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