Minutes 2006-10-10
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2006
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor/Chair Ferrara called the Regular City Council/Redevelopment Agency meeting to order at
7:04 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
City Council/RDA:
Council/Board Members Jim Dickens, Joe Costello, Ed Arnold, Mayor Pro
TemNice Chair Jim Guthrie and Mayor/Chair Tony Ferrara were present.
City Staff Present:
City Manager Steven Adams, City Attorney Tim Carmel, Director of
Administrative Services/City Clerk Kelly Wetmore, Director of Financial
Services Angela Kraetsch, Police Commander Steve Andrews, Director of
Public Works Don Spagnolo, Associate Planner Kelly Heffernon, Assistant
Planner Jim Bergman, and Consulting Engineer Craig Campbell.
3. FLAG SALUTE
Members of Girl Scout Troop 1016 led the Flag Salute.
4. INVOCATION
Pastor Robert Banker, Open Door Church, Oceano, delivered the invocation.
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
None.
6. AGENDA REVIEW
6.a. Ordinances Read in Title Only.
Council Member Costello, Council Member Arnold seconded, and the motion passed unanimously
that all ordinances presented at the meeting shall be read in title only and all further reading be
waived.
7. CITIZENS' INPUT, COMMENTS. AND SUGGESTIONS
Susan Flores, E. Branch Street, commented on a recent item on the Planning Commission's
Agenda concerning a project already started by the Lucia Mar Unified School District and
expressed concerns about the lack of erosion control, the deteriorating condition of the road, no
required tree replacements; the lack of sidewalks, and the loss of park space.
Gale Gascho, Quiet Oaks, responded to the position the Council took at a previous meeting to
oppose Measure J. He expressed concern that no public comment was allowed, the other side was
not invited to present its side, and felt that this was an unusual action by the City Council.
Bob Lund, E. Branch Street, Executive Director and President of the Village Improvement
Association, spoke in support of City Measure 0-06.
Mayor Ferrara clarified the position the Council took on Measure J to oppose the Measure as it was
written, not to oppose the project itself.
Minutes: City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Page 2
8. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor/Chair Ferrara invited members of the public who wished to comment on any Consent
Agenda Item to do so at this time. There were no public comments received.
Council/Board Member Arnold moved, and Mayor Pro TemNice Chair Guthrie seconded the motion
to approve Consent Agenda Items 8.a. through 8.0., with the recommended courses of action. The
motion passed on the following roll-call vote;
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Arnold, Guthrie, Dickens, Costello, Ferrara
None
None
8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification.
Action: Ratified the listing of cash disbursements for the period September 16, 2006
through September 30, 2006.
8.b. Consideration of Approval of Minutes.
Action: Approved the minutes of the Special City Council Meeting of August 29, 2006. as
submitted.
8.c. Consideration of Disposal of Surplus Bicycles.
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3956 as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DECLARING SURPLUS PROPERTY TO
BE DONATED TO THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
PROGRAM TO REFURBISH BICYCLES FOR NEEDY CHILDREN".
8.d. Consideration of Request for Funding from Energy Solutions Coalition.
Action: Approved funding in the amount of $500 for the Energy Solutions Coalition Smart
Energy Solutions Summit.
8.e. Consideration of Agreement with Tierra West Advisors, LLC for Redevelopment
Consultant Services.
[COUNCIURDA)
Action: 1) Authorized the City Manager/Redevelopment Agency Executive Director to
terminate the existing contract with Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc; and 2) Authorized the
Mayor/Redevelopment Agency Chair to execute the Agreement with Tierra West Advisors,
LLC for redevelopment consultant services.
8.f. Consideration of Agreement with Tierra West Advisors, LLC for Redevelopment Bond
Fiscal Consultant Services.
[COUNCIURDA)
Action: Approved the proposal received by Tierra West Advisors, LLC to provide fiscal
consultant services to the Redevelopment Agency to coordinate issuance of bond financing.
8.g. Consideration of City-County Tax Agreement Regarding Detachment No.1 of a 3700
S.F. Portion of a Larger Residential Property which is Predominantly Developed in
Unincorporated Area, but by Prior Legal Description Error is Partly within the City of
Arroyo Grande, as Requested by LAFCO (File 4-R-06).
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3957 as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING NEGOTIATED
EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY TAX REVENUE AND ANNUAL TAX INCREMENT
BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
REGARDING DETACHMENT NO.1 (LAFCO FILE 4-R-06)".
