PC Minutes 1974-04-0256
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission
April 2, 1974
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman
Pope presiding. Present are Commissioners Calhoon, Goulart, Mathews, Moots and
Ries. One vacancy exists on the Commission. Also in attendance are City
Administrator Butch, Mayor Talley, Councilman de Leon, City Engineer Garcia, and
Planning Director Gallop.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On motion by Commissioner Goulart, seconded by Commissioner Mathews, and
unanimously carried, the minutes of the regular meeting of March 6, 1974 were
approved as prepared.
INTRODUCTION OF NEW PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
Administrator Butch introduced new Commissioners Morgan Mathews and Allen
Ries, and the new City Engineer, Joe Garcia. He also noted that Mr. John
Sandoval had been appointed to the Commission by the City Council at their last
meeting. Chairman Pope welcomed the new members to the Planning Commission and
outlined some of the future actions, such as study sessions on zoning practices,
and updating elements of the General Plan.
COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS
Chairman Pope outlined the various committees and requirements, pointing
out that it was his feeling that all members of the Planning Commission should
be considered as alternates to the various committees at all times. Chairman
Pope noted that since some of the Commission Members work out of town and some-
times it is difficult for them to attend daytime meetings, he has considered
this in making the following Committee appointments:
ELECTION OF VICE CHAIRMAN
Chairman Pope declared nominations open for the office of Vice Chairman.
Commissioner Moots nominated Commissioner Calhoon as Vice Chairman of the
Planning Commission and, upon hearing no other nominations, Chairman Pope
,declared the nominations closed. On motion by Commissioner Ries, seconded by _
Commissioner Mathews, and unanimously carried, that the records show a
unanimous ballot be cast for Commissioner Calhoon to serve as Vice Chairman
of the Planning Commission for the remainder of the current fiscal year.
REPORT BY COASTAL VALLEY PLANNING COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE
Director Gallop advised that the preliminary Corridor Study of the Scenic
Highway from Highway 101 to Lopez Lake was reviewed in its primary form by the
Council at their meeting of April 1, 1974. He advised that it appears there is
a matter of interpretation of a P.U.C. ruling pertaining to Scenic Highways, in
that new utility distribution services shall be underground if they are within
a Scenic Corridor. He advised that, apparently, the study was approved in its
preliminary form, and is now in the County's hands to make a determination of
this particular aspect of the plan. Once that is resolved, Mr. McChesney,
Agricultural Liaison Committee, will be meeting with the property owners alonr
this route to discuss proposed plans with them. He further advised that thi-e
study does not propose any new ordinances or any new controls; that the exipt-
ing zoning and sign ordinances are adequate and nothing new is proposed t%'
control setbacks, etc. When the matter comes to the City, public hearings
not necessary because we are not recommending or :do not require anything rte'
controls and ordinances that we do not already have.
REVIEW - MINOR SUBDIVISION C0MMITTEE ACTION
Chairman Pope referred to the three Lot Split Committee reports, pertain-
ing to Ron Gray, Reynolds Ritchie and William Weitkamp, included with the/
agenda material and, upon hearing no comments or questions, ordered the re Orts
filed.
TENTATIVE MAP - TRACT NO. 531 - WALNUT CREEK TERRACE
`Director Gallop posted a map of the area and advised it is an extef °the
of Woodland Drive with frontage on Halcyon Road, and pointed out that {
subdivision is built, then the three segments of Woodland Drive 4-11 e one
common street from Fair Oaks Avenue southerly to Virginia Drive. He: te
oeet
map proposes 48 lots, all of which are 6,000 feet or better, and
Coastal Valley Planning Council
Minor Subdivision Review Board
Architectural Review Board
- Commissioners Goulart and Calhoon
- Commissioners Moots and Sandoval
- Commissioners Mathews and Ries
Arroyo Grande Planning 'Commi's'sion, 4 -2 -74 Page 2
the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance.
Director Gallop advised there are two items which the developers have dis-
cussed with him to some length and there is a difference of opinion as to what
should be done. He reviewed that in view of the past actions, the Commission
has always asked that the streambed area, roughly 10' above the streambed, be
deeded to the City for flood control and greenbelt area. The petitioners would
prefer to hold that property and show it as an easement. He further advised
that the Parks and Recreation Commission, at their last regular meeting, re-
quested that he attempt to negotiate with the developers to see if they could
provide an access on the strip of land that could eventually be proposed for
park development. He stated the developers indicated perhaps they would be
willing to give the City the 20' easement area to the south of Lot 48, as a
public pedestrian access to the creek area.
