Loading...
PC Minutes 1968-08-06i68 Planning Commission Arroyo Grande. California August 6, 1968 The Planning Commission met in regular session with Vice Chairman Strother presiding. Present are Commissioners Moss, Porter, St. Denis and Skel Absent are Chairman McMillen and Commissioner Sawyer. Also in attendance are City Administrator Butch, Public Works Director Anderson, and Planning Director Gallop. MINUTE APPROVAL On motion of Commissioner Moss, seconded by Commissioner St. Denis, and unanimously carried, the minutes of the regular meeting of July 16, 1968 were approved as prepared. ELLIS HARRIS LOT SPLIT - 606 EMAN COURT Director Gallop advised that an appeal had been made to the Commission on a lot split granted by the Lot Split Committee. A petition was presented to this Commission at their last meeting of July 16th, which the City Attorney deemed should be considered as an appeal to the Commission. The lot split involved the division of a large lot into two parcels in a cul-de -sac; one parcel is 8,400 square feet and the other approxi- mately 7,400 square feet, and curb and gutter is installed as required. Director Gallop stated that Mr. Hoffman presented a duplicated sheet to the Commission two weeks ago, and for the benefit of the Commissioners not present at that time, he read the six items which the neighbors felt created a hardship on their properties. Director Gallop also read a letter from City Attorney Shipsey, dated July 3rd, wherein he advises that any covenants placed on properties are placed by the developers and are agreed to by the property owners; they were not a requirement of the City and there- fore., a matter of civil enforcement. Director Gallop indicated he could seeno violation of any ordinance 'created by the granting of this lot split. He also stated that Mr. Shipsey felt there wasn't too much this Commission could do unless they wanted to reverse the action of the Lot Split Committee. Vice Chairman Strother advised the audience that the Commission would hold an informal hearing and anyone wishing to speak would have an opportunity to do so. Mrs. Ellis Harris was present and stated Mr. Harris was out of town but that she would attempt to answer any questions. , Mr. George Hoffman was present and stated he was representing the people protesting the lot split. Mr.Hoffman stated he had consulted an attorney regard- ing the lot split, who was quite shocked that the City would go ahead and violate the covenants of the tract. He explained that the covenants are a contract that the buyers enter into and these rules are mutually upheld, and that, in his opinion, for the City to aid in the breaking of this contract is legally wrong. Mr. Hoffman stated it was his attorney's opinion that covenants were legal documents and felt. they would stand up in court. Mr. Hoffman presented a picture of the lot frontage to the Commission. He stated his appeal was based on the fact that he, as a citizen, is expected to obey the rules of the City and they were here to ask the Commission to help them enforce their rules. Mrs. Harris stated that with regard to de- valuation of the property, there has been no reference made to building a house, and that if anyone is familiar with the type of homes they build, they will realize they are not sub - standard. She stated there was ample room to build a home on this lot, and it could be a split level home with a basement underneath and that, in her opinion, these homes are expensive to build and they are beautiful. She also stated that the covenants contradict themselves in several places. Mr. Hoffman read a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Clazie, 611 Eman Court, indicat- ing their objection to the lot split and their concern over losing their view, and problems created by parking in the cul -de -sac. Mr. Doug LeSage was present and stated he felt the typography should be con- sidered, and there was no assurance that a split level house would be built as the lot might be sold. He also stated that in the existing home the Harris' occupy, there is a violation of the covenants in that it does not meet the 15' rear yard setback requirement. Planning Commission, 8 -6 -68 Page 2 Mrs. Harris stated that quite frequently, due to the shape of different lots, that as long as their is ample square footage in the lot and you do not cover more than a specified amount of footage, there are stipulations to allow building within 5' rear yard setback. Vice Chairman Strother stated this matter was passed on by the Lot Split Committee and they were not cognizant of any covenants on a piece of property, and that if there are covenants, it is up to the people to enforce them; and that a letter of advice was read from City Attorney Shipsey. He stated this was not a municipal matter and the lot split does not violate the Ordinance of the City of Arroyo Grande and was done in a legal manner, and that this was, in his opinion, a matter between those who have signed the covenants, and that it was not within the power of this Commission to go beyond the powers of the laws and the ordinances in matters between the property owners, Commissioner Moss stated, in his opinion, as long as the City is not a partner: in the covenants, the Commission could take no action, and the covenants would have to be enforced by the property owners themselves. Director Gallop stated that the lot split approval was granted subject to a proper tentative map being prepared and