HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-06-17; City Council; 6275; Planned industrial development-----I__ Cty. fk1gr.G -- PLANN I NG - 5 P A RT M C N T :
---- - _-_-.----- --- - -
3 lJ r( 2 t C T : PLAU?!ED I MDlJSTR I AL DEVELOPMENT
A?PL I CANT: SHKbJ/iALCOT/BUDGE E DAV IS CASE NO: CT 80-15/PUD-17
The applicant is requesting approval for the first phase of a two phase Planned
industrial project located on Avenida Encinas between Cannon and Palomar Airport
Road. Approval is for Phase 1 only, and a new application for Phase II must be
submitted prior to its approval. The project (Phase I) will consist of 14 units
having a total of 104,000 square feet of building area.
The Planning Commission had a number of concerns relating to the impact of the
proposed development on the adjacent residences to the west. To alleviate visual
and noise impacts, the Commission has added conditions requiring a dense landscape
screen on the west property line, prohibition of light spillover onto adjacent
properties, screening of roof mounted equipment, and a limitation of the noise
levels at the property line to 45 dBA. Other than these concerns, the Planning
Commission was satisfied with the overall project.
Through the staff review and Planning Commission hearing all issues on this matter
have been satisfactorily resolved.
EXHIBITS
1. Resolution No. 1638, dated May 28, 1980
2. Resolution No. 1639, dated May 28, 1980 3. Staff Report, dated May 28, 1980 4. Exhibit "A" dated May 22, 1980
5.
6. Copy
RECOMMENDAT I ON
Exhibits E, C-1, C-2, D-1, D-2, F-1, F-2 dated, May 16, 1980 of Planning Commission Minutes of May 28, 1980, Pages 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7
Both the Planning Staff and Planning Commission recommend that this application
be,APPROVED and that the City Attorney be directed to prepare documents
APP-CT 80-15/PUD-17) per Planning Commission Resolution Fos: 1638 & 1639.
Council Action
6-17-80: Council directed the City Attorney to prepare documents
approving CT 80-15/PUD-17, as per Planning Commission Resolutions No. 1638,and 1639
t.
1
2
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
' 20
21
'22
23
24
25
26
* 27
28
PLANNING C0Y:IMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1638
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOI'LMENDING APPROVAL OF A PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY GENEXAZLY LOCATED ON AVENIDA ENCINAS, BETWEEN CANNON AND PALOMAR AIRPORT ROADS.
APPLICANT: SHAW, TALBOT,-BUDGE AND DAVIS
CASE NO: CT 80-15
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property to, wit:
Portion of Lot H of Rancho Agua Hedionda according to Map No. 823, County of San Diego
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to the
Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as
provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 28th day of May,
1980, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to
consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering
all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be
heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the
Tentative Tract Map.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A) That the above recitations are true and correct,
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission recommends APPROVAL of CT 80-15, based on the following findings and sub'ject to the following conditions: -
Findings
1) The proposed tentative map is consistent with the city's general plan since the site is designated by the land use plan for planned industrial and, as conditioned; the project is consistent with all other general plan elements.
////
\
‘t
1
-2
3
4
5
‘6
7
e
9
. 10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed since the basically flat topography of the site reduces the need for major land form alteration.
The design of the project will not cause any significant
environmental impacts since, based on an initial study of the project (including a field investigation of the site, an archaeological survey, and agricultural feasibility report), the Planning Director has determined that the project will not result in any adverse environmental impacts and therefore has issued a declaration of negative environmental impact on
May 12, 1980, Log No. 699.
The design of the subdivision will not cause any serious
health problems since the project meets all public health requirements.
The project is consistent with all city public facility policies and ordinances since:
Adequate sewer has been issued for the first phase of development, and approval for Phase I1 is in concept only with a new tentative map and revised planned unit
development required prior to development of the second phase.
Adequate water, gas and electric service will be availabl to serve the development.
All necessary public improvements will either be provided
or required as conditions of approval,
The applicant has agreed and is required by the inclusion of an appropriate condition to pay a public facilities
fee, Performance of that contract and payment of the fee will enable this body to find that all other public facilities will be available concurrent with need as required by the general plan.