Minutes: City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Page 3
8.h. Consideration of Development Code Amendment 04-005A - An Ordinance of the City
Council of the City of Arroyo Grande Amending Portions of Title 16 of the Arroyo
Grande Municipal Code, Revising Land Use Regulations for Design Development
Overlay District OMU-D-2.20 within the Office Mixed Use District.
Action: Adopted Ordinance No. 581 as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING PORTIONS OF TITLE 16 OF THE
ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE (DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 04-005A),
REVISING LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR DESIGN DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY
DISTRICT OMU-D-2.20 WITHIN THE OFFICE MIXED USE DISTRICT".
8.i. Consideration to Authorize the Expenditure of Funds to Purchase a Pre-Owned
Bucket Truck.
Action: Approved the expenditure of funds to purchase a pre-owned bucket truck for the
Public Works Department.
8.j. Consideration of an Award of Contract to Anderson Burton Construction, Inc. for the
City Hall Reception Area Renovation.
Action: 1) Awarded a contract in the amount of $29,969; 2) Authorized the City Manager to
approve change orders not to exceed the contingency of $5,000 for use only if needed for
unanticipated costs during the construction phase of the project: and 3) Appropriated $5,000
from the General Fund.
8.k. Consideration of Authorization to Purchase In-Car Video Systems for the New Police.
Patrol Vehicles.
Action: Authorized staff to purchase two (2) digital in-car video systems from ICOP Digital,
Inc. for a total cost of $13,458.35.
8.1. Consideration of a Resolution Integrating the National Incident Management System
(NIMS) into the City's Existing Emergency Management Plan and Operations.
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 3958 as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE INTEGRATING THE NATIONAL
INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM INTO THE CITY'S EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
PLAN AND OPERATIONS"; and adopted the NIMS Implementation Matrix for Tribal and
Local Jurisdictions as a guide, effective October 10, 2006.
8.m. Consideration of Authorization to Lease Purchase a New Fire Engine.
Action: Authorized the City Manager to execute a Purchase Order, not to exceed
$410,000, to Pierce Manufacturing for the purchase of one demonstrator 2007 Pierce fire
engine; and authorized the City Manager to solicit a Lease Purchase Agreement for this
purchase and be authorized to dispose of the surplus 1984 Van Pelt fire engine.
8.n. Consideration of Authorization of City Manager to Sign Contracts with Pacific Gas &
Electric for Phase 3 of "Let There Be Lights" Street Light Installations on East Branch
Street Between Short Street and Crown Hill.
Action: Authorized the City Manager to sign two contracts with PG&E for Phase 3 of "Let
There Be Lights" for streetlight installations on E. Branch Street between Short Street and
Crown Hill to replace 14 existing generic lanterns with 16 new decorative metal poles,
Holophane fixtures, and accessories, in the amounts of $44,329 and $6,444 from the
SLOCOG Branch Streetscape Grant Funds, to be partially reimbursed by continued
volunteer donations per pole.
Minutes: City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Page 4
8.0. Consideration of Engineer's Report and Adoption of Resolution of Intention to Form
the Grace Lane Assessment District (Tract 2236).
Action: Reviewed and approved the Engineer's Report and adopted Resolution No. 3959
as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE DECLARING AN INTENTION TO FORM THE GRACE LANE ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT".
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Council Member Dickens declared a conflict of interest due to his indirect financial interest in the
Dixson Ranch and stepped down from the dais.
9.a. Consideration of Development Code Amendment 04-007, Neighborhood Plan 04-001,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 04-002, and Planned Unit Development 04-002; Applicant:
Creekside Estates of Arroyo Grande, LLC; Location - 22 Acres Located East of
Noguera Court and North of East Cherry Avenue Extension (Cherry Creek).
Associate Planner Heffernon presented the staff report and recommended the Council consider a
Mitigated Negative Declaration for residential development within a 22-acre Neighborhood Plan
area consisting of two (2) subareas. Subarea 1 is a proposed thirty (30) unit residential
subdivision in a Planned Unit Development configuration on nine (9) of the twenty-two (22)
acres. Subarea 2 encompasses thirteen (13) acres where no subdivision is proposed at this
time. The Planning Commission recommended the Council find the current Mitigated Negative
Declaration insufficient and require an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be prepared for the
project. The Planning Commission further recommended that the project be returned to the
Planning Commission after Council consideration of the environmental determination.
