PC Minutes 1980-05-20ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
May 20, 1980
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman
Gorsline presiding. Present are Commissioners Simmons, Moots, Fischer and Carr.
Commissioners Sebastian and Cole are absent.' Planning Director Castro is also in
attendance.
MINUTE APPROVAL
Upon hearing no additions or corrections, the minutes of'the :regular meeting
of May 6, 1980 were approved on motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commis-
sioner Carr, and unanimously carried.
REVIEW - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 77-269, FREESTANDING SIGN, OAK PARK BLVD. AND WEST
BRANCH STREET, OAK PARK ACRES. (KVIDT)'
Planning Director Castro advised that the subject tract sign fronting on
Highway 101 advertising the Oak Park Acres development was granted a six month time
extension by the Planning Commission on September 18, 1979 to March 1980. He fur-
ther advised that staff is recommending approval of the sign because of the activity
that is still going on at the property and staff sees no problem with the sign or
the location of it.
After a brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Carr, seconded by Commis-
sioner Moots, and unanimously carried, approving a one year extension of Use Permit
Case No. 77 -269 to May 1981.
REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTIONS — ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 80 -218, BUILDING UTILIZA-
TION AND EXPANSION, 410 E. BRANCH STREET. (FUNCTIONAL LIVING INDUSTRIES)
Planning Director Castro advised that the Architectural Review Committee had
reviewed the project and recommended approval subject to the conditions noted in
the report dated May 14, 1980. He pointed out that the Committee felt the paving
and cleanup would add considerably to the property. He further noted that it is a
temporary use of the property and it does serve a very useful purpose in the commun-
ity. With regard to the required improvement of the parking area, Mr. Castro stated
that unless the applicants notify the City differently, it is assumed they are in-
tending to improve the parking to City standards and, if not, then the matter will
have to come back to the Commission for approval.
After a brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Com-
missioner Simmons, and unanimously carried, approving Architectural Review Commit-
tee Action, dated May 14, 1980.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE CASE NO. 80 -66, REQUESTING WAIVER OF OFF
STREET PARKING IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED UNDER ARTICLE 26, SEC. 9 -4 - .2601 OF THE ZONING
ORDINANCE, 320 E. BRANCH STREET IN THE "C -B -D" CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. (SHOWER)
Chairman Gorsline advised that the applicant has requested a continuance on
this matter. Planning Director Castro advised that he has scheduled a meeting with
Ron Grant, who is the owner of the adjoining parcels, and also he is suggesting that
the matter be referred to the Downtown Parking Advisory Board to see if they have
any suggestions regarding the request for waiver. He also will discuss the matter
with the Loomis and Scolari people with the idea of transferring some of that park-
ing in order to take advantage of the creek.
After a brief discussion; on motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commis-
sioner Carr, and unanimously carried, Variance Case No. 80 -66 was continued to the
next regular Planning Commission Meeting.
REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTIONS: ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 80 -221, RESTAURANT AND
DELICATESSEN, CORNER OF GRAND AVENUE AND ALPINE ST. (SORENSEN'S DELICATESSEN)
Planning Director Castro reviewed the proposed project, noting that the prop -
erty is located on the southwest corner of Grand Ave. and Alpine Street and the
project is a restaurant proposal for Sorensen's Delicatessen. Mr. Castro advised
that the Architectural Review Committee felt the proposal was acceptable subject
to the 12 conditions noted in their report, which are standard requirements. Mr.
Castro pointed out that as much of the landscaping along Alpine and Grand Ave. will
be saved, and some landscaping will be added to the property, and the architectural
theme of the building pretty much relates to the Village theme character of Arroyo
Grande.
After a. brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Fischer; seconded by Com-
missioner Simmons, and unanimously carried, Architectural Review Committee Action,
dated May 14, :1980, was approved with the conditions as noted.
211
212
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION, 5 -20 -80 Page 2
REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTIONS: ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 80 -222, RADIATOR COOLING
SYSTEMS PARTS AND SERVICE, 406 E. BRANCH STREET. (CHASTAIN).