II/ Director Gallop stated the other area of discussion with the developers
is the recommended 6' masonary fence on the northwest corner of the subdivision
which abuts a newly approved public street in connection with the Ron Gray lot
' split. The developers would request a consideration . of reducing this particular
recommendation and, other than that, ; ; they . are basically in agreement with all
o't'her conditions of the Subdivision Revi Board report dated March 25, 1974.
Director Gallop explained the requirement for the fence was made because it
was felt that it would be protection to the back of the properties from noise
and light from cars coming directly toward them.
Director Gallop reviewed the Negative Declaration of Environmental impact
prepared for the proposed tract, and advised that both the Land Use Plan of the
City and existing zoning recognize R -1 Single. Family development of this
p' property, extension 'of Woodland Drive does
particular- piece of and that the
meet the development plan for this area. .
After discussion, on motion by Commissioner Caihoon, seconded by,
Commissioner Mathews, and unanimously carried, the (Negative Declaration state-
ment was accepted.
Recognizing the fact that there are three new Commission members, Director
Gallop outlined the status of a tentative subdivision map, and.advised that if
the map is approved by`'this Commission tonight, then the conditions set out by_
the Subdivision Review- Board, and any conditions this Commission wishes to :.
impose, become a part of approval. The final map does not come back before
this Commissio'n`, but goes directly to the City Council after being reviewedby
:'staff for compliance. .
Mr. Jerry Osborn was present and stated. he was one of the owners of the
proposed subdivision, and referred to the Subdivision Review Board requirement
under County Departments, Item No. 2,:requiring either deeding or easement of
-t3,re;'stream and bank area for flood control purposes. He stated the owners are
= this subdivision be treated as the neighboring subdivisions to the
north and to the south, in that both have given flood control easements, and
advised they would be willing to also give flood control easements rather than
deeding. He further cited item No. 6,under Planning Department conditions,
requiring a wall 6' high along the northerly edge of Lots 1, 34 and 35. Mr.
Osborn stated they question the necessity of a wall, however, if the Commission
feels it would be necessary, they feel that 4' in height would be substantial.
He pointed out that normally when a wall or fence is built, the cost is divided
by the benefiting neighbors and, in this case, he had talked to the adJoining___ ,
owner'and was informed that he does not care to participate in the cost of the `
wall and in fact, he prefers that the wall not be built. a
Mr. Osborn stated that the Parks Department has asked for a deed to the
area indicated on the map, which is the creek bank, and he advised they would
prefer to grant an easement to this area. In conclusion,, Mr. Osborn stated "" " ��
the Parks Department asked Mr. Gallop to meet with Mr. Foster and himself to
negotiate the possible sale of land for pedestrian access from Woodland Drive
to the streambed, and that they would be willing to give an area 20' wide and
170' deep, free of charge, to the provided they are not asked to deed the
flood control area to the City.
Chairman Pope indicated it was his feeling that having an easement for
flood control purposes, and the owner of the individual lots having to pay
property taxes on it, was a little upsetting. He further pointed out that
57
58
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -2 -74 Page 3
the City has a Master Plan showing all of the creekbed area being developed as
greenbelt areas, and that prior to this the property owners have fenced the
people out, preventing them from enjoying the streambed area, and the idea of
fencing is to prohibit access from the subdivision's Lots 1, 34 and 35 to a
street that is substandard and is not up to City width, and the idea of shield-
ing the owners of these lots from headlight glare is a good idea.
Commissioner Moots stated he believed the public is entitled to the use
of the creekbed and he would_ Like to see It owned by the public, also, the
property owners would not have to pay taxes on and they cannot use. He
further pointed out that a 20' easement would allow a vehicle, in to work on
the streambed to keep it clean.
Commissioner Calhoon stated he felt the 6' fence is high, but is necessary
because the street is not up to standard. He further stated he feels it would
be better if. the City were deeded the land-In the back to avoid a number of
problems.
Commissioner Ries stated the subdivision as a
opinion, now is the time to hold our ground as the
:,he suggested looking ahead in providing the people
or fresh air and exercise.
Mr. Paul Sturges, representing the developers. was present and stated the
property has been surveyed and the property lines accurately located.
Commissioner Mathews stated it was his feeling the creek belongs to every-
body and everything within 10' of creeks, rivers, etc.,, should be public domain.
Mr. Osborn stated he agreed with this idea, and he didn't mean that they want
to fence off`the public. Commissioner Mathews further stated if an easement
could provide utilization of the creek to everyone who wanted to enjoy it he
would be in favor of it.
Commissi.oner•Goulart stated he would li �eft o
o n an continuation the
deeding of streambed property, and if it is
City would have the problem of weed abatement, etc. with the property owners.
