Loading...
PC Minutes 1976-10-19282 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission October 19, 1976 . The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session, with Chairman Pope presiding. Present were Commissioners Gerrish, Hi Mathews, Moots, and Ries; Commissioner Cole was absent. Also present were Planning Director Gallop and City Engineer Garcia. MINUTE APPROVAL The minutes of the regular meeting of October 5, 1976 were approved by the Chairman as prepared, after hearing no additions or corrections. REFERRAL FROM CIT" COUNCIL RE: ABANDONMENT OF TEN FEET ON SOUTH SIDE OF LE POINT City Engineer Garcia stated that at the last meeting of the City Council, Mr. Stickler had asked for a license agreement for his properties at 508 and 512 Le Point. At that time, he and Mr. Anderson, Director of Public Works, recommended against granting the license because they felt it did not adequately protect the City's rights, As it is now, the City has the right to require the garages in the right of way, permitted by an encroachment permit, to be removed if the City wants to use the right of way. They felt the only way a license agreement would be acceptable would be if the possibility of using the right of way were removed. They did not see any need for the excess right of way. A normal minor street is 52 -60 ft, wide; Le Point is 70 ft. wide. The present encroachment is approximately 9 ft. into the right of way. If ten feet on the south side of Le Point were abandoned, the garages would no longer be encroaching, although they would still fall under the Variance which was granted for front yard setback. Chairman Pope asked if the proposed abandonment was for the full length of Le Point, from Highway 227 to Crown Terrace; Mr. Garcia replied that this was correct. He added that Mr, Stickler was making the request because he was unable to get permanent financing on the houses with the present encroachment. Dorothy Rector, 545 Le Point, asked if the ten feet were abandoned on the south side, would ten feet be taken from the properties on the north side to maintain a 70 ft. width. Engineer Garcia explained that this abandonment would mean that the road would still have the required width of 60 ft; no additional right of way will be needed. COMMISSIONER COLE ENTERED THE MEETING DURING THE ABOVE DISCUSSION. On motion by Commissioner Gerrish, seconded by Commissioner Mathews, and carried, the Commission recommended to the City Council that the south ten feet (10') of the Le Point Street right of way be abandoned; Commissioner Ries voted no, REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTIONS° Lot Split Case No. 76 -251, 281 Miller Way (Evans) - Director Gallop stated that this is a lot line adjustment on Lots 18 and 19 of Loomis Heights in order to give a better building site on Lot 18. This would not depreciate Lot 19. After discussion, there being no additions or corrections, the Chairman ordered the report filed. Lot Split Case No. 76 -252, South County Operational Center, Lovasz Property - Director Gallop stated that the County Board of Supervisors acted this week to purchase a 40 acre parcel at the front of the Lovasz Property, which runs from St. Patrick's Church to the City Community Building property and which fronts on Highway 101. The property is planned for South County Operational Center, with many County facilities included in the final development. At this time, there is a lot split only to allow the County to buy this 40 acre parcel, The division was approved by the Committee with the condition that no further development or improvements are allowed until a development plan is presented and approved. The County has indicated they will honor all of the City's General Plan Elements. After discussion, there being no additions or corrections, the Chairman ordered the report filed. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 10 -19 -76 Page 2 Architectural Review Case No. 76 -127, Crown Terrace, Townhouses (Ryzner) - Jim Porter, 544 Crown, asked that this item be postponed until B'Ann Smith could be in attendance; he expected her to arrive around 8 P.M. Chairman Pope ordered the item set aside until Mrs. Smith was in attendance. REQUEST FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION Lot Split Case No, 76 -250, 1031 Huasna Road (Nelson) - Director Gallop stated that at the last meeting, the Commission approved this lot split. It is adjacent to a previously approved lot split and directly across the street from a subdivision, both of which carry Negative Environmental Statements. Commissioner Hitchen asked what a Negative Declaration consisted of. Chairman Pope said that basically it is a factual statement finding that the proposed lot split will not interfere with any environmental factors with regard to the property. Commissioner Gerrish said that in the Assessment of Negative Declaration Request prepared by Mr. Garcia, there is a reference to eucalyptus trees; Mr. Garcia replied that these have since been removed by the property owner. Ella Honeycutt, 540 Oak Hill Road, urged the Commission to consider a Tree Ordinance to prevent this type of thing from happening. She said these trees are needed as wind breaks. Chairman Pope stated that this is one of the items scheduled for discussion after the General Plan Elements have been completed. After further discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION 76 -470 EIR RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL, DECLARATION, On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Mathews, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Hitchen, Mathews, Moots, Ries, and Chairman Pope NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of October 1976. Lot Split Case No. 76 -252, South County Operational Center, Lovasz Property - Director Gallop stated that in approval of this site for the South County Operational Center, the County