PC Minutes 1978-05-02Arroyo Grande Planning Commission
May 2, 1978
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chair-
man Gerrish presiding. Present are Commissioners Cole, Harris, Moots, Ries
and Simmons. Commissioner Vandeveer is absent, Planning Director Castro
and Planner Sullivan are also in attendances
MINUTE APPROVAL
Planning Director Castro advised the minutes for the regular meeting of
April 18, 1978 were not yet completed and requested approval at the next meet-
ing.
REQUEST FOR ZONING ORDINANCE CLARIFICATION (DR, FREITAS)
Planning Director Castro stated he has received a verbal response to his
request from City Attorney Shipsey, in that he is in agreement that staff's
interpretation of the non - conforming ordinance that no partial conversion is
allowable. He advised that the Commission has the prerogative to make a
different interpretation if they so wish. He reviewed that the matter in
question is whether or not previous statements by the City are valid and
whether, in fact, Dr. Freitas was led to believe he was in conformance with
the Ordinance to split the use of the building; part for his residence and
part for his business, Mr. Castro added that there are other problems in-
volved with partial conversion. There are certain things you can and cannot
do with a non - conforming building as opposed to a conforming building, in that
you have a building under a single roof wherein you can do things to a portion
of the building that you can't do to the other portion, resulting in a series
of ramifications.
Stephen Cool, Attorney for Dr. Freitas, requested that this matter be de-
layed to later on since Dr. Freitas is not present yet.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT MAP
Chairman Gerrish reopened the public hearing on the General Plan Land Use
Element Map. Planner Sullivan reviewed for the Commission the dates advertised
for the various public hearings and pointed out that if the General Plan amend-
ments cannot be accomplished tonight and is continued to the next meeting, then
Phase I and Phase II rezonings will both be advanced two weeks,
Planning Director Castro stated that the General Plan Element has been re-
viewed in conjunction with the Zoning Map, however, tonight we are only address-
ing ourselves to the General Plan since it is a State requirement that this
document be considered first and then proceed with the zoning.
He advised that, contrary to what was advertised, staff is recommending
the following changes: Beginning with the north side of the City, the low den-
sity residential for the parcel that is on the extension of Traffic Way, has
been zoned single family residential, and staff is recommending that'- the:
Plan be changed from Highway Service to low density residential in conformance'
with the zoning.
On the Planned Manufacturing for light industry that staff has suggested
on Traffic Way, there have been numerous calls regarding use itself, and
we have expressed to people that we have been working with the Chamber of Com-
merce in locating some industrial property for the City and that in reviewing
the overall General Plan, there aren't too many parcels available unless you go
out of the City and start annexing County lands. After review, we felt that.this
was a logical parcel for that type of development. Mr. Castro further advised
that there is some Highway Service on that property; about 1/3 is zoned fmr_
Highway Service and the back portion is zoned for low density residential.,,- •-- Mr . a _..
Castro advised that on the property suggested for high density residential,
there is a petition and staff has no objections to that staying in single fam-
ily residential, however, there is a problem with the General Plan and zoning,
in that the General Plan indicates a greater depth of Highway Service on that
property between Alien Street and East Cherry Avenue. We either have to conform
to the zoning classification of Highway Service which extends all the way to
the alignment of Short Street from Allen to East Cherry Ave,, or do some modi-
fication to the zoning map or the General Plan, Staff would suggest, based on
the petition that has been submitted, that the portion recommended for R -3 be-
tween Allen and East Cherry remain as single family residential at this time,
497
498
..Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -2 -78 Page 2
The property north of Allen is labelled for multiples and has been zoned
for multiples according to the zoning map. On the properties between Nelson
and Poole, staff is suggesting it revert to a professional office designation.
We feel that the CBD is extending too far down; we feel there is too much com-
mercial land for the purchasing power of the community; and we feel that the
professional commercial is just as compatible and just as good,-arid would
probably benefit the downtown area.
With regard to the properties between Garden Street and Whiteley, the
Commission has acted on this matter before, so we are suggesting amending the
General Plan for that area to go from multiple classification to a single fam-
ily use.
On the Central Business District area, we are recommending that the en-
trance to the downtown, which is Branch and Traffic Way, which is labelled for
Highway Service be classified as C-B-D.