Consulting Engineer Campbell gave an overview of the existing drainage flows from Newsom
Springs; demonstrated how the improvements proposed by the Cherry Creek development would
significantly improve drainage flows, explained future drainage improvements in the regional plan;
and responded to questions from Council.
Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing, inviting the applicant or representative to address the
Council first.
John Knight, RRM Design Group, representing the applicant, gave a PowerPoint presentation (on
file in the Administrative Services Department) which highlighted regional issues associated with
the project (Neighborhood Plan, drainage, agricultural buffer, and emergency access), and site
specific issues associated with the project (density and lot size, drainage, street design, agricultural
buffer, and creek enhancement); noted that the applicant had met with the neighbors to create a
conceptual Neighborhood Plan for Subarea 1 that would address infrastructure (sewer, water,
drainage system, agricultural buffer, creek setback, and emergency access) improvements which
would also serve Subarea 2; reviewed components of the previous site plan for Subarea 1;
reviewed the revised site plan for Subarea 1, including proposed density and lot size, drainage
system, street design, agricultural buffer/entry features, and creek/channel features; and provided
an overview of the supplemental environmental studies conducted for the proposed project. He
asked for Council support of the project.
Minutes: City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Page 5
Cliff Branch, co-owner/applicant, addressed the density issue and noted that a lot of land was
required for drainage swales, setbacks, open space, and buffers, so the lot sizes had to be reduced
so the land could be used for other things. He explained the project includes 27 new lots and
anything less would not be feasible; therefore they are proposing the lowest density possible which
is lower than the City's standards allow. He referred to the creek and stated it was important not to
. have parking along that side of the street.
Mayor Ferrara invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on the matter.
Larry Turner, Noguera Place, spoke in support of the project as proposed, requested the City
abandon the existing drainage easement behind Noguera Place, supported the drainage plan, and
supported the proposed single story homes behind Noguera Place.
Steve Ross, Garden Street, spoke in support of the revised project; however, he encouraged the
improvement of E. Cherry Avenue.
Gary Scherquist, Short Street, urged the Council to require a full Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) for the project and expressed concern about the historical resources on the site, potential
impacts to the creek, potentiallraffic impacts, and the proposed density of the project.
Polly Tullis, Garden Street, distributed photos of the former Stilwell property located at 734 Myrtle
(on file in the Administrative Services Department), spoke about its historic walnut farm, that it was
important to recognize that the trees on the site have historic value, and expressed concern about
the removal of the walnut trees and the loss of prime farmland soils. She urged the Council to
require an EIR for the project and stated she would like to see fewer homes on the property and
see it used for heritage farming and gardening. She said there are many environmental issues that
have not been addressed by the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND).
Jim Dickens, Branch Mill Road, representing the Dixson Ranch Agricultural Preserve, provided
comments about the MND, referred to page 4, and said the land use classification for the property
located to the South of the project (the Dixson Ranch) should be designated as "Agriculture
Preserve", not "Agriculture" and that the current uses of the property are not "Undeveloped". He
said a more accurate and appropriate description of the land uses to the South of the proposed
project would be "Commercial Agricultural Production". He also stated that all references in the
MND to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (LESA Model)
should be stricken and recommended the City adopt a modified version of the LESA Model which
examines Arroyo Grande's distinctive set of circumstances and site conditions. Further, he
acknowledged the Council's direction and progress on the Newsom Springs regional drainage
solution; however, he expressed concern that the proposed project's drainage improvements were
not adequately and thoroughly considered in the MND and requested that appropriate time and
consideration be given to ensure the Dixson Ranch is not adversely impacted due to drainage
project amendments on or adjacent to their property. He requested that the current MND be
amended to reflect the concerns he addressed.
