Loading...
PC Minutes 1977-07-19376 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission July 19, 1977 The Arroyo.Grande Planning Gerrish presiding. Present are Commissioner Hitchen is absent. Planner Sullivan. Commission met in regular session with Vice Chairman Commissioners Cole, Harris, Moots, Ries and Vandeveer. Also in attendance are City Administrator Butch and MINUTE APPROVAL Upon hearing no additions or corrections, the minutes of the regular meeting of June 21, 1977 were approved by the Vice Chairman as prepared. WELCOME TO NEW PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Vice Chairman Gerrish welcomed newly appointed Commissioners Ron Harris and Lawrence Vandeveer to the Planning Commission. APPOINTMENT OF NEW PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Ries, and unanimously carried, Mrs. Pearl Phinney was appointed as Secretary of the Planning Commission. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Vice Chairman Gerrish opened nominations for Chairman of the Planning Com- mission. Commissioner Cole nominated Commissioner Gerrish as,Chairman. Commissioner Moots seconded the nomination. On motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Com- missioner Ries, and unanimously carried, the nominations were closed, and Commissioner Gerrish was elected as Chairman for 1977 -78. Chairman Gerrish opened the nominations for Vice Chairman.. Commissioner Ries nominated Commissioner Moots as Vice Chairman- Commissioner Moots declined the nomination. On motion by Commissioner'Ries, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and unanimously carried, Commissioner Cole was elected as Vice Chairman for 1977 -78. PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUATION OF REZONING CASE NO. 77 - 104. FROM "R - 7" STTj(;T.F, FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO "P -C" PROFESSIONAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, 303 SO. HALCYON ROAD (FILER/ GRIEB) . Chairman Gerrish opened the public hearing, stating that the rezoning case is being continued from the meeting of June 21st, 1977. Planner Sullivan recapped the matter, stating the request is to rezone approximately four acres currently zoned "R -1" to "P -C" District, and that,- apparently there is going to be a petition for condominium use on one of the parcels, and there is no indication of the use pro- posed for the other parcel. He pointed out_that at the last meeting, there were two questions raised that he did not have the answers to; (1) could the " -D" Over- ride be used'to limit the property to residential use. Mr. Sullivan- indicated the answer to this question is "yes ", and listed the recommended conditions as stated his letter of July 14, 1977; (2) Will Alpine or Woodland Drive ever go through to meet at Fair Oaks Avenue, and the answer to this is also "Yes ". He stated that there are approved plans on file that show So. Alpine Street continuing through to Fair Oaks Avenue; this was a condition of approval of the Architectural Committee's Action on Case #74 -88, Arroyo Grande Medical Suites,- American Medical International. This. project has not yet been realized, and may not be, however, the staff will con- tinue to recommend that with any development of the land between.So. Alpine and Fair Oaks Avenue, the:: extension,_.. of 'will be'.required:- -:Mr. Sullivan further pointed out that.if the zoning is allowed, the Commission would have 90 days in which to consider a General Plan map amendment because the uses. are different. COMMISSIONER RIES REQUESTED TO BE EXCUSED FROM THE DISCUSSION BECAUSE OF A POSSIBLE CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AND IS NOW ABSENT. Chairman Gerrish requested comments from the audience of those persons in favor of the rezoning request. .Mr._ Rob Filer, '322.Noguera Place.,. advised the purpose of this request is for the construction of 32 condominium units. He pointed out that the property adjoining this particular piece directly to the south is currently zoned "P -C ", and the property adjoining this property directly to the west is zoned "P -C ", and half of the property adjoining this to the north is currently zoned "R -3" and "R -2 ". He advised that prior to the last meeting, it was anticipated there would be protests from the surrounding neighbors in regard to traffic problem that this project could create, and they propose to allow only 18.units of the 32 units to enter on Alpine Street, with the balance of the units exiting on Halcyon. Road. He stated they are_not asking for any additional units to exit on Alpine Street than is permitted under the current zonin g . - Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 7 -19 -77 Page 2 Chairman Gerrish called for comments from the audience of those persons in opposition to the proposed zone change request. Victoria Robertson, 728 - 13th Street, Paso Robles, stated she was representing the Central Coast Indian Council, and the property to be rezoned is the remainder of a village site which belongs to the Chumash Tribe. She stated there are a lot of Chumash people still alive and still very much involved, and before any rezoning or Negative Declaration comes before the Planning Commission, an Environmental Impact Report should be done by a qualified Archaeologist,with an Indian person as an ad- visor. John Kling, Central Coast Indian Council, Paso Robles, stated it was his under- standing that the houses built across the road also had a Negative Impact Declaration filed, and stated there were people who live there that have found Indian burials in their own yards, after the Negative Impact Declaration was approved by the Planning Commission.