Loading...
PC Minutes 1975-05-20Arroyo Grande Planning Commission May 20, 1975 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman Calhoon presiding. Present are Commissioners Cole, Mathews, Moots, Ries and Sandoval. One vacancy exists on the Commission. Also in attendance are City Administrator Butch, Councilman Spierling and Planning Director Gallop. MINUTE APPROVAL Upon hearing no additions or corrections, the minutes of the regular meeting of May 6, 1975 were .approved by the Chairman as prepared. CONTINUATION - VARIANCE CASE NO. 75 - 52, REDUCE FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR CARPORT, 508 AND 512 LE POINT STREET (STICKLER) Director Gallop referred to the staff report prepared this afternoon, advising it is a summary of what has happened to date, and includes suggestions from staff to the Commission. Also, there was a report attached which was prepared by the petitioner's engineer, with particular relationship to the sight problem from the garage up and down Le Point Street. In reviewing the matter, Director Gallop pointed out that there was also a suggestion that perhaps this building could be used for purposes other than a garage, and he had a drawing prepared showing three possibilities that could be done with the building. One other alternative is that the carport- accessory building could be combined where a single carport would be permitted in the east and west of the existing structure and enclose the interior portion for use as an accessory or storage area. This would considerably reduce the access problem from the building to the street. It was pointed out that denial of the variance for the garage would be based upon public health and safety, or that granting of a variance would be based upon topography and nature of the subject property, in that it is much steeper and impossible to develop as was the flat land across the street and to the east. The properties to the west would be developed from above. It was also noted that the soils report set forth in the letter of April 22, 1975 from Central Coast Laboratories, and by the appearance of Central Coast Labor- atories' engineer at the last regular meeting, pointed out the danger which would be involved in further excavation or re- shaping of the existing front slope of the property. These conditions were all discussed and considered as a part of the Commission's action. Commissioner Cole stated it was her feeling, after considerable thought, it would be best to allow the garages to remain, but with some kind of pro- tection such as extablishing a red zone on either side of the driveway.. Director Gallop pointed out that redlining of the curb would have to be a recommendation from this Commission to the Parking and Traffic Commission. Commissioner Moots suggested the building be used for storage, and the front could be moved back from the street more, using the retaining wall they have and fill in around it; in other words, establishing a 3 or 4' setback for an accessory building with the conditions as suggested by staff. After discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 75 -380 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DENYING THE GRANTING OF A VARIANCE, CASE NO. 75 - 52. On motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Ries, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Moots, Ries and Sandoval NOES: Commissioners Cole, Mathews and Calhoon ABSENT: None The foregoing Resolution was lost because of the lack of a majority vote. 137 138 - A rOyo Grande Planning.. Commission, 5 -20-75 Page 2 It was further sJggest d that the variance be granted with the randitoon that the structure be a single -car garage on the exterior east Ain4 west portion of the existing structure, with storage area Sn the center and stairways to be on the inside. After further discussion, the following action wa.s- taken: RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMM I SSWN OF THE C I T Y OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A VARIANCE, CASE NO. 75.52.a On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Mathews, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: The foregoing Resolution was adopted this 20th day of May 1975. Chairman Calhoon informed the audience that an appeal to the Planning Commission decision•could be filed in writing to the City Council within ten days of this date. F'UBLB .HEARING m REZONING CASE NO. 75 -80. RA-B3 RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO R-I SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND PND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT LN_(_i NG TENTAT Director Gallop advised the purpose of this public hearing is for the purpose of consideration of a zone "change, and there are two zone changes involved. The Planned Development zone is the interior parcel of the prom • perty and in order to get access to the interior parcel, we have to consider a tentative subdivision map for a Single Family Residential Development. He pointed out that we are considering the Planned Dvelopment section. of the map as a concept with the Zone Change itself, The Tentative Subdivision Map is not involved, other than it does provide access to the Planned Development area... The Land Use Plan sets out low (42) unit per acre density in this area, and a Negative Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared and is before the Commission tonight. The negative statement does deal with the zone•ciange, with the Planned Development and R-1 