Planning Director Castro advised that the Architectural Review Committee had
revised the parking requirement in line with the revised plan. It was felt that
with the current alignment of Branch Street, ingress and egress to the property via
a 15 ft. easement may possibly create a bottleneck at the opening and, therefore,
the Committee and staff concurred that the driveway and portion of that easement be
widened at the front, with employee parking being provided at an angle at the front
of the property, with the balance of the parking to be located between the building
and the trees to be saved. He pointed out that there is a problem on widening the
driveway due to the fact that there is a light standard approximately 4 ft. from the
edge of the driveway and he didn't know whether that pole could be removed or not.
However, the Committee would like to go ahead with the recommendation to see if this
could be worked out and, if it is possible, then the relocation of the pole will be
at the expense of the applicant. An alternative to this requirement would be to red
curb or maybe suggest the widening of the driveway with the light being relocated.
The Architectural Review Committee felt that with the trees and the additional
scaping, and the proposed parking, that much of the area in the back would be screened
off. They also felt that this development would be of a temporary nature and eventu-
ally the whole area will be redeveloped.
Commissioner Carr referred to Condition #5 regarding fencing, and inquired as
to what type of fence is being required. He questioned whether or not it is really
necessary to have a fence on the two sides, and he couldn't see what purpose would
be served by having a fence in the rear. Planning Director Castro stated that nor-
mally a redwood neighborhood type fencing not to exceed 6 ft. is required.
After further discussion, on motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Com-
missioner Carr, and unanimously carried, approving Architectural Committee Action
dated May 14, 1980 with the conditions noted and amending Condition #5 as follows:
"That a neighborhood type wood fence not to exceed '6 ft. shall be provided at the
rear and easterly property lines ".
SUBDIVISION REVIEW - TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 921, 23 UNIT COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUM DEVELOP-
MENT, 321 AND 327 SO. HALCYON RD. (SAN LUIS ENGINEERING, AGENT FOR VAL HOWARD)
Planning Director Castro referred to a copy of the tentative map and reviewed
the .6 conditions of approval noted in the report dated May 15, 1980. He reviewed
that about a year ago the Planning Commission denied a Use Permit for residential
condominiums on this property and, at that time, it was. the Commission's feelings
that this property should be developed as medical or professional type uses.
After a brief review of the conditions, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO.: 80 -741
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING TENTATIVE MAP FOR TRACT
NO. 921, A COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT, AND
REFERRAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR INFORMATIONAL PUR-
POSES ONLY.
On motion by Commissioner Simmons, seconded by Commissioner Fischer, and by
the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Simmons, Moots, Fischer, Carr and Chairman Gorsline.
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Sebastian and Cole.
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 20th day of May 1980.
REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 80 -220 TENTATIVE MAP TRACT
NO. 921, 23 UNIT COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT, 321 AND 327 SO. HALCYON ROAD.
(SAN LUIS ENGINEERING, AGENT FOR VAL HOWARD).
Planning Director Castro reviewed the proposed plan, noting that the parking
requirements have been complied with, however, the Committee was concerned with the
overlapping of the automobiles into the landscaped area. The Committee recommended
that either the automobile and the landscaped area be physically separated, or if
the portion is concrete, that it be such that the fluids drain into the parking area
rather than the landscaped areas. Mr. Castro reviewed the conditions noted in Archi-
tectural Committee Action report, dated May 14,:1980, pointing out that the conditions
are standard requirements. He further suggested that Condition #10 be added to the
report, requiring that Mr. Robert Gibson be notified by the applicant prior to the
beginning of the construction activities.
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION; 5 -20 -80 Page 3
Mr. Richard Biolosky, Architect for the project, requested that the Commission
reconsider the requirement for the situation of the cars overhanging the landscaped
areas and stated he felt there is a better aesthetic solution to the problem. Plan-
ning Director Castro re- affirmed his position on the overhang area to allow the plants
to survive, stating he would still recommend either the alternative of separation of
the landscaped areas and the automobile or, if the developer does not want to go to
that expense, that the normal bumper stops be used.
After a brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commis-
sioner Simmons, and unanimously carried, approving Architectural Committee Action,
dated May 14, 1980, with the addition of Condition # #10 as follows: "That Mr. Robert
Gibson, Archaeologist, be notified by the applicant prior to the beginning of the
construction activities ".
