PC Minutes 1981-05-19ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
May 19, 1981
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman
Gorsline presiding. Present are Commissioners Fischer, Pilkington, and
Sebastian. Commissioners Gerrish, Cole and Moots are absent. Planning Director
Castro and new .Planning Director Mike Hays are also in attendance.
MINUTE APPROVAL
Upon hearing no additions or corrections, on motion by Commissioner Fischer,
seconded by Commissioner Pilkington, and unanimously carried, the minutes of the
regular meetings of April 7th and April 21, 1981 were approved as prepared.
WELCOME TO NEW PLANNING DIRECTOR
Chairman Gorsline welcomed new Planning Director Michael Hays on board, and
expressed his appreciation on behalf of the Commission to Mr. Castro for his
patience and leadership that he has given the Commission.
CONTINUATION - REVIEW OF INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY ERVIN ENGINEERING REGARDING
ANNEXATION REQUEST OF 15 ACRES ADJACENT TO GOLDEN WEST HOMES AND SUNRISE TERRACE.
Planning Director Hays briefly reviewed the past history of this item, and
referred to a map depicting the proposed land use and a scheme for circulation.
Larry Rohloff, engineer for the applicants, spoke briefly with regard to the
conceptual plan, stating the plan is in response to the Planning Commission's
earlier request for clarity. Chairman Gorsline stated that at the present time,
the Planning Commission's position is that we are not doing anything on annex-
ations until some word is received from the City Council on the resources study
and knowing what direction the City Council is wanting to go. Commissioner
Sebastian pointed out that right now the City of Arroyo Grande has a deficit in
certain resource capabilities. We don't have at this time adequate water to
fill the needs of the current approved zoning within the City, and once we have
a resource study available, then the City is going to be in a better position to
start planning for annexations. Mr. Rohloff stated, in his opinion, his clients
would not object to waiting until the resources study is complete.
PUBLIC HEARING - PREZONING CASE NO. 81 -155, STEM ANNEXATION ON FARROLL AVE.,
"R -3" MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. (CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE).
Planning Director Castro breifly reviewed the proposed annexation, noting
that the stem annexation was initiated by the Local Agency Formation Commission
(LAFCo) on instructions both to the City of Arroyo Grande and the City of Grover
City, stating that there were certain parcels of land that would be annexed by
both cities and in order to complete the annexation, both applications had to
be acted upon simultaneously. He noted that the property alloted to the City of
Arroyo Grande involves 15 acres, and staff's recommendation calls for the
properties to be pre -zoned "R -3" Multiple Family Residential District. He
stated it is staff's opinion that the recommended zoning would be compatible
with both what is existing in the City of Arroyo Grande and parts of the City
of Grover City. Mr. Castro further clarified that this annexation is City
initiated and is merely to resolve a dispute between the Cities of Arroyo Grande
and Grover City.
Mr. Castro read a letter from Chris Taylor, dated April 16, 1981 stating
that as a property owner on Golden West Place adjacent to the proposed annex-
ation, he is opposed to the annexation and the intended zoning. He stated also
that a letter was received today from Tom Sullivan, City Planner for the City
of Grover, advising that the Planning Commission and City Council have both
held public hearings on the pre - zoning and the applications should be filed with
LAFCo and completed with the exception of the required map which should be pre-
pared within the next couple of weeks.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that public hearing for
Prezoning Case No. 81 -155 had been duly published, posted and property owners
notified, Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Jerry Habeck, Rt. 2, Box 621, stated he is representing the owners of the
Sakomoto property and they have no objections to the proposed prezoning. Roger
Fuller, 222 McKinley Street, inquired if it is true that if the City does not
annex this property, that Grover City will annex it themselves. Planning
Director Castro explained that if, for some reason, there is a delay on Arroyo
Grande's part, Grover City could not even annex the property that is alloted
to them.
There being no further comments either for or against the proposed pre -
zoning and annexation, Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing closed.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -19 -81 Page 2
Commissioner Fischer inquired if it would be best to accept the property
and keep it with the zoning it has now. Planning Director Castro advised. that
the Commission can modify the staff's recommendation. He further pointed out
that it is marginal agricultural land with respect to size and location and, in
his opinion, it is just a matter of time before it is absorbed in some sort of
urbanization.