Conditions
1) Approval is granted for CT 80-15 as shown on exhibits A to CT 80-15/PUD-17 dated 5/22/80, on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by reference. Development shall occur substantially as shown on these exhibits unless otherwise noted in these conditions.
This subdivision is approved upon the express condition that
building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless the City Engineer determines that such sewer facilities are available at the time of application for such permits and will continue to be available until time of occupancy. If the City Engineer determines that sewer facilities are not available, building permits will not be issued. This note shall be placed on the final map.
PC RES0 #1638
-2-
15
16
t 17
.I ia
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
This approval is granted only for those buildings shown on
Exhibit A dated May 16, 1980 (Phase I). Any further development of this site shall require a new tentative map and a revision to PUD-17.
All conditions of approval of Resolution No. 1639 for PUD-17 shall be met.
The subdivider shall dedicate and improve Avenida Encinas based on a right-of-way width of 70' and a curb-to-curb width of 60'. The limits shall be from the existing terminus of Avenida Encinas, along the subdivision frontage, extending off site to Cannon Road. The right-of-way shall be dedicated
on approval of the final map and shall be free and clear of any liens and encumbrances. The improvemenGs shall be for the full street width including median >and shall conform to the City of Carlsbad standards subject to the
approval of the City Engineer and shall be completed prior to final occupancy of any units.
Improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer must be approved by the City Engineer, required security posed, and improvement agreement executed prior to approval of the final map.
Interior private streets and driveways shall be built to full width to serve all buildings being constructed.
The subdivider shall submit to the City Engineer letters of permission from all easement holders on the subject property prior to approval of the final map.
All required fees and deposits shall be paid prior to final map
This approval is expressly conditioned on the payment by the applicant of a public facilities fee as required by City Council Policy No. 17, dated August 29, 1979, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, and
according to the agreement executed by the applicant for payment of said fee. A copy of that agreement, dated February 28, 1980, is on file with the City Clerk and incor-
porated herein by reference. If said fee is not paid as promised, this application will not be consistent with the general plan and the project cannot proceed and this approval shall be void.
Street trees, as required by the city, shall be installed by the applicant at his expense. Trees shall be a type approved by the Parks and Recreation Department and shall be installed to their specifications.
The subdivider shall install landscaping in the median subject to the approval of the Parks and Recreation Director prior to final occupancy of any units.
PC RES0 #1638
-2-
\
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
13) An adjustment plat shall be submitted and a certificate of
compliance shall be recorded adjusting the northerly boundary
of the projectaprior to the approval of the final map.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on
the 28th day of May, 1980, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT :
ABSTAIN :
EDWIN S. SCHICK, JR., Chairman
CARLSBAD PLANNING COI4!VISSION
ATTEST :
JAMES C. HAGAMAN, Secretary
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
PC RES0 a1638 -4-
€
s
1c
13
li
12
14
1:
16
le
19
20
21
22
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COP?.MISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1639
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR A PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON AVENIDA ENCINAS BETWEEN
CANNON AND PAL0,WR AIRPORT ROADS. APPLICANT: SHAW, TALBOT, BUDGE & DAVIS CASE NO. PUD-17
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property, to wit:
Portion of Lot H of Rancho Agua Hedionda according to Map No. 823, County of San Diego
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to the
Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as
provided by Title 21 of the.Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 28th day of May
1980, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to
consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering
all testimony and arguments, if any of all persons desiring to be
heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the
Planned Unit Development; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A) That the above recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing
the Commission recommends APPROVAL of PUD-17, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings :
1) The proposed planned industrial development at the subject location is both necessary and desirable to provide a comprehensively and imaginatively designed facility which will contribute to the general well being of the community.
%
1
2
3
4
5
'6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
+- e
The proposed development will not be detrimental to the health safety.or general welfare of persons residing or working in
the same vicinity, nor would the project be injurious to property or improvements in this area.
All design criteria set forth in Section 21.45.110 and all minimum development standards set forth in Section 21.45.120 will be met.
The proposed project will be consistent with all elements of the General Plan.