REVIEW - PROPOSED SIGN ORDINANCE
The Commission briefly reviewed the proposed ordinance. Planning Director
Castro pointed out that, in his opinion, something should be adopted by the City be-
cause there are no requirements whatsoever in the Zoning Ordinance except for free
standing signs. After a brief discussion, the matter was continued to the next Plan-
ning Commission meeting of June 3, 1980.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Chairman Gorsline noted that the June 3rd meeting agenda is quite lengthy with
7 public hearings scheduled, and suggested that the Planning Commission meeting con-
vene at 7 :00 P.M. The Commission indicated their concurrence with this suggestion.
Commissioner Carr stated he would like to correct the minutes of the May 6th
meeting, Page 8, first sentence, under "Oral Communications ", as follows: "Commis-
sioner Carr suggested that a recommendation be made to the City Council on circula-
tion and parking for the Village Area, and also a recommendation addressing drainage
for that section of downtown and drainage for the other side of Grand Avenue where
the properties drain into the Sports Complex." The correction to the minutes of the
regular meeting of May 6th,1980 was approved on motion by Commissioner Fischer, sec-
onded by Commissioner Carr, and unanimously carried. In answer to Commissioner
Carr's question as to the disposition of these items, Planning Director Castro ad-
vised the reason he didn't bring a recommendation back on the downtown area yet, was
because he wanted to get together with the Downtown Parking Advisory Board and get
their thoughts on the matter. With regard to the drainage, Mr. Castro advised he
had talked to City Engineer Karp, and Mr. Karp advised that as far as the action of
the Council restricting the amount of storage capacity in the Soto Sports Complex,
that more or less determined what had to be done up stream, unless there were some
other alternatives like extending a pipe over to the ocean. Mr. Castro stated he
would talk to Mr. Karp again to see if he would like to come back with some sort of
suggestion or recommendation to the Commission. He stated that in looking at the
alternatives realistically, in his opinion, to look at a drainage system that extends
beyond the City limits to, the ocean is almost prohibitive in cost, and there aren't
that many properties available for ponding areas. Commissioner Carr stated, in his
opinion, the Commission needs to find out what is going on; what can be done, and
how to go about it.
With regard to the regular Commission meeting scheduled for June 17, 1980,
Planning Director Castro advised he would be on vacation that week, and unless there
is something pressing, he requested consideration of cancelling that meeting. Chair-
man Gorsline advised he too would be absent from that meeting, and Commissioner
Fischer also advised she may not be here.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commission, on motion by Commissioner
Simmons, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and unanimously carried, the meeting was
adjourned at 9:00 P.M.
ATTEST:
213
ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION
June 3, 1980
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in adjourned session at 7:00 P.M.
with Chairman Gorsline presiding. Present were Commissioners Cole, Carr, Fischer
and Sebastian. Commissioners Moots and Simmons were absent. Planning Director
Castro was also in attendance.
MINUTE APPROVAL
On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Sebastian, and
unanimously carried, the minutes of the regular meeting of May 20, 1980 were
approved as submitted.
REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTIONS - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 80 -223, CONSTRUCTION OF
MUSIC CLASSROOM, 230 VERNON AVE. (VALLEY VIEW JUNIOR ACADEMY)
Planning Director Castro reviewed the proposed addition to the Valley View
Junior Academy. He advised that the matter had been reviewed by the Architectural
Review Committee on May 28, 1980, and the Committee recommended that the addition
as indicated on the proposed plot plan be approved as submitted.
After a brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by
Commissioner Sebastian, and unanimously carried, approving Architectural Review
Committee Action, dated May 28, 1980.
WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE
Request from Gospel Lighthouse Church.
Planning Director Castro read a letter from The Gospel Lighthouse Church of
Arroyo Grande requesting permission to sell cherries in Arroyo Grande for approxi-
mately the next three weeks at the following locations: Gospel Lighthouse Church;
Arroyo Grande Hall Association; Leisure Mart; and Village Fabrics on Grand Avenue.
After a brief discussion, on motion by Commissioner Sebastian, seconded by
Commissioner Cole, and unanimously carried, granting a temporary permit to the
Gospel Lighthouse Church of Arroyo Grande to sell cherries at the locations and
during the times indicated in their letter dated June 2, 1980.
Notice of League of California Cities Quarterly Meeting.
Planning Director Castro distributed a Meeting Notice of the League of
California Cities, and requested that any Commissioners wishing to attend the
meeting notify the City Administrator's office by June 6, 1980.
