PC Minutes 1973-08-2120
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission
August 21, 1973
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with
Chairman Pope presiding. Present are Commissioners Calhoon, Goulart, Gullickson
and Spierling. Commissioners Jones and Porter are absent. Also in attendance
are City Administrator Butch, City Attorney Shipley, Councilman de Leon, Public
Works Director Anderson, and Planning Director Gallop.
CONTINUATION - PUBLIC HEARING ON TALLY HO ROAD PLAN LINE
Chairman Pope reviewed that the property owners on Tally Ho Road had
acquired the legal services of an attorney, Mr. Haynes, and the public heating
was reopened in order to give Mr. Haynes the opportunity to present a legal
opinion. City Attorney Shipsey is also present for legal counsel.
COMMISSIONER PORTER ENTERED THE MEETING,
Attorney Haynes outlined the issues under the State Code, and advised
there are very substantial questions regarding the City's engineering plan
prepared by someone who had a conflict of interest, stating it was his feeling
`e.that these issues have to be resolved. He further advised that the public
t of property can also be challenged by land owners where the taking is
greater than the use in question. Mr. Hayes stated that Tally Ho Road is
designated in the General Plan as a collector road; not as a major thorough-
fare. A collector road, according to the plan, is a road of less importance
than major roads designed as wide two lane streets protected from cross traffic.
He stated the problem seems to he the proposed width; two 12 foot driving lanes,
two 10 foot parking lanes, 10 feet on each side for sidewalks and planting.
Mr. Haynes stated he would submit, therefore, a very substantial question as to
whether the proposal is not a very substantial taking, considering the topo-
graphy and the area, and that the planting, parking lanes and sidewalks may
be very beneficial for the developers on the other side of the road.
Mr. Haynes also brought up another issue regarding the engineering
plan stating he has some questions as to whether or: not it is ,.;proper expen-
diture of public funds to pay for such a plan. He stated that, in necessity,
all public improvement is located where it is most compatible and has the
least injury to property owners.
Mr. Haynes also asked that any member of the Planning Commission who
owns property either in or outside of the City which would be served by Tally
Ho Road not vote on the issue. It was his opinion that this is required by
the provisions of the Government. Code. He further advised that in reviewing
the file, he could not find where there has been an environmental study, and
finder Section 21150 it would seem a study would be required before going
forward.
Mr. Haynes stated that, again, as to the issue of necessity of public
use, he would submit that having a street which is designed only as a
collector on the fringe of'the City, expanding it this wide would benefit no
one in the City of Arroyo Grande since the people : who live there can get
where they are going, but that such a street would serve people living Out-
side the City. He stated these are the major objections and he felt these
would have to be resolved and specifically asked for a vote on the public
necessity issue.
City Attorney Shipsey stated he felt there might be a good reason for
having the study re -done. He stated he would be concerned about there being
the feeling, even if there was no basis for it, about a person that did have .
an interest in the Plan Line preparing it. He stated he would look into Mr.
Haynes' case and review the current statute, and that Mr. Haynes would give
the four points to him in 'written outline form and he would get a written
response back to the Commission.
Chairman Pope stated, it is his understanding that the City Attorney
feels there might be a possible conflict of interest and the study should be
redone for the City by someone that has no interest in the area.
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission, 8-21-73 Page 2
Chairman Pope declared the hearing closed, and on motion by Commissioner
Goulart, seconded by Commissioner Porter, and unanimously carried, the matter
was tabled until the regular Planning Commission meeting of September 4th when
a written response from the City Attorney will be available.
COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS
Chairman Pope announced that Committee re- appointments were in order,
and made the following appointments for Council consideration:
Subdivision Review Board (Lot Split Committee
Commissioners Spierling and Porter
Architectural Review Board
Commissioners Goulart and Jones
Coastal Valley Planning Council
Commissioners Calhoon and Spierling.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chairman Pope adjourned the meeting
to a study session at 8:00 P.M.
ATTEST:
21