The applicant has agreed and is required by the inclusion of an appropriate condition to pay a public facilities fee. Performance of that contract and payment of the fee will enable this body to find that public facilities will be available concurrent with need as required by the General Plan
Based on aq initial study of the project, including a field investigation of the site, an archaeological survey, and agricultural feasibility report, the Planning Director has determined that the project will not result in any adverse environmental impacts and therefore has issued a declaration of negative environmental impact on May 12, 1980, Log No. 699.
That the applicant has provided sufficient additional amenities including increased landscaping along Avenida Encinas, increase of the number of parking spaces required under the RD-M zone, and recreational amenities consisting of
an exercise course for use by the employees to justify the modifications to the P-M zone yard and lot area requirements.
Conditions
~
I///
PC RES0 #1639
Approval is granted for PUD-17, as shown on exhibits B, C-1, C-2, D-1, D-2, F-1, and F-2 to CT 80-15/PUD-17, dated 5/16/80, on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by reference.. Development shall occur substantially as shown on these exhibits unless otherwise noted in these conditions.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a final Planned Unit Development Plan, incor- porating all changes required herein, for the approval of
the Planning Director.
The standards of the P-M (Planned Industrial) zone regarding permitted uses, conditional uses, building height, outdoor storage and industrial waste discharge shall apply to the subject property. No encroachment into any required yard, other than is permitted by this application shall be allowed unless a revised Planned Unit Development application is approved.
-2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
. 14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
This approval is for Phase I only as shown on Exhibit B dated May 16, 1980. Phase I1 is not approved,'and a revision to
this Planned Unit Development must be approved prior to the issuance of building permits in Phase 11.
A sign program for the entire development shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits. Said signs shall be low profile and well integrated into the development.
Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit a detailed landscape and irrigation plan, generally consistent with exhibits F-1 E, F-2 dated, 5/16/80, subject to the approval of the Planning Director.
Native drought tolerant plant species shall be utilized to the maximum extent feasible. Said landscape plan shall include a detailed description of the employee recreation area
Said landscape plan shall include solid planting of the west property line to visually screen the project from the adjacent properties to the west.
All roof top appurtenances shall be completely screened from adjacent properties to the west, Interstate 5, and Avenida
Encinas and integrated into the design of the building, subject to the approval of the Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits.
An all weather access road shall be maintained throughout construction as required by the Fire Marshall.
All fire alarm systems, fire hydrants, extinguishing systems, automatic sprinklers, and other systems pertinent to the location, shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to construction.
When any portion of a building is in excess of 150' from a water supply on a public street, there shall be provided, on-site hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required
fireflow, when required by the Chief.
Water for fire protection shall be available for use on-site before any combustibles are located on-site, as required by
the Fire Marshall.
In order to provide for fire protection, adequate fire
hydrants with required fire flow shall be installed on and off site as required by the Fire Marshall.
All conditions of approval of Resolution No. 1638, for CT 80-15, shall be met. Failure to do so shall void this Planned Unit Development.
This project is approved upon the express condition that the
applicant shall pay a public facilities fee as required by
PC RES0 #1639 -3-
1
2
3
4
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
! 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
’ 25
26
27
28
City Council Policy No. 17, dated August 29, 1979, on file
with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, and according to the agreement executed by the applicant for payment of said fee a copy of that agreement dated February
28, 1980, is on file with the City Clerk and is incorporated herein by reference. If said fee is not paid as promised, this application will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project shall be void. This fee is
required for all future development of this property for which a building permit has not been issued.
All lighting of buildings and parking areas shall be directed away from adjacent properties, in particular those residential properties to the west, so that no direct light or light spillover occurs on any such properties.
Per the requirements of the P-M zone, noise emanating from the project shall not exceed a level of 45 dBA at any property
line.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular rneeing of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on
the 28th day of May, 1980, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES :
NOES :
ABSENT :
ABSTAIN :
EDWIN S. SCHICK, JR., Chairman CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
JAMES C. HAGAMAN, Secretary
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
.
PC RES0 #1639 -4-
... . .- . .. -
STAFF &PORT 0
DATE : May 28, 1980
TO : Planning Commission
FROM : Brian Milich, Planning Department
SUBJECT: CT 80-15/PUD-17; SHAb7, TALBOT, BUDGE & DAVIS, Phased, planned industrial development on Avenida Encinas between Cannon and Palomar Airport Road.
