PC R 88-1189353
RFSOLUTION NO. 88-1189
A RFSOLUTION OF THE PLANNIIIG OOMMIS`SION OF THE
C1TY OF ARROYO GRANDE RDOONIlUIENDiNG DENIAL OF
RE7ANING CASE NO. 88-206, 1250 FARftOLL AVENUE,
FR.OM R-3 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISI'ItICT
1�0 PI�88-1 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DLSI'�tICI'.
(DENNI,S LOHOFF). �
WHEREAS, the Planning Caimission of the City of Arroyo Grande, California, has held
a public hearing on the application of Dennis Lohoff to amend the Municipal Code of the City
of Arroyo Grande as provided by ChApter 4, Article 32 of said Cade to rezone all that property
generally described as 1250 Farroll Avenue, and more specifically described as follows to P-D
Planned Development District:
In the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis
Obispo, State of California, County Asse,ssor's
Parcel No. 77-241-32; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Corrsnission feels that the public interest and general w�elfare
does not require sueh an emenchnent; and
WH[EREAS, , a Negative Declaration has been prepared on the project and was reviewed
by the Plannirg Corm�ission at a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Negative Declaration has found that no significant potential impacts of
the proposed zone change are anticipated; and
WI-IEREAS, the Planning Cargr�assion has deternuned that the proposed zone change is
not an appropriate use of the subject property and is not desirable for the orderly development
of the community; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Catvnission has detetmined that the proposed zone change is
not in confocmance with the City's General Plan; and
WHEKEAS,. the Planning Conmission minutes, including a list of persons who testified at
the public hearing, s�um�lacy of faet and fincfings, and copies of any maps pertinent to the
propos�l, are on file and hereby declared to be part of said Resolution.
NOW, TIiEftEFORE, be it resolved that the Planning Carmission of the G�ty of Arroyo
Grande does hereby recorm�end to the City Council denial of Zone Change No. 88-206, as
applied for, with the following findings:
1.
2.
The proposed zone change is clearly inconsistent with the existing General Plan
designation.
The subject site is not adequate in size and shape by itself to accorrurr�odate the
reasonable requirements of residential development.
3. 1fie proposed zone change
adequate services are not
properties in the City.
is not reasonable or beneficial at this time because
available and density is inebnsistent with surrounding
4. The proposed zone change would adversely affect the surrounding property because
it is not consistent with the adjacent uses and density.
On motion by Ca�rmissioner Gerrish, seconded by Cartmissioner Olsen, and by the followirg
roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Ca�rmissioners Flores, Olsen, Bogg�ess, Gerrish and Chairrnan Soto
NOES: Carrrri.ssioners Moore and Seott
ABSENT: None
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 5th �day of July 1988.
� `
ATTEST: �
Secretary Chai