and soils. At that time the Commission con-
tinued this matter to allow the applicant time to prepare more infor-
mation so that he could, hopefully, mitigate these particular concerns.
Mr. Hays advised that the information submitted by the applicant was
included in the Commission's agenda packets and, as noted in his letter
of January 13th, he was not totally convinced that there was enough in-
formation to enable him td .prepare the propermitigation measures.
Commissioner Carr stated that at the last meeting the issue was
raised regarding our procedures in rezoning areas that are designated in
the General Plan substantially different than the proposed rezoning, and
he inquired if this matter had been pursued. Planning Director Hays
advised that he has researched this,and, what has happened in the past
is when a request for - "P -D" zoning comes in, because it is a unique
zoning, if the zone change is approved,the General Plan _is.changed
at the same time. Mr. Hays further advised he has consulted with the
city attorney on this matter and Mr. Shipsey agreed that this is what
has been done in the past on "P -D" zonings.
In response to Chairman Gerrish's question regarding notification
of the continued public hearing, Planning Director Hays advised that
notices of the hearing were sent to the surrounding property owners who
had received the original notices. Chairman Gerrish reopened the public
hearing for comment.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 1 -18 -83 Page 2
Jeffrey Carrithers, 311 Harbor View, Pismo Beach, applicant for the
rezoning, spoke in favor of the zone change. He advised that current
neighborhood zoning is both "R -1" and "RA-B3", and the total land involved
in the proposed development is 1.31 acres, or aroximately 57,000 square
feet which, if translated to "R -1" zoning, would comprise about 10 single
family lots. He noted that there are "R -1" lots adjacent to the proposed
development varying in size from 5,000 to 6,000 square feet. Due to the
site topography and lot configurations, it is a unusual situation and the
Planned Development zoning is being proposed to create a single family de-
tached residential development that would conform to the character of the
neighborhood. Mr. Carrithers stated he has slightly reduced the lot sizes
because of the unusual characteristics, and he has taken that residually
and placed it into a neighborhood park and other public amenities.
With regard to density, Mr. Carrithers pointed out that the density in
the May Street /Paseo area is presently at 7.4 units per acre and his pro-
posal is proposed at 7.6 units per acre. With regard to the mitigation
measures that the Planning Commission required, Mr. Carrithers advised
that he has gone to considerable lengths to provide solutions appropriate
to the development. Regarding the sewerage, he stated that Lots 1 through
5 would have a multiple lift station with a force lateral providing the
sewage up to May Street. He noted that the lift station would be maintained
by the Homeowner's Association which would reduce the City's responsibilities
for maintenance. Mr. Carrithers further advised that Lots 6 through 10,
which all face May Street, would have their own individual lift stations.
Mr. Carrithers pointed out that the rights of way on Paseo Street
as it turns around the hill, and as May Street connects to Crown Terrace
are not conforming in widths; they are from 25 ft. to 35 ft. wide and
would need to be widened. He stated that he has contacted the two property
owners involved that would be necessary to make these acquisitions for the
City, and received favorable_input that they would be willing to give that
up for a price or in lieu of improvements and, since these acquisitions
for the City of Arroyo Grande would -be at his expense, it was his feeling
that it would be appropriate that these right of way dedications be acquired
after tentative project approval. With regard to the preliminary solid.
investigation, Mr. Carrithers stated that the engineer had prepared the
report which was submitted to the Planning Department and Department of
Public Works. He further stated that the purpose of the soils investigation
was to, examine surface materials and to determine the characteristics and
stability of the soils conditions. Upon completion of the investigation
no adverse conditions were found.
Mr. Carrithers stated that another mitigating measure was the drainage,
and the major problem of this particular portion of Tally Ho Creek has
historically been siltation and the project, if developed as proposed, would
reduce that siltation. Mr. Duane Miller, Civil Engineer for the project, .
reviewed the proposed drainage system, and advised that basically the system
would be designed within the guidelines of the Garing, Taylor & Associates'
drainage study which was made in 1978, and the accepted standards of the
Department of Public Works of the City.
Mr. John Sprague, 212 Tally Ho Road, stated he is in favor of the
proposed project and, in his opinion, it would be good to have a:
development there that somebody could use. Mr. Max Harris, 212 McKinley,
stated he opposed to the project because of drainage and flooding problems.
Doug Mannon, 210 Tally Ho Road, stated he is in favor of the proposed
development and he believes it is a good idea. Sandy Facchetti, 248 Tally
Ho Road, stated that, in his opinion, the zoning should remain Residential
Agricultural. Ray Gifford, 531 May Street, objected to the proposed re-
zoning because of the density, and expressed concern that if the property
is rezoned, people on Tally Ho Road and on Paseo Street will be asking for
zoning changes. Marsha Duggan, 222 McKinely Street, stated she is in
favor of the project. Michael Bondello, 207 McKinley, stated he is con-
cerned about the bird life in that particular area and, in his opinion,
we should retain what we do have and try to preserve some of the riparian
community. He stated if the development were to be approved we would
probably lose most of the birds and that would be a loss of environmental
quality in the neighborhood. Ella Honeycutt, 560 Oak Hill Road, stated
she hopes the development, if approved, doesn't look as bad as Crown Hill.