..
I. Project Description
The applicant is proposing a planned industrial develop- ment on 50.2 acres, located on Avenida Encinas. The project isaproposed in two phases, with 14 buildings in each phase. A total of 268,470 square feet of building space is proposed, with 103,895 square feet proposed in Phase I, The project must be built in
phases since the property has been allocated only 46 edu's. The buildings will be one and two stories (maximmn height of 20 feet), containing a mixture of manufacturing, storage and office space.
The property is generally level and presently vacant. Although the site has been previously used for
agriculture, an agricultural feasibility report prepared for the property indjcates that the property is not prime agricultural land and that continued agricultural production would, at best, be economically marginal.
The applicant is requesting a Planned Unit Development in order to create individual lots for each building. The lots.will correspond to the building foot print,
allowing them to be sold individually with an undivided interest in the common area. P- Planned Unit Development would also allow the applicant to modify the development standards required in the P-1.1 Zone.
Avenida Encinas will be extended and fully improved from its present terminus at the existina Burroughs Development, northward to its intersection with Cannon Road.
11. Analysis
Planning Issues
1. Is the project comprehensively designed, providing adequate on-site amenities which justify modification of the underlying P-M standards?
2. Does the circulation kystem provide safe and
efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic movement?
Discussion
The purpose of a Planned Unit Development is to facilitate
the development of a comprehensively planned project, emphasizing imaginative and innovative design, coupled
with individual building ownership. The Planned Unit Development also allows some variance in the application of zoning and subdivision regulations to the particular
property. In this case, the P-M zone would normally require one acre minimum lots, in addition to 50 foot front, 25 feet rear, and 20 feet rear yard setbacks. Also in the P-M zone, parking cannot be closer than 10 feet to a rear or interior side property line. The applicant is proposing a number of deviations from
these standards in order to allow individual building ownership and to provide additional on-site amenities.
More specifically, the "Postage Stamp" lots created for
each building do not meet the one acre lot minimum. Also, the plans show a reduction in the front yard setback to 35 feet, a reduced rear yard setback to 20 feet (eastern property line) and parking within 5 feet of the side and rear lot lines (northern and western property lines).
As previously mentioned, the applicant is proposing additional on-site amenities in order to justify the postage stamp lots and the reduced yards, These amenities
include ample landscaping throughout the development and a considerable landscape buffer along Avenida Encinas, on-site parking in excess of the required
1:400 parking requirements (parking is provided at approximately 1:300), attractively designed buildings, and an on-site recreation area for the employees of the
development. These amenities, coupled with the comprehensive design of the development, provide sufficient justification for modification to some of the zoning and subdivision
standards.
With regard to the on and off-site circulation system, the plans presently before the Commission represent considerable modification to those plans first submitted by the applicant. The applicant's initial submittal raised a number of concerns regarding driveway openings onto Avenida Encinas, the width of the driveways in relation to the loading doors, and the general design of the on-site circulation system. It was felt that the circulation system could not adequately handle the amount and type of traffic anticipated from the development.
-2-
t -
In response to these concerns, the applicant has eliminated a number of the driveway openings onto Avenida Encinas,
in addition to realigning several other drives in conjunction with a median strip along Avenida Encinas. Also, several of the on-site driveways have been increased in width and the parking areas redesigned. These modifications have significantly improved circulation and emergency vehicular accessibility.
As proposed, the project is comprehensively designed, providing sufficient circulation off-street parking, recreational facilities, landscaping, in addition to well designed buildings. Also, the project meets all of the development standards of the PUD ordinance as they relate to yards, coverage, height, refuse areas and open space.
The applicant has been allocated sewer for only a portion of the ultimate planned development of the
site. Since the Commission can only approve that portion of the project which has sewer, the applicant would have to apply for a new tentative map and revised
Planned Unit Development in order to develop the second phase.
111. Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt' Resolution Nos: 1638 and 1639, recommending APPROVAL of CT 80-15/PUD-17, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
Attachments Background Data Sheet
* Location Map Disclosure Form PC Resolution No. 1638 (CT 80-14) PC Resolution No. 1639 (PUD-17)
Exhibits A (5/22/80) Exhibits B, C-1, C-2, D-1, D-2, F-1, F-2 (5/16/80)
BM:ar 5/21/%0
-3-
- . .. " . .. . ____
BACKGIMUND DATA SHEFT
WE No: CT 80-15/PUD-17
Planned industrial development on 50.2 acres, located on -T AND LOCATION:
Ahda Ehcinas between Cannon and Palomar AFrport Road.
LM;AL DESZRI~TION: Portion of I& H of Rancho Agua Hediolada, according to
Map No. 823, County of San Diego.
Assessors Parcel Nunnber: 210 - 090 - 19
Acres 50.2 N~. of 1 (16 propsed) - Phase I only
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Density Allowed N/A Density Proposed -- - Existing zone P-E4 Proposed Zone
Surrounding Zoning and Larad Use:
East Freeway
0-S, RD-M, R-1 West
vacant
Industrial
Vacant, Residential
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District N/A
City of Carlsbad Water District
Have been mu's 46 allocated City of Carlsbad Sewer District
28. 1980 F&- Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated
(Other : 1
EWIR3~ IMPACT ASSES-
X Negative Declaration, issued 5/12/80 Log No. 699
E.I.R. Certified, dated
-,
e .
..
..
... .I
.
.. If after the information you have sibmitted has been review.ed, it is determined
that further information is required, you will be so advised.
.. RP. rnnr Tmnllrn. SHAW AND TALBOT, AND BUDkE ANn ~BTTTC /SIGNAL' DEVELOPMU ..
AGENT :
1303 AVOCADO, SUITE 220, NEWPORT BEACH, CA. 92660
Business Address
(714) 640-1360
Te,lephone Number
HOWARD F. THOMPSON, AIA
Name
16520 ASTON STREET, IRVINE, CA, 92714
Business Address
.. . (714) 557-7822
Telephone Number
MEMBERS : Donald W. Shaw, J.. Thomas Talbot, William A. Budqe, William K.
Davis Name (individual, partner, joint Home Address
venture, corporation, syndication)
..
~ -- ---.-
Name (individual, partnership, joint venture, corporation, syndication)
1303 Avocado, Suite 220, Newport Beach, Ca. 92660
Business Address
(714) 640-1360
Telephone Number Telephone Number
Signal Development Corp. .
Name Home Address
17890 Sky Park Circle, Irvine, Ca. 92714
Business Address I
I .. (714) 979-6900
Telephone Number Telephone Number ..
(Attach more sheets if necessary)
I/we declare under penalty of perjury that the infbrmation contained in this dis-
closure is true and correct and that it will remain true and correct and may be
relied upon as being true and correct until amended.
Applicant
Chairman Schick inquired what increased sound levels would occur and if same would exceed desirable decible rates.
Bill Hofman responded that as a professional complex, it would not create the amount of traffic generated in a commercial development, and expressed the opinion that sound would be minimal given the distance and elevations involved.
The Commission adopted Resolution 1641, approving Variance (V-307) to delete the requirement for a 6' high block wall along the southerly property line of property generally located on the south- east corner of El Camino Real and Hosp Way in the R-P-Q Zone.
MOTION : ROYBOTIS SECOND : MARCUS AYES : SCHICK, ROMBOTIS, MARCUS, FRIESTEDT, TARSON AND NOES : None ABSTAIN: JOSE
Commissioner Jose requested the record reflect his abstaining
as due to his absence during prior Commission hearings on the
LEEDS .
vote matter.
2. CT 80-15/PUD-17 Shaw, Talbot, Budge & Davis - An introductory staff report was given by the Planning Director, indicating this item was a phased, planned industrial development on Avenida Encinas between Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road, as set forth in the
Bill Hofman then detailed the staff report, explaining the project was Phase I of two phases of a light manufacturing, storage and office-
use complex located in the P-M Zone, situated along Avenida Encinas, adjacent to Interstate 5, just north of the Burroughs development and south of Cannon Road. As part of the project, the applicant would be improving Avenida Encinas to Cannon Road.
i May 28, 1980 staff report.