- Mike Johnson, 223 So.- Alpine St., stated he presented a petition at the last meeting against this proposal. Mr.- Johnson referred to the zoning map stating that all along Halcyon Road where the "P -C" zoning exists now, fronts on Halcyon Road, and on either side you can't see where "P -C" zoning goes through on the next resi- dential street, other than So. Rena which happens to be "R -3 ". The fact'that two adjacent sides are "P -C" is true, however, the two adjacent sides happen to be "R -1 ", so the logic doesn't make much sense there; they both weigh each other out. He pointed out that with the " -D" Override that was suggested restricting the "P -C" zoning to residential only, and with the suggestions that were made, this could also be the same thing as "R -G" zoning and, if this were rezoned to "P -C ", in reality it would actually be "R -G ", which in essence is spot zoning. Mr. Johnson stated that the people in this area bought single family residences and, in his opinion, have every right to expect that the area remain single family residences. He further stated that the people against the zone change are not necessarily against develop ment. Mr. Thompson proposed a compromise, in that they would like to keep the area fronting on Alpine as single family residences. The developer could go back 100 to 150 feet making that single family residences, and from that point, rezone toy "P -C" and use for condominiums. "R -1" is in conformance with your zoning map which'shows "R -1" bordering from Grand Avenue all the way on So. Alpine, with "P -C" still 'front- ing on Halcyon Road. With regard to the traffic, Mr. Johnson stated he believed the " -D" Override would take care of the traffic by allowing 18 homes in there. Mrs. Judy Winegard, 251 So.. Alpine, stated she lives directly across the street from the area, and that she is opposed to the rezoning. She stated there is no guarantee of what will be built across the street if it is rezoned "P-C"' She further stated that she has found an Indian burial and artifacts in her yard, and she felt it was a shame on Arroyo Grande's part to think that this'sort of thing has been covered up, and it is quite obvious this is a burial site and, in her opinion, the Planning Commission should consider the fact that an Environ- mental Impact Report must be filed. Mr. Paul McKenzie, 220 So. Alpine, stated he agreed with Mr. Johnson, in that if it is going to be changed at all, they would like to keep the So. Alpine front- age as "R -1 ". He further stated that when planting a garden in his yard, he found bones also. Ms. Arlene Rowan, 226 So. Alpine, stated that the developer mentioned they were planning on 18 condominiums, and at the last meeting she recalled they were talking about 16 units. Mr. Bob Gibson, Archaeologist, a Teacher at Cuesta College, P. O. Box 102, Paso Robles, stated he was at the-site today and there is a large Indian Chumash Village there anywhere :fxom 2500 years ago to the present modern times-and, if he were asked to do an EIA'}_ =:ice would recommend that it not be touched. Mr. Conrad Grieb, 30'3 Halcyon Road, inquired when these people mentioned "bones" if they had anyone to verify whether they were animal bones, because they had buried dozens of cows and livestock. He further stated they admit there are graves in the area, and that the University came in there several years ago and did some excavating. From the point where they excavated near the middle of the barn to the west, they have never found any burials whatsoever, and that he has lived there all of his life. Mr. Grieb pointed out that from the east side of the barn they have found many; but from that point west they have never found g bone or any kind of artifact to his knowledge. 377 378 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 7 -19 -77 Page 3 Mr. Bob Rowan, 226 So. Alpine, stated he agreed with his neighbors in opposition to this rezoning. Rea Buss, 625 Cerro Vista Circle, requested that . the Commission consider the idea of keeping the residential area on. Alpine Street. Mr. John Kling, Central Coast Indian Council, stated the Commission knows how they feel about an Environmental Impact Report, and it doesn't make any difference what happens on that property on Alpine Street, the law has been stretched to the point of no return. He further stated that someone approved a Negative Impact Declaration that came before the Commission and it is their responsibility to clean their own house. Ms. Marsha Fowler, 271 So. Alpine Street, stated that she is