presented.to the Committee before the final approval is granted. PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO. 68 -127, BODY AND PAINT SHOP, 931 - 933 GRAND Upon being assured by Director Gallop that the Public Hearing for Use Permit Case No. 68 -127, Body and Paint Shop, at 931 - 933 Grand Avenue, had been duly posted, published and property owners notified, Vice Chairman Strother declared the hearing open. Director. Gallop advised that the proposed location has been used for mechani- cal and automobile upholstery shop for at .least three years and possibly longer. That Mr. Crockett has conducted a body and paint business at 1000 Grand Avenue and they have never found a violation in his operation, and he has dotre an exceptionally good job of "housekeeping ". No complaints have been received on the present oper- ation or on the operation he proposes to move into. He operates a spray booth and plans to move It to the new location. He stated he had r'ecei'ved one letter and one telephone call objecting to this use and, in both cases, residents of South Halcyon whose property is presently zoned C-1. Mr. Robert B. Crockett was present and stated he has to move from his present location and submitted a list of signatures from people in the area in favor of the proposed move. He also stated that all painting would be done inside a build- ing, and his hours of operation would be from 8 :00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Mr. Walter Filer was present and indicated he had a business not far from Mr. Crockett's present business, and not far from where he is going to move, and that he has never found any objections to Mr. Crockett's business, and he would like to register approval of the Use Permit being granted. No further discussion for or against the request, Vice Chairman Strother declared the hearing closed. After a brief discussion, the following action was taken. RESOLUTION NO, 68 - 100 U A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF. ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING A USE PERMIT, CASE NO. 68 -127 On motion of Commissioner Moss, seconded by Commissioner Skelton, and by the following roll oall vote to wit: AYES: Commissioners Moss, Porter, St. Denis, Skelton and Strother NOES: a Ci . None ABSENT: Chairman McMillen and Commissioner Sawyer the fbregoix)g.Resolutlon was odopted this 6th day of August, 1968. 169 1 Planning Commission, 8 -6 -68 Page PUBLIC HEARING - FAIR OAKS EXTENSION PLAN LiNE Vice Chairman Strother explained a plan line is adopted regarding a proposed future street for the purpose of protecting the property from new construction. He advised that this Commission hears the evidence for and against a particular plan line and then it can make recommendations to the City Council. The City Council then holds another public hearing and if it chooses, adopts the plan lire. Director Gallop noted that two Resolutions had been received; one adopted by the Lucia Mar Unified School District, and one by the South County Development Association, both supporting adoption of this plan line and the development and construction as soon as possible. Director of Public Works Anderson presented the proposed plan line for a major street between Traffic Way and Halcyon Road, stating it was prepared by staff as the most feasible way through, and also that this plim conformed to the master plan adopted by the City. He advised it had been changed from a collector street with a 60' right -of -way to a major street with an 80' right -of -way. City Administrator Butch advised that the City Council has budgeted money for this project in the 1968 -69 fiscal year. Upon being assured by Director Gallop that the Public Hearing for this Plan Line had been duly published, Vice Chairman Strother declared the hearing open. Mr. Conrad Grieb was present and being an owner of the property involved, introduced Mr. Andrew David, Attorney, to represent him. Mr. David stated he was an attorney with an office in Arroyo Grande and was representing Mr. and Mrs. Fred Grieb and also the Grieb Trust. He stated they recognized that eventually there is going to be a street through here and it was their feeling it should be con- sidered at some depth, and they also recognized that this was a preliminary sketch and there have been no surveys made. Mr. David presented a map with the proposed plan line and an alternate plan line which he recommended. He stated that the pro- posed plan line would create several "dead spaces" on the Grieb property and also on the Saruwatari property. Mr. David stated they believed the alternate route to be more advantageous than the proposed route, and would like to ask the Commission not to make a decision at this: point but to have a further study of staff to con - sider the other possible routes and obtain further information so that an intelligent decision ca n be made as to whether or not the alternate route wouldn't be the best way to go. Mrs. Krovious, of 855 Virginia Drive, was present and sixke: In.. favor of the extension of Fair Oaks Avenue to Traffic Way. Dr. Robert Bailey, representing the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, was present and spoke in favor of the Fair Oaks extension, stating they have been interested in this street for a number of years and felt it would be very advantageous permitting another access to Traffic Way and the freeway for ambulance and emergency service. Mr. Saruwatari was present and stated he was a property owner directly in- volved in the proposed plan line, and asked that the plan line stay right on the property line to avoid dividing his property and losing his heaviest bearing walnut trees. After discussion, on motion by Commissioner Porter, seconded by Commissioner Moss, and unanimously carried, to continue the public hearing to the next regular meeting of August 20, 1968. REVIEW - USE PERMIT CASE N0. 