Commissioner Sebastian stated that we are faced with a question of prezoning
and, in his opinion, a lot of energy has been expended over the years about
annexation, and he feels it is apparent that this land will come into the City.
Also, from an agricultural land standpoint, he does not feel it is prime agri-
cultural land. He further stated he would like to go ahead and accept the pre -
zoning concept tonight and condition the annexation based upon available water
resources that is going to come out of the resources study, which would keep the
land in agricultural use until such time as we have the water to be able to
convert it into a residential type project. Commissioner Fischer stated she
agrees: with. Mr. Sebastian in that this will solve a problem and it is not a
development coming within the City Limits.
After discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -820 Z
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMEND-
MENT TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE AS PROVIDED BY CHAPTER 4, ZONING, ARTICLE
32 QF SAID CODE.
On motion by Commissioner Sebastian, seconded by Commissioner Fischer, and
by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Fischer, Pilkington, Sebastian and Chairman
Gorsline
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners. Gerrish, Cole and Moots
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of May 1981.
PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING IMPLEMENTATION OF SENATE
BILL 1960. PROVIDING FOR MOBILE HOMES ON RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
Planning Director Castro reviewed the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment,
noting that the City has little choice in implementing this State mandated per-
mitted use. Commissioner Sebastian referred to Item #6 of the proposed ordi-
nance noting that there is no reference to the Uniform Building Code. He ex-
pressed concern of an acceptable wiring standard to the mobilehome industry not
being compatible to the Uniform Building Code, and when the Commission originally
discussed the bill, it was his understanding that the UBC is going to be met.
Planning Director Castro stated it is his understanding that the actual specs
that come out from the manufacturer will have to be reviewed by the City; also,
in discussing the matter with. Al Santinello, Chief Building Inspector, the units'
manufacturers will have to certify that the type or wiring is an acceptable stand-
ard.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that public hearing for
implementation of Senate Bill 1960 had been duly published and posted, Chairman
Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Mr. Albert Stillwell, 734 Myrtle Street, noted that the Commission could
require that the conduit and wiring be installed after the mobile home is in
place. Be further commented that in some neighborhoods a mobile home would be
an improvement.
There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Gorsline
declared the hearing closed.
Commissioner Sebastian commented that under the old FHA loan requirements
there was a lot of study put into how much exterior storage would be required
in a garage or carport to satisfy public needs and, in his opinion, we should
define some sort of minimum requirements for exterior storage in a carport situ-
ation to preclude the use of the Sears type aluminum storage sheds. He further
stated that Item #6 would be the appropriate place when a plan review is done
to require the mobile home developer to certify conformance with the UBC at that
time. He commented he feels we should have some sort of guarantee that when
they go into a residential area, they should be as safe as the surrounding homes.
19
7
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -19 -81 Page 3
With regard to Item . #7, Commissioner Sebastian inquired how high we are
going to allow solid concrete or masonry perimeters, and stated he felt there
should be some sort of agreement on a maximum foundation height. Commissioner
Sebastian stated he does not understand Item #9 with regard to the requirement
of the one third side yard setback. Mr. Castro stated that is a requirement
of the Zoning Code.
After further discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -821
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING
ORDINANCE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SENATE BILL 1960.
On motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Sebastian, and
by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Fischer, Pilkington, Sebastian and Chairman
Gorsline
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Gerrish, Cole and Moots
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of May 1981.
Commissioner Sebastian commented, in his opinion, Mr. Hays could handle
the concerns regarding parking requirements and outside storage.
PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING CASE NO. 81 -152, FROM "RA -B3" RESIDENTIAL AGRI-
CULTURAL DISTRICT TO "R -1" SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, "WALNUT VIEW
ESTATES ",'SO. OF CHERRY AVENUE. (KUDEN /ELLSWORTH).
Planning Director Hays referred to the proposed subdivision map, noting
that the only consideration tonight is the rezoning request. He stated that
the applicants, Kuden and Ellsworth Realty, have submitted an application to
change the zoning on approximately 16 acres from "RA -B3" District to an "R -1
designation. He further noted that the subdivision map that accompanied this
application is not completed relative to drainage.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Hays that public hearing for Re-
zoning Case No. 81 -152 had been duly published, posted and property owners noti-
fied, Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Mr. Fred Schott, Project Engineer, reviewed the proposed project and the
plans for drainage. He noted that they have not yet submitted the hydrology
study, however, it has been completed.
