Loading...
PC Minutes 1977-09-20402 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission September 20, 1977 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met' in regular session with Chairman Gerrish presiding. Present are Commissioners Harris, Hitchen, Moots, Ries and Vandeveer. Commissioner Cole is absent. Also in attendance are Planning Director Castro and Planner Sullivan. MINUTE APPROVAL Upon hearing no additions or corrections, the minutes of the regular meeting of September 6, 1977 were approved by the Chairman as submitted. REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 77 -278, 141 TALLY HO ROAD (LA VINE). Planning Director Castro advised that there are some problems involved in Lot Split Case No. 77 -278 and requested that this matter be continued until the next meeting of October 4th. He stated that the applicant is aware of the problems and has consented to the continuance. REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTIONS - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO 77 -148 1051 GRAND AVE. (LANDINI) Planner Sullivan advised that the proposed project is a three office addition to the existing Fair Oaks Pharmacy, and read the conditions of the Architectural Review Committee, dated September 15, 1977. In answer to Chairman Gerrish's question as to additional parking, Planner Sullivan stated that the existing parking is suf- ficient to take care of the new building. Commissioner Hitchen stated that even though there is cooperative parking between Scolari's Market and the pharmacy, it is quite crowded now. He further pointed out that some of the businesses in the back of the pharmacy limit the parking to their clients only and, consequently, that parking should not be considered. Chairman Gerrish advised that the Commission is concerned that they do have the available parking required by the Ordinance. Mr. Len Sirrocci, 189 Wood Place, Arroyo Grande, stated he was representing Mr. Landini, and there are 56 existing parking spaces in the lot that is shared by Scolari's Market and the pharmacy. He further advised that there is room for ten more spaces without interferring with anything else, and as far as any more development, there is not room for any more buildings. Mr. Sirrocci added that no one uses the lot on the other side of the building that Scolari's has for parking. Commissioner Gerrish requested this matter be held over until the next meeting until additional information is provided from staff as to what the exact parking requirements are and how many spaces are there now. SUBDIVISION REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 672, "OAK PARK LEISURE GARDENS" (O'NEAL AND KVIDT). Planning Director Castro referred to the Subdivision Review Board report, dated September 15, 1977, and recommended that the matter be continued until the next regular meeting. He further advised that staff has reviewed the matter with the Subdivision Review Board and felt additional information is required in order to evaluate the project in question. - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 673, LOT 9 OF SUBDIVISION REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS OAK PARK ACRES (KVIDT) A composite map of the subdivisions as proposed for the Oak Park Development was displayed and Planner Sullivan reviewed the proposed land use of Oak Park Acres. Planning Director Castro advised the proposed development is to create 30 lots, and reviewed the recommendations of the Subdivision Review Board, dated September 15, 1977. In answer to Mrs. Langworthy's question with regard to the equestrian trail and what provisions have been made to dispose of the horse manure, Planning Director Castro advised he has discussed the matter with Mr. Kvidt, and has re- quested that a more detailed physical plan be submitted with reference to the entire greenbelt system with regard to maintenance, liabilities, clean -up, details on the stables, etc., and these matters will be coming forth before the Planning Commission within the near future. Mr. Larry Rohloff, engineer and agent for the applicant, stated they have re- viewed all of the comments and have no particular question or dissention among the recommendations. He stated they did have one concern with regard to Item #5, "Ornamental street lights per City and P. G. and E. standards ", in that in check- ing the City standards he could find no reference to the street light requirements. Mr. Rohloff was advised that these requirements could be worked out with the Public Works Department. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9 -20 -77 There being no further discussion, the following action was taker: RESOLUTION NO. 77-558 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR TRACT NO. 67.3, AND REFERRED TO THE CITY COUNCIL. On motion by Commissioner Hitchen, seconded by Commissioner .Moot:, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Harris, Hitchen, Moots, Ries, Vandeveer and Chairman Gerrish NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Cole the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 20th day of September 1977. SUBDIVISION REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO „ 674 LOT 10 OF OAK PARK ACRES (O'NEAL). Planning Director Castro advised the proposed development will create 15 lots ranging from 40,000 to 50,000 square feet in size, and reviewed the recommendations of the Subdivision Review Board, dated September 15, 1977. Page 2 Mr, Larry Rohloff, engineer and agent for the applicant, stated that, again the recommendations cite that street lights shall be required on this particular tract. The tract is a rural section and as such, a 52 ft, right of way is al- lowed. He stated they have no real major objection about using the street lights in a rural section, however, they would like to maintain it as a rural section. He pointed out that the Circulation Element of the General Plan does not cite street lights as being a requirement in a rural section, and inquired why the staff is deviating