Mr. Hofman then explained the modifications requested by the applicant through the PUD process: (1) reduction in lot size to allow for individual ownership; (2) reduction in set back requirements; and (3)
encroachment of the parking area into the side yards. With the aid of wall maps, Mr. Hofman explained the amenities proposed over and above that which are required by the underlying zone: (1) increased landscaping along Avenida Encinas and increased landscaping to buffer Interstate 5; (2) central court areas with water courses and bridges; (3) increased number of parking spaces; and (4) on-site recreational facilities consisting of an exercise course.
In terms of design, Mr. Hofman stated the relationship of the recreational area, circulation pattern for both vehicles and pedestrians and location of the buildings is well integrated and comprehensively designed.
Commissioner Rombotis requested clarification of the width of Avenida Encinas, commenting the measurement did not reflect the standard.
-3-
Richard Allen responded the width had been increased to accommodate a median in the street to control turn movements from the large number of driveways.
Commissioner Larson questioned if the subject project represented the direction the City desired to follow in the future with regard to
industrial-type developments, and expressed the opinion approval af the applicant would establish a precedent for same in the P-M Zone, by reducing what is required compared to the requirements for Planned Unit Development.
Bill Hofman acknowledged Commissioner Larson, expressing the opinion in this case the comprehensive design and additional amenities far exceed what could be built in the P-M zone, if normal zoning standards are met.
Commissioner Jose then requested clarification on page 2 under Discussion regarding setbacks on eastern property line versus the northern/western property lines, and inquired which was the rear
lot line.
Mr. Hofman referenced the wall maps explaining the propery lines from the perspective of the street which runs through the project in
relation to the location of the buildings.
Commissioner Jose expressed the opinion that heavy landscaping should be required along 1-5.
Bill Hofman then related staff concerns regarding building elevation along 1-5 and referred to the wall maps explaining the buildings were well designed to afford improved visual impacts of an industrial type project.
Commissioner Jose inquired if parking would be permitted along the freeway on the eastern side.
Bill Hofman responded negatively, indicating the area would be landscaped, consisting of the water courses and recreational areas, with approximately 20 to 25 foot separation between parking and the freeway right-of-way, and no parking facing the freeway.
Commissioner Larson inquired if the 1 to 300 parking ration proposed by the applicant as an additional amenity would apply to Phase I1 as well as Phase I.
Mr. Hofman responded affirmately.
Commissioner Larson expressed the opinoin that the PUD should reflect the findings of additional on-site amenities to substantiate the reduced lot size and set backs in view of the precedent setting element of approving the project.
Commissioner Larson expressed the opinion the wording of Condition 7 of the PUD should be more specific and establish type of required
screening to effectively screen the project from the freeway.
c
Commissioner Leeds and Chairman Schick expressed the opinion the
landscaping along the west side of: the project should be heavier and compare with that proposed along the freeway to achieve greater balance.
Mr. Hofman responded the railroad right-of-way and existing open space corridor along the western side adjacent to the R-l Zone
was considered by staff to be sufficient buffer in terms of distance between living units to the west and the industrial project,
Chairman Schi'ck expressed concerns with the effects of total build- out of development on the traffic pattern and circulation at
Cannon Road in relation to existing residences, and inquired of traffic projections in the area and mitigation measures.
Richard Allen responded he was unaware of any traffic studies for that area and that Cannon Road was designated as a secondary arterial. However, if a traffic signal became warranted, it would be provided through the public facilities fee.
Chairman Schick then opened the public hearing at 7:41 P.M. and inquired if the applicant or a representative was present and desired to address the Commission.
The Commission recognized Howard F. Thompson, of Howard F. Thompson & Associates, Inc., 16520 Askin Street, Imine, CA. Mr. Thompson indicated he represented the owners and was responsible for the
land planning and architecture of the project. With regard to the maximum height of the buildings, Mr. Thompson offered for correction the figure of 25 feet, rather than 20 feet as stated under Project Description of the staff report.
I
Comission recognized Howard Clark, 5500 El Arbol, Carlsbad, CA, who indicated he resided adjacent to the west of the proposed development, and explained the proximity of his home to the existing development at Burroughs and the freeway. Mr. Clark expressed concern with the noise generated from additional development of this sort which might compound existing noise from the freeway. Additionally, Mr. Clark expressed concerns with visual effects of the project on his residential area.