Mrs. Stillwell, 734 Myrtle Street, stated she has the adjoining property
to the east and the water that comes into the property now flows into the
channel and if something was put there to obstruct the flow of the water, it
would come on down into her property. Mr. Schott explained on the map how the
water would be diverted. Mr. Albert Stillwell, 734 Myrtle Street, stated that
the present ditch is completely filled with trash. Mr. Hill, 611 E. Cherry Avenue
inquired as to who is going to pay for the flood control. He stated he is also
speaking for his neighbors that could not come tonight, and they have a problem
there right now with. traffic. Mr. Gullickson, 529 E. Cherry Avenue, stated he
has lived in that immediate vicinity for many years and, in his opinion, that
property is in the City Limits and they have paid City taxes for many years; it
is not prime agricultural land, and he feels it should be zoned for single family
dwellings. Mr. Schott explained, with regard to the cost, there is no possibility
that the applicant would try to create an assessment district. Ann Haskin, 426
Garden Street, stated they have a lot of traffic problems there now. Roger
Fuller, 222 McKinley Street, asked who would maintain the drainage pipe after it
is placed? Planning Director Castro advised that after the improvements have
been accepted by the City, the City would maintain it.
Commissioner Sebastian stated he felt that the public hearing could be closed
because the two key issues are drainage and traffic, and he couldn't envision any
more problems. After a brief discussion it was decided that the public hearing
be continued to the next meeting.
Commissioner Sebastian commented that one of the things that we have to deal
with is the aspect of low density in this particular area. He further stated
that, in his opinion, a focus report covering drainage is going to be in order
when we come to the Subdivision Review and a traffic analysis would also fit
into that type of a focus report. He stated he seriously questions the ability
Arroyo Grande. Planning Commission, 5 -19 -81 Page 4
to entirely divert the water without really impacting the people to the west,
and it is his feeling that possibly the "R -1" density might be a little too
dense for that location.
After discussion, Chairman Gorsline announced that the matter would be con-
tinued until the next meeting of June 2, 1981.
PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING CASE NO. 81 -154, FROM "RA -B3" RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL
DISTRICT TO "RA -B2" RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT, 321 and 331 TALLY HO ROAD.
(MCLAUGHLIN /LECHNER).
Planning Director Hays stated that the applicants have submitted a petition
to rezone their properties from "RA -B3" to "RA -B2 ", and that both parcels are
approximately 1 acre in size and a change of zoning would allow a future lot
split on each parcel. He further advised that the General Plan designates this
area for Low Density Residential uses and the request is compatible with that
designation.
In answer to Commissioner Sebastian's question as to what occupancy is there
now, structure -wise, Planning Director Hays advised he believes there is one
house on each parcel. Commissioner Sebastian questioned if the current location
of the structure is going to preclude a lot split. Planning Director Hays noted
that their intention is to split their properties and, hopefully, the location
of the present structures would not preclude that procedure.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Hays that public hearing for
Rezoning Case No. 81 -154 had been duly published, posted and property owners
notified, Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Mr. Vincent Lechner, 331 Tally Ho Road, spoke in favor of the rezoning.
He advised that the lot is wide enough for two houses. Mr. Delbert McLaughlin,
321 Tally Ho Road, also spoke in favor of the rezoning, advising that there is
room to allow for the proper footage if they wish to proceed with the lot split.
There being no further discussion for or against the proposed rezoning,
Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing closed.
After a brief discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -822 EIR
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL
DECLARATION.
On motion by Commissioner Sebastian, seconded by Commissioner Pilkington,
and by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Fischer, Pilkington, Sebastian and Chairman
Gorsline
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Gerrish, Cole and Moots
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of May 1981.
RESOLUTION NO. 81 -823 Z
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT
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 Sebastian, seconded by Commissioner Pilkington,
and by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commiss Fischer, Pilkington, Sebastian and Chairman
Gorsline
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Gerrish, Cole and Moots
the. foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of May 1981.
321
322
Arroyo Grande. Planning Commission, 5 -19 -81 Page 5
PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING CASE NO. 81 -156 - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT - AGRICULTURAL
TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE, HUASNA ROAD. (IKEDA BROS.)