from the rural section. Planning Director Castro advised the matter wa considered and the Board did. review the requirement as 'sp;acified'by .he 'element of the General Plan, however, the views expressed at the staff levdl were that, even though the rural section does not require the street lights, they felt that for reasons of safety, and to prevent vandalism due to the deep lots, it would be desirable to have some lighting on the street. In response to Commissioner Hit.chen's question: as to how many lights would be the minimum required, Planning Director. Castro advised there would be approximately 4 or 5 lights required. Mr. Rohloff asked if the Commission could perhaps stipulate the minimum number of lights that would be required at this time. Planning Director. Castro was requested to get together with the Public Works Department and determine the minimum number of street lights that would be required, and Item #4 under "Public Works ", of the Sub- division Review Board recommendations, dated September 15, 1977, be rewritten to read "Ornamental street lights per City and P. G. & E. standards, with minimum lighting as approved by the. City". There being no further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISEION'OF THE CITY` OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR TRACT NO. 674, AND REFERRED TO THE CITY COUNCIL. On motion by Commissioner Hitchen, seconded by Commissioner Vandeveer., and by the following roll call vote, to wits AYES: Commissioners Harris, Hitchen, Moots, Ries, Vandeveer and Chairman Gerrish NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Cole RESOLUTION NO. 77 -559 T. l the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 20th. day of September 1977. 403 404 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9 -20 -77 Page 3 SUBDIVISION REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 675, LOT 12 OF OAK PARK ACRES (O'NEAL). Planning Director Castro reviewed the proposed tract for the Commission, advis- ing this subdivision will create 20 lots ranging in size from 40,000 to 78,500 square feet; He reviewed the recommendations of the Subdivision Review Board, dated September 15, 1977. . MroiBill-Langworthy stated he lives fairly close to this development just out- side the City, and the developer originally proposed approximately 1 -1/2 acre lots, and that was what formed the basis of the EIR over two years ago, and in a later version of the development, they asked that in the event they are required to de- velop sewers -for that parcel; that they might be allowed to -increase the density by 50% further stated that was left as kind of a loophole in Ordinance_140 CoS. where it is written in a rather permissive Way and, as he understood it`, that 'decision was going`to be put Off until some later date. What we now wind up with ..- on`tnis parcel is a density that meets the standards of RA 40,000, but is more dense by about 50% than what the developer had originally asked for just -over =two-' ears a Mr Lan rth further pointed out that all of-the-people Y � o._.... g� Y p . `l in the Noyes, Road area, their land is zoned into 10 acre minimums, and these'�riouses "will be jaMted into just about an acre on the average, whereas the original proposal was going to be about 1 -1/2 acres. Mrs. Langworthy stated she understood they were dickering around with an easement onthe road because of the oaks, and since one of the key mitigating measures was preservation of as many oaks as possible, asked if in the landscaping plans, there are any restrictions on individual lot developments if there are old oaks on a particular lot. Planning Director Castro advised that the Architectural Review Committee of the Home Owners' Association is supposed to police the type of de- velopment that goes in and what trees are supposed to be preserved. He further stated he didn't think the City would be involved in the architectural review; we may be involved in the grading which will give us some ability to look into what trees will be cut or removed, but as far as the building site, this is the responsibility of the Home Owners' Association Architectural Review Committee. Mr. Kvidt, the petitioner, advised that the C. C. & R's are being written to include that no trees be removed without the Homeowners' Association's permission. Mrs. Madeline Steele, 1598 Hillcrest Drive, stated she is concerned with the way the letters from the School District are passed over, and she assumed that the impact.on the schools is already foregone when the applicants are given per - - mission to develop. Planning Director Castro advised that in reading the EIR, there was really nothing more said about the School District, except that the enrollment factor from Arroyo Grande was not as great as from other areas and, therefore, the number of children to be generated by this development was not going to be as great as it would be if it were in a separate location. He further stated he had met with Dr. Hoagland of the Lucia Mar School District and asked if there were any further comments he could give with regard to the proposed development - -in general, and Dr. Hoagland's response was that they do have a problem and that the solution for it is not necessarily within the City of Arroyo Grande, but it is within the entire School District; that is to say that monies are needed not only to help this particular area, but also other areas. Commissioner Harris stated that he would have to agree with Mrs. Steele in part, in that the accumulative effect is going to have an effect on the high school, however, the point is a moot one at this time because the petitioners have been given the right to have a development here under certain conditions, and if they meet these conditions, they are allowed to have the development, and the Planning Commission's job right now is to determine whether they have met the basic criteria set down by the City Council and by the staff. Planner Sullivan explained the "Phase I Requirements" as set forth in the Subdivision Review Board Report, dated September 15, 1977, stating that in the conditions of the accepted improvement plans for Tract 604, as a condition of approval of that tract, there are certain things that must be done before any development, with the exception of one single family home on each of those lots, such as construction of James Way, some improvements on Oak Park Boulevard, improvements on West Branch Street, some drainage control device installations, and sewer and water lines. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9 -20 -77 After further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO 77 -560 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR TRACT NO. 675, AND REFERRED TO THE CITY COUNCIL. Page 4 On motion by Commissioner Hitchen, seconded by Commissioner Ries, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Harris, Hitchen, Moots, Ries, Vandeveer and Chairman Gerrish NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Cole the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 20th day of September 1977. Planning Director Castro advised that in the Resolution passed for the Oak Park development, is a requirement that all subdivisions and /or development plans have to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and the City Council. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Planning Director Castro .advised that in view of some of the problems the City has had lately regarding certain developments, the staff has drafted a letter to all land developers regarding a proposed development packages He stated it was the feeling of staff that by having this information complete, they will be able to review the projects in more detail, and perhaps have less complications in the future DISCUSSION OF APARTMENTS ON CROWN HILL Planning Director Castro advised,' as information to the Planning Commission, that he has been requested to give final occupancy on the Crown Hill apartments and, in his discussion with the City Attorney, if certain conditions are met, they couldn't see any other solution except to go ahead and grant the final occupancy. In answer to Councilman Mark Millis' question as to the grade on the driveway being more than 20 %, Planning Director Castro advised there are a lot of things that are irregular, but when you take a look at the conditions, there is nothing that makes reference to the angle of the driveway. Planner Sullivan pointed out that 20% slope is a requirement in the Subdivision Ordinance, and staff tries to hold to that 20% standard as part of the City standards, which, to his knowledge, have never been adopted by the City Council; 20% is a standard for all development, and within subdivisions, it is an Ordinance requirement.. Councilman Millis stated he was concerned about whether a City body, whether it be the City Council, the Planning Commission or the Architectural Review Board, can do something in violation of the City Code and then just because they have done it, it's legal, such as allowing three parking spaces when the Code requires four. Planning Director Castro stated that some Ordinances do state that no public official can commit the City to a violation of the Ordinance, and that violation has to be corrected in one way or another. He further advised that he did ask the question of both Jerry Shipsey and John Seitz as to what the remedies are in this kind of a situation, and what guidelines are to be followed to resolve the matter. Their remarks were that, in effect, we have committed certain expendi- tures of funds by someone by issuing a building permit realizing there was an errors Councilman Millis stated it would seem that if the parking doesn't meet the Code, that the owners would have to get .a Variance such as in the case on Aspen Street. Chairman Gerrish stated he felt this should be referred to the City Attorney for an opinion. Commissioner Harris stated he would prefer that if the City Attorney gives an opinion in this matter, that it be submitted in writing, and agreed that this is primarily a legal problem and not a policy one. Planning Director Castro advised he would review the matter with the City Attorney from a Variance point of view. RECUESTS FOR FINAL OCCUPANCIES Planning Director Castro stated he would like to get some feel from the Commission as far as their concerns, or what direction should be taken in regard to final occupancies prior to the completion of projects-- 405 406 .Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 9 -20 -77 Page 5 Commissioner Hitchen stated unless a project is finished, it is not ready for occupancy. He pointed out however, in some cases if the petitioner can post a bond to guarantee completion of such things as the irrigation system or the land- - scaping within a reasonable time, he would not be opposed to that. Commissioner :Ries stated that if,= in a case where the person runs out of money for a "garage or whatever, he should be able to appeal the matter to the Planning Commission. DISCUSSION OF MEETING DATES Planning Director Castro pointed obit that we need to set a number of- . public. .. - hearings:: later on in the year, and he would like the Commission's feelings as to whether or not they wanted to meet on December 20th and on. January 3rd due -to the tholidays. After discussion, it was agreed not to cancel the two meetings:, but to adjust the Planning Commission agenda around so that there is nothing of great .importance scheduled for public hearings. BROWNE PROPERTY Chairman Gerrish advised the Commission that Mr. Browne had contacted him and would like to work out some kind of a schedule with the Commission members to view the . property at a time that is convenient to them. He stated it was his _understanding that we are going to try to have a public hearing on this EIR either :et the last meeting in October or the first meeting in November. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was ;adjourned by the Chairman at 9:30 P.M. ATTEST: 7 1711 A Y � it Secretary