With regard to the Loomis property,, they have a series of districts there,
and since the use is primarily in the planned manufacturing, we are suggesting
that that area be labelled "P-M".
Extending on East Branch, there is a
mediate school that has been labelled for
suggesting that small portion of property
we are also classifying some of this land
parcel of land that is near the inter -
Planned Manufacturing, and staff is
be reverted to single family use, and
as part of the intermediate school.
The Neighborhood Commercial center at the corner of Corbett Canyon Road
and Huasna Road shows on the zoning map as low density residential, and staff
recommends that revert to a low density classification. Staff does not feel
that a neighborhood shopping center with the proximity to the downtown area is
realistic or is needed at this time.
The properties on Clarence. Avenue and Huasna Road are currently being used
as duplex development, and staff is recommending a density classification to
meet that residential development.
Regarding the Waller Seed Farm property on Huasna Road, staff is recom-
mending that be classified for agricultural uses; and we are recommending
that Strother Park be labelled as Open Space, which would be in conformance.
On the South side of the freeway, staff is recommending that the mobile-
home park on Valley Road be labelled high density residential because it is a
high density classification.
Extending on Valley Road, we are suggesting that the Catholic Church and
Gospel Lighthouse Church be labelled a low density classification because that
use has been applied to the property. Most of the surrounding area is labelled
as Prime I or Prime II agricultural classification.
The people who farm the area at the corner of Fair Oaks Avenue and the
Freeway, have indicated they would like to be part of the 'agricultural district,
and the staff sees no objection to that, or to label it as a low density classi-
fication, however staff feels it would make more sense to put the entire thing
in the agricultural classification to avoid spot zoning.
Continuing on Grand Avenue, the property which the Commission has reviewed
before, between Alpine and Grand Avenue, staff is suggesting that that be tied
with the frontage parcels, which is a single ownership, and that be labelled
Highway Service District.
With regard to Western Addition, we have received a petition from the prop-
erty owners and staff sees no problem with leaving that classification as sin-
gle family use. In this case, we would rend that the General Plan be
changed to low density to meet the zoning designation.
On Rena Street, staff is suggesting that remain in the R-3 classification.
There is already development gvi sting there . _amd,. < _ .w,.ea y ltd, there
would be more problems with the lower density in that there would be non-con-
forming buildings, and in all probability the General Plan should go to a high
density classification to satisfy the development that is existing.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -2-78
Page 3
The area of Wood Place and Dodson Way is labelled on the Zoning Map as
a low density classification, and is labelled as multiple use on the General
Plan, Since there are a substantial number of homes there, we could main-
tain that in a single family residential use.
The lot extending at the end of Linda Drive should be labelled as low
density residential. There was a recent lot split on that property and there
are homes being proposed for that area.
Insofar as County properties are concerned, the island we have on El
Camino Real, we are recognizing the multiple development, if and when the
property comes in. Also the industrial land fronting on El Camino Real, we
are proposing that the back portion be tied in with the front and be labelled
as Planned Manufacturing. The Brisco'residence and continuing on with the
lots that front on Chilton Street would be tied in with the low density classi-
fication. We would suggest medium high density residential for those frontage
lots on El Camino Real in the County, which is more or less what the use is
now.
Regarding the Office Professional classification suggested on Oak Park
Boulevard and Highway 101, the main concern there was the types of uses that
would be permitted under the Highway Service District, and basically the only
one that is not permitted in the P -C District is a service station. Mr.
Castro advised that Glenn Peters has written a letter to the effect he would
like the property to remain as Highway Service, and if the Commission wants
to retain it as such, staff sees no problem with that, however, the General'
Plan still needs to be changed as it shows the area as low density residential.