Planning Director Hays advised that before the Commission this evening are a
series of applications based on a particular piece of property. The first appli-
cation deals with an amendment to the General Plan. The property in question lies
immediately to the southwest of the new Strother Park on the south side of Huasna
Road. The request to amend the General Plan is to change it from agricultural to
low density residential designation and the other consideration is the rezoning
of the property from "A" District to "R -1" District, and the third consideration
would be a subdivision map which has been submitted, however, it was felt it was
not ready to process because of some questions that have arisen. Mr. Hays further
stated it is staff's feeling that there are some possible environmental concerns
relative to this particular application, and that the amendment and rezoning,
and the ultimate subdivision may have some environmental aspects of concern to
the Commission as noted on the Assessment form. Mr. Hays stated there is a
technical problem with this application, in that the property that we are to
consider tonight is surrounded by a dark dashed line, but the subdivision map
that was brought in took in not only that property, but portions of other
properties on the north side of the creek. The ultimate proposal is to acquire
these two properties,.'.arid it seems that should be accomplished first; then we
could go ahead and consider the General Plan amendment and ultimate rezoning
and subdivision. .
Upon being assured by Planning Director Hays that Rezoning Case No. 81 -156
had been duly published, posted and property owners notified, Chairman Gorsline
declared the hearing open.
Jim McGillis, Engineer for the applicant, briefly reviewed the proposal,
pointing out that the potential use of the property for agriculture is nothing,
because to commercially farm it and make a profit off of it you have to consider
what you are getting back on the cost of the land; it has to have a big enough
acreage to use mechanical farming implements on it; it has to have good water;
you have to have a good local labor supply; and it has to have a good market
place. He stated this land has virtually none of those, and,the agricultural
report points that out. He further stated the property is isolated from the
farming community, and the creek will be probably 200 or 300 ft. wide with
heavy vegetation between it and the agricultural community. Also, the property
is on a road that the General Plan calls a collector road which is supposed to
be used to collect traffic, and the way that it gets widened and improved is
through development. With regard to the significant items pointed out by Mr.
Hays, he stated the impact on the Arroyo Grande Creek and the flooding of the
property has been engineered and turned in to the Army Corps of Engineers and
they have a verbal O.K. that there is no problem with it, and it will sustain
more than a 100 year storm; there will be no erosion problems with the design
and erosion control on this side of the creek.
Mr. Gabe deLeon, 450 Coach Road, spoke in favor of the proposed zone
change. Christine Phillips, 216 Pearwood, stated her concerns with regard to
drainage and increased traffic, and also the fact that the water situation
hasn't been resolved yet. Mr. John Roulard, adjacent property owner, stated
he has no intention of developing his property; they have farmed that property
and it is agricultural property, and any time a subdivision is created next to
agricultural property, a tremendous impact is imposed. He requested that the
open space be maintained, or if the property is not prime agricultural land,
if it could be changed to some other designation that is not as dense.
In answer to Planning Director Castro's question, Mr. McGillis stated
he should have written information available from the Corps of Engineers in
two weeks regarding the drainage concerns.
On motion by Commissioner Sebastian, seconded by Commissioner Fischer, and
unanimously carried, that the public hearing be continued when the item comes
up on the agenda again.
PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING CASE NO. 81 -157, FROM "A" AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO
"R -1" SINGLE FAMiLY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT; HUASNA ROAD: (IKEDA BROS.)
Upon being assured by Planning Director Hays that public hearing for Re-
zoning Case No. 81 -157 had beeniduly published, posted and property owners
notified, Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing open. After a brief dis-
cussion, on motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Pilkington,
and unanimously carried, the public hearing was continued in view of the
continuation of the request for a General Plan amendment.
Arroyo Grande_p1anning Commission, 5 -19 -81 Page 6
LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 81 -355, LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, PRINTZ ROAD. (WHITE).
Planning Director Castro explained that the Lot Line Adjustment before the
Commission still proposes to maintain the same number of lots, but merely shifts
the buildable lot to the rear of the property. He stated that the City Attorney
has again reviewed this matter and advises that the request is still a violation
of the existing. zoning district and doesn't see how the Commission can proceed
with the applicant's request.