Subdivision. AYES: Commissioner's Cole, Mathews, Sandoval and Chairman Calhoon NOES: Commissioners Moots and Ries ABSENT: None IVE SUBD 1 V S 0 N MAP TRACT NO. 560 TALLY HO ESTATES. Director Gallop advised that the Planned Development area is what is generally termed a cluster development, which allows 42 dwelling units per acre, and one of the recommendations of the Subdivision Review Board was that the 58 units noted on the map be reduced to 56 units to meet this density requirement. Further, it has been recommended that this area be developed under Horne Owners° Association concept, wherein each property owner has an equal interest in open space and common property. It was pointed out that the open space area is too steep and too restrictive to be accepted for public park purposes. It was also suggested by staff that the lots in Tract #560 could be made a part of that Association, wherein the recre- ational amenities could be made available to more people. Director Gallop explained, what we are doing first is considering this area for Planned Development zone change and accepting the concept of the cluster development, and the R -1 zoning of this property which is adjacent to James Way. Director Gallop referred to the report of the Subdivision Review Board which hangs on three problems, namely drainage, sewer and water, which must he resolved by the developers prior to the final rezoning action. ,f the rezoning reaches the point of the second reading before the City Coun dT'and it appears that these problems have not been resolved, then the Planning_ Commission would recommend that the second reading be held off un- til they can be resolved. He further pointed out that this development will not in any way affect any of the .properties to the east as far as drain- age, sewer or water is concerned, except that it may open the door for the people to the east to get better water service, in that the 4" line will have to be increased considerably to serve this development. RESOLUTION NO. 75 V New 1 t Array. Grande Planning Commission, 5 -20 -75 Page 3 Director Gallop requested consideration of the Negative Environmental impact Statement fog the Rezr'rninq and proposed Subdivisions #560 and x#561 and after consideration, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO, 75 -382 E I R RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMM I SS I ON OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION. On motion by Commissioner Mathews, seconded by Commissioner Sandoval, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Mathews, Moots, Sandoval and Chairman Calhoon NOES: Commissioner Ries ABSENT: None The foregoing Resolution was adopted this 20th day of May 1975. Upon being assured by Director Gallop that public hearing for Rezoning Case No, 15•-80 had been duly published and property owners notified, Chair- man Calhoon declared the hearing open. Mr., Sam Taylor, of Gering, Taylor & Associates, stated he was a part: owner of the property. he stated he felt the Planned Development area could be developed into a real desirable project, and that is what we are trying to do with it so that people that buy in there will have the things they need and control over the property. The tract going into the R -1 subdivision would probably be a conventional subdivision with 6,000 square feet lots, and they did not know at this point whether it will be a part of the Planned Development. Home Owners Association or not:. Mrs, Soto, 120 TaI1y Ho Road, inquired if the street would have to be widened before the development is built. Director Gallop advised that the widening of the road will be anticipated, and the developer will have to widen that portion of the road that he is responsible for, Mrs. Swa stated • they have been against the widening of the road a l l along because it w i l l take too much of their property. Director Gallop advised that this a,r•tictilar zone change will not take anything from other property owners, and t :,. plan line is not a part of the consideration at this time. Mr. Jim Gates, 136 Tally Ho Road, inquired if the pine tree in the front of his house would have to be removed. Director Gallop advised that it would not and that the only place this road would be widened would be immediately in front of and adjacent to the property to be developed. Mrs, Simmons, 150 Tally Ho Road, inquired as to what: is being planned to handle the additional traffic for this development, Allison Gates, 136 Tally Ho Road, stated she felt any more traffic: on the road would be dangerous to the children and animals on the street. Lou Buckley, 282 Tally Ho Road, stated he was against widening any portion of the road. Director Gallop reminded the Commission and the audience that the Plan Line is not a part of this public hearing. Mr. L. C, LaVine, 141 Tally Ho Road, staged he lives in the area adjacent to the proposed development, and it is now semi - country, and he is against any development that does not go along with what is already there. Mr. B i l l Weitkarnp, 231 So. Alpine St :,, stated he owns prope.roty :on- tbp• east side of James Way, and he is opposed to condominium type development, and he would prefer larger lot development to maintain the open space, Mr. Sipes, 188 Tally Ho Road, stated he was concerned about the sewer system, i f the development i s permitted to t i e into the existing sewer l i n e . Direc- tor G a l l o p advised that the sewer l i n e on Tally Ho Road was designed to the capacity of the Land Use Plan, and could adequately serve R -1 density. Michael Duckwort :h, 395 Tally Ho Road, stated he felt the size of the lots should be one acre rather than the proposed 4 lots per acre. There being no further discussion for or against the proposed zone change, Chairman Calhoon declared the hearing closed. 