PC Minutes 1980-09-16242
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
September 16, 1980
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman
Gorsline presiding. Present are Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Moots and Pilkington.
Commissioners Fischer and Sebastian are absent. Planning Director Castro is also in
attendance.
MINUTE APPROVAL
Upon hearing no additions or corrections, the minutes of the regular meeting of
August 19, 1980 were approved as prepared on a motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded
by Commissioner Gerrish, and unanimously carried.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR 1980 -81.
Chairman Gorsline recommended that the Election of Officers for 1980 -81 be post-
poned to the next meeting since the full Commission is not present.
ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO AGENDA.
Planning Director Castro advised that the applicant has requested continuance of
Item 10.b, Lot Split Case No. 80 -335, to the next Commission meeting of October 7, 1980.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 80- 231,1100 BLOCK OF ASH STREET, 27 UNIT TOWNHOUSE PROJECT.
(NICKELL AND WILLIAMS)..
Planning Director Castro advised that the plans before the Commission are almost
identical to the plans that were submitted by Mr. Newdoll for the same property. He
noted the changes that have occured are primarily in the recreational area in that the
uses have been changed, however, the concept of the amount of land and the recreation
facilities are still there. He further advised that the interior design of the units
has changed, and the architectural design has been changed slightly from the previous
plan. Mr. Castro pointed out that the problem with the site plan now is with the park-
ing. He explained that on Unit C, the additional parking space that is required by the
ordinance would be in conflict with the garage use if it is projected the full 20 ft.,
and the same is true with Unit F. He stated it may require that the entire unit be re-
designed or they may have to substitute some other workable unit.
COMMISSIONER FISCHER ENTERED THE MEETING DURING THE ABOVE DISCUSSION.
Mr. Castro advised that the Commission could either continue the matter or they
could give him the authority to go ahead and administratively approve the redesign pro-
vided it meets the requirements of the code and there are no other major changes made
to the plan itself.
After a brief discussion, the Commission was in agreement with Mr. Castro's recom-
mendation and granted him the authority to wo'.k with the applicant on the above concerns
and to give administrative approval on the redesign provided there are no major problems.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUATION -USE PERMIT CASE NO. 80 -300, 28 UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT IN
THE "R -D" GARDEN APARTMENT DISTRICT, 1133 MAPLE STREET. (WOOD).
Planning Director Castro advised the Commission that it is his understanding the
petitioner does not wish to provide common recreational facilities for the project and,
in his opinion, he could not support the project without those facilities being that
there may be children involved. Mr. Castro further advised that he is concerned about
the mixed uses that will prevail during the phasing out of the office /commercial activ-
ities and the addition of the new condominium units.
Mr. Keith Tracy, representing the applicant, pointed out the basic differences be-
tween the two plans submitted. He stated the circulation has been improved and a drive-
way added for access.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that public hearing for Use Permit
Case No. 80 -300 had been duly published, posted and property owners notified, Chairman
Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fair View Drive, asked Commissioner Gerrish if he had dis-
solved partnership with Pacific Plaza, with which Addison Wood was associated? Commis-
sioner Gerrish stated that the partnership no longer exists. Mr. Don Cummings stated
he lives across the street from the proposed construction and inquired if Mr. Wood would
still maintain his office on the property after the condominiums are built. Planning
Director Castro advised that the office would be maintained until it is phased out by
the project. Mrs. Johnson stated she lives in front of the proposed project and it was
her understanding that Mr. Wood is keeping the back end of his business in there too.
Mr. Castro advised that as each phase takes place, the present uses on the property will
no longer exist. He further stated that is one of the concerns that staff has regarding
the project. Mr. Cummings stated that if Mr. Wood plans to move his business ventures
out eventually, then the project would be alright with him. Mrs. Johnson stated she
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9 -16 -80 Page 2
doesn't mind Mr. Wood's office in there, but she doesn't approve of the condominiums.
Mr..Jenee, 180 Walnut Street, stated his concerns 'regarding the additional traffic
which.would be generated by the proposed project and requested.that the Commission
take proper action in regard to this.
Mr. Tracy stated that the reason the project is being done in phases is because
the developer doesn't want to flood the market at one time. He'further stated that
the completion time would be roughly three years from start of the first phase to the
final phase of the whole project. Mr. Tracy further stated they feel.the project is
one of the better ones in the area.