The Commission recognized Ethel Barosh, 5470 El Arbol, Carlsbad, CA, who questioned why the land east of the freeway which is still agriculture and not hear existing residences had not been utilized. Mks. Barosh expressed the opinion that this type of project in the P-M Zone would create more activity, more roads and more noise. Further, the railroad would not serve to sufficiently buffer adjacent homes due to its lower elevation in relation to the residences.
The Commission recognized Roger Williams, 5118 Shore Drive, Carlsbad, who indicated he represented the residents of Terramar, as the
President of that Association.
-5-
Mr. Williams explained his concerns in that Cannon Road, after completion and extension, would be utilized by the heavy traffic generated by the Palomar Airport Business Park employees during the times when school children were boarding and departing the public transportation buses. Further, such traffic would conflict with childrens' recreational activities in that there were few
curbs and sidewalks in the area. Therefore, Mr. Williams requested Commission consideration of providing same.
The Commission again recognized Howard Thompson, who responded to concerns. Mr. Thompson explained along the west property line there was a total of 14 feet of landscaping. Additionally, there is approximately 250 feet of permanently designated open space; therefore, the landscaping, open space and railroad provide a
substantial buffer to those residences to the rear of the project.
With regard to screening, Mr. Thompson indicated opaque, rather than
perforated screening would be used to decrease noise concerns and any lihhting at the rear end of the project would be "down lighting" as a security matter for anyone parking behind the facility and would not extend beyond the yard.
Commissioner Larson requested information regarding the type of potential use of the buildings and the potential for noise emanating as a result.
Mr. Thompson responded that both Phase I and I1 will be research and development type facilities -- whether light assembly, etc., it is not meant to be any sort of heavy manufacturing -- being
people oriented rather than machinery oriented.
There being no further indication to speak, Chairman Schick closed the public hearing at 8:03 P.M.
As a matter of clarification for the audience, Commissioner Rombotis explained the Commission was not considering a rezone; the project is in the PM Zone.
Commissioner Larson inquired if the project could be conditioned to require selection of landscaping material which would provide a solid buffer on the west side of the property.
Bill Hofman suggested Commission add a sentence to Condition 6 of the PUD Resolution to state "said landscape plan shall include planting of the west property line to visually screen the project from the adjacent properties to the west, subject to the approval of the Planning Director. "
With regard to Condition 7, Mr. Hofman suggested wording to reflect "all roof top appurtenances shall be completely screened from adjacent properties, Interstate 5 and Avenida Encinas, and integrated into the design of the building, subject to the approval of the Planning Director, prior to the issuance of building permits."
-6-
F @
During discussion regarding noise concerns, Cornmissioner Jose ob- served that no amount of landscaping would exclude noise altogether. Commissioner Rombotis offered that the buildings themselves would provide some buffer .
As a point of information, Mr. Hofman explained a requirement of the P-M Zone is that noise beyond the boundaries of the site cannot exceed a decible level of 45, as measured by the American Standard of Sound Level Meters. Therefore, sound attenuation measures on the site are required and sound attenuation would be enforced. Mr. Hofman suggested
a condition be added to reiterate the sound requirements of the PM Zone.
Commissioners Jose and Rombotis also requested the standard conditions regarding lighting and screening be included.
Chairman Schick expressed concerns that the Commission needed to have a total analysis of traffic with regard to development in order to effectively deal with problems in the future. Specifically, he inquired into policies and provisions for curbs and sidewalks beyond the applicant's commitment to complete the street. In this regard, Chairman Schick requested that staff provide the necessary information.
Richard Allen responsed there were no present plans the project. However, he believed agreements for future public improvements do exist.
for work west of
The Commission adopted Resolution 1638, recommending approval of a
Planned Industrial Development on property generally located on Avenida Encinas, between Cannon and Palomar Airport Roads, based on the findings and conditions outlined in the May 28, 1980 staff report.
The Commission adopted Resolution 1639, reconnnending approval of a Planned Unit Development for a planned industrial development on
property generally located on AvenidaEncinas between Cannon and Palomar Airport Roads, based on the findings and conditions outlined in the staff report of May 28, 1980, subject to the changes to conditions and additional conditions, as expressed during discussion.