Planning Director Castro pointed out there is a problem north of Grand
Avenue and west of Fair View Drive, in that there is a condominium develop-
ment on Brighton Avenue and the zoning line extends all the way across and
abuts two single family lots at the corner of Brighton Avenue and Fair View
Drive; also, there was a lot split approved on the two properties that abut
the single family use, which actually extend on a north -south direction, yet
the zoning splits it across. Mr. Castro advised that staff recommends recog-
nizing the condominiums, because, in his opinion, it would be wrong to change
the classification to a low density because of the high investment in the
development. Planner Sullivan drew an illustration on the blackboard, advis-
ing that the piece of property off of Brighton involves a lot split; the top
portion is R -3 and the bottom is zoned Neighborhood Commercial, which essenti-
ally splits the property four different ways. It is suggested that the zon-
ing on the property be all one zone. Planning Director Castro advised that
the ownership pattern on the Neighborhood Commercial will be difficult to deal
with or to develop, and staff would recommend recognition of the R -3 and the
lot split that Mr. Sullivan mentioned. With reference to the .C714 portion
directly south of that property line, staff is recommending that be Highway
Service District; and is also recommending that the Williams Brothers Shop-
ping Center be labelled as Highway Service instead of C -N, which would bring
the development into conformance.
The staff is also suggesting that the industrial land proposed on Grand
Avenue between Juniper and the City Limits be labelled as H -S to provide a
better type of development fronting on Grand Avenue.
On the parcel directly in back of the shopping center, which is owned
by Mr. Carl Hogan, staff has no objections to,latselii t that as R -3; it was
merely suggested for low density as a holding zone at this time, and if and
when the property develops, staff feels that a multiple use would be more
compatible with the single family residences across the street.
Staff is recommending that the Grandmothers' mobilehome park on Farroll
Avenue be classified as high density residential. Staff is also recognizing
the zone change petition in that area from R -1 to multiple use. We feel that
is compatible with the adjoining uses, and that it is in keeping with the
properties across the street.
There is a parcel of property on Farroll Avenue just east of Elm Street
where the frontage is zoned R -G and the back portion is zoned R -2, and staff
is suggesting that we recognize the R -2 District instead of the medium density
classification by classifying the area as medium low density residential.
499
500
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 52778 Page 4
The property between Halcyon Road and Bennett Avenue is labelled P -M
on,the zoning map and the General Plan shows that as H -S District, Staff is
suggesting the Highway Service be recognized as more compatible with the
uses that may develop there in the future. The cemetery, the Elm Street
Park and City facilities are being'recommended as "0" District.
Chairman Gerrish requested comments from the audience with objections
or suggestions to the staff recommendations on the General Plan,
Faith Wascom, 203 E, Cherry Avenue, objected to the Negative Declara-
tion on the overall General Plan, stating she felt an Environmental Impact
Report should be made especially on lands that are being used for agricul-
tural purposes, Planning Director Castro advised that staff's recommends
tions have placed most of the properties back in agricultural status as far
as the "A" is concerned. For instance, on East Cherry, we are not suggest-
ing that •area -be rezoned; we are saying maintain the single family use, but
there needs to be something done with the Highway Service classification,
and we are retaining the RA -B3 that is already there.
Glenn Peters, 1587 El Camino Real, stated that Mr, Castro mentioned
that the Office Professional and the Highway Service would do about the same
thing, and he strongly requests that the area remain Highway Service as it
is now zoned,
Mr, Bill Galentine, 703 Cornwall Ave,, asked if Western Addition is go-
ing to stay as R-1 and not be changed over to R-2, Chairman Gerrish advised
that the staff is recommending that Western Addition remain as R -1 zoning,
Roy Burke, 917 Bennett Ave,, stated his main objection from P-M to H -S
is that it would make his building supply yard non - conforming, which would
require him to operate under a Use Permit, He stated he owns about 50% of
that block and he also has letters from two of the property owners who own
a large portion of the rest of the block, stating they have no objection to
it remaining as P -M. He stated he felt the rezoning to Highway Service Dis-
trict would create a hardship on him, and due to the fact they have been in
that location long before it was in the City and longer than any of the other
businesses there, he would like the Commission to take that into consideration,
Mr. Burke pointed out that if he wished to expand the building or improve the
property under Highway Service he would be under a Use Permit; also, if there
was a fire where 50% of the building was burnt, he Auld not be allowed to
rebuild,