After further discussion, Commissioner Sebastian stated, in his opinion,
the simpliest and least expensive process is to go ahead and recommend the matter
to the City Council and, if that fails, then it is up to the Whites to come back
with possibly a zone change.
After discussion, on motion by Commissioner Sebastian, seconded by Commissioner
Fischer, and unanimously carried, recommending to the City Council acceptance of
Lot Split Case No. 81 -355.
LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 81 -356, CANYON WAY. (SCHAFER).
Planning Director Hays advised that the proposed lot split will create 4
parcels and will be developed under the Optional Design Standards as approved
by the Council. He also reviewed the recommended conditions of approval noted
in the staff report, dated May 14, 1981, noting that a 9th condition should be
added requiring payment of park fees and street tree fees.
Commissioner Fischer stated that the applicant's yield for drainage
assessment was two lots and they are creating 4 lots. Larry Rohloff, Engineer
for the applicant noted that their potential lot yield was for two lots which
was based upon potential figures if dedicated streets were going to be put in,
because it was not certain what was going to be done to subdivide the properties.
Commissioner Sebastian expressed a concern that Lot A and possibly Lot B is not
going to have adequate water and, in his opinion, the only way they are going
to be able to have adequate water is when the Knollwood project and the Rancho
Grande project build a storage tank at a higher elevation. He further stated
his personal recommendation would be that people should be allowed to have a
larger meter size without a surcharge when they are at 200 ft. contour or above.
After further discussion, Mr. Rohloff requested continuance of the
matter until a full Commission is present.
LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 81 -357, CANYON WAY. (CUMLEY).
Mrs. Cumley requested that this matter be continued also until a full
Commission is present.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 81 -239, 22 UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT, 1133 MAPLE
STREET. (WOOD).
Planning Director Castro reviewed the staff report, dated May 12, 1981.
He noted that an appeal was made by Mr. Wood regarding the architectural dis-
approval by the Planning Commission. This matter was considered by the City
Council at their last regular meeting, and the matter was approved by the City
Council in favor of the applicant, subject to one modification. The modification
was that Phase 1 and Phase 2 be incorporated as Phase 1, which means that there
will be two phases instead of three as originally proposed.
After discussion, on motion by Commissioner Sebastian, seconded by
Commissioner Pilkington, and unanimously carried, approving Architectural
Review Case No. 81 -239 with the conditions noted in the staff report, dated
May 12, 1981, and additional conditions as follows:
12. That the trash receptacle area be noted between the two
proposed private driveways shall be included as part of
Phase 1 and improved as noted in Condition #8.
13. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant
shall present final improvement plans for the total
recreational area to be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Director and the Planning Commission.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 81 -240, EL CAMINO REAL, 24 UNIT CONDOMINIUM
PROJECT. (HILL TOP DEVELOPERS).
Planning Director Castro reviewed the proposed plans for the development
and the staff report dated May 12, 1981. He stated he did clarify with
Public Works Director Karp some of the comments that Mr. Walker made with
regard to the pre - approval made by the City, and the only approvals the City
made was on grading and drainage.
323
?24
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -19 -81 Page 7
Commissioner Sebastian stated he was concerned about the siding and recom-
mended that a condition be added requiring that the siding be of one of the
weather resistant woods such as cedar, redwood or cypress.
It was pointed out by Mr. Castro that there is a problem with the fence
being proposed right on the property line which cannot occur because a 10 ft.
setback is required and, if that is the case, the proposed design will not work.
After further discussion, on motion by Commissioner Sebastian, seconded by
Commissioner Pilkington, and unanimously carried, Architectural Review Case No.
81 -240 was continued until the next regular meeting pending architectural
review of the project.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 81 -241, ADDITION OF A DAY CARE CENTER, 244 NO.
OAK PARK BOULEVARD. (PEACE LUTHERAN CHURCH).
Planning Director Hays advised that the proposal is for a structure to be
used for educational purposes. After a brief discussion, on motion by
Commissioner Pilkington, seconded by Commissioner Fischer, and unanimously
carried, Architectural Review Case No. 81 -241 was approved as per plans sub-
mitted.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was
adjourned by the Chairman at 11:35 P.M.
ATTEST:
Secretary Chairman