Colleen Martin, Olive Street, spoke of the importance of public involvement in local government;
expressed concern about the proposed drainage plan and its continuing evolution; concern with the
Neighborhood Plan and the lack of an improved road on E. Cherry to serve Phase 2; ~tated that the
Page,
staff repOrt does not address a ,
PI", ""'d 'he, -, . ~""" 01 do""op""O/
and "'''' 'h, ""Old " a""'<aO/ h., d'.al.. "om 'he ""hes 0:: p",po,.. by lho N,'9hborho
pm_.. "'"'Oak a:: 10 'oe ,," d,,,,,~ '0 Pha" , ~ '0 Pha" h, _,,~ ,",a"",. doo"
'"9a""og -, .~,." ",ho.,h, "'I" g", 'O/Olhe W'''''k. 'a~ ;'. 'xp~".. _ abool"
there COntinue to be many li';:errnehabk '""a", /h" lhe d'';,,,,,,,,,~:,;:,:'.,,,,: ha, "0/ I,.., P"",
"",~. and '''''''0''' "" I ""'0 be "1d~"'d "'Ih " .' '." ""'CO"" """ lhal
'nd --~.. ho'/h ",:0.. She ""," /h" lhe pi" '''''"d', ,:'". '''''''''ng Voe ~'''''''. '''ff,
""helle, '"" the i" ' .., ""'g " be '-"'hed. Sh, '"Hh~''''''''.'' '"","", " _'on,.
no,.. th, P"'''' has ";0"'0,:",,, lhe Pri"" '''. d'fioWon "'" 'he ":::;.""d ""'~'" ,,_ do""
'---'100 ,~ ~ ." ",""h ""oy 'h,og". She ~"o, ' 'galoo '", ""'" 'oil,. Sh,
"'id if the """",n '",it"g, '"" <I" "'d "'''' lhe C""IId' 'b~ "b'h' PI,,,,og Co""""Ioo',
'''''Od... "" ,- "...." '.0 <I". 'he "~.. Ih" _, 'y ," ~"'"'"""""on Sh,
"",''' by.... """," ~~'" 10 'g,,,,,,, 10 ~.", Ih, "",," ~:::NO """ 10 be ~""'''do",.
. , ""'d""", by "'giog /he C""Od' 10 , .d "" ""og"" '''''''P"",", .,
Cliff Branch co, onsl er an fiR for the project,
' -owner/apPlicant
P""',"y a"" "al.. h, h . ~""""''' 10 p"bli, "'",",,01' , .
de""o''''d d"I/og lhe 200, "g" lhe c"""," "'"'" "'y "'0""'0/ ::;;,"J:'.g /h, ""',. '" II"
"Ii", "" "'" , .,~" Plan 0",,,, H, a/" '" I , P'""MP'y _" '"
'0/ or "'''''''''''''0/:' ;~ '''' '" 'he,. fi" ."'''" a", 'om, '" ::::;':,'" -a/ lhe """'" I"" ", "'"
les, and In addition, more stUdy Will 0 - e noted that they have done a
T CCUr On the dralnag 1
Ony JanOWicz Lie'ly L , e Pan_
o '" ane, read a lett '
'Pa""''''') '""P","og ", P"'k"" P';"':~ -, ~_ Ion .. '0 lhe Ado/i';"""" S'"''''
Nora LOoney, Lierly Lane s ok '
d'aillag, "." "'a, . P ''" '"P"",, '" '''' ""'i'<1" ,
th. Cou~, 10 ';~'''' i:;;:: ':;:"''''y -" """""'""", lhal ';","";;.';," :': ""__, /he
Che"Y C_ ",0.," ''''''y '" 0',,,,,",, '0 S'ba~, 2 . 0 I '_. She ","",
h,,,,, d.o,", ",: ""::;:,'~:::'';;::, ~.Che"Y. S" Ool'd lhel ~, ~~ ':.~": ,"::
POlly TUllis, Garden St~ t
Vand"".., """ ". 'X""""" ''''''''m ab"", 'he ,". .
'he dkJ 001 ,"",:: :"%,'::,'7;''''a/ i_d 10 lhe '''''''"'''~",:'o~:': :: ~he ,blo,... ~ /h, 1m"",
W;~;o /h. 300" ",,'" ' ,"0,," ""Ooe, "-'''''. 'he '" 001 ''" , : 00". She "'" """
d".""o. if "y ;" /he':;: '" ""'''''Iion She "0 ,"gOO".. Ih,;; " ""-e",... Iooa",
or "';"" a_,at I,,,, age "tho '''' 22_ ""'Pe"y he, "gation t, WhOUld be WOrthWhile to
. " I, " " ~.'" ~ 10"
There Were no fUrther b,.
pu IC comments received and MayO F
' r errara clOsed th bl' h '
MaYor Ferrara cal' d' 'Po " ",,",.
,e 'Or a recess at g-01 T ,
. . P.m. he Co'Oc'''_",Oed a",,,,, rn
COO""' ....""", CO""1o P'""do. p. .
