The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission on Tuesday voted unanimously to recommend a hybrid land‑use alternative to the City Council for the city’s general plan update, asking council to prioritize infill and higher‑density development along the East Grand Avenue corridor while preserving a process (specific plans) to consider future development of agricultural parcels at North Fair Oaks and the Frederick property.

The recommendation came after a roughly one‑hour presentation from city consultants and staff, public comment from scores of residents and property owners, and a commission discussion about housing, traffic, water and farmland preservation.

Consultant Michael Gibbons of Mintier Harnish described the meeting’s purpose as “this is really an introduction into the land use alternatives phase as part of the general plan project.” Gibbons and colleague Nikki Zanchetta outlined four scenarios the project team modeled: 1) the existing general plan (baseline); 2) an infill‑focused alternative emphasizing development on vacant and underused sites; 3) a residential‑oriented alternative that converts some agricultural/open space land under a specific‑plan process; and 4) a commercial/employment‑focused alternative. Zanchetta summarized outreach numbers, saying the project received “354 responses to that mapping survey” from last fall and about 93 responses to the recent online worksheet that duplicated a January workshop.

City Planning Manager Andrew Perez told the audience, “The survey is closed,” and explained that additional public comment may be submitted through the project website (planarroyogrande.com) and would be forwarded to the City Council when it considers a preferred alternative. The consultants said the commission’s recommendation will be sent to council; staff set the council hearing for April 8.

Public comment focused on three recurring concerns: the small number of survey respondents relative to Arroyo Grande’s population, traffic and circulation impacts from new development, and preserving prime agricultural soils at North Fair Oaks. Longtime resident Mary Anne Gallardi emphasized the survey sample size, saying, “that is point 48% of the population on which this report was written,” and several speakers urged more outreach and slower timelines so more residents could weigh in.

Commissioners and staff repeatedly stressed that tonight’s action is advisory and high level. The commission’s motion—moved by Commissioner Martin and seconded by a fellow commissioner—creates a hybrid recommendation that uses the infill emphasis of Alternative 2 as its foundation, adds language from Alternative 3 allowing conversion of agricultural land within city limits only through a required specific‑plan process for the North Fair Oaks and Frederick focus areas, and asks that a new corridor mixed‑use designation be available to permit higher‑density infill along East Grand.

Commission discussion acknowledged the variety of public views. Several commissioners said the city needs additional housing and that infill along East Grand is a logical place to concentrate growth. Others stressed that any conversion of agricultural land should be voluntary on the part of landowners and must be guided by specific plans that address circulation, water, parks and other infrastructure. Consultants noted the alternative models are theoretical build‑outs used to compare tradeoffs and that technical studies including an environmental impact report (EIR), water analysis and traffic/circulation evaluations will follow the selection of a preferred alternative.

Votes at a glance

- Approval of minutes from Feb. 18, 2025 regular meeting — Approved 5–0 (roll call: Commissioners Sackerson, Martin, Buchanan, Worthen, Vice Chair Rufe voted yes).
- Recommendation of preferred land‑use alternative (hybrid infill + specific‑plan pathway) — Approved 5–0. Motion by Commissioner Martin; the commission unanimously voted to forward the recommendation to City Council for consideration on April 8, 2025.
- Receipt and filing of the 2024 General Plan Annual Progress Report (staff recommendation) — Approved 5–0.
- Election of officers: Virginia Rufe elected Chair; Commissioner Martin elected Vice Chair — unanimous.

What the commission recommended and what happens next

The commission’s recommendation is advisory to the City Council. If council selects a preferred alternative (or a modified variant), the project will proceed to drafting the updated general plan, a required environmental review (EIR) that will analyze water, hazard, traffic and other impacts, and then a subsequent comprehensive development‑code (zoning) update to implement the land‑use map and policies. Staff and consultants emphasized that specific plans would be required to change the uses of agricultural parcels in the two focus areas; specific‑plan review would itself require public hearings, environmental analysis and review by the commission and council.

Consultants noted that the models used to estimate population and housing outcomes are illustrative: they are built with publicly available tools and multiple assumptions, and the actual build‑out will depend on market conditions, landowner choices and the detailed implementation steps that follow. The project website (planarroyogrande.com) contains the land‑use alternatives summary report, workshop materials, and the comment and sign‑up buttons staff referenced during the meeting.

Why this matters

The general plan is the city’s foundational document guiding land use, housing, transportation and open‑space policy for decades. How the city balances infill, housing needs, commercial opportunity and preservation of limited agricultural soils will shape traffic patterns, water demand and community character. The commission’s recommendation narrows the set of options Council will review and signals the commission’s preference for directing growth toward infill and corridor redevelopment while keeping a formal process for potential future changes on agricultural parcels.

The Planning Commission will transmit its recommendation and packaged materials to City Council for the April 8, 2025 public hearing; residents who want to comment to council were advised to use the project website or the council meeting public‑comment period.