very much in favor of this change, and that if the Indians are so concerned, where were they before tonight? jack Mallory, 230 So. Alpine St., stated it was his opinion that the zoning change would make a fine addition to the community. Mr. Rob Filer stated the main problem was traffic, and that,has_been re- solved and,,with regard to the Indian•burial ground, there could be Indian burial grounds across every square foot of Arroyo Grande. He further stated the point of the "P- -C" zoning is that the development is still residential; it is a 32. unit residential complex with 18 units exiting on So. Alpine, and the " -D" Over- ride will restrict that. No further discussion, for or against the proposed zone change, Chairman Gerrish. declared the hearing closed. In answer to Commissioner Harris' question as to what the General Plan is for the area, Planner Sullivan stated it is low density and would require con - sideration for a General Plan Land Use Map amendment within 90 days.. Commissioner Moots stated he sat on this Commission when the.houses were built'on Cerro Vista, and if the condition existed at that time, the Commission was not apprised of it. He inquired as to what Mr. Filer's feelings would be on splitting the "R -1" and "P -C" division. Mr. Filer stated this would destroy the design concept,- and he felt the Commission is going to be faced with the . same problem if they allow "R -1" in there right now. In answer to Commissioner Cole's question, Planner Sullivan stated that,. in his opinion, the only way to get a clear answer on the extent of the Indian burial ground or the community that may have been the ;re at one time is through environmental procedures. Changing the zoning would have no effect on the burial ground itself because that is not putting anything on the - land.. What would have an effect would be the condominiums o"r ar "R -1" subdivision. He further advised that the Commission seems to have two options as follows: (1) Grant a Negative Declaration flagging that there are potential impacts in areas of archaeological findings or, (2) order a Focus Environmental Impact Report now to get a clear answer and continue the public hearing for the re- quested zone change until that time- After further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO, 77 -529 Z RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING AN AMENDMENT TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE,. AS PROVIDED BY CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE 32, OF SAID CODE:' On motion by Commissioner Harris, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Harris, Moots and Vandeveer NOES: Commissioners Cole and Gerrish ABSENT: Commissioners Hitchen and Ries the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of July, 1977. COMMISSIONER RIES'IS NOW PRESENT. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 7 -19 -77 Page 4 PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 77 -263, PRIVATE RACQUETBALL CLUB IN AN "H -S" HIGHWAY SERVICE DISTRICT, CORNWALL AND OAK STREET (DE PUE). Planner Sullivan pointed out the area on the map and advised it is in an "H -S" District and that private athletic clubs are permissive uses in the district, subject to Use Permit procedures. Upon being assured by Planner Sullivan that public hearing for Use Permit Case No. 77 -263 had been duly published, posted and property owners notified, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing open. Jim De Pue, Oak Park Road, petitioner for the Use Permit, spoke in favor of the Use Permit being granted, and advised it will be a two court facility and will be opened to approximately 35 members per court. He pointed out that the courts are totally enclosed and there is no exterior playing at all, and no noise will be heard in the vicinity. Mr. John Cowhite, 1131 Palm Court, stated he was representing Mr. and Mrs. Fink, who live directly across the street from the subject property, and they are very much in favor of this development. Mr. Terry Berryhill, 871 Todd Lane, stated he was in favor of this development. Mr. Jack Mallory, 306 Noguera Place, stated he is in favor of the project and, in his opinion, it would be a fine additon. Mr. Edward La Boe, 424 Alder St., stated he owns the property in the area and was concerned about off street parking, and also the noise and the lights at night in a residential area. Mr. De Pue advised that they are required to have 9 parking spaces by law, which they have been able to do.. He further pointed out that at any given time there can be a maximum of four players per court, which would be a maximum -of 8-people involved in any given situation, and the only noise that could possibly occur would be the driving to or driving away from the build- ing site because the walls are made of thick cement blocks. He stated there will be some lighting available because playing will take place until 10:00 at night. No further dis'CUssion for or against the proposed Use Permit, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed and, after discussion among the