Mr, James Bradley, 4958 Wrigley Ave,, Buena Park, representing the
soda riiyake Farms,stated that the property he represents is now on the Gen-
eral Plan as "A" and the zoning is "RA -B3 ". He further noted that at one
time in the past the zoning was also "A "; that the Planning Commission and
City Council granted the zoning from "A" to "RA -E3 ", however the General Plan
was never changed due to negligence, He stated that rather than have this
amended in this manner, he would like to have this oversight of the past
taken care of at this time and have the "A" District changed to "RA - B3" on
the General Plan, Planning Director Castro stated he felt that since the
property is a part of the agricultural belt, before we start modifying any
zoning districts, we should look at the entire property and make sure that
protection is provided for the existing farmlands, Mr. Bradley advised that
on this particular property people from, the Department of Agriculture and
fromVal Poly state the land is unsuitable for agriculture, Mr. Castro stated
he is merely suggesting that at this point in time the change would be con-
trary to the City's policies and objectives right now,
Linda Shepherd, Linda Drive, stated she would like to join Mr. Burke and
request that the property on Bennett Ave, net to the low density residential
not be changed to Highway Service but to retain it in light industry,
Rob Gibson, Cherry Avenue, requested that more consideration be given
for open space in the downtown area if at all possible because there really
aren't any park facilities for the people who live in this area, Planner
Sullivan advised that when the County builds the South County Regional Center,
they will be moving out of the County Corporate Yard property on Whiteley
Street, and the City has gone on record with the County for first opportunity
for that property, The City could develop that property as a park,
1
1
1
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -2 -78
Dick Barnes, Farroll Avenue,
inquired as to the status of that
recommending the area will remain
there that is zoned R -3 and staff
it is built R -2 and R -3 now,
stated he has a duplex on Dodson Way and
area. Mr. Castro advised the staff is
R -2, He pointed out there is a sliver
is suggesting it remain as it is because
Mr, Jack Bellot, 210 So, Mason agreed with Mr, Moore, stating he has
talked to just about everyone in that area, and they would suggest that the
General Plan be changed to conform to the zoning map and retain the area as
R -3,
Page 5
Mrs. Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fair View Drive, stated she and her neigh-
bors are strongly opposed to the zoning that is on the Baden property; that
the whole area is surrounded by R -1 residential lots and they object to their
neighborhood being turned from an R -1 district to a multiple residential area.
She pointed out that R -1 has been on the General Plan for years and the zon-
ing map has not been in conformance.
Mr, Joe Moore, 200 Nelson Street, spoke concerning the area between
Nelson and Poole Streets proposed for office professional, stating at the
present time it is zoned R -3; that all of the houses in there are R -1 except
some lots have two structures on one lot. He stated he would like to see the
Commission make the Land Use Element conform to the zoning map,
Mr, Orin Cox, Deer Canyon, stated he has purchased about 12 acres on the
northeast corner of Brisco Road and Grand Avenue and at the time he purchased
it, his intentions were to construct an office building along Grand Avenue,
and it is his understanding that this zone change might make the proposed de-
velopment difficult, Planning Director Castro advised that administrative
offices are permitted in the P -M District.
Evelyn Calhoon Tallman, 532 Carol Place, stated she is representing a
lot of people in her area, and they are not in favor of having that vacant
piece of land on Farroll Avenue changed to R -3 District, because of the traf-
fic problem,
Gordon Bennett, 415 Allen Street, inquired as to what is being done to
open up the area east of Arroyo Grande for traffic, He stated that each day
the traffic picks up more and more and, in his opinion, something should be
done about the roads before we do something on the rezoning°' Planning Dict-
or Castro advised that the City is looking at some alternative to the Circula-
tion Element, especially on East Branch Street; some possibilities are the ex-
tension of Le Point Street and James Way.
Diana Bryant, 1120 Linda Drive, stated she agreed with Ms,, Shepherd and
Mr. Burke that the property on Bennett Ave. be retained as P -M District,
Archie Howard, 508 Launa Lane, inquired about the classification for the
celery fields on Cherry Avenue and Traffic Way, Planning Director Castro ad-
vised that. staff is recommending that the two thirds portion of the property
towards Los Olivos Lane, remain as Single Family use. The front portion is
labelled for Highway Service but the zoning map shows the Highway 9rvice to
be less than what is shown on the General Plan, so we need to either extend
the Highway Service and the zoning to this line, or bring this line back to
the zoning map, or maybe modify the whole thing for single family use, since
it is being used for farmland,
Ann Nichols, 215 Mason St,, stated she is opposed to the Office Profess-
ional District on Nelson and Poole.