Drainage in the_:Fair..'.Oaks District.....
Planning Director Castro referred to a memorandum from City Engineer Paul
Karp, dated June 2, 1980, with reference to drainage in the Fair Oaks District,
addressing the Commission's concerns and request for direction from the City
Engineer. Mr. Karp has briefly outlined what the City will be doing in regard
to the drainage problem. Mr. Castro stated that it appears nothing can be done
with current development until the completion of the Parks and Recreation Sports
Complex.
Commissioner Carr stated he was concerned about the drainage and he felt that
the Planning Commission should take a look at it in some language that they could
send to the City Council as a recommendation for solving some of the drainage
problems and, in view of Mr. Castro's discussions with Mr. Karp and his memo,
dated June 2, 1980, maybe it is not appropriate to make a recommendation at this
time. Mr. Castro stated that the Commission may wish to discuss the matter
further with the City Engineer before making their recommendation. After a brief
discussion, the matter was continued until such time as Mr. Karp could be present.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE CASE NO. 80 -66, REQUESTING WAIVER OF
OFF - STREET PARKING IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED UNDER ARTICLE 26, SEC. 9- 4.2601 OF THE
ZONING ORDINANCE, 320 E. BRANCH STREET IN THE "C -B -D" CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT.
(SHOWER) .
Planning Director Castro referred to the staff report on the matter indi-
cating that he would bring the Commission up to date on the comments offered by
the Downtown Parking Advisory Board. He pointed out that the Board's comments
to not apply to the Variance application submitted by Dr. Shower. He noted that
staff has recommended denial of that request and, in his opinion, the Commission
should act on the Variance on those findings alone.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6 -3 -80 Page 2
Mr. Castro stated there was some discussion by the Commission on what could
be done to preserve the creek area. The Board discussed the potential of the
property owners on both sides of Branch, from Mason Street to the creek, getting
together and perhaps resolving where the parking could be accomplished. One
possibility would be the purchase of part of the Commercial Market property and
expanding into the Loomis property. Another possibility is the reservation of
the front of the properties on the south side of Branch, from Mason Street to
where Dr. Shower's building is presently located. This is another strip of
property that perhaps could be obtained as part of the parking assessment district.
Mr. Castro further advised that there is a joint meeting proposed between the
Downtown Parking Advisory Board and the City Council and, in his opinion, that
meeting is going to be crucial, in that it will provide some direction for the
Board as to what is going to be done in the Village area, whether there is going
to be any future planning, not only circulation -wise, but on parking and some other
improvements that need to be done.
Mr. Castro stated that the Board, at this point in time, does not feel that
any of the property owners should be relieved of their parking requirements.
Chairman Gorsline advised that the continued public hearing is now open
for comment. Dr. Shower, 320 E. Branch Street, petitioner for the Variance,
stated he feels that the simplest solution would be to pave the parking lot.
There being no further comments for or against the proposed Variance,
Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing closed.
After considerable discussion by the Commission, the following action was
taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 80 -742 V
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE DENYING A VARIANCE, CASE NO. 80 -66.
On motion by Commissioner Fischer, seconded by Commissioner Carr, and by
the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Carr, Fischer, Sebastian and Chairman
Gorsline
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Moots and Simmons
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 3rd day of June 1980.
PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE CASE NO. 80 -67, REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 2 -1/2 FT. CHAIN
LINK FENCE WITH REDWOOD INSERTS ON TOP OF A 6 FT. BLOCK WALL, 556 VIA LA BARRANCA.
(MOTT) .
Planning Director Castro advised that the retaining wall is already erected
and, after having looked at the property, he could understand Mr. Mott's concern
for the noise and exhaust. He stated he could see no problem with the construction
of the chain link fence and would so recommend.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that Public Hearing for Variance
Case No. 80 -67 had been duly published, posted and property owners notified,
Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Mr. Russell Mott, 556 Via La Barranca, applicant for the Variance, presented
photographs of the area for the Commission's information. Mr. Mott stated he had
contacted the owner of the house to the south of him and she had no objections at
all. Mr. LaVine, 145 Tally Ho Road, stated he is the owner of the greenhouse, and
he has no objection to the fence, and it seems he would be the one most directly
affected by it.
There being no further comments for or against the requested Variance,
Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing closed and the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 80 -743 V
RESOLUTION OE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A VARIANCE,
CASE NO. 80 -66.