There being no further comments for or against the.proposed Use Permit, Chairman
Gorsline declared the hearing closed.
Commissioner Gerrish stated his major concern is the mixed commercial /residential
use, and he doesn't . see how the City could set up a phasing program that they could
hold the developer to. Commissioner Moots stated he doesn't like the phasing aspect
of the development, and he feels some.recreation facilities should be provided. Also,
in his opinion, the condominiums would be harder to sell with those businesses in there.
After a brief discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 80 -764 U
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING A USE PERMIT, CASE NO..
80 -300.
On motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Pilkington, and by
the following roll call vote,. to wit:
AYES.: Commissioners Cole, Fischer, Gerrish, Moots, Pilkington and
Chairman Gorsline
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Sebastian
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 16th day of September 1980.
PUBLIC. HEARING-CONTINUATION, VARIANCE CASE NO. 80 -68, REQUEST FOR REDUCTION IN
DRIVEWAY WIDTH, 222 MCKINLEY STREET. (FULLER).
Planning Director Castro advised that Mr. Fuller is requesting a Variance to
permit the construction of an 11 ft. driveway'to the rear of his property. He noted
that the lot, by its own definition, is a landlocked parcel of property. He stated
that he has discussed the . request with Public Works Director Joe Anderson and Fire
Chief Marsalek, and it was the concensus.of opinion that an 11 ft. drive is . not ad-
equate for emergency vehicles, and staff is recommending denial of the Variance appli-
cation.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that Variance Case No. 80 -68 had
been duly published, posted and property owners notified, Chairman Gorsline declared
the hearing open.
Roger Fuller, 222 McKinley Street, petitioner for the Variance, spoke in favor
of the Variance being granted.. He stated he is requesting the 11 ft. drive to avoid
having to move or demolish the garage in order to gain access . to the rear property,and
he plans to build a home for himself on the unimproved lot.
There being no further comments for or against the proposed Variance, Chairman
Gorsline declared the hearing closed. The Commission indicated their concurrence with
staff's recommendation for denial, in that an 11 ft. drive would not be adequate for
emergency vehicles and, after a brief discussion, the following, action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 80 -765 V
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 16th day of September 1980.
243
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE .CITY OF
' ARROYO GRANDE DENYING A VARIANCE, CASE NO. 80 -68.
On motion by Commissioner Pilkington, seconded by. Commissioner Cole, and by the
following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Fischer, Gerrish, Moots,. Pilkington and Chairman
Gorsline.
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Sebastian.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9 -16 -80 Page 3
PUBLIC HEARING - PRE - ZONING CASE NO. 80 -139, 1485 CHILTON ST. (STERNBERGH ANNEX.)
Planning Director Castro stated the property being considered for pre- zoning is
approximately one acre in size. He noted that staff is recommending the annexation of
the property with pre- zoning of "R -1" Single Family Residential District. He further
noted that if and when the annexation becomes final, there will be requirements to
furnish city. utilities.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that public hearing for Pre - Zoning
Case No. 80 -139 had been duly published, posted and property owners notified, Chairman
Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Ella Honeycutt, 560 Oak Hill Road, inquired if the City has done . a study of its
resources at the present time? Mr. Castro advised that a study was done when the Knoll -
wood development was approved. He. further advised that in calculating both the current
water sources and the Lopez water, it is estimated we still have 770 acre feet of water
surplus. Mrs. Honeycutt stated her concern over a dangerous situation being created
when you crowd people into an area without the resources. Mr. Vern Erno, 270 Hillcrest,
stated they do have a water problem over there with regard to the water pressure _on,
Hillcrest.
There being no further comments for or against the proposed pre- zoning, Chairman
Gorsline declared the hearing closed.
In answer to Commissioner Gerrish's question regarding the pre- zoning procedure,
Planning Director Castro advised that one of LAFCO's requirements is that before the
annexation can be finaled, the City must act on the annexation itself and, secondly,
the City must bring the property in with some sort of interim zoning; otherwise, it is
brought into the City under the "A" zoning. He further advised that according to our
zoning regulations, at least 3 and maybe 4 residences could be developed on the property
in question. In answer to Commissioner Moot's question if the annexation would affect
the water pressure on Hillcrest if those homes were built, Planning Director Castro
stated, in his opinion, it would not change drastically, and it was his feeling that the
problem is probably that the main lines need to be upgraded, which would be a matter
that the Public Works Department would have to respond to. .