- In dete'm" - h d the fOllOWing comments_
' . Inlng Wether the MNO ' _
""Pact, ~ Primo '" · adeq"",. he "at" lhel d, . .
G,,,.,,, PI", 'O"""':':~~~he ~' ',,,",,,,, .",,, '''' he ,::::;,: :"'k'"''''''''''''''~1
'" """,. - io -, a,,,. Pact 'P""""kh """".~ adif""" "';'9 at~ t? thhe 2001
"'''ed Ih~ · . . . , , "'" '''' I , 10,;,
' P'''Pen, '" '''''lion '" 001 "'n.. "' Ag""'....
.
Minutes: City CounCi//Rectevelo
7"",,,,.. 0",_ '0. ""'Ii ""',," A"M.y ,,"",;,"
Minutes: City Council/Redeve/opment Agency Meeting
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Page 7
Expressed concern with drainage and favored the proposed drainage plan; however, he
wanted to ensure that the development does not move forward until it ties into the completion of
the EIR on the drainage issues for Newsom Springs regional project;
Acknowledged that setbacks are established for creek protection;
Noted that siltation would be addressed in the regional drainage solution and would tie in with
the proposed drainage system;
Does not believe there any additional pesticide calculations that need to be addressed that
come from Dixson Ranch; pesticide calculations for the project would be adequately addressed
in the MND;
- Would like to see the MND amended to show the correct descriptions of the properties;
Does not think a full EIR is warranted for the project;
Suggested a reduction in density with lot sizes larger than 6,000 square feet;
Supports proposed lot sizes for the duet lots;
Suggested that Subarea 2 be zoned as Medium-low Density when that comes forw~rd;
Stated the issues with E. Cherry Avenue should be adequately addressed which guarantees
that the road is going to be improved.
Council Member Arnold provided the following comments:
Referred to the Report on Conservation of Prime Agricultural Resources dated July 2003 (on
file) which addresses all the agricultural lands in the City and stated that the agricultural Class 1,
2, & 3 soils on the subject property is referred to on Maps 4 and 5; and acknowledged that
farming could not occur on any of the land because zoning for the majority of the property is
residential;
Acknowledged that this property has been zoned as residential for a very long time; and if
someone wanted to bring commercial agriculture operations to this property, an agricultural
buffer would be required and would substantially reduce the usable land;
Believed that residential development was planned for this property and is appropriate;
Believes there is a need to mitigate the loss of the one acre of prime soils with an in-lieu fee;
Does not support eminent domain on E. Cherry; however, acknowledged difficulties in
determining/contacting owners;
Supports extension and improvement of E. Cherry Avenue;
With regard to Subarea 2, suggested that Planning Commission revisit the zoning for that area;
Medium-low Density may be more appropriate;
Supported the abandonment of the Noguera drainage easement, assuming this project moves
forward with the correct drainage plan implemented;
Need to ensure the proposed drainage system is sufficient before development occurs;
Supports number of lots proposed;
Supports one-story homes backing up to Noguera Place;
Can approve the MND as amended to remove the lESA model and to correct the land use
description for the Dixson Ranch.
Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie provided the following comments:
Referred to the 2001 General Plan Update and remembered specific discussion regarding the
rezoning of the property to a higher density classification and that the reason was specifically
related to the drainage issue and the potential to solve the biggest flooding issue in Arroyo
Grande, as well as that this was a good in-fill project adjacent to the Village;
Minutes: City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Page 8
Spoke about transitional housing as it relates to the adjacent agricultural use and the
agricultural buffer concept;
Did not recalt any previous discussion about prime soils on the property which required special
consideration as it has always been zoned residential;
Also noted that in 2003, there were changes to the Agricultural Element and there was no
discussion about the prime agricultural potential on this property;
Believed that the General Plan language that refers specifically to an EIR required for loss of
prime agriculture soils does not apply for this project;
Supports MND with modifications to the land use definitions for the surrounding property and
supports the use of the LESA model.
