Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout PC Minutes 07-12-00CITY OFATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Special Meeting July 12, 2000 — 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Eddings called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and let the Pledge of Allegiance ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Eddings, Bentz, Fonzi, Kelley, and Norton. Absent: Commissioners Carden and Jeanes Staff: Community & Economic Development Director Paul Saldana, Principal Planner Warren Frace, Assistant Planner Jamie Heltsley, and Recording Secretary Pat Hicks. PUBLIC COMMENT NONE CONSENT CALENDAR NONE PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. ATASCADERO DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION PLAN (General Plan Amendment 99004, Zone Change 2000-0003); Atascadero Redevelopment Agency The project includes the adoption of a General Plan Amendment repealing the existing Downtown land use description and the Downtown Master Plan Element. The project proposes the adoption of a new General Plan Downtown land use description and the adoption of design guidelines for future development in the Downtown Area. The adoption of a Downtown Revitalization Plan independent of the General Plan will also be considered. The project also includes an amendment to the Official City Zoning Map consolidating the five existing zoning districts in the Downtown into two zoning districts, Downtown Commercial and Downtown Office. The existing Downtown M071200.doc 06/17/14 City of Atascadero Planning Commission Minutes Special Meeting July 12, 2000 Page 2 of 8 Zoning District text will be repealed and replaced with a new zoning district code text for the Downtown Commercial and Downtown Office districts. The uses in the downtown will remain relatively unchanged, the areas in which they are allowed and the permit requirements for the uses will be modified. The project will also amend the City's Sign Ordinance for Downtown Uses. PROJECT LOCATION: The Downtown Area is generally bounded by Highway 101, Highway 41, Bajada Avenue, and Rosario Avenue. PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: The proposed project is consistent with the Program EIR adopted for the Atascadero Redevelopment Plan, based on the findings of the initial study a Negative Declaration is proposed for the project consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act. Staff Recommendations: 1. Adopt Resolution No. PC 2000-040 recommending adoption of a Negative Declaration; and, 2. Adopt Resolution No. PC 2000-041 recommending approval of general plan amendment 99004 to (1) repeal the Atascadero Downtown Master Plan, (2) amend the general plan land use diagram, (3) adopt a downtown land use designation and (4) adopt the Downtown Design Guidelines. 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC 2000-042 recommending approval of Zone Change 2000-0003 to (1) repeal Article 13 through 16 and Article 22 through 23 of Title 9, (2) amend the Official Zoning Map, (3) amend the Zoning Regulations text to implement the Downtown designation of the General Plan, and (4) repeal and replace section 9-15.0005 (b) of the Sign Regulations. 4. Adopt Resolution No. PC 2000-043 recommending adoption of the Downtown Revitalization Plan. Community & Economic Development Director Paul Saldana, Principal Planner Warren Frace, and Assistant Planner Jamie Heltsley provided the staff report and answered questions of the Commission. Commissioner Eddings inquired if there had been any interaction with the utility companies to underground the lines in the area. Director Saldana answered that there was not. Commissioner Eddings asked if any studies had been done on the infrastructure of the area that would indicate current infrastructures could handle the projected changes in the area. Director Saldana responded that there hadn't been any specific studies in terms of the downtown area, but those issues will be looked at in the overall General Plan Update. City of Atascadero Planning Commission Minutes Special Meeting July 12, 2000 Page 3 of 8 Commissioner Kelley inquired about the parking spaces currently available and what parking provisions would be needed to accommodate the expected growth in the downtown area. Director Saldana indicated that parking would be considered on a case- by-case basis depending on the project. This will be a beginning; however, over the course of the next several months, they will be looking at a more comprehensive parking program based on the type of businesses that will be coming into the downtown area. Commissioner Fonzi asked if the police and fire departments have reviewed the plan, and if so, what was their response to the use of the second and third floors of the building as residential. Director Saldana stated that to date they have not received any comments regarding that issue. In terms of fire regulations, buildings will be required to meet all the uniform building codes and occupancy separation requirements. Commissioner Kelley questioned whether home occupations will be permitted on the first floor or are they restricted to the second and third floors of buildings. Assistant Planner Heltsley responded that the definition of "home occupation" in the zoning ordinance refers to using a home as an office; this would be done on the second or third floors. Use of the first floor will fall under the "live -work" use that has been put into the ordinance. Under this concept, uses such as artisan shops with a shop at the front of the store and a residence at the back would qualify for first floor usage. Commissioner Norton questioned whether the school district has seen the plan, given that they must relocate the junior high school, and have they made any comments regarding their desire to relocate in the future. Director Saldana referred to the comment the interim superintendent had made in the newspaper that they would like to see the Junior High move out of downtown and that moving the Junior High school has been in the district's plan for some time. Commissioner Fonzi asked how this plan would impact the adult store, and would that be an allowable use within the district. Director Saldana responded that the adult business is regulated by a different section of the municipal code, and as no