67 -104 - TIRE .RECAP SHOP 111 ALDER STREET Director Gallop advised that since two weeks ago when he made a report on this operation, the operator at that time is no longer operating the business, and that Mr. Wheat and Mr. Filer have taken the operation over. Director Gallop in- dicated that since that time the deficiencies which were noted two weeks ago have all been corrected, and in his opinion the interior and exterior of the build ing is in the best shape it has been in since the operation started. He stated that as far as the conditions of the Use Permit are concerned, he felt they were complying. He also stated Fire Chief Marsalek had made an inspection and found several deficiencies, and that he had given the owners until August 20th to correct same, at which time the Fire Chief will submit a report. After a brief discussion, on motion of Commissioner Skelton, seconded by Commissioner Moss, and unanimously carried, that this case be reviewed again at the meeting of September 3rd, after review of the Fire Chief's report. Page l+ Planning Commission, 8 - - ARROYO GRANDE URBAN RESERVE LINE Director Gallop stated that during a joint meeting with the County Planning Commission January 19, 1967, the establishment of an Urban Reserve Line for Arroyo Grande was discussed and the County Commission agreed to consider this, and that he appeared at the following County meeting, at which time Mr. Ned Rogoway, County Planning Director, requested that this be put over to the following fiscal year 1968 -69 because of the present staff workloads. Several months ago Mr. Gallop requested that the County Commission advise this Commission when they could expect this Urban Reserve Line be given to them for study, and was advised by Mr. Rogoway that, because of workload, he was requesting that this matter be put over to at least the 1969 -70 fiscal year. Director Gallop indicated his feelings were that this Commission should take a stand on the matter and also recommend that the City Council take a stand, because he would not like to see the matter put off indefinitely. On motion of Commissioner Skelton, seconded - by Commissioner Moss, and unanimously carried, Director Gallop was requested to write a letter to the County Planning Commission requesting they consider the development of the Urban Reserve Line in the 1968-69 fiscal year. On motion of Commissioner Moss, seconded by Commissioner St. Denis, and unanimously carried, that a recommendation be made to the City Council that they also write a letter in support of this Commission's stand on the Urban Reserve Line. 2OTH STREET - RENAMING Director Gallop stated that several months ago the City Council referred the matter of renaming 20th Street to this Commission, recognizing the problems that were created by the name of "20th Street ". He indicated that this Commission re- quested he contact the residents of the street suggesting that they select a name which would be acceptable to them. He stated that the residents of this street had agreed among themselves to recommend the name of "Courtland ". A review of the streets in the north -south pattern indicates that three - fourths of the streets carry a suffix of "street ", therefore, the staff would recommend that 20th Street be renamed "Courtland Street ". He stated the name does not conflict with any existing street in the community. 25TH STREET RENAMING Director Gallop stated that 25th Street is one block long and that in the original subdivision was called "Tierra Street ". When this street was still In the County, the County renamed it "25th Street" in accordance with their naming plan which starts at the ocean and proceeds easterly. This matter was discussed by the Commission a few months ago and a request made that the residents on this street be contacted regarding their preference of a street name. Out of the 22 persons con_' tacted, 17 replies were received; 12 of which indicated a preference for "Tierra Street " and 5 for "25th Street ". On motion of Commissioner Moss, seconded by Commissioner Porter, and unanimously carried, that public hearings on the renaming of 20th and 25th Streets be set for September 3, 1968, at 7:45 p.m. RE U.EST TO BE OUT OF STATE Commissiiner Skelton requested permission to be out of the state the week of August 20th, 1968. On motion of Commissioner Porter, seconded by Commissioner Moss, and unanimously carried, permission was granted to Commissioner Skelton to be out of state the week of August 20, 1968, COASTA MVAI EY PLANNING COUNCIL Cemm ssioner St. Denis reported that members of the Coastal-Valley Planning Council had prepared a rough draft of the procedures covering the Council at their meeting of August 5th, which he believed would be ready for tentative approval at the next Coastal - Valley Planning Council meeting, He stated that every member was present at the meeting and the group seemed to be getting well under way. ADJOURNMENT Viee Chairman Strother declared the meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m, ATTEST: ice Chairman