Mr. Dosey, 1371 Newport Street, referred to the area on the zoning map
next to the Baden property on Brighton, stating he felt that area should go
back to R -1 and not be zoned R -3, Planning Director Castro advised that staff
has reviewed the development that is there and is suggesting recognizing the
property as R -3, and that the zoning of the property be such that it, encompas-
ses those two lots, instead of splitting the property with the C -N District,
It would make a better development abutting the single family residential uses.
In other words, staff is suggesting it be recognized as R -3 to bring these
condominiums into conformance instead of the R -1 as indicated on the General
Plano
Arrmy ®"Grande Planning Commission, 5 -2 -.78 Page 6
Helen Dosey, 1371 Newport, stated that the Baden property next to the
condominiums on Brighton Avenue is shown on the General Plan as R -1 District,
and she recommended that property be kept as R -1 because there is R -1 around
it. Planning Director Castro stated that in some instances we are bringing
the zoning into conformance with the General Plan, and in some instances, be-
cause of existing developments, we are recommending to maintain the distriOt
that fits that particular investment,
Paul Giehs, Pismo Beach, stated he represents Mr. Baden, and with regard
to the Baden property, staff is recommending that the Land Use Element of the
General Plan be increased from a low density residential to a high density
residential to be compatible with the present R-3 zoning. He further advised
that the Attorney General of the State of California has said that this con-
sistency requirement that the cities are bound to can be brought into play
by either amending the zoning ordinance or amending the General Plan, and Mr,
Castro is quite properly attempting to reconcile the two documents, With rem
gard to the Baden property he is recommending that the General Plan be chopged
to increase the density to be compatible with the zoning ordinance because`of
the 16 unit condominiums right next door, and what we have left is the Baden
property that has recently been approved for a lot split, Mr. Giehs pointed
out that the parcel map allowed a lot split creating two parcels, and that
property is severed in the middle by two zones; an R- 3 at the top and a
C-N zone at the bottom, and from a planning point of view that make
any sense, in that planners will generally attempt to keep a single ownership
of land in one use if at all possible, rather th'an'eplitting.it down the mid-
dle. He further advised another reason that staff recommends this Plan be
updated to meet the conformity of the General Plan, and that is because if
you don't do that, then you have created a non - conforming use because of the
16 unit condominiums, In addition, he advised that if the Baden parcel is
dawn - zoned, you could very well be creating a spot zoning in that area that
is not compatible with the neighboring property. In summation, Mr, Giehs
asked that the Baden parcel be made high density residential, both the C-N
portion and the R-3 to preclude a splitting of zoning where we have a single
owner; to preclude the creation of a non - conforming use on the adjacent prop-
erty; to preclude a spot zone; and to create a good buffer zone between R-1
property and commercial property,
Jean Bellot spoke with regard to the area from Nelson to Poole on Mason
Street, stating she objects to the proposed zoning to Professional Commercial
District, and requested the area remain in R -1 and R -2 use.
Bill Lackey, 930 No, 6th Street, Grover City, referred to the area on
the north side of the Freeway where it shows P -D or medium density residential,
stating it was his understanding that was being reverted back to A= District.
Planning Director Castro stated that the General Plan shows that area as low
density residential use and staff is suggesting deletion of the P-D District,
Mr. Robert Strong, Planning Consultant from San Luis Obispo, stated he
is representing Dr, Farmer and Martin Polin, owners of the property in the
vicinity of Grand Avenue and Alpine Street, and inquired as to the proposed
zoning of that property, Planning Director Castro advised staff is recommend-
ing that property be reverted to highway commercial use to tie in with the
frontage of the property. Mr. Strong advised that the property owners would
support the staff's proposal,
Planning Director Castro read a letter from Mrs. Melba Tucker, Manager
of the Grandmothers' Mobilehome Park on Farroll Avenue,, stating the majority of
the Park's residents are in favor of the zone change to "R -3" at 1219 Farroll Ave,
Planning Director Castro advised there is one additional item that needs
to be reviewed Arith this document, and staff is recommending some changes be
made in the legend describing the General Plan. (1) That the A ric itural
District was previously noted as 0,2 dwelling units per'acre, gOF staff is
suggesting that be labelled as 5 acre minimum, which is what it represents,
(2) On the law'density residential, staff was considering 5.4 dwelling units
per acre as opposed to the 4,5, and we would like to revert back to the 4.6,
which means you cannot have more than 405 lots per acre, and the minimum lot
size shall be 6,000, (3) On the medium density residential, staff issuggest-
ing that the new density level be increased from 12 to 17, (4) On the high
density classification, which is 1,500 square feet.of lot area per unit, the
classification should be 29 instead of 20, (5) We are suggesting that a new
classification, a medium low density residential, between the low density and
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -2 -78
the medium density, to yield duplex zoning which
would be 11 dwelling units per acre, so that you
minimum, a low density of 405 per acre, a medium
duplex zoning of 11 dwelling units per acre, the
and the high density of 29. These numbers would
zoning code.