Commissioners, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -530 U RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A USE PERMIT, CASE NO. 77 -263. .On motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Cole, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Harris, Moots, Ries, Vandeveer and Chairman Gerrish NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hitchen the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of July, 1977. PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT.CASE NO. 77 -264, 10 UNIT CONo ®MINIUM IN AN "R -G" GARDEN APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, 1169 MAPLE ST. (CURTIS)., Planner Sullivan pointed that under the City's ordinance, condominiums are a permissive use in an "R -G" District subject to obtaining a Use Permit, and that there is a lot split pending that has received tentative approval. He advised there is a residence in the front and there is'150 ft.. deep flag going back to the rear of the lot, and the proposal is for a 10 unit condo- minium. After being assured by Planner Sullivan that public hearing for Use Permit Case No. 77 -264 had been duly published, posted and property owners notified, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing open. Mr. Jim McGillis, Sunset Drive, stated he is the surveyor for the project and it is in compliance with the General Plan. He stated it is in the middle of an "R -G" Zone and the property around it is going to be developed the same way. Commissioner Ries pointed out.various changes to the map as a result of the Architectural Review Committee action. 379 380 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 7 -19 -77 Page 5 Ms. Marcie Romero, 1194 Maple St., inquired if the condominiums are not sold if they would be rented. Chairman Gerrish advised that Mr. Curtis can rent them out just the same as apartment buildings. It is quite possible that they will be rentals, but they will be individually owned units. Ms. Ella Honeycutt inquired as to the 40% of open space required. Mr. McGillis stated there are large green strips at the bottom of each unit and along the back and there is, in fact, more than 40% of open space. No further discussion for or against the proposed Use Permit, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed. After a brief discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -531 U RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A USE PERMIT, CASE NO. 77 -264. On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Harris, Moots, Ries, Vandeveer and Chairman Gerrish NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hitchen the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of July, 1977. PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 77 -265, OUTDOOR FLOWER SALES STAND IN AN "H -S" HIGHWAY SERVICE DISTRICT, 1200 GRAND AVENUE (HOLMAN). Planner Sullivan stated the request is for a Flower Sales Stand to be lo- cated at the Sunset Furniture store parking lot on Grand Avenue, and there is a written statement on file from the property owner giving his permission for this activity. He stated that outdoor sales are a permissive use in an "H -S" District subject to obtaining a Use Permit. Upon being assured by Planner Sullivan that public hearing for Use Permit Case No. 77 -265 had been duly published, posted and property owners notified, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing open. Ms. Dana Holman, 134 Palomar Ave., Shell Beach, petitioner for the Use Permit, inquired as to the possibility of an awning being put up approximately 4 yards by 6 ft. high in accordance with the property owner's wishes. Peggy Langworthy, Branch Road, stated she felt that having a flower stand is an excellent image for the City of Arroyo Grande, and that she is highly in favor of Ms. Holman's endeavor. Ms.. Joyce Beihler, 1304 Brighton, stated she was in favor of the Use Permit, and she didn't feel this location would create a traffic problem. No further discussion for or against the proposed Use Permit, Chairman Gerrish declared the hearing closed. Commissioner Ries stated he noted some of the other cities had problems on curb side sales with regard to traffic problems._ Ms. Holman stated she has sold flowers through almost every holiday of the past year, and.there have not been any problems there. After a brief discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -532 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A USE PERMIT, CASE NO. 77 -265. On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 7 -19 -77 Page 6 AYES: Commissioners Cole, Harris, Moots, Ries, Vandeveer and Chairman Gerrish NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hitchen the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of July 1977. REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 77 -269, 1031 HUASNA RD. (NELSON). Planner Sullivan advised that the property is a large parcel and the proposal is to create four lots, and the request is in keeping with Zoning and the Land Use Plan. Mr. Sullivan read the conditions of approval by the Minor Subdivision Committee Action dated July 5, 1977. After a brief discussion, the Committee action was approved. REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION - LOT SPLIT CASE. NO. 77 -270. 