Loading...
PC Minutes 1977-11-01Arroyo Grande Planning Commission November 1, 1977 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met' tegular session with Chairman Gerrish presiding. Present are Commissioners Cole, Harris, Moots, Ries and Vandeveer. Commissioner Hitchen is absent. Planner Sullivan is also in attendance. COMMISSIONER HITCHEN ENTERED THE MEETING AND IS NOW PRESENT MINUTE APPROVAL The minutes of the regular meeting of October 18, 1977 were reviewed by the Commission. A correction was noted on the last paragraph of Page 1 150 Tally Ho Road" should be changed to read "Mrs. Simmons ". The minutes wre approved by the Chairman with the noted correction. REVIEW OF OPEN SPACE AND EQUESTRIAN DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE OAK PARK DEVELOPMENT. Planner Sullivan explained the developer had requested additional time to prepare these plans. The-Commission was requested to continue this item until their next regular meeting of November 15, 1977. The request for continuation was granted by the Commission. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING CASE NO. 77 -112, 112 AND 113 BELL STREET, "R -1" SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO "H -S" HIGHWAY SERVICE DISTRICT (NOVOA, STRASSER, PIERCE). Planner Sullivan explained that the City had received a letter from the appli- cant requesting this public hearing be continued for 60 days. He explained that the Commission could open the public hearing and note that the hearing would be continued in 60 days. Chairman Gerrish asked if anyone in the audience, had come specifically to speak on this public hearing. There being no comment from the audience, the Commission discussed the matter briefly. Upon being assured by Planner Sullivan that public hearing for Rezoning Case No. 77 -112 had been duly published, posted and- .property owners notified, Chairman Gerrish opened the public hearing and noted that the public hearing would be con- tinued in 60 days, i.e., the Planning Commission's regular meeting of January 3, 1978. PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE MAP OF THE GENERAL PLAN. Planner Sullivan displayed a map showing the three areas which are .being con- sidered for a change in the General Plan Land Use Map. (1) Properties south of Huasna Road (Waller Seed Farm) be reverted to a holding classification, "A" District. (2) Crown Hill from Le Point Terrace east to Corbett Canyon Road be changed from medium density to low density residential. (3) Property north of LePoint Street, in Loomis Heights and Methodist Camp- ground be revised from medium density to low density Mr. Sullivan noted the Crown Hill School was not being considered for change. There was considerable discussion from the audience on this item. Several people spoke in favor of the change, noting extensive traffic problems, which would only be aggravated if multiple dwellings are allowed in the area; and the problems with water service. Margaret Menton, 465 Columbia Avenue, Merced, owner of property on Crown Hill being considered for the change, spoke against the change. She noted the property was currently in Escrow, and wanted to know why she had not been notified of this hearing. Mr. Sullivan, explained that the City was required to do one of three things when holding a public hearing on changing the General Plan; either publish it in the local newspaper, post the notice in a conspicuous place, or notify the owners. The City published the notice and posted same, thus doing two of the three -- only one is required by, law. Mr. Menton, 465 Columbia Avenue, Merced, spoke against the change, noting the General Plan which had been adopted several years before had foreseen the need' for multiple dwellings in. this area and had provided for them. Now that the time for such development was here, the General Plan was up for change to prevent such a development. Pat Sanger, Crown Hill; Jim`f'Porter, 544 Crown Hill; Barbara Carlson, Arroyo Grande; Fran Laskins; and Chuck Comstock, 111 McKinley, all spoke in favor of the change. Mr. John Kane, 353 Hillcrest, spoke, noting that gradually the City seems • .. 417 418 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 11 -1 -77 Page 2 to be eliminating its areas zoned for multiple dwellings, which is a serious handicap to the housing in our area. Since many of the houses now being built are beyond the fi- nancial capabilities of many of the residents, the only alternative available to them is .apartments.. By changing the multiple dwelling designation to single family resi- dences, the Commission is creating an even greater housing problem. Mrs. Menton spoke again, noting she was very disappointed to see such a change made. The City is con- stantly changing, and it must continue to do so in order to survive. Multiple dwelling units are an asset to the City providing homes for additional residents to help support the City. Mrs. Menton specifically requested that she be notified regarding any further changes which are scheduled for