we don't now have, This
would wind up wp-ith 5 acre
low density which is the
medium high density of 17,
be in conformance with the
Mr. Castro advised that staff is suggesting wording to that effect on
Page 28 of the General Plan Text, and that procedure be inserted as part of
the requirements for reviewing agricultural properties, which is going back
to Page 14 of the same text. He advised that staff supports the procedure,
with the feeling that is a reasonable way to address the problems of the
farmers and try to be equitable with them as we are with other people in
business who have property.
Upon being assured by Planning Director Castro that public hearing for
the proposed amendment to the General Plan Text had been duly published,
Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing open.
Page 7
There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Gerrish de-
clared the hearing closed,
Commissioner Harris requested that the discussion on this matter be post-
poned for two weeks. After a brief discussion among the Commissioners, Chair-
man declared the public hearing reopened and continued to the next
regular meeting of May 16, 19780
PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT TEXT RE
PRIME I AND II AGRICULTURAL LANDS.
Planning Director Castro advised that the public hearing on the te)Ct
amendment was properly advertised. He referred to the staff memo outlining
the recommendations forwarded by the City Council to the Commission regarding
procedures for the rezoning of Prime I and II agricultural lands. The recom-
mendation by the Council states "That on any rezoning applications, the appli-
cation shall first be reviewed by the City Council and by a 4 /5th majority
vote of the City Council, the five acre minimum shall be deleted subject to
the following findings 1) That the City Council finds and determines that
the land under consideration is no longer an economically viable agricultural
unit; 2) That the deletion of the five acre minimum or the proposed land use
shall have no physical adverse affect on any adjoining Prime I and II agri-
cultural::.landso" Following this procedure, the applicant shall apply to the
Planning Commission for a zone change in keeping with the Ordinance require-
ments.
James Bradley, 4958 Wrigley Avenue, Buena Park, representing Sawada
Miyake Farms, stated, as he understands it, the main objection to the
Sawada Miyake property is that by allowing the development of that property
is because it would infringe on the adjacent existing farms. He pointed
out that this is a 20 acre parcel of land; 6 acres of which are farmable,
'14 acres are complete non- farmable, and the City is, in effect, saying to
the owner, you can't do anything with it because we want it as a buffer.
Planning Director Castro advised that what is being suggested is that
each property be reviewed on its own merits and, in his opinion, this pro-
vides the opportunity for the property owners to approach the City, Mr.
Bradley advised that the trees on the property are 53 years old and they
are completely worthless. Mr. Castro advised what we are trying to do is
lift the conditions of a 5 acre minimum, which makes it totally unrealistic
to sell or develop the property. The policy here is saying that if the City
Council finds those two conditions to be valid, then they will lift the 5
acre minimum requirement by a 4 /5th majority vote. Mr. Bradley stated that
the statement that no change can be made if it adversely affects abutting
properties, and that, is telling us right off that no change is possible.
Chairman Gerrish pointed out that this Planning Commission can only
suggest that if this amendment comes to pass, that Mr. Bradley attempt to
get whatever zone change he wishes. He further stated that one of the
Iles on the property in the past has been that there were no guidelines to
either this Commission or the Council and even these guidelines may be rather
.broad, at least there are some guidelines to start from.