Goulart stated he felt the nor
if a 4' fence is installed, there
44 and 45 extending to 6'. He
and if Lot 1 is determined to be
With regard to the fence, Commissioner
construction on a back lot is 6' high, and
is going to be problems with owners of Lots
felt that Lots 34 and 35 should be 6' high,
a side lot, 4' fence could be considered.
Commissioner Mathews stated. with
of the regard
lottto the
put fence
the that,
fencenif this
he case,
he felt it would be up to the owner
wanted it.
Mr. Sturges advised he didn't think the owners are objecting to putting
a wall up, but a 6' high concrete block wall is a bleak thing, and they would
probably be willing to build a 4' wall with perhaps a 2' decorative redwood
strip along the top to come up to the 6' height, which would be much more
attractive. Mr. Osborn indicated that is what he was attempting to express,
in that he thought a 4' fence would be much more attractive and less like a
barricade, and that 2' redwood on the top would be acceptable.
After discussion on the fence requirement, on motion by Commissioner
Mathews, seconded by Commissioner Goulart, and unanimously carried, that
Item 6, Page 2, under "Planning Department ", of the Subdivision Review Board
Report, dated March 25, 1974, be changed to read "Concrete decorative block
wall shall be constructed along the northerly edge of Lots 1, 34 and 35 on
property line. Said wall shall be aft. high within the 20 foot setback line
of Lot.1, and the balance of the wall to be 4' high with 2' decorative red-
wood on top to 6' high ".
After discussion of item 2, Page 3, under "Parks Department ", on motion
by Comtiil'ssloner Goulart, seconded by Commissioner Ries, and carried with one
"no" vote, to approve the Parks Department's recomnendation,__that; the creek
bank I pndiflood cpntroi. easement area be deeded to the the.CIty as'greenbelt and.:
whole is fine, but In his
areas are closing in, and
a place where they can go
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -2 -74
flood control area, and to include the 20 ft. Union 011 pipeline easement along
the southerly side of Lot 48 as part of this requirement.
Mr. Osborn stated that the Parks and Recreation Commission wanted to buy
access to the creek, and the developers were going to give the land to the City
providing they did not have to deed the flood control easement, however, under
Commissioner Goulart's motion, the 20 ft. easement has been included. He stated
they would rather not have the 20 ft. easement included.
Director Gallop explained that nothing can be built over the easement, but
it could be used as a side lot. He advised that the Parks and Recreation
Commission felt the deeding of this easement would be desirable, however, they
did not authorize him to buy the easement; but to try to negotiate some type of
arrangements. Director Gallop further explained the concept of what the Parks
and Recreation Commission is trying to do is to get improvement of the streambed
as a continuous park from the city limits to city limits, and that the west side
has been pretty well built up by subdivision, but the east side does not have
any development from Valley. Gardens Subdivision to Fair Oaks Avenue, and what
they'were talking about with regard to the 20' easement would be access to this
greenbelt area
no
Director Gallop noted that when the subdivisions to the north.and south
were approved, the City did not have a General Plan, parkwise for park develop
ment.
Mr. Foster, one of the partners in the development, advised that the 20'
strip was never brought up by the Parks Committee; the developers were talking_
to Mr. Gallop this afternoon and he suggested possibly negotiating the purchase
for future purposes. The developers felt if it was, at all possible, they would
give the 20' access strip to the City and possibly be excused from deeding the
greenbelt area. Mr. Paul Sturges stated that the Union Oil easement is only
10 ft. centered on a line which is 15' off of property line.
In view of the above, Commissioner Goulart moved to amend his last motion
to require deeding of the southerly 10 ft. of Lot 48 as a pedestrian walkway
and access to the greenbelt area. Motion seconded by Commissioner Ries, and ``'
,carried with one "no" vote,
Director Gallop recommended that perhaps the final action should be held`
over until the next Commission meeting and perhaps something can be negotiated
that is reasonably acceptable to everyone. Mr. Sturges stated they have been
holding off Union Oil until after this meeting and asked if the tract could be
approved with the access portion open to negotiation. '''p'
After discussion, Director Gallop suggested that action be taken to
approve the Tentative Map subject to the requirements in the Staff Report with
the exception of Item 2 on Page 3, as amended, and that this item again be con-
sidered at the next regular Planning Commission meeting, and the following
action was taken:
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
TRACT NO. 531, WITH EXCEPTIONS, AND REFERRAL TO THE.
CITY COUNCIL FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.