MOT1 ON : LARSON SECOND : ROMBOTIS AYES : SCHICK, ROMBOTIS, MARCUS, FRIESTEDT, LARSON, LEEDS AND JOSE. NOES L None ABSTAIN : None
RECESS :
The Commission recessed at 8:24 P.M. and reconvened at 8:36 P.M. with all Commissioners present.
3. CUP-85(A) Pilgrim Congregation Church - An introductory report was
given by the Planning Director, explaining the item as a request for an amendment to the conditional use permit to replace an existing building at the church facility located at the northeast corner of Chestnut Avenue and Monroe Street, as discussed in the May 28, 1980 staff report.
-7-
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CT 80-15/PUD-17
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Carlsbad City Council will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, June 17, 1980 at 6:OO P.M. in the City Council Chambers , 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California,
to consider approval of a 28 unit Planned Industrial Development on property generally located on Avenida Encinas, between Cannon and Palomar Airport Roads, and more particularly described as: "Portion of Lot H of Rancho Agua Hedionda according to Map 823, County of San Diego."
APPLICANT: Shaw, Talbot, Budge & Davis
PUBLISH : June 7, 1980
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
State of California
&pt, of TranSpOr&~t.iCm 12Q.S. Spring Street
muis & Bertha Pieper b. 10947 Barman
9ns Angaes, Ca. 90012
2 10-100-10
State of California
Dept, of Transportation 120 S. Spring Street
Us Angeles, Ca. 90012
210-090-07
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, Ca. 92008
2 10-0 90-17
William C. & Ruth Dealy Jr.
5850 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad, Ca. 92008
210-170-01
210-170-02
Paul & Magdalena Eke
P. 0. Box 488 EslcinitaS, Ca. 92024
210-170-04
210-090-16
Vincent R. Dimn
5555 Paseo Del Norte
Carlsbad, Ca. 92008
2U-060-07
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elm Avenue carlsbad, Ca. 92008
2 11-06 0-08
J-s Fhy Jr.
440 Santa Helena salana Beach, Ca. 92075
211-060-09
Charles & Patricia Wsblom
1015 Eucalyptus Street C)ceansi.de, Ca. 92054
211-060-10
What & Susan Melendez
5520 El Arb01 Drive
Carlsbad, Ca. 92008
210-113-16
Culver City, Ca. 90230
i 210-113-17
J
'> I
I George Braman
P. 0. Box 155 i; Upland, Ca. 91786
' 210-113-18
I
i WdKleCker
I 5500 El Arb01 Drive I ! Carlsbad, Ca. 92008
I 210-113-21 1; 4.
1-
I Richanl&Marie$iblfrum
I 4034 Edenhurst Averme I I Los Angeles, Ca. 90039
1 210-113-22 I
I
1 AT&SFRailwayCo.
1 IDS Angeles, Ca. 90014
1 EngineeringDeparm?nt
J 121 E. Sixth Street
' I 210-090-18
I
I I 1.
1: I
I i
I I
.I
I
I
I.
1' I!
I
I
1 I
1
4 I
I
I
I
I I' I
I -'
1.
I
~ -. ..
.i. .,. .-. ,
..a
I.
. 1
c i
..
I I
1
i
8. /7TICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
*. IC
KY~ICE IS 5EIIEBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carls5F.d will hold a public hearing at the City Council Cham-
bers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 7:OO P-M. on Wednesday, May 28, 1980, to consider approval of a 28 unit Planned Industria; Development on property generally located on Avenida Encinas, between Cannon and Palomar Airport Road and more parti- cularly described as:
Portion of Lot €3 of Rancho Agua Hedionda according
to ?,k? No. 823, C2:nnty of San Diego-
Those ~ersons wishing ta speak on this proposal are cordially invite5 ~3 attend “ihs 2u5lic hearing. If you have any questions
please tall 438-5591.
CASE FZZ: CT 8O-IS/PUD-17 Sq-T 7- APPLIGLX : ;-=$et Y-X30T, BUDGE AND DAVIS
PUBLISE: Ezy 17 2980
.T P i