162 WALNUT STREET (PANELLA) Planner Sullivan read the conditions of approval by the Minor Subdivision Committee Action dated July 5, 1977. After a brief discussion, the Committee action was approved as submitted. REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 77 -143, 420 CORNWALL ST. -(DE PUE - RACQUETBALL CLUB). Planner Sullivan advised the Use Permit for the Racquetball Club was granted earlier this evening, and he read the conditions of approval by the Architectural Review Committee. After discussion, the Committee action was approved as sub- mitted. REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO. 77- 144,CHILTON STREET AND EL CAMINO REAL (PETERS - PETER PAYDAY CARE CENTER).. Planner Sullivan advised that - several months ago this Commission granted a Use Permit for a day care center on this parcel. Mr. Sullivan further advised that when the building originally came before the Committee it was to be adjacent to Chilton, however, Mr. Peters has run into problems, in that he want to cut any more oak trees down, and he has shifted the same building to below and adjacent to El Camino Real. This does not change any of the architectural features. Commissioner Ries advised that the only thing that was mentioned at the Committee review was that the Fire Department stated the entrance from Frontage Road was a better entrance than from Chilton. After - discussion, the Committee action was approved as submitted. SUBDIVISION REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 667, "AUTUMN GARDENS ",1169 MAPLE ST., A CONDOMINIUM (CURTIS). Mr. McGillis, San Luis Engineering, referred to the requirement for a 10 ft. Public Utility Easement, and requested an opportunity to work with City staff to see if the utility companies are willing to accept a 6 ft. easement back there so they can keep the open space. City Engineer Karp was in the audience and advised he would rather have the sewer and the water out in the parking area, and if the other utilities can live with a 6 ft. easement, that is fine with Public Works. Planner Sullivan commented they can probably go down to a 6 ft. easement, with a 10 ft. water and sewer easement. After discussion, the Subdivision Review Board Recommendations were approved on a motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Ries, and unanimously carried. The Commission also approved the request for Mr. Curtis to work with City staff regarding Public Utility Easements.. REQUEST FOR NEGATIVE- DECLARATION - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 667, "AUTUMN GARDENS ", 1169 MAPLE STREET, A CONDOMINIUM (CURTIS). After a brief discussion by the Commission regarding Negative Statement for Tentative Tract No. 667, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -533 EIR RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DECLARATION. On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded. by Commissioner Ries, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: 381 382 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 7 -19 -77 Page 7 AYES: Commissioners Cole, Harris, Moots, Ries, Vandeveer and Chairman Gerrish NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hitchen the ' foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of July, 1977. SUBDIVISION REVIEW BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 602, "WALNUT CREEK TERRACE #3" WOODLAND DRIVE (FOSTER & OSBORN). Planner Sullivan-pointed out that this is the third unit of a previously approved master plan, and because of a change in State law, a new tentative map was required to gain Subdivision Review Board approval again. Planner Sullivan reviewed the requirements as set out in the Subdivision Review Board recommendations of July 13, 1977. After discussion, the Chairman approved the action as submitted. REQUEST FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 77 -269, 1031 HUASNA ROAD IN AN "RA -B3" RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT (NELSON). After a brief discussion regarding Negative Statement for Lot Split Case No. 77 -269, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -534 EIR RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DECLARATION. On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Vandeveer, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Harris, Moots, Ries, Vandeveer and Chairman Gerrish NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hitchen the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of July, 1977. REQUEST FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION - LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 77 -270, 162 WALNUT ST., IN AN "R -1" SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (PANELLA). After a brief discussion regarding Negative Statement for Lot Split Case No. 77 -270, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION N®. 