139 14o ?!annung commss , Paqe,,4 Director Gallop advised eile Commission the Planned Development conc•pt 5c being considered as apart of the :cone change. The subdivon comes back to the Commission for final approval, All conditions must be resolved by the devebopers and the City prior to the final reading of the Rezoning Ordinance, In oxparni-n l'he Manned Levelopment zoning, Director Gal advised it Os the same as 11-i density, roweeer it e)lows the Cty to require a developer to use a different concept to require more cpen space. Director Calflop pointed out that the staff has been working with this particular developer for almost three years to try to get what the City felt waF acceptable in this kind of terrain, and trying to accomplish the intent o' fte City Council ard Planning COM7OSSOP OF deveop:no hhisides and protecting the fiat land, After further discussion, the following action was taken! RESOLUTION 75 z RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AS PROVIDED BY CHAPTER 4 ZONING, ARTcCLE 32, OF Si2AID. CODE, On motion by Comm5ssioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Sandoval, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, , Moots, Ries, Sandoval and Chairman Calhoon NOES: None ABSEW: one The foregoing Resolution was adopted this 2Oth day of May 1975. TENTATiVE SUBDIVISION MAP, TRACT NO, 561 STALEY HO ESTATES) Director Gallop advied this is a standard R-1 Subdivision; cL is 29 lots en 5.5 acres, which is less than 4 dwelling unit. -er acre which, in this particular case, is a normal permissive use T. Subdivision Review Board report of May 16, 1975 was reviewed and it pointed out that drainage, sewer and water would be the same recomme,; 'ation as for the Planned Development district, and would have to be approved prior to the second reading of the zone change, Director Gallop advised there would be a right-of-way requirement on Tally Ho Road, and full off-site improvements on the interior street, There would also be'a street tree and park fee required based upon the total number of lots in the approved final subdivision map, After a brief discussion, the following action was taken: RESOLUTiCN NO 75-384 RESOLUTION OF THE HAJ CO OF THE CT" OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR TRACT #561, "TALLY HO ESTATES", AND REFERRAL TO THE CITY COUNCL FOR WORMATMNAL PURPOSES ONLY On motion by Commissioner Cole, seconded by Commissioner Sandoval, and by the following con can vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Cole, Mathews, Moots, Ries, Sandoval and Chairman Cahoon NOES; None None The foregoing Resolution was adopted this 2Oth day of May.1975. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 5 -20 -75 Page 5 REVIEW OF COMMITTEE ACTIONS - LOT SPLIT CASE NOS. 75 - 218 AND 75 - 219 Director Gallop noted that the two Lot Split Cases were approved and are being submitted for informational purposes only. There being no additions or comments, Chairman Calhoon ordered the reports filed. REQUEST TO PURCHASE CITY PROPERTY - REFERRAL FROM THE CITY COUNCIL Director Gallop requested permission to introduce a non - agenda item regarding disposal of City property. On motion by Commissioner Moots, seconded by Commissioner Mathews, and unanimously carried, the Commission agreed to consider the request. Director Gallop advised the referral is from the City Council with respect to the disposal of two lots in the City. An individual has offered to purchase these lots, and his action must be considered by the Planning Commission before the City Council can act on it. The property is located on Le Point Street on lots located above and behind the "Hoosegow ". He indicated three lots had been purchased by the developer east of the two lots in questions, and pointed out that the two parcels of property adjacent to it are quite steep, but could be developed in connection with the proposed development, and the owner has offered the City $3,000 each for Lots #5 and #6 of Becketts Addition, facing on Le Point Street. Director Gallop advised that the staff has reviewed the matter; however, it has not been taken to the Parks and Recreation Commission as yet. He further recommended that these lots not be retained for open space, but that the proceeds be used to develop the "Hoosegow" property, and the balance be used for development or acquisition of the streambed. He felt this would be more advantageous to the City than retaining two lots that can not even be mowed. If the Commission feels that it is not adviseable to retain them, a recommendation to the City Council would be in order. After discussion, on motion by Commissioner Mathews, seconded by Commissioner Moots, and unanimously carried, that Lots 5 and 6 of Becketts Addition be considered for disposal by the City Council. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Commission, on motion by Commissioner Ries, seconded by Commissioner Mathews, and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 9 :00 P.M. to a.study session on the Central Business District Element. After review and discussion, a public hearing on the Central Business District Element of the General Plan was set for June 3, 1975. ATTEST: - _ Secretary Chairman 141