Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 03-02-04CITY OFATASCADER 0 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting March 21 2004 — 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Kelley called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and Commissioner Beraud led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Beraud, Fonzi, Peterson, Porter, Jones and Chairperson Kelley Absent: Commissioner O'Keefe Staff Present: Community Development Director Warren Frace, City Engineer Steve Kahn, Planning Services Manager Steve McHarris, Associate Civil Engineer Jeff van den Eikhof, Associate Planner Kerry Margason, Assistant Planner Lisa Wilkinson and Recording Secretary Grace Pucci. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: By Commissioner Fonzi and seconded by Commissioner Beraud to approve the agenda. AYES: Commissioners Fonzi, Beraud, Peterson, Porter, Jones and Chairperson Kelley NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Motion passed 6:0 by a roll -call vote. Chairperson Kelley suggested changing the order of the agenda placing Items # 3 and 4 ahead of the Tree Ordinance Discussion (Item #2). PUBLIC COMMENT Eric Greening questioned the process for changing the agenda. Chairperson Kelley closed the Public Comment period. MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Jones and seconded by Commissioner Fonzi to approve the amended agenda. AYES: Commissioners Fonzi, Beraud, Peterson, Porter, Jones and Chairperson Kelley NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Motion passed 6:0 by a roll -call vote. PUBLIC COMMENT None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON FEBRUARY 17, 2004. MOTION: By Commissioner Beraud and seconded by Vice Chairperson Jones to approve the Consent Calendar. AYES: Commissioners Beraud, Peterson, Fonzi, Jones and Chairperson Kelley NOES: None ABSTAIN: Commissioner Porter Motion passed 5:0 by a roll -call vote. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2003-0011; ZONE CHANGE 2003-0076, 5245/5265 EL CAMINO REAL (K-JONS) Applicant: Stan Sherwin, 5265 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422, 466-7248 Project Title: General Plan Amendment 2003-0011; Zone Change 2003-0076, 5245/5265 El Camino Real (K-Jons) Project 5245/5265 El Camino Real (K-Jons), Atascadero CA 93422 Location: Project The proposed project consists of an application for a General Plan Amendment from General Description: Commercial (GC) to Medium -Density Residential (MDR) and from Commercial Retail (CR) to Residential Multi -Family -10 (RMF -10) Zoning District. The proposal is associated with a previously approved 1600 square foot residential duplex building with parking and landscaping on 0.15 acres on an existing 0.46 acre commercial site. General Plan Designation: General Commercial (GC) Zoning District: Commercial Retail (CR) Proposed Certified Mitigated Negative Declaration 2002-0044 Addendum Environmental Determination: Planning Services Manager Steve McHarris provided the staff report and answered questions of the Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT Stan Sherwin, 6649 San Gabriel Road, Applicant, briefly discussed the project. Joanne Main, 4980 San Gabriel Road, stated the Chamber of Commerce supports this project and the mixed use on this site. Maxwell Keith stated he lives next to the applicant's site and he is in support of the project. Chairperson Kelley closed the Public Comment period. Steve McHarris stated that staff had made a minor change to Zone Change Map 2003-0076 and explained the change. MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Jones and seconded by Commissioner Porter to adopt Resolution No. PC 2004-0021 recommending that the City Council recertify Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2002-0044; and adopt Resolution No. PC 2004-0022 recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment 2003-0011 based on findings; and, adopt Resolution No. PC 2004- 0023 recommending that the City Council introduce an ordinance for first reading to approve Zone Change 2003-0076 based on findings and subject to the presentation from staff regarding the Zone Change Map. AYES: Commissioners Porter, Beraud, Peterson, Fonzi, Jones and Chairperson Kelley NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Motion passed 6:0 by a roll -call vote. 3. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2003-0046; 9055 LA CANADA (NELSON) Applicant: Nolan Nelson, 9055 La Canada, Atascadero, CA 93422 805-466-7891 Project Title: Tentative Parcel Map 2003-0046 Project 9055 La Canada, Atascadero, CA 93422, San Luis Obispo County Location: APN 050-021-028 Project A proposed subdivision of an existing 7.82 gross acre lot into two individual parcels of 3.91 Description: gross acres each. The site is currently developed with a single-family residence that will be confined to one lot to allow the new lot to be developed with a single-family residence. The parcels are moderately to steeply sloped and contain vegetation and native oak trees. Onsite septic will serve the property and water is available from Atascadero Mutual Water Company. General Plan Designation: Residential Suburban (RS) Zoning District: Rural Estate (RE) Based on the initial study prepared for the project, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is Proposed proposed. The proposed Negative Declaration is available for public review through March Environmental 2, 2004 at 6905 El Camino Real, Suite 6, Community Development Department, from 8:00 Determination: a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Associate Planner Kerry Margason provided the staff report and answered questions of the Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT Nolan Nelson, 9055 La Canada, Applicant, spoke about the project, the protection of the trees on the site and asked the Commission to approve the project. Chip Tamagni, arborist, spoke about the site and impacts to the trees. Chairperson Kelley closed the Public Comment period. MOTION: By Commissioner Fonzi and seconded by Commissioner Peterson to adopt Resolution No. PC 2003-0116, certifying the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration 2003-0050 and approving Tentative Parcel Map 2003-0046, a request to subdivide two parcels totaling 7.82 acres into two parcels of 4.62 and 3.60 acres, gross, based on findings and subject to conditions. AYES: Commissioners Fonzi, Peterson, Beraud, Porter, Jones and Chairperson Kelley. NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Motion passed 6:0 by a roll -call vote. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS 4. TREE ORDINANCE DISCUSSION Community Development Director Warren Frace stated that this discussion would give the Commission the opportunity to discuss concerns and give staff feedback. PUBLIC COMMENT Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, stated it was his opinion that the tree ordinance is generally working well. He expressed some concerns including: 1) in densely covered difficult building sites where large numbers of trees are being removed for single family residences, he would rather see payment of mitigation fees than replanting, those fees should be used for habitat protection, and 2) the consequences of taking out smaller trees that have a longer lifespan. George Molina expressed his opinion that it was important to look at the Tree Ordinance and the way it effects the economics of building a house. He stated that staff could be trusted to make decisions, and public hearings were not necessary and inefficient. He would like to see a reduction in the time frame to get permits. Jean Sterns, 5700 Olmeda Avenue, disagreed with the last comments. She is against cutting down trees to put in more houses and expressed concern regarding the height of buildings and how high buildings cut off mountain views. Chip Tamagni, 2900 Monterey Road, arborist, indicated that he has done many tree protection plans and he sees the greatest problem as being monitoring during construction. He would like to see more teeth in the ordinance regarding monitoring and the responsibility of owners and developers to insure their contractors follow the ordinance and tree protection plans. Steven Alvarez, 1615 Lupin Lane, arborist, stated he tries to abide by the high standards of the Tree Ordinance. The problems he sees is the post -construction landscaping planned around trees and feels the focus must be on the value of native trees. The irrigation going up against tree trunks and drip lines is drowning the trees and depleting oxygen. He would like to see less of a focus on older trees and greater consideration given to younger treeswe should be looking at reforestation. Jean Sterns related incidents she has seen where roots have been cut while digging a trench, she would like to see trees saved properly. Chairperson Kelley closed the Public Comment period. Commissioner Beraud stated that the Tree Ordinance does a good job overall. She sees a lot of problems with monitoring and would like to see a better system including penalties and incentives for following the Tree Ordinance. Total tree coverage losses are important, especially the removal of younger trees. Regarding use of the mitigation fees, she would like to see the City be proactive in obtaining open space. Landscape plans must be appropriate to the trees left on site Commissioner Porter indicated that he has a problem with the current fee schedule. He has a hard time requiring applicants to pay mitigation trees for removal of trees that pose a hazard to the public, there should be some avenue in the Tree Ordinance that would allow the Planning Commission or the City Council to waive these fees if necessary. He would like to see a 10% variance rule once a project is approved that would allow the Community Development Director or staff to approve subsequent tree removals. Vice Chairperson Jones agreed with need to protect younger trees. He would like to see the City Council encourage the use of mitigation funds for easements for habitat protection. The Ordinance should be more efficient and allow staff to make some of the decisions. He is disturbed by requiring the applicant to pay into the mitigation fund when there is a hazardous situation or no room to plant more trees. The Commission should be able to waive fees when appropriate. Commissioner Fonzi expressed concern with charging applicants to remove dead trees, as these are being removed for the public good. She questioned why there are different standards for replacement and fees in different areas. There does not seem to be any consistency, she would like the fees to be uniform. Table 8-A in the Tree Ordinance is confusing and she would like staff to look into it. She suggested reevaluating the native tree species in the Tree Ordinance, and feels Digger Pines should be considered native trees and that Elm trees should be protected in Atascadero. Staff should have more flexibility in determining tree removal—should have a certain percentage. She would like staff to review the Ordinance and let the Commission know if there are superfluous areas in the ordinance. Commissioner Fonzi has concerns with vineyards going in and the subsequent removal of all the trees on the site. This is not covered under the Ordinance. There is no uniformity to tree protection plans and arborist reports, and guidelines are necessary so arborists know what to expect. There should be more monitoring during the construction process and penalties where abuses occur. Chairperson Kelley would like to see mitigation fees used when tree removal on packed lots takes place. The Ordinance should be made more user friendly, staff can make some decisions on tree removals; 10% change is acceptable. He has a problem with charging for removal of dead trees. Chairperson Kelley would like the Planning Commission to have the ability to adjust some of the fees especially with dead or hazardous trees. If a tree is deemed hazardous staff should be able to deal with that immediately. He stated that a tree on a residential lot is the same as a tree on a commercial lot and should be treated the same with the same fee structure. Monitoring tree protection plans are difficult, and should be left to the arborist. A penalty plan is good; perhaps institute a phased system of penalties. Mitigation fees can be put back into easements and protection of trees as well as an education program for anyone coming in for tree removals. A uniform application/checklist would be good. The Fire Department should have input into the Ordinance especially in mountainous areas. Where tree removals are necessary for fire protection no fees should be involved. The Ordinance seems to address developers only; it should treat everyone equally. Commissioner Beraud stated she was afraid of the 10% staff approval and feels it could lead to sloppy tree protection. Chairperson Kelley indicated that if someone does make an attempt to try to save a tree but it must be taken down, there should be some way to waive the fee. Chip Tamagni addressed the issue of taking down hazardous trees without permits. There is an approved, standardized hazardous tree evaluation form. He stated that those who want to live around oak trees must assume some degree of risk. Some threshold of hazard to cause trees to come down must be considered. Jerry Clay reminded those present that nature has planted the trees. The perception is that if we don't take care of the trees, nothing will happen but trees do regenerate themselves and nature takes care of the trees. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS & REPORTS None DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director Frace reminded the Commissioners of the planning conference at the end of March. Upcoming agendas were reviewed and a brief report was given on the status of the homeless shelter. ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Kelley adjourned the meeting at 8:13 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission on March 16, 2004. MEETING RECORDED AND MINUTES PREPARED BY: Grace Pucci, Recording Secretary Adopted 3/16/04 \\Cityhall\CDvlpmnt\— PC Minutes\PC Minutes 04\PC Minutes. 03-02-04.gp.doc