On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Fischer, and by
the following roll call vote, to wit:
215
218
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6 -3 -80 Page 3
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Carr, Fischer, Sebastian and
Chairman Gorsline
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Moots and Simmons
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 3rd day of June 1980.
PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 80 -294, 523 CROWN HILL, CONVERSION FROM
APARTMENTS TO AIRSPACE CONDOMINIUMS. (WILLIAM IRVINE AND KIRBY GORDON, DBA
CROWN HILL INVESTORS).
Planning Director Castro advised that this matter was before the Planning
Commission in 1979, and the staff report, dated May 29, 1980 reviews the action
of both the Planning Commission and City Council at that time. He further stated
that the project does have an approved tentative map at this time, but without a
Use Permit, the applicant is unable to subdivide the property.
Mr. Castro referred to a report prepared by Mr. Tom Sullivan, dated July
27, 1979, regarding the densities that should have been alloted on the property,
and also a copy of the Conversion Ordinance No. 197 C. S. He called the Com-
mission's attention to the first paragraph, Page 2, of that Ordinance, which
reads as follows: "All condominiums and condominium conversions must be found
consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning ". He stated that he had dis-
cussed this matter with the City Attorney, Jerry Shipsey, and Mr. Shipsey advised
him that there is no possible way that the Commission can vary from that rule.
Mr. Castro pointed out that it seems the only solution to the problem would be to
amend the General Plan. The General Plan identifies the properties, including
the Skinner /Ryzner townhouses, the applicants' project, and the &ourplex as a
medium density residential district. If the General Plan were changed to an
"R -3" High Density Residential District, the density factor then would be 20
units to the acre, and that factor applied to the current acreage of the property
would yield 16 units. That appears to be the only solution to the problem if
the property is to be converted from apartments to condominium untis.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that Public Hearing for Use
Permit Case No. 80 -204 had been duly published, posted and property owners noti-
fied, Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Kirby Gordon, 405 Indio Drive, Pismo Beach, Attorney for Crown Hill Investors,
pointed out to the Commission that the petitioners have tentative map approval. He
stated his opinion, in reading the law, differs from Mr. Shipsey's, in that, prior
to the City having an ordinance, State law says that a project does not have to be
consistent; it specifically says that the following sections shall not apply to
condominium conversions where there is simply a division of airspace. He stated
that one of the provisions that does not apply is the provision for consistency,
Mr. Gordon stated that if it is possible that they can get a General Plan
amendment to conform with the ordinance as it now stands, they would like to do
that. He inquired if it would be possible for the Conditional Use Permit to be
granted subject to the Zone Change and General Plan amendment and, in that way,
they would not have to come back in,again for another Conditional Use Permit and
public hearing.
Brad Burrough, 523 Crown Hill, stated he has been talking to quite a few of
the people in the apartments right now, and most of them feel as he does, and that
is that Mr. Gordon is trying to provide them the possibility of affordable hous-
ing, which is limited here in the Arroyo Grande and Grover City area. Eric
Grassman, Unit 2, Crown Terrace, stated he would like to buy one of these units.
They have lived there for six months and they feel the design of the units are
very adaptable to condominiums, and as far as open space is concerned, they feel
they have a great deal of open space and they have a terrific panoramic view and,
as far as physical land area, they don't feel they need it. He felt the condominiums
would benefit the community and would give more ownership to more people, and that
way create a little bit more interest in the community.
There being no further comments for or against the proposed Use Permit,
Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing closed.
In answer to Chairman Gorsline's question if the project is in conformance
with the Code, Planning Director Castro stated staff would have to review the
plans, look at the project and see what would be required to bring it into con-
formance and come back to the Commission with a report. Commissioner Sebastian
clarified that the permits were issued for apartments, and not for condominiums.
He further stated in discussing approval of the condominiums conditioned upon the
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6-3-80 Page 4
General Plan and Zone change, we have an ordinance that has quite a number of
sieves which that project would have to go through, and staff has not had the
opportunity to really evaluate the project to see if it does meet the ordinance.
He stated he, personally, would rather see the applicant petition for a General
Plan change or Zone change, rather than the Commission giving any kind of approval
without having the knowledge of how that project is going to conform to the ordi-
nance. He further advised he is concerned about the guest parking requirement
which is being imposed on all new projects at this time, stating that Crown Hill
is not the best place for alternative parking.