Board of Supervisors has required that a full -blown EIR be developed by the County. This Request for Negative Declara- tion is for the lot split and land acquisition only. The City will not require a.full EIR on the development itself unless the County document does not satisfy the needs of the Commission. Bruce Dodson, San Luis Obispo, consultant representing the County, stated he wished to afirm the County's intention to do an EIR, They plan to develop a master plan first, and prepare the EIR based on that plan. Supervisor Mankins stated that the sewer assessments will be completely paid by the buyer of the back parcel; the assessment will not be forgiven. After discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. EIR RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION. On motion by Commissioner. Mathews, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and by the following r011 call vote, to wit: 283 284 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 10 -19 -76 Page 3 3. AYES NOES; ABSENT: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Hitchen, Mathews, Moots, Ries, and Chairman Pope None None the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of October 1976. REFERRAL FROM CITY COUNCIL RE: LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN Director Gallop stated that the Council was requesting that a portion of a paragraph in the "P-D" section of the Land Use Plan be retained from the original Plan. The Commission had dropped this portion in rewriting the "P-D" section. This portion reads as follows: "At present, most of this portion of the City is included in the "A" zoning district, which is a holding zone applied to properties until specific development plans are prepared. Grazing is considered as an interim use of these areas. By directing development into these areas of marginal agricultural value, the most produF.ti.ve land on the valley floor can be reserved for continued agricultural use »' Bill McCann, 428 Tanner Lane, stated his immediate reaction was that because it makes reference to the "A" lands in c=paring it to the hillside "A" lands, it would seem that it would be inappropriate to put this back in the "P -D" section until the "A" zone situation i.5 taken care of Chairman Pope said this was the Commission's original feeling; however, the City Council felt this was important enough that since "P -D" land,could be considered agricultural land too, it should be included in the "P -D" section, Commissioner Gerrish said he also believed this was important, but that it would be premature to put it in at this point in time, After discussion, on motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Ries, to deny the requested change to the Land Use Element of the General Plan until the agricultural lands matter is clarified by the Agricultural Lands Committee; the motion was carried by the following roll call vote: Commissioners Gerrish, Hitchen, Moots, Ries, and Chairman Pope Commissioners Cole and Mathews None REVIEW OF COMMISSION'S EXTENSION OF TIME ON TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS,, NO, 553 AND NO. 555 Director Gallop stated that the request for extension of time on Tract 553, which the Commission granted at the last regular meeting, was not necessary. He had since reviewed the original parcel recorded of this tract and all units, 1, 2, and 3, were approved as a tentative map,. When Unit 1 was recorded, this in effect froze the entire Tentative Map. Thus there was no time limit on Unit 1 Regarding Tract No„ 555, the tract was originally approved by the Commis, in January 1975, The Negative Environmental Statement per.tai_ning•to that tract was approved in May 1975. In his opinion, under the Environmental Act, that tract was not effective until such time as the environmental d■termination was made> That would make the effective date May 1975, and the i_ermination date would then be eighteen months later, or November 1976. Since the last meeting, • Mrs. Honeycutt has gone to an attorney, who is chal]:en:g!.g the action of the , Commission, The attorney did point out one oversight on the Planning Director's part., An.extension can only be granted for one year, and must lie forwarded to the City Council for its acknowledgement, He recommended that the Commission • withdraw the eighteen month extension approval and grant a one year extension 'in a. recommendation to the City Council. If the City Attorney and Mrs. Hcn.eycutt's attorney determine that the Planning Director's opinion is incorrect, then the map would have lapsed automatically; but if it is still active, then the change of appr:.val should be noted, He added that he had discussed the previous exten- sion of ki.me on this. tract, with reg .rd to the original expiration date, with the Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 10 -19 -76 Page 4 City Attorney and Dr. Harrow, the County's Environmental Coordinator, who both agreed in his determination. Ella Honeycutt, 560 Oak Hill Road, stated she had talked to Dr. Harrow, who told her that it is customary in the County to have an environ- mental determination before something is voted on. She also questioned two statements made by Director Gallop at the Lot Split meeting. She stated that at that time he said he had forgot to check the records and that 553 had expired; the Staff Report said he didn't double -check the records. She said she had no animosity towards the builders and would ask the City to forego any charges. She said she was very concerned about this area and felt that there were some things not considered in the original Negative Declaration. Chairman Pope suggested she contact her attorney on this as the Negative Declaration had been accepted by the City. Mrs Honeycutt read a letter from her attorney which questioned the validity of the previous action be- cause of the unclear dates, Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fairview, asked for clarification regarding Tract 553. The Staff Report referred to Tract 434 and she asked if this was an error; Director Gallop explained that each unit had a different tract number. After discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO 76 =472 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT A ONE YEAR EXTENSION BE GRANTED FOR TENTATIVE MAP OF TRACT 555. On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner. Mathews, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, Mathews, and Chairman Pope NOES: Commissioners Moots and Ries ABSENT: None ABSTAINING: Commissioner Hitchen the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 19th day of October 1976 Commissioners Moots and Ries noted they had voted against granting the extension because of the unclear status of the dates. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CASE NO, 76 -127, CROWN TERRACE, TOWNHOUSESJRYZNER Chairman Pope stated that this discussion was strictly on architectural review. It was not about zoning or the builder's right to place the structures on the property. The developer has met all existing zoning requirements and all ordinances. Director Gallop stated that several months ago, three property owners. with properties adjacent to Le Point Terrace, a portion of which has been aban- doned, requested that the rest of the street be abandoned. This Commission recommended to the City Council that the abandonment be granted and it was approved subject to all properties reverting to acreage. This eliminated all the old lots; Mr. Ryzner felt this would no longer serve his purposes. Mr Ryzner filed a letter with the Public Works Department, which has jurisdication over public rights of way saying he withdrew his suppoxt of the abandonment and filing plans for Architectural Review, The plans call for construction of town- houses on each of the pre - existing lots in an "R-G" zone; if apartments were built instead, there would be a capability of three more units than he is pro- posing,, Two adjacent lots are being developed by another individual and will have access through the Ryzner development :. Director Gallop reviewed the pro- posed development and the conditions recommended by the Architectural Review Committee. 285 286 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 10'19 -76 Page 5 Dorothy Rector, 545 Le Point, asked about the location of the garages.. Chairman Pope replied that they would be on of th hi Di ect added that all of the vehicular access t o Terrace, Jim Porter, 544 Crown, asked if Crown Street would be improved; Chairman Pope stated that it would will ot t t oil approved timdeyelopm n ty insofar as drainage and grading wil and a grading permit will have to be issued,. He added everything, the petitioner is asking for is legal as far as the prof e r t Y under Porter asked about sideyard setbacks. dl D ancet o ehe a Archi tecturalhCommittee s Section 9-4.2701 (b) of the Zoning ro erne may consider and recommend varindiuse ,�aesthetcs,landtutilization of d ew to obtain a higher degree of la concepts providing such variations do not conflict with the int ther density of the district in which the variation is granted. asked for the square footage of each of the lots. Director Gallop stated a would a llow three more units in apartments he did not have this figure handy; however, the total square footag than the petitioner is requesting in a townhouses. Jim Smith, 548 Crown, stated he thought the minimum lot depth was 100 or from adoption of the ft., Director Gallop explained that tofsrecordlots of record from the early 1900s. Any subdivision map and lot however, ective Zoning Ordinance is a legal building spwouldeapplyize: in t final approval, all the other percentages .' ith 548 Crown Hill, stated she didn't understand most of the B��Ann Sm _, She asked if the Architectural w who "garbage that went on at the meetings, hat the building looks like; Committee members considered anything Chairman Pope stated that the makes sure that all requirements are met. Planning Commission, on behalf of the Planning Director and the Building Department takes care of all of those type of requirements The sole pur- the architectural app pose of the Architectural Committee is to make Muse t asked about building at the hill and see nothing appearance will be a credit to the community She said she did not want to look up locations is zoned to contain this but apartments. Chairman Pope stated the property - al of the conditions tco of the type of development The petitioner is meetingSmll asked safety is cone ordinances of the City of Arroyo Grande, Mrs; she felt Crown Hill is an unsafe road. Chairman Pope stated that sidered; it is upon the obligation of the City to rectify• insofar as if it is unsafe, asked if two adjacent property owners, la cement Bruce Dodson, representing a stated that p- any site planning at all is considered; Chairman Pope s on the site is basically worked out betw s ituatAon , ite e tura_ Re building t the best p_."_ heighth and bulk, land disturbance, Review Committee and the developer to get Dodson also asked about access and eg e e atated this is all considered between minimum intrusion, etc. Chairman Pope developer, and his architect, Mr, Dodson stated that on January 15, 1975 adjacent property owners the City staff, -- petitioned the City Council for Six months later a response came portion of the street, May 2c and ree° from A o f a p Me the Council the matter e from 4 Anderson saying l had reviewed Iota the e, M r , onnended' that the abandonment be accomplished with acreage, advise proposed the ve pm?