, 3
5 el
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -2 -78 Page 8
Mr, Conrad Grieb, Rt, 1, Box 484, stated that the Miyake property is_
not feasible for farming. He advised that he farmed the.property and there
were 6 acres of apricots there originally, and the biggest percentage of.
those have'died out. He pointed out that it is not a feasible operation to
go in there and take those trees out and treat the land to put those orchards
back in there. He further stated they have a piece of property just north. of
this property that they are going to have to dispose of in the near future,
and they don't want to be in the same predicament ae'Mr, Miyake is in today.
With regard to the walnut trees, Mr. Grieb stated•that in the State of Cal -
ifornia, they figure a little more or a little leas for grafted walnut trees
because of the root system and after 30 years there is a decline and you had
better" figure on getting rid of them. He stated that production here is 3m
to a ton per acre against 2 to 4 tons .er baer. i t:1t , /atley.a*d the "^ g
fa" no ° .way we':can•° compete,.with the dew archer As' ver there, and.. to continue
farming that-Land is asinine,
irg'im fu Lieriatireassion for or against the proposed
Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed,
Commissioner Harris stated'heAs not in favor of the amendment, in that
he doesn't like the 4 /5th majority'vote, and he doesn't like it going to the
City Council first.instead of coming to the Planning Commission as traditional,
and he doesn't like the criterion of having an economically viable agricultural
unit. He stated that apparently none of the City Council or Commission feel
that there is.obviously a problem with the requirements of the General Plan
that "•all prime agricultural land be kept at a five acre minimum without having
a Way of getting out of that, and by sticking this.in, they are creating a"
buresiu ti6 network condition which they have already got, which is unneces-
sary"," If they want to delete the 5 acre minimum for prime agricultural land,
simply delete it from the General Plan and decide on a case by case basis, but
by saying "an economically viable agricultural unit" is very unprecise and is
virtually meaningless. What is an economically viable agricultural unit to one
pion is not economically viable to another; it is very vague, and there is
really no standard that anyone can go by. He stated that if the Planning Com-
mission and City Council want to take agricultural land out of agricultural
use and put in another type of use, they don't need to have /this justification
here; simply delete from the General Plan that they have a ,five acre minimum,
and when they come in for a zoning change or General Plan change, let them come
in for it the way they would on any other type of property; there is nothing
sacred about agricultural land that it is completely different from any other
type of property, Commissioner Harris suggested simply changing the General
Plan which requires all Prime Agricultural Land to be five acre minimum. He
stated that right now the way the General Plan is, if it is Prime Agricultural
Land, you should not be able to have any other type of classification other
than agricultural, which means 5 acre minimum, and if you deleted the section
that requires that all prime agricultural land be classified as agricultural,
you would be able to change land that is, in fact, prime agricultural to a non-
agricultural use, thereby circumventing 5 acre minimum. So you could use it
if it was not suitable for agricultural use, even though the soil type was prime
agricultural, you would have the flexibility to change it to something which
is more suitable.
After considerable discussion, it was agreed that the matter be continued
to the next meeting for further review and possiblewof Page 14 of
the text, Chairman Gerrish declared the public hearing reopened. and continued
to the next regular meeting of May 16, 1978,
REQUEST FOR ZONING ORDINANCE CLARIFICATION (DR, FREITAS),
Mr,"Cool advised that.Dr. Freitag could not be present at this meeting;
and requested continuance of the matter to the next meeting,
CHAIRMAN GERRISH DECLARED A FIVE MINUTE RECESS, THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEET-
ING RECONVENED AT 10 i 00 P.M. WITH ALL COMMIES TON MEMBERS PRESENTR R :CALt
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING CASE N0_78 -116, 1219 FARROLL'AVE
"R -1" SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO "R -3" MULTIPLE FAMILY DISTRICT,
(1�ULLER/DAVTNO)
Planning Director Castro, recommended that this matter be continued pend-
ing action on the General Plan amendment, advising that the petitioners have
agreed to this continuance. Chairman Gerrish declared the public hearing re-
opened and continued to the next regular meeting,of May 16, 1978,
1
1
1
1
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -2 -78
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING CASE NO, 78 -117 STAGECOACH ROAD
"RA -B3" RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT (ZOGATA).