After considerable discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 80 -744 U
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE USE PERMIT,
CASE NO. 80 -294.
On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Sebastian, and by
the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Carr, Fischer, Sebastian and Chairman
Gorsline
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Simmons and Moots
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 3rd day of June 1980.
The applicant was advised that the Use Permit was denied without prejudice.
He stated he understands that the Commission is suggesting he work with staff to
investigate the feasibility of the conversion with respect to the Ordinance, and
also the suggestion that the applicant look into a General Plan amendment and re-
zoning of the property in question.
PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 80 -295, REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A GREENHOUSE IN
THE "RA -B3" DISTRICT, 200 ORCHID LANE. (ASBELL).
Planning Director Castro referred to a plot plan of the property, pointing
out the existing greenhouse location and where the proposed greenhouse and resi-
dence would be located on the property. Mr. Castro also read a letter from Mr.
Asbell, dated May 13, 1980, requesting permission to construct the greenhouse to
raise and market cymbidium orchid plants, to be marketed on a wholesale basis out-
side of Arroyo Grande.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that public hearing for Use
Permit Case No. 80 -295 had been duly published, posted and property owners noti-
fied, Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Mr. Bob Asbell, applicant for the Use Permit, stated he was concerned about
the staff recommendation for a time review process because it takes about five
years to get started in the orchid business, and then it would take about another
four or five years to realize a return on the investment so, in essence, it will
take about a ten year period before a profit could really be realized.
Marie Cattoir, 195 Orchid Lane, stated she has lived adjacent to the present
greenhouse since its inception and it is a clean, non - polluting operation and she
would not be opposed to the construction of another greenhouse.
James Hollerman, 750 Traffic Way, stated that the present greenhouse has been
well kept and maintained, and he has no objection to the request for another green-
house.
There being no further discussion for or against the proposed Use Permit,
Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing closed.
With regard to the time review process, it was the consensus of the Com-
mission that a ten year review of the use permit would be reasonable and, after
discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 80 -745 U
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A USE PERMIT, CASE NO.
80 -295.
On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Fischer, and by
the following roll call vote, to wit:
217
218
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6 -3 -80 Page 5
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Carr, Fischer, Sebastian and Chairman
Gorsline
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Moots and Simmons
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 3rd day of June 1980.
PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 80 -296, REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO USE PORTION
OF NEW CHURCH BUILDING FOR A CHRISTIAN SCHOOL, 497 FAIR OAKS AVENUE, IN THE "A"
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT. (GOSPEL LIGHTHOUSE).
Planning Director Castro stated it is his understanding that as the need for
future school facilities arises, the Church proposes to embark on a building program
separate from the main Church building. He pointed out that at that point in time,
a new Use Permit would be required and the Commission would have control and archi-
tectural review at that time. He stated the request before the Commission tonight
is to merely use the current facilities for a Christian School.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that public hearing for Use
Permit Case No. 80 -296 had been duly published, posted and property owners noti-
fied, Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Ken Baglin, 551 East Branch Street, Pastor the Gospel Lighthouse Church,
stated that the Lighthouse Christian School is a part of the Christian Educational
Program of the Gospel Lighthouse. He stated they are starting with a very small
enrollment of approximately 50 students and they are going to be using part of the
facilities that are used for Sunday School. He further stated there are 102 parking
spaces, which will meet the requirements for parking for the school.
Ben Miller, 1035 Sunset Drive, Principal of the proposed Lighthouse Christian
School, spoke in favor of the use permit being granted and briefly reviewed the
educational program being offered.
Tom Runnels, 586 Valley Road, stated he is not opposed to the school provid-
ing they are going to stay within the building; however, he questioned if they do
get the permit for the school this year, are they going to want to build another
building next year? He stated there is a real problem down there now with traffic
and drainage, and if they are going to keep their school within the existing build-
ing and not plan on building any more, he would have no objections to it, but if
they are going to come back in a year or two and request to build an annex to it,
he would oppose it right now. Planning Director Castro pointed out that there is
nothing to prevent the Church from requesting an additional building on their
property, whether it be Church or school, as long as it does not exceed the Ordi-
nance requirements.