77 -535 EIR RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DECLARATION. On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Harris, Moots, Ries, Vandeveer and Chairman Gerrish NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hitchen the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of July, 1977. USE OF DENIAL STRIP AND BARRICADES ON LOCAL STREETS; GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY. CHAIRMAN GERRISH EXCUSED HIMSELF DUE TO A POSSIBLE CONFLICT. OF INTEREST AND IS NOW ABSENT. VICE CHAIRPERSON COLE ASSUMED THE CHAIR. Planner Sullivan read a communication from the Director of Public Works, the City Engineer and himself, dated July 15, 1977. He advised that the street design guidelines are set out in the Subdivision Ordinance. Vice Chairperson Cole requested comments from the audience. Margaret Stone. from Haynes & Olpin, 1012 Grand Avenue, addressing Mr. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 7 -19 -77 Page 8 Sullivan's last point in his position paper, stated that the City Council dis- cussed in their last meeting what sets this street apart from other local streets; first, that it is a long established residential community and, second, that it is being faced with a concentration of apartment development, and we understand that there is in the works, a shopping center development as well. In view of that kind of traffic, and the fact that this has been a street with a natural barricade for a considerable length of time, this was the reason that this street be considered for a denial strip or a barricade, and it was inserted into the Negative Declaration by the City Council at its last meeting, so that isn't really an issue. What is possibly an issue is whether or not the Planning Commission finds that the denial strip is consistent with the Circulation Element. Al Gorsline, 1300 Brighton Avenue, stated he has lived there for three years and he has noticed that there has been a great increase in traffic since Brighton has been opened up through to Elm Street. He stated there is another problem in that on those two blocks there are no sidewalks and there are at least 10 children in there, and if that street is openedlup for the traffic to go right straight ' through, you are going to have those children coming down from all of those apart- ments and you are going to have a real traffic hazard. He further stated the road has been closed and, in his opinion, it should stay that way because by dumping all that traffic down there, there are going to be serious traffic problems. Billie Silva, 309 Ledo Place, stated that when that barricade was put there several - years ago, they were assured that at the time the property was developed, the street would go through. Now, it is beginning to be developed and that street should be put through, and also Courtland, and she would like to know what is going to happen to all of the traffic if the barricade is left there when this other section across the street is developed. Planner Sullivan stated that the area on Brighton that is currently being considered for development is a 16 unit apartment complex on half of the Baden property; there is preliminary discussion of an "R -1" Subdivision on the Prather property. Janet Strain, 366 Ledo Place, stated there is virtually no access to Ledo Place right now, and that to get to Ledo Place down to, say the shopping center, they have to go down Ledo Place, over Brighton, go up Courtland, go across Newport and down Oak Park; it makes absolutely no sense and they are trapped in there. She stated Brighton should be opened up and /or Courtland Street paved all the way down and with all of those apartments going in, it wouldn't even be sufficient just to have Courtland paved. Joyce Beihler, 1304 Brighton, stated she believed that Mr. Baden offered the City the street area for improvement to keep it open before he asked for the barricade, and the City refused. Now the barricade has been up there ap- proximately 5 years and there seems to have been no problem with the Fire Depart- ment and people coming and going on the other side of the barricade at that time. With regard to Ms. Beihler's question as to the improvement of Courtland, Planner Sullivan reviewed that each unit in three separate developments is being assessed $100.00 and possibly there would be enough to pay for maybe one half of the improvement on Courtland. Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fair View Drive, advised that the City did state that due to the assessment that they were going to go ahead and pave that them- selves and then collect the money, and it would be paved immediately. Ms. Silva stated she thought it would be wonderful if they do pave Courtland, but that it is going to be inadequate because of those apartments and the other developments going in there. She further stated she didn't know why the people on Fair View should be exempt from having the cars pass by their doors: - Mr. George Silva, 309 Ledo Place, stated he could not see why the barricades went up, and that we need Brighton opened up on both sides between Oak Park and Elm Street because that is part of the street, and every road on that hillside is opened except Brighton. Ms. Cora Higdon, 183 Fair View, stated she has lived on Fair View for 20 years and she is against opening up that street because it is a residential district and she doesn't want all that traffic from the apartments. 