Loading...
PC Minutes 1968-04-02Planning Commission Arroyo Grande, California April 2, 1968 The Planning Commission met in regular session with Chairman McMillen presiding. Present are Commissioners Sawyer, Smith and Strother, Absent are Commissioners Moss, Porter and Schultz. Also in attendance is City Administrator Butch, Councilman Levine, Public Works Director Anderson, and Planning Director Gallop. MINUTE APPROVAL . . On motion of Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Sawyer, and unanimously carried, the minutes of the meeting of 1'9th,1968 were approved as prepared, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF PLANNING OFFICIALS CONFERENCE Due to the absence of three Commission members, no decision was made re- garding the attendance of the American Society of Planning Officials Conference being held in San Francisco on May 4th through the 8th. COMMGSSI.ONER PORTER ENTERED THE MEETING SLO COUNTY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION MEETING Director Gallop reminded the Commission of the wrap -up meeting of the County Development Association In San Luis Obispo on Wednesday evening at 8 :00 in the Cuesta Theater, LETTER OF RESIGNATION Chairman McMillen read a letter addressed to the Commission from Orville Schultz, stating he had submitted a letter of resignation to the City Council. Chairman McMillen directed Mr. Gallop to write a letter to Mr. Schultz ex- pressing the Commission's appreciation for the work he has done serving the community. CITY COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT Commissioner Smith stated he had attended the last Council meeting, and felt the minutes of this meeting were self - explanatory; therefore, an oral report from him was not necessary. RENAMING OF THE EXISTING HUASNA ROAD WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS Administrator Butch advised that the City Council, at their last meeting, requested the Planning Commission take into consideration a possible Public Hearing on renaming Huasna Road within the City of Arroyo Grande. Director Gallop stated this item would be placed on the Agenda for the next Planning Commission meeting of April 17th, at which time a Public Hearing date could be set. PUBLIC HEARING - USE PERMIT CASE NO 68 -121 - 107 BRIDGE STREET JOYCE Chairman McMillen advised that the Public Hearing was officially opened at the last meeting. and because of lack of a representative of the petitioner at that meeting, was continued over to this meeting. Chairman McMillen declared the hearing re- opened. Mrs. Joyce was present and spoke in favor of the Use Permit being granted, stating this was an attractive sign and had won an award. She stated the sign meets all the specifications required, and believed it would be a benefit to the community because it lights the area which is quite dark in the evening. There were no protests received. No further discussion for or against the request, Chairman McMillen declared the hearing closed. Director Gallop stated a memo had been received from the Fire Depart- ment concerning the accumulation of packing boxes, etc., on the property. In asnwer to Commissioner Strother's question as to how the sign would be fastened, Director Gallop Indicated the sign would be mounted on top of a pole and would have to be approved by the Building Department so far as stress etc. is concerned before it can be erected. Planning Commission - April 2, 1968 After a -brief discussion the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 68 -92 U On motion of Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Sawyer,, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Porter, Sawyer, Smith, Strother and McMillen NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Moss and Schultz the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 2nd day of April, 1968. PUBLIC HEARING- USE PERMIT CASE NO. 68 -123 - 204 SO. HALCYON HAMILTONZ Upon being assured by Director Gallop that the Public Hearing for Use Permit Case No. 68 -123, Mercedes Hamilton, to allow for a Beauty Salon at 204 So. Halcyon, in a P -C District, had been duly posted, published and property owners notified, Chairman McMillen declared the hearing open. RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING USE PERMIT CASE NO:. 68 -121 Mrs.. Hamilton was present and spoke in favor of the Use Permit being granted. She stated she was renting the property and, with regard to the requirement that a sidewalk be installed, she didn't think the landlord would be able to put the sidewalk in at the present time, and asked if the Commission could give him some time to put this walk in. Director Gallop advised that this same condition was imposed on another Use Permit and that they were given a year in which to install the sidewalk. Director Gallop also noted the petitioner was requesting permission for a 21 x 4' sign, and advised this would be handled administratively under the new sign ordinance. There were no protests received. No further discussion for or against the request, Chairman McMillen declared the hearing closed. Director Gallop also advised that the Fire Department had requested that no burning be permitted on the premises, and the primary concern was the burn- ing of hair. Mrs. Hamilton stated she does no burning whatsoever. After discussion the following action was taken: RESOLUTION 68-93 U RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING USE PERMIT CASE Na. 68-123 On motion of Commissioner Strother, seconded by Commissioner Smith., and by'the following roll .call vote, .to wit: AYES :. Commissioners Porter, Sawyer, Smith, Strother and McMillen NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Moss and Schultz the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 2nd day of April 1968. PROPOSED RETIREMENT UNITS - TRACT 283 Chairman McMillen advised that this discussion was being held for in- formational purposes only and was not a Public Hearing, and he asked Director Gallop to, explain the proposal.. Director Gallop stated this was a proposal to utilize 26 of the re- maining lots on the southerly half, ,a westerly portion, of Tract 283 at the intersection of Farrell and Elm Streets. He stated at the present time there are 20 single family homes with 2 bedrooms, 1 bath and single car garage. He stated he has talked with Central Savings, the people who own the undeveloped property; he has talked with Mr. Wise -, of Hahn, Wise and Associates; and City Attorney Shipsey. The people who want to develop this property intend to request lot splits as noted on the plot layout, which would create 80 foot lots. They would build what is generally considered semi - condaminium homes of two single family dwellings with a common wall. Page -2 x°37 1- 38 Planning Commission - April 2, 1968 Page 3 These houses would be sold with one