_ tAnderson d that they retain a.civil engineer had resist this p� se to acreage, which they had done, They strongly Chairman Pope asked if the abandonment was ever r Mr, Dodson said the the map had not been filed yet; he felt the City c recorded, should M them the same tyasho Pope advised him this ave the City,. consideration in time as they g the Commission is not in a position to should City Council; anything should be directed to the y on anthi, " "_ the rest of the Commission t oughy that point, He added that the Cenlighteningt acting tonight. The only thing they are doing it is strictly for in€ormat +one purposes Mr, Dodson commented on drainage etitioner is proposing to develop; arty,. Chairman about what the p a on the prop _._ lane must be approved and permits must be inag p. Pope stated that drainage and grading pans p per se development: 't pp s . before any They were just. Mr, Dodson said they didn't s evera l b oo t pngje trying to point that there were nf severs. bits of missing information, He felt the Commission should have this . informt!j.on before making a final determination° Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 10-19-76 Page 6 Elizabeth Jackson, 208 Fairview, said she felt now was the time to catch any problems. There had already been one problem with elevations on Le Point Street. Chairman Pope replied that the enforcement of Uniform Building Code and City ordinances is done by the Building Department. Madeleine Steele, 1598 Hillcrest, stated she felt this was the ugliest little box she ever saw and she hoped the Commission agreed,:. Allan Jackson, 208 Fairview, asked if this was the regular drawing of what the buildings would be, or if it was an artist's conception. Chariman Pope stated this was the architect's rendering of planned elevations. Craig Meagher, an adjacent property owner, said he did not oppose the development; what bothered him was the fact that they had applied for abandonment of the street. Mr. Ryzner contacted the City after signing an agreement with the adjacent property owners. Mr. Meagher asked if that portion of the abandoned street would now be developed, Chairman Pope stated this was basically true. Director Gallop noted that the full development costs of the street would be borne by Mr, Ryzner, However, if Mr. Meagher wanted to utilize any portion of the street when he developed his property, he would have to repay Mr,. Ryzner a portion of the development costs,. Mr. Meagher said he planned on developing his property and had spent a great deal of time considering all aspects; his only concern was developing more of a water problem,, He said he would address his remarks to the Planning Director at a later date. Director Gallop noted he had been talking with the property owners in that area for about four months, as have other staff members, trying to get all of them to cooperate in a joint development so that there would be a minimum interruption to everybody and maximum improvement.; He understood that some of the property owners did not want to develop until next year. In the meantime,. Mr Ryzner wants to develop now, He finally advised them that unless they could come in with a plan that was mutually agreeable, he would have to take the first set of plans that came in. After further discussion, on motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Ries, that Architectural Review Case No. 76 -127 be denied in its present form based on lack of information, with elevations, end pieces, more design detail, building locations, etc. to be provided for reconsideration by the Committee before consideration by the Planning Commission; the motion was carried by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Hitchen, Moots, Ries, and Chairman Pope NOES: Commissioners Cole, Gerrish, and Mathews ABSENT; None STUDY SESSION ON THE PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN Director Gallop stated that the Public Services and Facilities Element is not a required element of the General Plan by State legislation,: It is prepared and adopted by choice. The Element was first adopted in 1967, then updated and readopted in 1970, In essence, there is nothing new in the Plan other than a revision of what has been done in the City in the last ten years to implement to the original plan, such as expansion of the water system, etc. It ties water to population and population to planned expansion. He stated he would recommend public hearing at the next regular meeting, After a brief discussion, Chairman Pope ordered a public hearing to be scheduled for the next regular meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Donald Skinner, 100 El Portal, Pismo Beach, a property owner adjacent to the property involved in Architectural Review Case No 76-127, said he had been held up in his planned development for two months because he wanted to go along with having the traffic on Le Point Terrace rather than Crown Street, He felt a total development plan on the area was not due now, The concept must be approved of first. Until Case No, 76127 was approved, he could not bring his plans in, as they worked together. He felt the plans presented for approval were adequate for this point in time. He said he may'just go ;head with his plan with access from Crown Street,: 287' 288 Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 10 -19 -76 Page 7 Coastal Valley Planning_Commission Delegates - Commissioner Mathews requested that new delegates to the CVPC be appointed as he did not wish to serve any longer; Commissioner Ries seconded this request. Director Gallop asked that the request be held in abeyance, as action may not be necessary. Agricultural Lands Committee - Chairman Pope stated that the Agricultural Lands Committee had had a meeting Monday, October 18. The Committee is in the process of developing a policy statement, Each member is preparing an individual statement for consideration at the next meeting, and they hoped to have the matter resolved in about three or four more meetings. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, on motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Mathews, and unanimously carried, the Commission adjourned at 9:20 P.M. Secretary 1