383 384 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 7 -19 -77 Page 9 Planner Sullivan stated he wanted to clear up the matter of why the property owners on Fair View were not notified of the zone change that took place over by Ledo, and on that end of Brighton and down to Grand Avenue. In 1960 that was all zoned "R -1" and it was requested to be rezoned; and it was rezoned. In 1962 Fair View was annexed into the City in an election held in April or May, so the area was not even in the City when the zone change took place. Mr. Sullivan further stated that any commercial development would not have access on Brighton Avenue; it would have access on to Grand Avenue and Courtland Street. Commissioner Moots stated he was a little bit confused, in that on one side of town we are trying to get Alpine Street and Woodland Drive opened up for cir- culation, and on the other side of town we are trying to keep Brighton closed so we won't have circulation. The City Commissions and every member of the staff was opposed to keeping Brighton Avenue closed, from the Fire Chief, Police Chief, Public Works Director Anderson, and City Engineer Karp, and to do this we have to change the General Plan to say that this Brighton Street is not necessary to the Circu- lation Element and, his opinion, Brighton should be a completed street, and Courtland should be improved. Commissioner Vandeveer stated he was in agreement with Commissioner Moots, and if it is in the General Plan as a through street from Elm to Courtland, then it should remain there and should be improved instead of deterred. Planner Sullivan pointed out that the General Plan Circulation Element does not necessarily address individual local streets. It does address it to the ex- tent of the number one objective of the Circulation Element'is to provide safe, easy access to and from areas of residential use, employment, business and recreation ", and also in the wording that is used under a section called "Local Streets ". In your feelings and your desires for the community, you are here to make a determination that the denial strip and barricade is either consistent with the General Plan, or it is not consistent, and follow through with the other findings on which the staff needs direction. After discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -536 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DETERMINING THAT DENIAL STRIPS OR BARRICADES ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN. ..On motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Vandeveer, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Harris, Moots, Ries and Vandeveer NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hitchen and Chairman Gerrish the foregoing resolution was adopted this 19th day of July 1977. Commissioner Moots stated he wanted it understood that it is the intent of his motion that Brighton be opened up, and stated he doesn't really feel -the use of denial strips and barricades are unnecessary in some instances, but they are not necessary on this Brighton instance. After further discussion, it was concurred that there had been a misunder- standing on the passing of: Resolution No. 77 -536, in that the Commission felt they were voting on the use of denial strips and barricades with regard to Brighton Avenue. On motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Harris, and unanimously carried, that Resolution No. 77 -536 be rescinded. For clarification purposes, Planner Sullivan again read the memo from Public Works Director Anderson, City Engineer Karp and himself, dated July 15, 1977 regarding "Denial Strips and /or Barricades Blocking Local Streets ". Vice Chairperson Cole stated that the matter before the Commission now is to either agree or disagree with the statement that in certain conditions, denial strips and /or barricade blocking on certain streets could be consistent with the General Plan. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission; 7 -19 -77 .Page 10 In answer to Commissioner Harris' question as to why the City Council found Brighton to be a unique' area that they should' have a barricade in that area, Administrator Butch explained that it was an effort by both the developers and the residents in that area that they had come to some mutual agreement. Both parties involved agreed to the height limitation problem and then they came for - ward to the City Council, and they both agreed that if the denial strip was per - mitted, the developers Would be happy to live with it and most of the residents on the street would be happy with the situation and they would withdraw their appeal. So,. the City Council felt that thiswould be a resolution to the problem. Then there was concern that this might be in:confiict with the Circulation Element of the General Plan and, therefore, it was'referred ,to the P lanning . C4? �mmission. Commissioner Moots pointed out that also on file is Development Plan No. 1 which shows Brighton as a through street from Elm Street to Courtland and, in his opinion, barricades on local streets is not consistent with the. General Plan. Commissioner Harris stated he felt that denial strips and barricades are consistent because circulation is a secondary function of local streets and they should be designed to discourage ..through ` traffic. Commissioner Harris moved that denial strips and barricades be considered consistent with-the General Plan.'