Mitch Walker, representing Mr. Sternbergh, pointed out that. there is an existing
house under contract with the City for water and there will probably be 3 more houses
coming in on that lot. He further stated that he has talked to City Engineer Karp and
has been advised that the water lines will be brought up to standard, and off -site and
utility extensions were approved by Mr. Karp, so the. City is checking all of those things
for conformance with City standards. Mr. Castro stated that, in his opinion, the City
would make certain that there is enough water before recommending annexation. He further
advised that when a new development takes place the water system would be extended from
the property to the City_'s water main and if there is a system existing that is sub-
standard, it would be the owner's expense to. improve those facilities.
After a further discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION•NO. 80 -766 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
OF SAID CODE.
On motion by Commissioner cole, seconded by Commissioner Pilkington, and by the
following roll . call vote, to. wit:
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Fischer., Gerrish, Moots, Pilkington and
Chairman Gorsline.
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Sebastian.
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this. 16th day of September 1980.
PUBLIC HEARING - PRE- ZONING CASE NO. 80 -140, VALLEY ROAD AT LOS BERROS ROAD. (LOS
BERROS ANNEXATION - GARING).
Planning Director Castro pointed out the property on the map and advised the Com-
mission that staff's recommendation, as previously discussed, is that in order to de-
velop the property along the same lines as the development to the rear, it would almost
have to be brought in as an "R -2" District.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9- 16 -80. Page 4
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that public hearing for Pre - zoning
Case No. 80 -140 had been duly . published, posted and property owners _notified, . Chairman
Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Mr. Bruce Geller, Tiger Tail Drive, stated he is speaking for 67 residents in that
area, and they have no objection to that area being zoned R -1,' but would strongly object
to the "R -2" zoning. Mrs. Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fair View Drive, stated she is opposed
to all annexations to the City until the . land within the City is developed. She further
stated that the area is "R -1" and should remain "R -1" and, in her opinion, there should
not be mixed housing in there now. Mr. Don Stewart, 834 Bambi.Court, stated he is speak -
ing on behalf of 22 families in the area, and the development that is there now are
single family dwellings on individual lots, and they are opposed to anything other than
that. Mr. K. P. French, 820 Bambi Court., stated he is definitely against .changing the
zoning. He stated there are a lot of problems regarding that, property, . such as ingress
and egress off of Valley Road adding to the already trafficked road and, in his opinion,
to rezone .less than one acre.of.land to "R -2" is not feasible.
Mr. Jim Garing, Rt. 1, Box 418, one of the owners of the property, stated that what
the petitioners have in mind for that property was the same type of development as the
Tiger Tail development.
Planning Director Castro advised that the Valley Gardens development across Valley
Road is zoned "R -1 ", the mobilehome park is zoned "R -3" with a " -D" Override, and the
Tiger Tail development is a Planned Development, which is simply one that was approved
subject to a special plan. He noted that in this particular instance, the density is
greater than what would be permitted in the "R -1" District. Mr. Warren Huffman, 813
Mesa Drive, stated he would like to see the adult community continued there. Mr. Tony
Azevedo, spoke in favor of the prezoning.
There being no further discussion for or against the pre- zoning, Chairman Gorsline
declared the hearing closed.
Commissioner Gerrish inquired if the development could be restricted to an adult
community to keep it in line with the adjacent development? Planning Director Castro
advised that the " -D" Override allows the Commission to'make reference to a specific
plan. He stated he didn't see any problem in adding the override which would make the
design that is finally approved by the Commission subject to certain conditions. Mr.
Garing stated they would have no objections to the "R -2" zoning with the " -D'! Override.
After further discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 80 -767 Z
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 16th day of September 1980.
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE 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 Gerrish, seconded by Commissioner Cole, and by the fol-
lowingroll call vote, to wit:,
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Fischer, Gerrish, Moots, Pilkington and
Chairman Gorsline.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Sebastian.