Mr. Baglin stated, in answer to Mr. Runnels' question, that they did not
buy 3 acres of land not to be able to build again. He pointed out that they
installed 800 ft. of curb, gutter and sidewalk, 800 ft. of City street, they in-
stalled three City street lights, and have moved a P. G. & E. pole at their own
expense, and they purposely built the church on the corner so that they could
utilize the remaining part of the 3 acres in more parking and more building. He
further stated that the school is an intricate part of their church, and they do
plan to build on that property.
LeRoy Saruwatari, 512 Launa Drive, stated he farms 80 acres on the north
side of the Church property, and being that it is an intensively farmed agri-
cultural area, the property will be subjected to some dust, odors from decaying
crops, etc., and also the use of insecticides and herbicides, and if people of
the church object to these common practices of an agricultural area, then he
would also object to the proposed school.
There being no further discussion for or against the proposed Use Permit,
Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing closed.
Commissioner Carr stated he has no problems with granting a use permit for 50
students to use the same buildings that are there, but he does have some problems
about traffic and what is going to happen with future growth out there, and there
are drainage problems that he wasn't even aware of. He further stated he also has
a problem with the proximity of that type of school with the high school, in that
he doesn't particularly feel it is a good idea to put the Christian school across
from the High School. Also, with regard to the agricultural land that is there,
he stated, in his opinion we are just putting more pressure on that land to be put
into some other use by allowing those uses in there. Planning Director Castro
commented that any expansion development of the Church property would have to go
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6 -3 -80 Page 6
through normal design review process and, at that point, the drainage, circulation,
etc. would have to be looked at. He further pointed out that when the property was
first proposed for a Church approximately two years ago, everybody endorsed it
because they felt this use would not cause a problem with the agricultural land as
opposed to either residential or commercial use.
Chairman Gorsline pointed out that the issue now is the Use Permit to use
the existing building, and as far as any future expansion, that will have to go
through the normal review procedures to look at the drainage and circulation concerns.
Commissioner Sebastian stated, in his opinion, the current educational system
that we have in the Lucia Mar School District is doing nothing but creating the need
for new schools, and that only the Churches are responding to that need, and he is
very much in favor of them being entitled to begin a school, which is very much needed.
He further stated he believes the drainage issue is very complex and has been dis-
cussed many times, but the issue is the school and it should be separated from the
drainage at this time because that is something to be evaluated at a later time if
additional facilities are to be built.
Commissioner Cole stated that the time to consider the water problem is if
there is going to be a change in what is now constructed, and she would be in favor
of the Use Permit being granted.
Chairman Gorsline stated he supports the Use Permit because, in his opinion,
they have a right to do that, however, he does not want this construed as a vote
against the Lucia Mar School District because, in his opinion, they are doing the
best they can in the situation.
After discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 80 -746 U
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A USE PERMIT, CASE NO. 80 -296.
On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Sebastian, and by
the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Sebastian and Chairman Gorsline
NOES: Commissioners Carr and Fischer
ABSENT: Commissioners Moots and Simmons
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 3rd day of June 1980.
PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 80 -297, CONSTRUCTION OF 22 UNIT CONDOMINIUM
PROJECT IN "R -2" DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, 1259 FARROLL AVENUE. (FULLER /DAVINO).
Planning Director Castro reviewed the staff report, dated May 29, 1980,
pointing out that the Architectural Review Board felt that the proposal was a
tight design and lacking guest parking.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that Public Hearing for Use
Permit Case No. 80 -297 had been duly published, posted and property owners noti-
fied, Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Roger Fuller, 222 McKinley Street, petitioner for the Use Permit, briefly
reviewed the proposed project.
Evelyn Tallman, 532 Carol Place, stated she was under the impression that
this property was zoned for duplexes and she is against condominiums being built
in there and would prefer duplexes for a buffer. Planning Director Castro advised
that the proposal is not apartments; they are duplex units being attached to one
another, and the design of the units are slightly different where they back up to
the mobilehome park, in that they are going to be two story structures. Mrs.
Tallman stated that the residents of the area will not be happy with that back
row being two story units. Mr. Fuller stated that only 6 of the 22 units will be
two story, and they are in the back adjacent to the mobilehome park. He pointed
out that if Mrs. Tallman wished to add another story on her home in the "R -1"
District, there is nothing to prevent her from doing that.