Mayor Ferrara provided the following comments:
Referred to 2001 General Plan Update and agreed that discussion regarding prime soils did not
come up; however, the issue of density did come up;
Believes the zoning should have remained as Rural Residential or at least Medium-Low density;
Acknowledged the site has always been zoned Residential and is pleased the proposal for
Subarea 1 has fewer units per acre than what it is currently zoned for;
Has issue with Subarea 2 as it relates to zoning and spoke about the need for transitional
zoning; recommended sending Subarea 2 back to the Planning Commission for review of
potential change in General Plan land use designation;
Stated he is comfortable with the MNDfor Subarea 1 as it relates to addressing all the
constraints on the site, including creek protection and the drainage plan;
Acknowledged that any proposal for Subarea 2 would require detailed environmental review;
Supports the MND as modified to clarify the land use description of the Dixson Ranch as
indicated; and before adding language about the use of the LESA model, recommended being
clear about the criteria being applied;
Supports the MND as it relates to Subarea 1; has issue with Subarea 2 and prefers going back
to review the density.
Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie provided the following additional comments:
Requiring mitigation for loss of prime soils on residential zoned property would set a bad
precedent;
Supports the Neighborhood Plan as it provides adequate infrastructure to develop the rest of the
area;
Supports the 130 foot agricultural buffer for the proposed project;
Supports the drainage plan and emphasized how big of an improvement it is to the community;
Noted that development impacts fees will provide for traffic improvements;
Eminent domain for E. Cherry might be necessary as last resort;
- Agreed that parking should not be allowed along creekside.
Brief discussion ensued regarding the suggestion to include mitigation for loss of prime soils on
residential zoned property.
'Action: Council Member Arnold moved to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Subarea 1, as
amended to remove the LESA model reference, to change the land use category definition of the
Dixson Ranch to reflect the existing commercial agricultural operations. to mitigate the loss of the
Minutes: City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Page 9
one-acre of agricultural land at a similar rate that was used on the Fair Oaks project, and to send
Subarea 2 back to the Planning Commission to review the zoning for that area.
Council Member Costello asked if the two Subareas could be separated.
City Attorney Carmel responded that he did not think they could be separated without going through
the mitigations to see what should be taken out and what should not and requiring some level of
recirculation of the document. As a matter of clarification, he explained that the Mitigated Negative
Declaration evaluates the Neighborhood Plan component, which identifies whether the Subarea 1
project provides adequate infrastructure for Subarea 2. He recommended not separating out
Subarea 2 from the Mitigated Negative Declaration. He clarified that Subarea 2 would have a
project, or a sequence of projects, that would all be evaluated separately with full environmental
review.
City Manager Adams explained that recommendations regarding the zoning for Phase 2 could be
considered separately.
Mayor Ferrara asked for clarification on whether the City was moving forward with the Mitigated
Negative Declaration on the Neighborhood Plan only.
City Attorney Carmel explained that the Mitigated Negative Declaration evaluates all components
including the Development Code Amendment, the Neighborhood Plan, the Planned Unit
Development, and the Tract Map. He noted that the Development Code Amendment is a City
initiated application and process to achieve General Plan consistency; however, the City is not
taking action tonight on the Development Code Amendment. He explained that approval of the
Mitigated Negative Declaration allows approval of the Development Code Amendment at a later
date; however, does not bind the Council to approve it as currently proposed. He explained that the
City could amend its Development Code Amendment application to consider Subarea 1 separately
and exclude the Subarea 2 portion.
Mayor Ferrara inquired whether the motion could be separated into two motions to 1) approve the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, and 2) to direct staff to review Subarea 2 separately.
Council Member Arnold amended his motion to not separate out Subarea 2 from the Mitigated
Negative Declaration; however, he said the remainder of the motion stands. Mayor Ferrara clarified
that the motion includes the issue concerning the mitigation of the loss of 1-acre of prime soils.
Council Member Costello seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Arnold, Costello, Ferrara
Guthrie
Dickens
Action: Council Member Arnold moved to direct staff to amend the (Development Code
Amendment) application for Subarea 2 and send it back to the Planning Commission to revisit the
zoning for that property. Council Member Costello seconded, and the motion passed on the
following roll-call vote:
Minutes: City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting
Tuesday, October 10,2006
Page 10
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Arnold. Costello, Guthrie. Ferrara
None
Dickens
Discussion ensued concerning the process for continued review of the project, and clarification that
Subarea 2 would be considered separately from Subarea 1. Further Council discussion ensued
clarifying that approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration addressed environmental issues
related to the project and that Council would be directing the project back to the Planning
Commission to review only the specific proposed project (Development Code Amendment,
Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit Development) for Subarea 1.