PUBLIC HEARING - PRE - ZONING CASE NO. 80 -141, EL CAMINO REAL AND ROBLES ROAD. (ANNEXA-
TION OF TRACT 652 - FILER).
Planning Director Castro advised that the property at the corner of Robles Road
and El Camino Real is the parcel being considered for annexation, and staff is recom-
mending that the property be pre -zoned "R -G ". He further advised that the property con -
sists of approximately 1 -1/3 acres and plans have been approved by the County for 24
condominium units. In answer to Commissioner Fischer's question if the "R -G" zoning'
would cover the number of units that have already been approved by the County, Planning
Director Castro advised that the approval by the. County would take precedence over the
zoning by the City, and the action by the City is.merely accepting the property and the
development as approved by the County. He noted that the proposed density would conform
to the "R -G" District.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that public hearing for Pre - zoning
Case No. 80 -141 had been duly published, posted and property owners notified, Chairman
Gorsline declared the hearing open.
245
2 6
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9- 16 -.80 Page 5
Mr. Mitch Walker, agent for the petitioner, gave a brief history of the property,
noting that there is a recorded final map; the project is an existing one and will
either be built under the City or in the County, and has been reviewed by the City
Council a number of times.
Mr. Vern Erno, 270 Hillcrest Drive, stated he didn't realize this was changed to
an "R -G" District, and he doesn't know where this new change comes in, but there are
only single family residences in there. Mr. Castro advised that the current County
land use is almost identical to what the City is recommending, and when you look at the
entire strip, it is primarily a multiple use.
There being no further comments for or_against the proposed pre- zoning, Chairman
Gorsline declared the hearing closed. •
Chairman Gorsline stated, as he understands the situation, if the Commission does
not recommend the pre- zoning, the development will be the same even if it is in the
County. Mr. Castro pointed out that there is a contract arrangement between Mr. Filer
and the City regarding water.
After a brief discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 80 -768 Z
following roll call vote, to wit:
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO
THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AS PRO-
VIDED BY CHAPTER 4, ZONING,' ARTICLE 32 OF SAID CODE.
On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Pilkington, and by the
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Fischer, Gerrish, Moots, Pilkington and Chair-
man Gorsline. _
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Sebastian. .
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 16th day of September 1980.
PUBLIC HEARING— PRE - ZONING CASE NO. 80 =142, HUASNA ROAD. (HUASNA ROAD ANNEXATION NO. 4 -
WELLS).
Planning Director Castro referred to the staff report, dated September 11, 1980.
Mr. Castro pointed out that the property is contiguous to the City Limits and is also
contiguous to a single family residential development and, therefore, the approval of
this annexation would not constitute a new land use trend. He further pointed out that
from previous studies and recommendations that staff has made to the Planning Commission
and City Council, the City is capable of providing needed services. Mr. Castro stated
that upon personal inspection of the property, this.property is approximately 12 acres
of flat to gently rolling land, with a 10 to 30% slopage in,the northern_portion. This
property description makes it available for a higher density development in the front
as opposed to the back portion, which would necessitate considerable grading to achieve
a medium high density development.
Planning Director Castro advised that the current zoning of the property'in the
County is "A -1 -21" Light Agricultural and, in'accordance with the previous legal des-
cription of this annexation hearing, we.have again re- advertised the property from the
County's current zoning to the City's "R -1" Single Family Residential District. He
pointed out that based on the General Plan's density allowances, this 12 acres could
achieve on a low density level, 54 units. Mr.- Castro stated that in further re-
searching the property and determining what merits may exist for the City by recomend-
ing this annexation, one issue that appears.favorable in the best interests of every-
body is the solution of a.drainage problem which has prevailed in this area for some
time and has caused a series of disagreements among the property owners and Mr. Wells.
Mr. Castro stated, in his opinion, through the annexation process, and through the ap-
proval of a development proposal, a lasting_solution to the drainage concerns could be
achieved.
Mr. Castro pointed out that in view of the geography of the . property and problems
concerning drainage and circulation, in his opinion, the "R -1" District would not be
the best zoning for the property, and he recommended that the annexation be approved and
the Commission endorse the Planned Development District for the following reasons:
1. Rather than to apply a conventional application or design to the property, the
Planned Development process would be better capable of addressing the key concerns with
regard to land use, drainage and circulation.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9 -16 -80 Page 6
2. The Planned Development should allow for enough flexibility for the City and
the applicant to coordinate the various concerns into a viable development plan.