. Motion lost for lack of a second. Mr. Severn, San Luis Obispo, stated that at the meeting held with'Mrs. Stone and Mrs. Jackson, it was his, interpretation that at some future date this could . be opened ..,up, and that is-why,;they were building'. it up to where.: it could be a through street or it could b'e 'changed ' o v erto'a through:' street. Planner Sullivan again referred to the memo dated July 15th and stated that in Step 1 of the recommendations , what staff was wanting to know is if the City Council action in requiring denial" strip on Brighton and the barricade is con sistent with the General Plan, or not consistent. The following action was taken: RESOLUTION; OF ARROYO GRANDE AVENUE,:IS NOT PLAN.. ' RESOLUTION NO. 77 -537 1 THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY" OF DETERMINING THAT DENIAL STRIP ON BRIGHTON CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE GENERAL On motion by Cominissi�ner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Ries, and by the following roll call vote,- to wit: Conmu.ssioners Moots and Ries Commissioners Harris, Vandeveer and Vice - Chairperson Cole Commissioner and- Chairman-Gerrish the foregoing Resolution was defeated, this 19th day, of July 1977: City Engineer Karp stated that he is;going to have to sign this map, and even though ,the Commission has voted . that it was not inconsistent, he would like them to say that it is consistent. Vice Chairperson Cole stated when the Commission discussed that the Brighton Street denial could be consistent' with the General Plan, that doesn't mean that they are approving-or-disapproving of- of -that denial strip. She further stated that she wants it understood that by saying the denial strip on Brighton is consistent, she is not,voting for the approval of it because that is another issue.' After discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 77 -538 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF. THE CITY 0 ARROYO .GRANDE DETERMINING THAT THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON JULY 12TH IN .REGARDS TO THE DENitI, ' STRIP ON BRIGHTON IS' CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE GEN PLAN, 4 385 386 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 7 -19 -77 •page 11 On motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Vandeveer, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners. Harris, Vandeveer and Vice Chairperson Cole NOES: Commissioners Moots and Ries ABSENT: Commissioner Hitchen and Chairman Gerrish the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of July 1977. Planner Sullivan stated that the Planning Commission has agreed to the action that the use o that denial strip and barricade on Brighton is consistent to the General Plan; now, is it consistent on all local streets? The Commission felt it would be redundant to take further action with regard to the use of denial strips and barricades on all local streets, in that if the City Council action was legal on Brighton, it would be legal anywhere, within the general guidelines of the General Plan. LOT SPLIT CASE NO. 77 -267, 1385 BRIGHTON AVE. (BADEN). Vice Chairperson Cole advised the request is for a Negative Declaration amendment; addition of mitigating measures to resolution accepting the Negative Environmental Declaration. After considerable discussion, Vice Chairperson Cole advised it is the Commission Members wishes that this matter be continued over to the next meeting, with the staff supplying all of the necessary information needed for a decision. CHAIRMAN GERRISH IS NOW PRESENT AND HAS ASSUMED THE CHAIR. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Doris Olson, Santa Maria Times, stated that she understood that Mr. Vandeveer's Conflict of Interest Statement was not filed with the City Clerk until July 13th, so technically he could not sit on this Commission until the 2nd of August. Planner Sullivan_advised that Mr. Vandeveer had filled the form out on the 5th of July, followed the directions of the letter on the Conflict of Interest form requesting him to take the packet to the department with which he is affiliated, which in this case was the Planning Department. He did that, and it was officially received on the 5th of July by Mr. Gallop in Mr. Sullivan's presence. Chairman Gerrish requested Mr. Sullivan to contact the City Attorney with regards to Mrs. Olson's question. ADJOURNMENT On'motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Ries, and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 11:40 P.M. ATTEST: Secretary 1