. City Attorney Carmel clarified that the Council would be directing only the Development Code
Amendment, Planned Unit Development and Tentative Tract Map for Subarea 1 back to the
Planning Commission for a recommendation.
Action: Council Member Arnold moved to continue the public hearing to the Regular City Council
Meeting of November 14, 2006 and to return the project to the Planning Commission for a
recomrnendation on the Development Code Amendment, Tentative Tract Map and Planned Unit
Development for Subarea 1. Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie seconded, and the motion passed on the
following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Arnold. Guthrie, Costello, Ferrara
None
Dickens
Mayor Ferrara called for a recess at 10:29 p.m. The Council reconvened at 10:37 p.rn.
9.b. Consideration of Development Code Amendment Case No. 06-001. and Tentative
Parcel Map Case No. 06-004 - location: APNs 006-095-001 & 002, Including and
Adjoining Arroyo Grande High School at Valley Road/Fair Oaks Avenue.
Assistant Planner Bergman presented the staff report and recommended the Council: 1) Adopt an
Ordinance amending the Zoning Map to designate the subject properties as Residential Hillside
(RH) and Public Facility (PF), initiated by the City of Arroyo Grande for property located on and
adjacent to Arroyo Grande High School; and 2) Adopt a Resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map
06-004 located south of and including part of Arroyo Grande High School campus at Valley Road
and Fair Oaks Avenue, initiated by the City of Arroyo Grande. including improvement and extension
of Castillo Del Mar Drive from Orchard Street to Valley Road. City Manager Adams briefly
explained issues that had arisen regarding the design of the proposed road extension and
identification of several drainage issues which have increased the cost of the project. He outlined
the associated costs and recommended that the Council authorize execution of a Reimbursement
Agreement with JH Land Partnership in a form approved by the City Attorney; and authorize the
City Manager to execute an amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) reflecting
proposed changes in the payment provided by JH land Partnership and any other minor
modifications determined to be necessary to carry out the direction provided by City Council.
Minutes: City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Page 11
Consulting Engineer Campbell reviewed the proposed drainage improvements as it relates to the
extension of Castillo del Mar and responded to questions from Council.
Mayor Ferrara opened the public hearing, inviting the applicant or representative to address the
Council first.
Carol Florence, Principal Planner, Oasis Associates, representing Lucia Mar Unified School District,
stated that she had shared the road design and drainage with the District and said they understand
and concur with the current design; noted that the property will be impacted with a loss and
reconfiguration of parking spaces; stated that she had discussed the concept with John Taylor and
received written confirmation from his legal counsel regarding his concurrence with the proposal;
and noted that modifications to the Memorandum of Understanding would have to be revisited with
the Board of Education and Mr. Taylor. She requested the Council approve the parcel map and the
changes to the conditions on the map.
In response to a question from Council Member Dickens, Ms. Florence said that environmental
concerns on the ten acres of hillside property to the south had been relayed to the District
Superintendent and Boara, and any proposed subdivision or development would have to go through
the environmental review process. Council Member Dickens commented that he had previously
recommended a Conservation Overlay for the parcel to identify to potential purchasers that there
were environmental concerns that would need to be addressed. Ms. Florence responded briefly
and noted that processes are in place via the California Environmental Quality Act to address
environmental impacts.
There were no further public comments received, and Mayor Ferrara closed the publiC hearing.
Council Member Arnold provided the following comments:
Supported the proposal;
Supported the proposed funding and reimbursement agreement;
Noted that flooding problems at the school would be addressed.
Council Member Dickens provided the following comments:
Supported the conceptual issues;
Expressed concern about disclosure of environmental concerns associated with the parcel;
Would like to see a conservation overlay on the parcel being considered for rezoning to
Residential Hillside;
Expressed concern with the reduction in the agricultural mitigation fee due to the increased cost
of the road and the drainage improvements;
Recommended that the fee be changed back to $200,000. as originally agreed to;
Acknowledged that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted at the previous meeting;
however, he referred to the smaller portion of land that is considered prime agriculture land
which was not taken into consideration;
Stated it was important to maintain the City's policies;
Supported modification of the Memorandum of Understanding as recommended; however, need
to add for some potential reimbursement of agricultural mitigation.
Minutes: City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting
Tuesday. October 10. 2006
Page 12
There was brief discussion regarding the mitigation fee for loss of prime agricultural soils as it
relates to the total estimated costs of the proposed road extension and improvements.