3. With the Planned Development process, the final product of what the developer
and the staff finally resolve will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and Council,
if necessary, for compliance with previous understandings or conditions of approval.
247
4. The annexation would be a logical extension of the City limits, and a positive
action by the. City should allow for engineering and planning concerns to be addressed
and resolved to the mutual satisfaction of the City and the property. owner.
Mr. Castro further stated that, in his opinion, the annexation would not generate
any more than normal property into the real estate market than now prevails; it is only
one additional parcel of land which, in all probability, will be phased out (development -
wise) and will add to the diversibility of housing in the community.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that public hearing for Pre - zoning
Case No. 80 -142 had been duly published, posted and property owners notified, Chairman
Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Steve Cool, 1577 El Camino Real, representing Mr. Wells, pointed out that Mr.
Wells' property is within the Urban Reserve Line established by the City and the County.
He further pointed out that, as Mr. Castro had mentioned, the developer feels that the
annexation will solve a long standing drainage problem for the.area. He stated also
that the petitioners are in agreement with staff's recommendation that the property be
designated as Planned Development rather than "R -1 ". He stated that what they plan to
do in terms of the development,.the overall density for the approximate 12 acres would
be about 4 units per acre, which would be approximately 48 units; which would be single
family residences.
Robert Phillips, 216 Pearwood; Harvey Palmer, 210 Pearwood; Mrs. Silva, 102 Pear -
wood; Christine Phillips, 216 Pearwood; Ella Honeycutt, 560 Oak Hill Road; Jim Drummond,
204 Pearwood and Charles Silva, 102 Pearwood, spoke in opposition to the proposed pre -
zoning and annexation.
Lonnie Wells, petitioner for the pre- zoning; Anthony Azevedo; Jack Huber, 208
Pearwood; Jackie Stewart, 202 .Pearwood; Linda Klempke, 1207 Huasna Road; Rose Stewart,
202 Pearwood; Tony Burdick, 130 Pearwood; Joseph Rose, 212 Pearwood; Mary O'Neal, 206
Pearwood, and Paul Klempke, 1207 Huasna Road, spoke in favor of the proposed pre- zoning
and annexation:
Mrs. Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fair View Drive, stated it.is her contention that we
should develop the property that is within.our City• :• She also made reference_to
the big projects that have been approved,,.stating_ when all of. are fully developed,
we are going_to have a very.small amount of water.
There.being no further comments for or against the pre-zoning, Chairman Gorsline
declared the hearing closed. .
.Commissioner Cole- pointed out she is concerned about what is going.to happen in
Arroyo Grande because of.the outside development using our services, and circulation
is becoming a problem because of these developments. She stated that water is a-problem
whether whether we approve this annexation.or not and.we have to start working with the problem
many years in advance. We are going to have to find some other source.of water for this
community. With regard to drainage, Commissioner Cole stated if we can control those
areas and have a better system for all the people concerned, then the City should act in
a positive manner. She_further pointed out that_this area has been recommended for
Planned.Development which -puts a limitation on.the development. Commissioner Moots _
stated, in his opinion, we have enough undeveloped land in the City without going to the
County. Commissioner Fischer stated she would agree with Commissioner Moots, and that
she is against annexing_parcels•of land this large. • .
After considerable discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 80-769 Z,
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO
THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AS PRO-
VIDED BY CHAPTER 4, ZONING, ARTICLE 32 OF SAID CODE.
On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Gerrish, and by the fol-
lowing roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Cole and Gerrish.
•
?48
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9 -16 -80 Page 7
NOES: Commissioners Fischer, Moots, Pilkington and Chairman Gorsline.
ABSENT: Commissioner Sebastian.
the foregoing Resolution was defeated this 16th day of September 1980.
PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING CASE NO. 80 -143, ZONE CHANGE FROM "A" DISTRICT TO "P -D"
DISTRICT - GRANDE HIGHLANDS.