changes are proposed, they will remain a nonconforming use. Commissioner Kelley inquired if there could be a pre -planning review committee that would involve citizens from the town participating in the planning aspects of the buildings that will be going in downtown. Director Saldana responded that they have encouraged pre -application review of projects, and that the design guidelines are fairly well detailed and descriptive so that any of the planners can easily compare a project to the guidelines and the revitalization plans. Additionally, part of the Main Street organization will include subcommittees that will be working to help promote the downtown area and restructure the economy. One of the committees formed will be a design committee made up of professionals, i.e., architects and others in the community that would give advice to the potential investors and help them implement the guidelines. City of Atascadero Planning Commission Minutes Special Meeting July 12, 2000 Page 4 of 8 PUBLIC COMMENT Joan O'Keefe (9985 Old Morro Road East) submitted a letter to the Planning Commissioners that presented eight questions she has regarding the proposed revitalization plan. (Attachment 1) Marjorie Mackie stated that the lot on the corner of Bajada and Rosario Avenue was hers, and it is currently multiple zoned allowing for five units. She does not wish to build units on it, and she does not want to be told that she is not using it to its best advantage. She is speaking up now so that her comments will be on record for the future. Livia Kellerman (5463 Honda) addressed the Commission stating that the plan before them is not just a plan to revitalize the downtown, but a different way of thinking about space, buildings, people, and businesses. She is personally very excited about the downtown revitalization, and she would like to see the downtown remain pedestrian friendly. Additionally, she would like to see some commitment to saving trees and planning the development of the area to maintain its natural feeling. She is also concerned about allowing three-story buildings where there are currently one-story homes. She would like to see the Commission put in safeguards which might allow three-story buildings only on El Camino and Traffic Way while keeping an overall design style for the buildings reflective of their 1920's or California cottage origins. Mike Zappas (8189 San Dimas Lane) stated that his main concern is the size of the expenditure that will be needed to move the Junior High school. He feels that money could be better utilized to further the revitalization goals. Fred Frank (3615 Ardilla Avenue) commended the staff and consultants in putting together an excellent start to the downtown revitalization process. He feels consideration has been given to the traffic issues in the downtown providing on -street parking as well as parking structures. He is in favor of a higher density, mixed use in the downtown. He also feels the Junior High school should be moved to make way for businesses and would like to see the 1920's atmosphere remain in the downtown. Ben Hoff (North Jefferson Street, Nashville, Indiana — P.O. Box 928, Atascadero) stated that his family owns property in Atascadero. In the past, he has been unable to develop his properties as he would like due to parking issues with the City. However, with the new revitalization plan, parking restrictions have been eased making this no longer an issue in development of downtown properties. He feels there are now three property classifications including a subgroup of downtown commercial. That subgroup (outlined as the green portion at the bottom of the map) is limited to one story 18 feet in height. Mr. Hoff has a building currently being used as North County Christian School Thrift Store, which is over 18 feet in height, and according to the new standards, a case could be made that if he was to redevelop that particular building, it would have to come into conformity with the height requirement which is 18 feet. This is one of the few original Colony buildings still in existence, built between 1916 and 1920. He suggests that the planners come up with a list of Colony era buildings and attempt to keep the unique City of Atascadero Planning Commission Minutes Special Meeting July 12, 2000 Page 5 of 8 history of the town by maintaining those historical buildings. He feels that the restriction to one story for the buildings between Atascadero Creek and Jack in the Box is a disservice to the property owners in that area and that it hinders their ability to compete effectively. He asks that if building height is to be limited to 18 feet in this area that there be the option for a variance to bring it before the City Council for review. Assistant Planner Heltsley addressed the height limitations in this area and stated that they were placed in the plan through a recommendation by the steering committee that felt the consensus within the community was to have a view of the Sunken Gardens and City Hall from the freeway. The height limitation does not apply to currently existing buildings. Cindy Dugar (5930 El Camino Real) has a business in the downtown and feels the simplicity of life in Atascadero is being lost. She feels that the revitalization plan will take away the lifestyle she moved to the area to enjoy. Mike Lucas (8315 Atascadero Avenue) stated that it was his understanding that the BIA would be disbanded in favor of the Main Street program. He asked if the BIA assessment paid by owners within the BIA area will be dropped or will those business owners continue to pay the assessment. Chris Bell (7150 Portola Road) stated that he owns a duplex across from the Fire Department and questioned what would happen with the zoning change should he choose to fix it up now leaving it as a duplex. Would there be any worth in that or would he have to tear it down and replace the duplex with a three-story structure to realize any value in his property. Chairman Carden closed the Public Comment period. Director Saldana answered the questions as follows: 1. Streamlining of permit process: Streamlining the permit process is recommended in the downtown revitalization area, and the concept is that those projects slated for the downtown would go to the top of the list and be considered first. Historically, the downtown area has been the most restricted and regulated area to develop in the community. 