Mrs. Marsha Fuller, 222 McKinley Street, stated if that property was divided
into "R -1" lots, there would be no restrictions to prevent individuals from coming
in and building two story homes in there. Commissioner Sebastian pointed out that
under the "R -1" District, only 9 units would be permitted on the two acres.
219
220
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6 -3 -80 Page 7
There being no further comments, Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing
closed.
Commissioner Sebastian stated that the Architectural Review Committee has
seen this plan three times, and each time the Committee has generated the response
to the applicant that the project would be extremely congested and very tight. He
stated that the guest parking is not there and, in his opinion, it must be provided
somewhere within the project. He further stated he is not opposed to utilizing some
of Farroll Avenue for guest parking, but he does not believe that Farroll Avenue
should be utilized for more than those units within 100 ft., which would be 6 units,
so there would still be a need for an additional 5 units of guest parking within
the complex to meet the minimum requirements that are being imposed on other projects.
Commissioner Cole stated she feels that the guest parking needs to be within
the area, and she also feels the project is too congested.
Chairman Gorsline inquired if it would be agreeable to the applicants to
continue the matter pending revision of the plans. Mr. Fuller stated he would be
agreeable to the continuation. Planning Director Castro advised that the basic
areas of concern are the densities of the project, the guest parking and how that
would relate to the overall design of the property. Commissioner Sebastian sug-
gested that if the project is not going to be for young children, then the C.C. &:R.'s
should clearly state that and the design should fit that concept.
After discussion, Chairman Gorsline announced that consideration of the Use
Permit and Architectural Review on this matter would be continued to the next meet-
ing.
PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 80 -298, REMODEL STORE FRONT AND SIGN CHANGES
IN THE "H -S" HIGHWAY SERVICE DISTRICT, 1650 GRAND AVENUE. (WILLIAMS BROS. MARKET).
Planning Director Castro referred to the staff report, dated May 29, 1980,
recommending that the height limitation of the sign be limited to within 15 ft. to
20 ft. He stated in looking at the site several times, he would change his recom-
mendation because of the fact that a smaller sign would be completely over shadowed
by the "sea of asphalt" and would look out of proportion.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that Use Permit Case No.
80 -298 had been duly published, posted and property owners notified, Chairman
Gorsline declared the hearing open.
Mr. Ray Baker, 126 E. Grove Ave., Orange, California, representing Williams
Bros. on this project, presented a colored rendering of the proposal and briefly
described the project for the Commission.
There being no further comments for or against the proposed Use Permit,
Chairman Gorsline declared the hearing closed.
Commissioner Fischer stated that since Grand Avenue has been included as
part of the scenic corridor, in her opinion, something other than a "sea of asphalt"
is what she envisioned when the Commission voted on making Grand Avenue a scenic
corridor, and she would like to see the asphalt broken up with some landscaping or
in some way.
Mr. Merle Williams, petitioner, pointed out problems in getting water to
the area for landscaping, and advised that being that close to the sidewalk, it
creates a lot of problems with trash, broken bottles, etc., being dumped in
these planter areas.
After a brief discussion, it was agreed that the sign height be as submitted
on the plot plan, and the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 80 -747 U
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A USE PERMIT, CASE NO.
80 -298.
On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Carr, and by the
following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Cole, Carr, Sebastian and Chairman Gorsline
NOES: Commissioner Fischer
ABSENT: Commissioners Moots and Simmons
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 3rd day of June 1980.
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 6 -3 -80 Page 8
With reference to Architectural Review Case No. 80 -224, on motion by
Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Sebastian, and unanimously carried,
approving Architectural Committee Action, dated May 28, 1980.
SUBDIVISION RE VIEW - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 741, WILDWOOD RANCH DEVELOPMENT,
CORBETT CANYON ROAD. (TEMPUS).
Planning Director Castro reviewed the staff report, dated May 29, 1980,
and briefly reviewed the revised Tentative Map and architectural plans for the
development. Messers.Montgomery and Callaghy, architect and engineer for the
project, gave a brief presentation oh the architectural plans and changes in-
corporated in the revised Tentative Map.
After discussion, due to the lateness of the hour, the matter was continued
to the next regular meeting of June 17, 1980.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further .. discussion, the meeting was adjourned by the
Chairman at 11:00 P.M.
ATTEST
P1 Inning Dire
} r .,
221