L. 6 8
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 1 -18 -83 Page 3
Also, speaking for the Coastal San Luis Conservation District, Mrs. Honeycutt
requested that the regular planting be taken care of because of the siltation.
She noted that the Arroyo Grande Creek at the present time has lost almost
32% of its capacity and any additional siltation in the creek will be a
burden on the farmland. Gene Donaldson, 538 May Street, stated he has no
objection to the proposed plan, however if the property is rezoned and some-
thing else goes in there, then he would object. Steve Diaz, 580 May Street,
stated, in his opinion, the proposed development is a nice project but it is
in the wrong location, and he feels it would be somewhat spot zoning. Bill
Burke, 203 Oro Drive, stated he is against the zoning change and the proposed
development and, in his opinion, it is not in conformance with the General
Plan. Al Vareo, 550 May Street, stated he is opposed to the rezoning because
of increased traffic and the possibility of zone changes of the rest of the
property in that area. Gary Allan, 556 May Street, stated he is opposed to
the rezoning.
There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Gerrish
declared the hearing closed.
Commissioner Moots stated he feels the project is much too dense and,
in his opinion, the terrain is not capable of 10 houses with the amount of
slope on those hills. Commissioner Pilkington stated his concerns regarding
the pole houses_and the fire control. He noted that with pole homes open
underneath creates a tough situation to fight fires. Commissioner Carr
stated he feels that the process of changing the General Plan at the same
time the zoning is changed is not proper. Also, he feels that the property
cannot handle the proposed density and the type of'development; and that
the design of the project_- is not in keeping with the character of the rest
of the neighborhood. Commissioner Moore stated he agreed with Commissioners
Moots and Carr on the density because it is very heavy density for this area.
Also the road is severe with the steep lines. Mr. Moore further
stated he has been_studying this area for about 30 years and one of the
things they have been trying to solve is the drainage problem and it is not
solved yet. He referred to the Garing and Taylor drainage plan, stating
that the plan has never been put into action, nor has there been any
maintenance of._the- creek. He inquired cif the present plan as drawn leaves
any space for access for maintenance along the creek. Mr. Miller commented
that the plan was developed for the full width of the right of way. Mr.
Moore commented that there has to be access to the creek for maintenance.
He further stated that he has already been approached by property owners
of about 8 lots on May Street indicating that they are ready to go if this
project gets approved.
Chairman Gerrish stated he is not prepared to give the project a total
"thumbs down" at this time, but he feels that the information received is
inadequate. Further, he feels that an EIR should be required in the areas of
concern that• have.tbeen.brought.out tonight. He further commented that it
seems to be the consensus of the Commission that the density is too high
and, if that is the case, there would be no point in requiring an EIR be
prepared. Commissioner Carr stated he •doesn't_ feel the.'.`
Commission should require an EIR for the rezoning to "P - D" District because
he does not feel it is approvable.
After further discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 83 -934 Z
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF AN AMEND-
MENT TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE AS PROVIDED BY CHAPTER 4 ZONING, ARTICLE
32 OF SAID CODE.
On motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Moore,
and by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing
Commissioners Carr, Moore, Moots, Pilkington and
Chairman Gerrish
None
Commissioners Benhardt and Cole
Resolution was adopted this 18th day of January 1983.
i
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 1 -18 -83 Page :4
CONTINUATION - CONSIDERATION OF SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
Planning Director Hays reviewed that at the Commission's last meeting
the concept of the Sphere of Influence was discussed, and the matter was
continued to allow the LAFCO Executive Directorco make a presentation
to the Commission on the matter, however, at the recommendation of the Mayor,
a presentation was held before the City Council at their last meeting
in order to save time and avoid duplication. Additional information was
received at that meeting and included in the Commission's packets. He
pointed out that basically, as he had stated before, the Sphere of In-
fluence is the probable ultimate physical boundaries of the City. Mr.
Hays advised that LAFCo has asked the City for input into the matter,
however, LAFCo will be making the decision as to where the line should
be based on the information they receive.
COMMISSIONER PILKINGTON LEFT THE MEETING DURING THE ABOVE DISCUSSION.
After considerable discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission
that prime agricultural land should not be included within the Sphere of
Influence because of ultimate development. On motion by Commissioner Carr,
seconded by Commissioner Moots, and unanimously carried, recommending to
the City Council that the Sphere of Influence be co- terminus with the
existing City Limits. Commissioner Moore commented that if the City
Council is not in concurrence with the recommendation that perhaps a
joint study session should be held.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting
was adjourned by the Chairman at 9:30 p.m.
1,,71