this property. There being no.further discussion for or against the proposed amendment, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed. There was considerable discussion of the matter by the Commission. The general concensus was in favor of the changes in the General Plan. It was noted the.only dis- sention was in the change in the Crown Hill area, and the Commission felt that such a change was advisable to prevent aggravation of traffic and water problems, .and to pre- serve the village atmosphere of the Crown Hill area. After further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -572 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING THE REVISED AND UPDATED LAND USE ELEMENT MAP OF THE GENERAL PLAN. On motion by Commissioner Harris, seconded by Commissioner Cole, and by the follow- ing roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Hitchen, Harris, Vandeveer, Cole, Ries, Moots and Chairman Gerrish NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 1st day of November 1977. . RESOLUTION NO. 77 -573 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING THE REVISED AND UPDATED LAND USE ELEMENT MAP OF THE GENERAL PLAN. On motion by Commissioner Vandeveer, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Hitchen, Vandeveer, Cole, Ries, Moots and Chairman Gerrish NOES: None ABSTAIN: Commissioner Harris ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 1st day of November 1977. REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 77 -149, SO. ELM ST., 22 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX (PACE).- Planner Sullivan displayed the site plan and the architectural elevations of the ,proposed complex. He noted that, on the first review, the Architectural Committee had not been satisfied with the plans and had asked that the plans be revised. However, the second site plan was not as well planned as the first and had been rejected, and that the original plan was what the Commission was considering at this time. He further advised that the developer has met all necessary legal and building requirements. There was considerable_ discussion by the Commission, who noted their dissatisfaction with the site plan and the aesthetic appeal of the complex's design. After discussion, on motion by Commissioner Vandeveer, seconded by Commissioner Harris, and carried, that these plans be sent back to the Architectural Review Board on the basis that the site plan was very poor and not acceptable, and the aesthetic design of the complex was unacceptable. REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 77 -152, BRANCH AND MASON STS., SHOPPING CENTER COMPLEX (BILLINGTON AND DE BLAUW). Planner'Suilivan reviewed this matter for the Commission and displayed a site plan and architectural plan. He noted the conditions of approval of the Architectural Com- mittee, dated October 26, 1977, and advised that the architecture of the proposed comp- lex is similar to the current architecture of the Loomis Building across the street, thus preserving the village atmosphere. After discussion, Architectural Committee Action, dated October 26, 1977 was as submitted. ; ,REVIEW COMMITTEE,ACTION - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 77 -153, 1248 GRAND AVENUE, OFFICE ADDITION (MC HANEY). , !E Planner Sullivan advised that4.he request is for office expansion to provide more REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION. = ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 77- 154, 227.LEPOINT STREET, REMODEL RESIDENCE TO DUPLEX (CALHOON AND KNUTSON). Planner Sullivan reported on the request to remodel a s.ingle_.`fami,ly residence into a duplex:.: He noted this would be a multiple dwelling unit; and, that there were plans for a third apartment above the garage, however, the Architectural Review Com- mittee had made the condition that before any work could be on the third apart- ment, it must Come before the Committee for approval. He further advised th the parking requirements had been met, and there would be no physical change of the outside of the building except for the addition of a dormer on the roof. There was considerable discussion by the Commission because of their concern over action taken earlier in the evening to change this -area of Le Point Street to low density, in that if they approved this remodeling, would they be in conflict with their earlier action? Planner Sullivan explained that the action to change - the General Plan to low density in this area would not become effective until thirty days after the City Council's approval of th' amendment. Thus, the current medium density residential land use in the General Plan was still in affect, and remodeling of this residence would not be in contrast to the current General Plan or Zoning. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 11 -7 -77 space in the McHaney Commercial mmplex. After a brief discussion, Architectural Review Committee Actiondated October 26, 1977 was approved as submitted. After considerable discussion, it was the general concensus of the Commission that this remodeling could not be denied on the basis of earlier action to'lower the density in the area. After discussion, Architectural Rev'iew,Committee Action, dated October 26, 1977, was approved as submitted. Planner Sullivan noted, for the Commission's information, that should the Council accept the change to low density in the General Plan; then it would elimi- nate the developer's plan to place a third apartment over the garage unless it was done before the 30 day limit after Councii's`"ado}tion, which is very unlikely due to the time element. REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 77 -280, 1071 FARROLL AVENUE (ROSENTHAL). Planner Sullivan reviewed this matter briefly, . noting that the Minor Subdivision Committee had denied this application on the basis that no further land division could take place until the lots are served by a public right of way. ,The Commission agreed with this decision. After discussion, Minor Subdivision Committee Action, dated October 26, 1977 was approved as submitted. REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 77 -281, 268 ALDER STREET (ROBERTSON) Planner Sullivar reviewed this matter for the Commission, noting that Mr. Robertson's six month extension had expired before he could get the . map recorded. Because of this, Mr. Robertson was back before the Commission for approval of the map. Page There was concern by the Commission on this split because Mr. Robertson had requested a variance of minimum lot frontage on an "R -1" lot to 52 -1/2 feet for each of the two lots fronting on Alder Street. Mr. Sullivan explained that Mr. Robertson had met all of the requirements with regard to utilities, etc. before his extension had run out, however, the paving was not completed; this was the only improvement left to be done. It was noted by Commissioner Hitchen that in 1975 the Planning Commission had approved this lot split, with the 52 -1/2 foot variance, and that Mr. Robertson had paid all the fees and expenditures to put in the necessary requirements for approval. He stated, in his opinion, although the City has a 60 ft. minimum in the Ordinance, since the Commission had approved this lot split in 1975, and since Mr. Robertson had met all of the conditions except the paving, which he would be finishing, then the Commission should approve the lot split. After considerable discussion, Chairman Gerrish ordered,the report accepted and filed. SUBDIVISION REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS - TRACT NO. 689, "OAK PARK VILLAS", - MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, LOT 7, TRACT NO. 604 (KVIDT AND FOREMASTER) Planner Sullivan requested that this item be continued so that the Subdivision Review Board would have time to gather and review more information on the project. It was agreed by the Planning Commission to continue the matter. 419 420 Arroyo Grande :Planning Commission,•11 -1 -77 Page 4 REVIEW..OF EXISTING POLICY OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE REGARDING TREE REMOVAL. . Planner Sullivan reviewed this matter for.the Commission. He noted•it was the general feeling of the Parks and Recreation Commission that the City's present ordinance on tree removal was sufficient. However, the Planning Director and the Planner do not share this feeling. The point of contest in this matter is,.whether the City should regulate the removal and /or trimming of trees on private property; who would-conduct such work, and how would such a program be enforced. It was "re - quested by the Planning staff that a study session between. the Planning Commission and the Parks and Recreation Commission be held to study and resolve this problem, And to draft a new or amended Ordinance on tree removal. The Commission agreed to hold such a session. REVIEW - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 77 -259, 1200 GRAND AVENUE, RECYCLING CENTER (LARRABEE). Planner Sullivan advised that he had contacted Mr. Terrance Larrabee regard- ing his Use Permit No. 77 -259, for a recycling center at 1200 Grand Avenue. Mr. Larrabee informed him that he did hope to continue to operate in the City, however, it would not be at that location. Also, Mr. Larrabee had not been operating the recycling center in Arroyo Grande for about three months. Planner Sullivan stated that he had informed Mr. Larrabee that to operate at a different location would require a new Use Permit. REQUEST BY COMMISSIONER HITCHEN TO BE REMOVED FROM COUNCIL DUTY. Commissioner Hitchen explained that due to conflicting interests and meetings, the Tuesdays which alternated with the Planning Commission meetings were scheduled for school meetings. He requested that he be excused from service at City Council meetings. The Commission granted his request. Commissioner Ries offered to attend the City Council meetings during the month of November. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commiss th- -sting was adjourned by the Chairman at 9 :55 P.M. ATTEST: /11!"- an