Council Member Costello provided the following comments:
- Supported the proposal as recommended; however, would like to include some form of future
mitigation to offset the loss of the $100,000 for the prime agricultural soils.
Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie provided the following comments:
- Supported the proposal as recommended;
- Sees the nexus between development of the residential parcel and the agricultural mitigation
that is taking place now as it relates to the reimbursement agreement.
Mayor Ferrara provided the following comments:
- Supported concerns, expressed by Council Member Dickens regarding additional mitigation for
loss of prime agricultural soils. .
Carol Florence, representative for Lucia Mar Unified School District, requested that staff provide
language for the Memorandum of Understanding that conditions some future development of the
parcel as it relates to the mitigation for the loss of prime agricultural soils.
Council Members Dickens and Arnold inquired how the Council could notify and condition a
potential applicant coming forth with a tentative tract map' to include reimbursement for its fair share
of the increased cost of the road, and also reimbursement of the agricultural mitigation that was
reduced in the proposed Memorandum of Understanding. Discussion ensued regarding the
subdivision map process and language that is included in the Memorandum of Understanding
concerning reimbursement for loss of prime agricultural property.
Brief discussion ensued regarding the concept for a conservation overlay on the property.
. Mayor Pro Tern Guthrie moved to adopt an Ordinance as follows: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO
DESIGNATE THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES AS RESIDENTIAL HILLSIDE (RH) AND PUBLIC
FACILITY (PF), DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 06-004, INITIATED BY THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON AND ADJACENT TO ARROYO GRANDE
HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS", Council Member Arnold seconded . and the motion passed on the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Guthrie, Arnold. Costello, Ferrara
Dickens
None
Mayor Pro Tern Guthrie moved to adopt a Resolution, as amended. as follows: "A RESOLUTION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP 06-004 LOCATED SOUTH OF AND INCLUDING PART OF ARROYO GRANDE
HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS AT VALLEY ROAD AND FAIR OAKS AVENUE INITIATED BY THE
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE". Council Member Arnold seconded the motion.
Minutes: City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Page 13
As a mailer of clarification, City Allorney Carmel noted that the motion referred to the revised
tentative parcel map resolution which included the modified conditions of approval.
The motion passed on the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Guthrie, Arnold, Dickens. Costello, Ferrara
None
None
Mayor Pro Tem Guthrie moved to authorize the City Manager to execute a Reimbursement
Agreement with JH Land Partnership that includes road improvements and also the reimbursement
for agricultural mitigation; and further authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) reflecting proposed changes in the payment provided by JH
Land Partnership and any other minor modifications necessary to carry out the direction provided
by City Council. Council Member Dickens seconded the motion.
As a mailer of clarification, City Allorney Carmel stated that the noted provisions would be included
in the MOU, the reimbursement agreement, and/or both documents.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Guthrie. Dickens, Costello, Arnold, Ferrara
None
None
10. CONTINUED BUSINESS ITEMS
None.
11. NEW BUSINESS ITEMS
None.
12. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS
a) Request to place on future agenda an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Plot
Plan Review Case No. 06-015; Applicant - Ocean Oaks Builders; Location - 579 Camino
Mercado. (ARNOLD)
Council Member Arnold requested, and the Council unanimously concurred, an appeal of the
Planning Commission's approval of Plot Plan Review Case No. 06-015 which proposes the
conversion of twelve (12) of the sixty (60) previously approved condominium units from two (2)
bedrooms to three (3) bedrooms located at 579 Camino Mercado.
13. CITY MANAGER ITEMS
None.
14. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
15. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
None.
Minutes: City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting
Tuesday, October 10,2006
Page 14
16. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Colleen Martin, Olive Street, recommended a proposed agenda item to look at a rubric. threshold,
or formula regarding mitigation for agricultural prime soils. She suggested that a policy be put in
place regarding this issue. She also suggested some type of rubric to decide at what point the
threshold has been met for requiring a project EIR versus a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND).
She referred to the decision the Council made on the MND for the Cherry Creek project and pointed
out that the Council had agreed that the language could be amended in the MND regarding the
description of the subject properties. She noted that the reason to amend the MND would be to
recirculate it for public review and she questioned why it would be amended if the Planning
Commission was not going to discuss it and it was not going to be recirculated.
17. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Ferrara adjourned the meeting at11 :35 p.m.
ATTEST:
{Approved at CC Mtg [H<!-20e4>I