�i#ad�it�,.Y�•dadha�kivy .:�mi:
RESOLUTION N0. 74 -327
Page it
On motion by Commissioner Goulart, seconded by Commissioner Calhoon, andis
on the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Calhoon, Goulart, Mathews,. Moots, Ries.
and Chairman Pope
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing Resolution was adopted this 2nd day of April, 1974.
The developers were informed by the Chairman that they ,ha ithe right.,.1:o d
appeal to the City Council.
c!e
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -2 -74
Page 5
PARKING RE UEST FOR DEPT, OF TRANSPORTATION 601 GRAND AVENUE
Director Gallop advised that the matter was discussed at the March 6th
PlanningCommission meeting, at which time he had advised that if the trailer
was parked behind the fence, he could see no conflict with this use. Commissioner
Goulart stated he felt the intent of the Use Permit was storage of recreational
vehicles, and the requested use was beyond the use of storage. He felt the matter
should be considered by this Commission again.
Director Gallop reviewed the Use Permit for the new Commission members. He
advised that a Use Permit was petitioned and granted after a public hearing
to allow the storage of recreational vehicles behind the fence, which is adjacent
to the office. The ruling at that time was that there should be no storage of
any type in front of the fence, Now, the Department of Transportation have two
major contracts in the area and desire to use this. site for their daytime office.
After discussion, the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 74 - 328 U
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 73 - 308 U, USE
PERMIT CASE NO. 73.213.
On motion by Commissioner Ries, seconded by Commissioner Calhoon, and on
the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Calhoon, Mathews Moots and Ries
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Goulart and Chairman Pope
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 2nd day of April, 1974.
CHANNEL COUNTIES DIVISION LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES MEETING
Director Gallop noted that Mayor Talley is also the President of this
Chapter of the League of California Cities, and asked all Commission members
who plan to attend the meeting to notif Mrs. Queen or himself no la
Friday, April 5th. Mayor Talley extended his personal invitation to ter the than
members and their wives to'attend.
REQUEST FOR - A.DETERMINATION OF USE
Director outlined a request of some people Interested in setting
up a recycling-bus.iness, and requested the matter be considered as a non -
agenda item. On motion by Commissioner Goulart, seconded by Commissioner
Ries, and unanimously carried, that the. matter would be considered as a non -
aenda item.
Director Gallop advised the request is for a determination as to whether
the commercial collection and purchasing of waste paper is permitted in the
City and, if so, in what zoned district and under what conditions.
Director Gallop explained that the pets >t:i.oners propose a closed `van
parked on private property in the City two days a week, and noted that these
people are presently operating in Morro Bay and in San Luis Obispo. He
suggested that if the Commission feels this would be a worthwhile use, it
could be acceptable in an H -S or P -M District subject to Use Permit procedure,
and the following action was taken:
RESOLUTION NO. 74 -329
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE DETERMINING THAT THE COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
OF WASTE PAPER.FOR_PURPOSES OF RECYCLING IS APERMISSIVE
USE IN THE HIGHWAY SERVICE OR PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS
SUBJECT TO USE PERMIT PROCEDURE.
On motion by Commissioner Ries, seconded by Commissioner Goulart, and
by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
Commissioners Calhoon,. Goulart, Mathews, Moots, Ries
and Chairman Pope
(00
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 4 -2 -74 Page 6
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 2nd day of April, 1974,
O AL COMMUNICATIONS
�omr�±4s_s over Qy;la. t 11ota4 thot oft OtW1 Street off of Wth El (11
%VIM) o *A% oro •h@6ng Wit on tho %oath Edo, 40 the 1:ast has 4
ro616ni %Woo wll@ro tho devolopor ho% mod% a vort6o41 cot of oppr .6r ately.
t% 3* f@ot. Me po6ntod okkt thot tho Wldar .6s roods- to Joy the togAdot1;on
and thorn 6€ P4 %tie of on,y 6n %to16otton of o rota6n6ng wool. toEt#R6Wo.nor
aoolort Incl4t -od 6f thorn to 4 rwittromont In tho 401d6ng pormtt for tht%
now con %trktot6on to con %trvot O roto6n6nii Wolll D6rootor %ollop odv6 %ed that
tho rototnhn9 woll rocoatromont wom1d oomo 4ndor tho Can dln9 Qrd6nonoet w 6 h
6% tho mpona64ll6ty of the Puhl60 Work% Doport nt. he tnd6catad h@ w'u1d
chock and vor6fy tho rogo6rent for o rota6n6ng wall.
1R�
T . @o Ong no d6$e$,6or,:h,a t@at6e: wog adp4r,a0 . at
9;,5 P.O.
ATTEST:
C
61