half as one house with an undivided interest in an 80' lot. There would be two owners in the house and in the lot. Director Gallop advised in talking with Mr. Wise that these are used in the Bay Area quite extensively, and providing the down payment was of a reasonable size and total cost not over$12,000 or $13,000, the houses were being used as designed and as intended. The houses will be approximately 900 square feet per unit and adequate space for three cars; enclosed garage, carport and off street space. The proposal also provides for 5° side yard set back. Director Gallop also noted Section 14, Page 372 of the City Ordinance, the "D" Zone which may be placed upon any district in the City at the Commission's request. By putting a "D" override zone on the property, you can then require a development plan being filed with the Commission which must be used by the developer. The D Zone has been used in a number of cases in order to get satisfactory controls.. The standards as noted under Sec. 9- 4.1402 include height, bulk and area of buildings; architectural features, landscaping, light- ing and other amenities, parking and location of vehicles. These are conditions the Commission may require. by placing a "D" override on this district and can be placed without holding a Public Hearing. All that is required is a majority vote of this Commission. Development plans must be approved by Mr. Anderson, Director of Public Works, Planning Director, and the Commission. Mr. Gallop also suggested that if this proposal is considered, there should be a provision that if any of the lots are not built on, they revert to the original subdivision lot lines. Mr. Gallop indicated at present there are no sewers and this should be a requirement. The developer indicated a willingness to do so. The property is all improved except for sewers. The utilities are all in and easements were provided in the original Tract Map, but it would be necessary to require one additional easement. Mr. Gallop called attention to a letter received from Mr. David J. Sieperman,.508 Carol Place, received March 29, 1968. Mr. Siperman was present and stated he lives in the tract and that some homes have 2 baths and 2 bed - rooms, and that there are six 3 bedroom homes; they have 1,026 square feet and are about $12,000 in value. Mrs. Tallman of 532 Carol Place stated the pro- posed units sounded very small and asked if the 900 square feet included the carport. Mr. C. L. Martin, of McAbrey and Martin Co., stated the units con- tained 815 feet of living space per unit, which doubled, would be 2400 square feet, including the carport and garage, under roof for one structure.. Mr. B. J. Meade, 517 Carol Place, stated before they moved here, they looked the property over and liked it very well. They looked at the 26 lots and it looked like a continuation of what was started and that was their object in buying the property. He stated if this change is made, it isn't what they were looking for. Mr. Martin introduced Mr. Robinson, of Earco Co.., Carlsbad, California, stating he had built 800 of these units within the last 5 years. Mr. Robinson advised they had 20 years experience in this operation; they do this exclusively and have for the last 5 years. Mr. Robinson invited anyone concerned about degrading or lowering the value of their property to inspect any of the exist- ing units, at his expense, to see how they are being maintained, and to talk to some of the owners, and then make their conclusions. He stated in this particular type of development the person on the same property is farther from his neighbor than in an average tract home, Mr. Martin also stated owners had some control over their neighbor under deed restrictions. If, for instance, the yard is not maintained, a Committee will see that it is done and he will be charged for it. There are certain cooperative controls exercised so that yards and premises will be maintained. Mr. Robinson stated that when they take this package to a lender, the lender wants to know what happens. They show them the existing units and the lenders are happy to lend, He also stated that funds were committed for the program here if they are permitted to go ahead with it. Mr. Robinson advised that 90% of their units are sold to retired couples, and their down payment require- ment is $1,000. The average net worth of the buyer is $23,000, and the average age is 60.5. 1 1 Planning Commission - April 2, 1968 Page 4 Mr. Robinson stated that restrictions applied with the deed provides for a committee of three or five functioning as an architectural committee so that the exterior and grounds must be maintained. The Committee functions when there is any conflict., therefore, these units are all maintained to a standard. He also stated it was their intention to direct their advertising of these homes to the Bakersfield and Fresno areas.. Director Gallop stated a developer can limit sales by the design, number of square footage available for living purposes., facilities included within the house, and by orienting their advertising, and the minimum down payment required. There are very few tracts or subdivisions in this area where houses have sold for a minimum of $1,000 down unless they are custom homes.. In discussing this with Central Savings, they indicated that as far as lending agencies were concerned., they would consider $15,000 to be the maximum retail sales price. With $1,000 down on a $12,000 to $15,000 house, this limits the merchandising area quite severly. Director Gallop also stated that 14 additional units would not put an undue burden on these streets as they were built for a higher capacity. A developer could build very marginal single family homes with 1 or 2 bathrooms and 4 bedrooms, which could bring in a lot of children. Mr. Gallop mentioned one other fact brought out many times in research is that retirement couples do not create additional school tax problems, they spend their money here, and for each person that moves into the City, the City gets $15.00 from the State for tax benefits. This kind of person coming into the community is definitely a benefit. Mr. Robinson also stated that the homes would be sold as an individual half interest of the real property with the sole exclusive right to use the one half portion. He also stated that there were •restrictions to what owners can do; for example, they cannot make two stories and cannot add on. The modern concept is a common wall, 40' fee simple title on each side. After further discussion, on motion of Commissioner Porter, seconded by Commissioner Strother, and unanimously carried, that a special meeting be set for Tuesday, April 30th, with the Public Hearing scheduled at 7:45. ADJOURNMENT Chairman McMillen declared the meeting adjourned at 9 :08 p.m. ATTEST: /`.. ch.e. c ' Secretary 139