Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-11-2015 PC MinutesSAN LUIS OBISPO PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 11, 2015 CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Commissioners Hemalata Dandekar, John Fowler, Ronald Malak, William Riggs, Vice - Chairperson Michael Multari, and Chairperson John Larson Absent: Commissioner Draze Staff: Deputy Community Development Director Doug Davidson, Senior Planner Phil Dunsmore, Associate Planner Marcus Carloni, Supervising Civil Engineer Hal Hannula, Assistant City Attorney Jon Ansolabehere, and Recording Secretary Erica Inderlied ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented. MINUTES: Minutes of December 10, 2014, and January 14, 2015, were approved as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON - AGENDA ITEMS: There were no comments from the public. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. 2120 Santa Barbara Avenue. USE - 0916 -2015: Review of a mixed -use project with 69 multi - family units and 3,000 square feet of retail space with a categorical exemption from CEQA; C -S -H zone; Covelop Management, Inc., applicant. (Phil Dunsmore) Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, recommending adoption of a resolution allowing approval of the mixed -use project based on findings and subject to conditions which he outlined. In response to inquiry from Vice -Chair Multari, Senior Planner Dunsmore clarified that the extent of the Emily Street improvements is still under discussion but details will be presented to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) for its hearing of the project and that the site's northern driveway is shared with Miner's Hardware but no shared parking exists. In response to inquiry from Commr. Fowler, Senior Planner Dunsmore clarified that the Miner's Hardware property to the north of the project site is party to a parcel map that must be recorded before the Junction project moves forward, that access to the Miner's Hardware property would not be interrupted during construction of the junction, and that the ARC is familiar with the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC)'s project recommendations. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 2015 Page 2 In response to inquiry from Commr. Malak, Senior Planner Dunsmore clarified that, Emily Street improvements notwithstanding, the project will have front and rear access points, and that each time a new project is analyzed by staff, the cumulative environmental and traffic impacts of recent projects are considered. In response to inquiry from Commr. Dandekar, Senior Planner Dunsmore clarified that Miner's Hardware will continue to utilize a driveway connecting to High Street. Steve Rigor, Arris Studio Architects, applicant representative, provided a presentation and summarized modifications made to the proposal following CHC review; noted the applicants' commitment to minimize disruptions impacting Miner's Hardware. In response to inquiry from Vice -Chair Multari, Rigor clarified that Miner's Hardware will relocate its storage currently located upon the proposed project site; noted that portions of Roundhouse Street may be paved to provide access. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Lea Brooks, SLO, stated that her family owns two businesses adjacent to the project site; expressed concern about competition for parking between residential and commercial uses, and difficulty for cyclists and pedestrians crossing Santa Barbara Street. Myron Amerine, SLO, voiced support for the project's bicycle accommodations, noted concern about providing adequate bicycle connectivity to the north and south of the site. There were no further comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: In response to inquiry from Commr. Malak, Senior Planner Dunsmore clarified that the project did not meet the threshold for requiring a traffic study. Malak opined that, while the project is intended as affordable workforce housing, the impacts of other types of tenants may not be controllable; commented that the project meets community needs, but noted concern that transportation "what -ifs" have not been vetted. Commr. Malak stated a desire to continue the project to avoid extensive conditioning and a mysterious outcome. Commr. Riggs commented that Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) policies adequately address the issue of small projects without traffic studies creating cumulative impacts; noted that there is a difference between induced demand and standard trip generation calculation. Riggs voiced concern about the lack of a complete project proposal; noted apparent zoning and LUCE inconsistencies, particularly with regard to parking and circulation; cautioned that traffic problems will persist unless the City aggressively discourages traditional transportation and makes non - motorized transportation interfaces prominent; suggested that a class II bike line should exist along Santa Barbara Street. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 2015 Page 3 Vice -Chair Multari voiced support for high- density housing in the proposed location surrounded by similar uses; stated that the CHC and ARC should render the architectural determinations. Multari noted concern about the lack of project conditions requiring street improvements; suggested that the connection of Emily and High Streets should be required to aid in the daily mobility of project residents and that overflow parking from Miner's and the Junction could be accommodated by a shared easement; opined that project circulation does not appear to comply with the LUCE. In response to inquiry from Commr. Fowler, Senior Planner Dunsmore summarized planned improvements including Santa Barbara Street frontage, Emily Street, and a bike path to the east of the project site, the location of which is undetermined due to complications relating to railroad right -of -way acquisition. Dunsmore noted a condition prepared by staff relating to the bike path, should the Commission wish to consider it. Supervising Civil Engineer Hannula clarified that other businesses such as Sears with Emily Street frontage may need to contribute to the construction of curb, gutter and sidewalk, and that Emily Street improvements will be constructed between the project site and Roundhouse Street regardless. In response to inquiry from Vice -Chair Multari, Hannula stated that, with guidance from the Railroad District Plan and LUCE, the Public Works Department is evaluating circulation designs above and beyond standard street improvements. Multari noted a desire to see a multi -modal Emily Street plan with connections to High and Roundhouse Streets; noted that no nearby transit stop exists; suggested that differentiation be made between residential and commercial driveways along Santa Barbara Street. Commr. Dandekar expressed desire to be presented the "big picture" of all traffic flows impacting the site; noted that complicated traffic flows may deter Miner's patrons. Dandekar voiced support for the architectural style; suggested that it would be more feasible to acquire bike path right -of -way from Miner's than from Union Pacific. Chair Larson inquired about the trajectory of Emily Street on the south side of its intersection with Roundhouse, noted his lack of readiness of approve a project without final public improvement plans and or sufficient alignment with LUCE policies. Commr. Fowler voiced general approval for the proposed use in this location; noted desire for more information before action, including a reduced parking plan. Rachel Kovesdi, consultant, asked for clarification as to the Commission's stance on the proposed parking. Chair Larson stated that the Commission supports relaxed parking standards, and shifting emphasis away from cars. Commr. Riggs clarified that a shared parking agreement and a reduction in parking need not be mutually exclusive. There were no further comments made from the Commission. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 2015 Page 4 On motion by Vice -Chair Multari, seconded by Commr. Malak, to continue the item to April 22, 2015, to allow staff to return with additional project details including refined Emily Street improvements, a bike path connecting the project to the north and south per the City's Bicycle Plan, and enhanced pedestrian and bicycle improvements. AYES: Commrs. Dandekar, Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, and Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Commr. Draze The motion passed on a 6:0 vote. The Commission recessed at 7:36 p.m., and reconvened at 7:40 p.m. 2. 110, 120, 130, and 140 Grand Avenue. U 141 -14: Request to remodel existing residential buildings to be used as satellite high school classrooms for the SLO Classical Academy located across Grand Avenue from the project site. Parking is to be located offsite at the SLO Classical Academy site (115 Grand Avenue). Project includes a categorical exemption from CEQA; SLO Classical Academy, applicant. (Marcus Carloni) Marcus Carloni, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending adoption of a draft resolution denying the use permit due to inconsistency with General Plan policy, based on findings which he outlined. He noted that, should the Commission wish to approve the project, it could consider adopting the alternative resolution prepared by staff, setting forth an alternative interpretation of General Plan Policy 2.2.1, which requires that any housing units eliminated by a project must be replaced elsewhere. In response to inquiry from Chair Larson, Associate Planner Carloni confirmed that the structures are vacant, and that the proposed vehicle access to the project site will be an accessible parking space between 120 and 130 Grand Avenue. In response to Commr. Riggs, Associate Planner Carloni stated that students will be dropped off at the main campus to the west; Supervising Civil Engineer Hannula stated that curb ramps will be required at both ends of the cross walk across Grand Avenue, at the Slack Street intersection. In response to inquiry from Commr. Fowler, Associate Planner Carloni stated that, due to the low intensity of the school use, the structures could be converted back to residential uses in the future. Deputy Community Development Director Davidson clarified that no contingency for a return to residential uses is factored into the proposal. Chair Larson commented that the vacancy of the structures could potentially render moot the dilemma of General Plan Policy 2.2.1, which deals with "existing dwellings." Tim Ronda, SLO, project architect, representing San Luis Obispo Classical Academy (SLOCA), urged the Commission to approve the project based on its merit and broad community support, utilizing the alternative resolution prepared by staff. In response to inquiry from Chair Larson, Mr. Ronda stated that approximately 34 students would be in Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 2015 Page 5 attendance at the site initially, and remain there during the day; in response to Vice - Chair Multari, Mr. Ronda stated that the site lease runs for 4 years beginning July 2014, with two 2 -year extension options. In response to inquiry from Commrs. Riggs and Malak, Mr. Ronda clarified that the relocation of students to the new facilities would create an incremental increase of approximately 60 students maximum over time. In response to inquiry from Commr. Riggs, Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere confirmed that, as the Cal Poly Corporation is not a state entity, they are subject to local zoning regulations. Associate Planner Carloni clarified that the Commission would need to condition the project explicitly, should it wish to limit the number of occupants; noted that Condition 11 stipulates that the Community Development Director will evaluate whether a change in use is significant enough to require a new use permit. Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere stated that the approved use would run with the land; clarified that a new use permit would need to be obtained for a change to another use that is not consistent with the use permit or as required by Zoning Regulations Table 9, but not for a return to residential use. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Bryan Ridley, SLOCA parent and local Architect, urged the Commission to approve the project via alternate findings; commented that SLOCA is growing and in need of space, and that morning traffic at Slack and Grand is only moderate. Commr. Dandekar left the meeting at 8:26 p.m. Sandra Rowley, SLO, voiced support for granting the use permit but noted concern that allowing non - residential uses may set a precedent that could be problematic in the future. Linda White, SLO, representing the Monterey Heights neighborhood, asked the Commission for assurance that the project would be conditioned for occupancy by SLOCA only. Sarah Shotwell, SLOCA teacher, SLO, commented that the high school students deserve more dedicated space; urged the Commission to approve the project. Susie Theule, SLOCA Executive Director, commented that the growing school population needs a home; read excerpts from a recent article in The Atlantic about the Academy. Sarah Weinschenk, SLOCA teacher, spoke in support of the project; summarized a recent speaking engagement by author Gary Schmidt. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 2015 Page 6 Jill Talley, SLOCA parent, summarized the history of SLOCA; spoke in support of the project. Kris Vardis, Pismo Beach, spoke in support of the project; noted low impacts to the community; urged support for the alternative findings. Dan Dow, SLOCA parent, Templeton, spoke in support of the school, encouraged support for alternative findings for approval. There were no further comments from the public. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commr. Riggs noted no apparent problems with the land use; noted concern about the increase in traffic over time, and whether it is accurately accounted for by proposed traffic impact fees; opined that high school students will risk crossing Grand Avenue mid -block to reach the site; suggested a mid -block crosswalk with beacons as a condition. Vice -Chair Multari clarified for the public that the merit of SLOCA is not a factor in the Commission's deliberation; voiced support for the use based on alternative findings, with added conditions that a change in lessee shall trigger an amendment to the permit, and that the use permit shall expire concurrent with the lease. Multari noted desire for more traffic control measures mid -block at Hays Street. Commr. Fowler opined that Mission College Preparatory High School students cross streets with little trouble; stated that crosswalk beacons would significantly increase cost for applicants; voiced support for limiting the use permit to this lessee only. In response to Commrs. Malak and Larson, staff confirmed that no new structures are proposed, and that Condition 16, relating to new structures, is standard language from the Public Works Department; Malak suggested striking the condition. Malak opined that speed tables would be more appropriate than a crosswalk with lights, and that a different use for the property might better benefit the community. Commr. Riggs clarified that rapid rectangular flashing beacons (RRFBs) are much more cost effective for crosswalks than in- ground flashers. Chair Larson noted no problem with interpreting General Plan Policy 2.2.1 in favor of the project; opined that in reality, parents will probably drop students off while stuck in traffic along Grand Avenue, or curbside at the project site, rather than at the designated main campus drop off; concurred that, students may cross the street mid -block at Hays. In response to inquiry from Commr. Riggs, Assistant City Attorney Ansolabehere clarified that traffic impact fee calculations are complex, and that they are too tightly regulated for the Commission to impose them subjectively in an effort to offset the potential cost of mid -block pedestrian crossing associated with the project. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 2015 Page 7 Commr. Fowler opined that students will actually cross the street where parents and faculty dictate; inquired as to why traffic fees apply if students are already at the school; Commr. Riggs responded that a traffic analysis is attendant to the change in use. In response to Commission inquiry, Associate Planner Carloni and Supervising Civil Engineer Hannula confirmed that traffic impact fees are required by code, and have been calculated in the $15,000 — $20,000 range. In response to comment from Chair Larson, Vice -Chair Multari clarified that the existing condition related to traffic and pedestrian control plans relates only to the Encroachment Permit; suggested an additional condition requiring a plan for the path of travel from the drop off point to Hays Street. Commr. Riggs noted for the record his desire to have staff explore whether a mid -block crossing can be more safely facilitated. There were no further comments from the Commission. On motion by Commr. Multari, seconded by Commr. Fowler, to approve the project utilizing the resolution set forth in staff's Alternative 1, with conditions amended as follows: 11. The Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director for compliance with conditions of approval, or to determine whether a modification of the Use Permit is necessary upon significant change to the business as represented in the application materials and the Planning Commission Agenda Report and attachments dated March 11, 2015. Approval shall be subject to review on August 1 2022 unless extended by an amendment to the use permit. 14. Traffic impact fees are required and shall be paid as re uired b code prior to the issuance of a building permit for this development. • (Remove) ProjeGtS inVOlViRg th- - a - - •a ments be installed or existing - _�. • 16. (Add new condition 16) A pedestrian safety plan shall be developed. subject to approval by the Public Works Director, considering the possibility of a block crossing crossin between the main campus student dro off area and Hays Rtrpint AYES: Commrs. Fowler, Larson, Malak, Multari, and Riggs NOES: None RECUSED: None ABSENT: Commrs. Dandekar and Draze The motion passed on a 5:0 vote Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 2015 Page 8 COMMENT AND DISCUSSION: 3. Staff a. Agenda Forecast Deputy Community Development Director Davidson provided a summary of upcoming agenda items. 4. Commission Commissioners requested that staff include ARC and CHC minutes with staff report materials when their review of a project precedes the Planning Commission's review. Vice -Chair Multari requested that staff acknowledge the breadth of the Commission's purview when presenting project materials for analysis, rather than attempting to narrow the focus. Chair Larson concurred. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Erica Inderlied Recording Secretary Approved by the Planning Commission on March 25, 2015, Laur`e Thomas Administrative Assistant III