2. Economic restructuring and consolidating of property: This is a project that would be undertaken by a public body and would require a public hearing. 3. Redevelopment process: All property owners were required to be notified by mail and notification was provided for all town hall meetings through mailings and advertisements in the local newspaper. 4. Local service clubs: A correction will be made to include the Atascadero Homeowners Association in the revitalization process. 5. Use of trees: This is a recommendation by the steering committee to the City Council not a project. That project would have to be designed and go out to bid. City of Atascadero Planning Commission Minutes Special Meeting July 12, 2000 Page 6 of 8 The native tree ordinance strongly encourages the City to use native varieties of trees on all such projects. 6. Circulation along creek area and parking for Stadium Park: These issues are contained in the conceptual plan. This was a broad -brush approach by the steering committee and they did not get into particulars about ownerships, easements, etc. 7. Bajada and Rosario: This area was not included in the downtown revitalization plan as it includes residentially zoned properties. 8. Pedestrian friendly area and protection of green space and trees: These items are a component of the revitalization plan, which encourages pedestrian usage. The row of trees through the junior high school property are contained in one of the historical reports on facilities and other features developed by E.G. Lewis, and that row of trees will be protected. 9. Height restrictions in the downtown: The steering committee vision was to open up the area to be visible to the downtown corridor from the freeway. The Commission has, through the zoning ordinance, the ability by conditional use permit to vary the height of buildings. 10. Historical Buildings: The City has a listing of some of the historical buildings downtown. A key component of the Main Street Program is the preservation of the historical nature of the buildings that are currently in the downtown revitalization area. 11. Thrift Stores: Thrift stores are not separated out in the zoning ordinance from any other types of general merchandise stores, which includes new and used merchandise. General merchandising is a permitted use in the downtown commercial zone. 12. Dissolving the BIA: Only the existing organization will be dissolved, the responsibility for advising the City on improvements in the downtown will be shifted to the Main Street organization. There is no recommendation to eliminate the BIA as a revenue -generating district. Those funds generated by the BIA will be returned to the downtown area for use as directed by the downtown businesses and property owners. 13. Junior High: The plan does not advocate that any entity in particular should move the Junior High. It contemplates the future vision of the downtown revitalization effort without the Junior High where it is presently located. Moving the Junior High from the downtown has been part of the school district strategy; however, there is no money dedicated or earmarked as a result of this plan toward that effort. The steering committee envisioned the utilization of the existing Junior High buildings for cultural and performing arts and community gathering places, not large-scale retail. 14. Boundaries of BIA: All of the boundaries of the BIA are contained in the ordinance that enacted that district, but they are not necessarily the same boundaries contained in the current revitalization plan. The Planning Department is looking at discrepancies in the two maps to ensure that the boundaries are correct. 15. Duplexes: Most residential properties in the downtown area are nonconforming uses so they do have some protection in the zoning ordinance to do renovations and limited expansions. The Redevelopment Agency is prohibited from exercising its use of eminent domain on any property zoned or used for residential purposes. City of Atascadero Planning Commission Minutes Special Meeting July 12, 2000 Page 7 of 8 MOTION: By Commissioner Kelley and seconded by Commissioner Bentz to adopt Resolution No. PC 2000-040 recommending adoption of a Negative Declaration; and, Adopt Resolution No. PC 2000-041 recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 99004 to (1) repeal the Atascadero Downtown Master Plan, (2) amend the general plan land use diagram, (3) adopt a downtown land use designation, and (4) adopt the Downtown Design Guidelines. Adopt Resolution No. PC 2000-042 recommending approval of Zone Change 2000-0003 to (1) repeal Article 13 through 16 and Article 22 through 23 of Title 9, (2) amend the Official Zoning Map, (3) amend the Zoning Regulations text to implement the Downtown designation of the General Plan, and (4) repeal and replace section 9-15.0005 (b) of the Sign Regulations. Adopt Resolution No. PC 2000-043 recommending adoption of the Downtown Revitalization Plan incorporating the errata of corrections as submitted by the staff at the start of the meeting. AYES: Commissioner Kelley, Bentz, Norton, Fonzi, and Chairman Eddings NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS Director Saldana indicated that there would be another round of community meetings for the General Plan update. Options and issues raised will be brought back to a joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission at the end of August. There will be a website which should be on-line on Monday at www. future. atascadero.org. Regular updates and information about the General Plan update process will be available at this site. City of Atascadero Planning Commission Minutes COMMISSIONER COMMENTS & REPORT Special Meeting July 12, 2000 Page 8 of 8 Commissioner Fonzi inquired if there is an email address where the public could send their comments regarding the General Plan. Director Saldana stated that the address is generalplan@ataseadero.org. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Eddings adjourned the meeting at 8:22 p.m. to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled for August 1, 2000. MEETING RECORDED BY AND MINUTES PREPARED BY: Grace Pucci, Recording Secretary Attachments: 1) Joan O'Keefe letter dated 7-12-00 2) Staff Errata