Planning Director Castro advised that a meeting was held with Mr. Zogata
and his engineer, and staff feels more time is needed for further review, and
that the petitioner is in agreement with the continuance, Chairman Gerrish
reopened the public hearing and continued the matter to the next regular meet-
ing of May 16, 1.978,
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO, 78 -276 FREE STANDING
SIGN, 1192 GRAND AVENUE (SANTA MARIA NEON FOR WES JOHNSON),
Chairman Gerrish reopened the public hearing, Planning Director Castro
advised that following the directive of the Commission, staff met with Mr.
Johnson and discussed the objectives of the City and his concerns. In view
of the fact that there are other tenants involved in the application, staff
is recommending approval of the sign with a maximum height of 23 ft,; that
the uprights of the sign and the sign boxes be trimmed with a brown color;
and that the sign plastic be either a buff color or a non -glare plastic mater-
ial with the letters to remain in blue and black as per exhibit on file,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
None
RESO'LUTIO'N NO, 78 -609 U
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A USE PERMIT, CASE NO. 78 -276,
On motion by Commissioner Ries, seconded by CommisO%oner Cole, and by
the following roll call vote, to wit:
Commissioner Vandeveer
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 2nd day of May, 1978,
Page 9
There being no discussion for or against the proposed Use Permit, Chair-
man Gerrish declared the hearing closed, and the following action was taken:
Commissioners Cole, Harris, Moots, Ries, Simmons and Chair-
man Gerrish.,
REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTIONS - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 78 -293 3 SO, ELM STREET
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT VORHEES),
Planner Sullivan reviewed the lot line adjustment for the Commission and
the conditions of the Minor Subdivision Committee dated Apr%1 26, 1978. After
discussion, Minor Subdivision Committee Action of April 26,'1978 was approved
as submitted,
REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTIONS - LOT SPLIT CASE NO, 78 -294 CORNER OF MILLER WAY
AND LE POINT ST, D.M. WALKER AGENT FOR D. CHI'L'L o
Planning Director Castro advised that this matter was withdrawn by the
applicant.
REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO, 78 -166 VALLEY ROAD
AND FAIR OAKS AVENUE GOSPEL
Planning Director Castro advised that this matter was continued by the
Architectural Review Committee pending receipt of a revised site plan and an
attempt by the designer to give the exterior of the building more character.
REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 78 -167 5 UNIT
HAYES AND LE SAGE
LIGHTHOUSE UPC
STREET
APARTMENT COMPLEX
Planning Director Castro advised that the Architectural Review Committee
requested this matter be continued pending redesign of the proposal reducing
the number of proposed units.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 78-168, 401 GRAND AVENUE. TACO BELL ,
Planning Director Castro advised he had been unable to contact the Taco
Bell representative in San Francisco, and requested continuance of the matter
pending a meeting with the representative.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -2 -78 Page 10
FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE TREE ORDINANCE
Planning Director Castro advised that staff presented to the City Council
the recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Planning
Commission's findings regarding the proposed Tree Ordinance for the City. A
petition was received from residents on Printz Road and staff again reviewed
the matter of removal of trees on private land, and because of that petition,
the Countil decided to withhold their action and have requested that the Com-
mission review the City of San Luis Obispo's Tree Ordinances Staff has re-
viewed and it is their feeling that basically our ordinance covers the same
thing, and the only area we don't cover is the undeveloped parcels. Mr. Castro
stated he feels the basic question is whether or not the Commission wants to
get involved in the policing of trees on private lands.
After considerable discussion, and in view of the fact that the Parks
and Recreation Commission reviewed this tree ordinance and felt that it is
sufficient, it was the genera:: feeling of the Commission that the present
ordinance is adequate, A.
STUDY SESSION ON SIGN ORDINANCE
Planning Director Castro requested that this matter be continued due to
the fact that staff is in the process of preparing the final draft on the
propoged Ordinance.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Commis on, Cha ,.n errish
declared the meeting adjourned at 10:45 P.M.
WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE
Planning Director Castro read a letter from Mr. George Johanknecht,
204 Oak Street, addressed to the Planning Commission requesting reconsidera-
tion of the Use Permit approved for a racquetball club on Cornwall Street.
After a brief discussion, staff was requested to discuss the matter with Mr.
Johanknecht to go over the requirements with him, and if there is still a
problem to bring the matter back to the Commission.
ATTEST: /
Secretary
1