Planning Director Castro reviewed that the Planning Commission, back in 1979,
recommended'that the subject property be rezoned from the "A" District to the "P -D"
District, and further accepted the Environmental Impact Report as being proper and
mitigating the concerns expressed both in the development plan and,the Environmental
Impact Report. The Council the matter on August 28, 1979 and denied the ap-
plication without prejudice, basically because they wanted matters pertaining to the
drainage and traffic circulation resolved before the zoning was permitted.
Mr. Castro noted that the revised plans have been changed slightly, however the
land use has not been changed. He further reviewed the proposed circulation element
for the development. Mr. Castro advised that if the Commission is so disposed in ac-
cepting the concept of drainage in a ponding manner, they should then proceed with ask-
ing the developer for additional information prior to the rezoning of the property.
With regard to the Circulation Element, Mr. Castro stated that, in his opinion, what
the City Engineer is saying basically is that he approves of the way the developer has
come back with alternatives. From a zoning point of view, Mr. Castro recommended the
Planned Development as being the best type of zoning application. He further stated
that he is not suggesting to the Commission at this point in time that the density defi-
nition, type of dwelling units, design or the circulation is correct; this is something
that would have to come back at a later date.
Mr. Castro read a letter from Mr. Paul Haddox, dated September 10, 1980, regarding
the proposed zone - change.
With regard to the E.I.R., Planning Director Castro requested that the Commission
reconfirm the Environmental Impact Report as previously approved'by the Commission.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that public hearing for Rezoning
Case No. 80 -143 had been duly published, posted and property owners notified, Chairman
Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Mr. Mitch Walker, agent for the developer, explained that the original application
was for annexation and pre- zoning of the property, however, the application before the
Commission this evening does not include anything other than the portion of land that
is within the City. Mr. Walker briefly reviewed the proposed drainage plan, explaining
that the proposal will, in effect, reduce the run off from the property by 86% of the
volume that is coming . off not. He noted that the City Engineer has suggested that they
do this, plus improve the drainage channel. Mr. Castro pointed out that the improve-
ments as proposed will not solve the ultimate problem that we have, and that is the
water going from that channel on to the farmers' property,'etc., but if the Commission
finds that this is an acceptable means of allowing the development, then it would be
up to the Commission to recommend that system. He further noted that the Commission
recommended the system on the Knollwood and Wil'wood developments.
Mr. Lester Kruschef, 222 W. Cherry Ave., expressed concern with regard to the City's
ability to provide adequate water for new developments, and also•his concerns with re-
gard to the circulation. He stated that the drainage sounded good to him.
In answer to Ella Honeycutt's question as to who would operate and maintain the
retention basins, Planning Director Castro advised that would be the responsibility
of the developer.
After considerable discussion,' the Commission basically felt that the drainage pro-
posal appeared to be adequate, but expressed concern with regard to the proposed circula-
tion element.
Chairman Gorsline announced that the public hearing would be continued to the next
regular meeting of October 7, 1980.
1
1
1
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9 -16 -80 Page 8
PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING CASE NO. 80 -144, AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE PLAN FROM MEDIUM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 523 CROWN STREET. (IRVINE /GORDON).
Planning Director Castro referred to the staff report, dated September 8, 1980.
Mr. Castro advised that the City is suggesting that the right of way be abandoned and
deeded to the adjoining property for perpetual maintenance. Staff's recommendation,
if the Commission is disposed in approving the amendment, would be to modify the
General Plan Land Use from a Medium High Density Residential to a High Density Resi-
dential. Mr. Castro pointed out that it appears the project will be able to meet most
of the criteria outlined by the Conversion Ordinance or policies of the Commission,
and at the same time the project would be put in a conforming status.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that Rezoning Case No. 80 -144 had
been duly published, posted and property owners notified, Chairman Gorsline declared
the hearing open. Mr. Kirby Gordon 405 Indio Drive, Pismo Beach, was present and .
spoke in favor of the zone change. Mrs. Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fair View Drive, in-
quired if these buildings were built to the building code where the fire wall gags
clear through to the attic. Planning Director Castro advised that the buildings ware
built to code.
After a brief discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 80 -770 Z
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT
TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN.
On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Pilkington, and by the
following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Cole, Moots, Pilkington and Chairman Gorsline.
Commissioners Fischer and Gerrish.
Commissioner Sebastian.
zy9
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 16th day of September 1980.
ADJOURNMENT
"There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned
by the Chairman at 12 :05 P.M.