Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-09-01; City Council; 6728; Preannexation Zone Change KellyAGENDA BILL O. INITIAL; BHrar AGENDA BILL NO: (& y £ JT _ DEPT. HD. Ptf DATE: SEPTEMBER 1, 1981 CTY. ATTY. J DEPARTMENT: PLANNING CTY. MGR SUBJECT: PREANNEXATlONAL ZONE CHANGE FROM COUNTY C AND R-4 TO THE P-M-Q ZONE; SOUTH SIDE OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, EAST OF LAUREL TREE ROAD. CASE NO: ZC-239 APPLICANT: KELLY STATEMENT OF* Tl This item is a request for approval of a preannexational zone change from County C and R-4 to the P-M-Q zone on property as described above. The boundaries of the rezoning would include two properties. The Commission expressed a concern regarding access if the two properties were to develop independently. The applicant indicated that a joint use driveway agreement had been signed by the owners of both parcels. The Commission was satisfied that if the access to both properties was limited to one driveway, then the site could support industrial development. Through staff review and Planning Commission hearing, all issues on this matter have been satisfactorily resolved. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Director has determined that this project will not cause any significant environmental impacts and, therefore, has issued a Negative Declaration, dated July 1, 1981, which was approved by the Planning Commission on August 12, 1981. A copy of the environmental documents is on file in the Planning Department. FISCAL IMPACT Prior to development of the property, the applicant will be required to install all public facilities needed to serve the project. Also, the applicant has agreed to pay a public facilities fee to offset the cost of providing other public services. RECOMMENDATION Both the Planning Staff and Planning Commission recommend that this application be APPROVED and that the City Attorney be directed to prepare documents APPROVING ZC-239, per Planning Commission Resolution No. 1837. ATTACHMENTS TTPlanning Commission Resolution No. 1837 2. Staff Report dated August 12, 1981 w/attachments APPROVED 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 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1837 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OP THE CITY OP CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OP A PREANNEXATIONAL ZONE CHANGE FROM COUNTY OP SAN DIEGO C AND R-4 TO CITY OF CARLSBAD P-M-Q ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE EAST OF INTERSTATE 5 IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THE POWER TRANSMISSION LINES. APPLICANT: ROBERT B. KELLY CASE NO; ZC-239 WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property, to wit: That portion of.that certain parcel designated as "Description No. 3" filed December 19, 1960 being of that portion of Lot "9" according to Map 823 filed November 16r 1896 has been filed with the city of Carlsbad, and referred to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 22nd day of Julyr 1981, and on the 12th day of August, 1981, 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 Zone Change; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission recommends APPROVAL of ZC-239, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: X: 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 Findings; 1) That the P-M-Q zone is consistent with the P-I (Planned In- dustrial) land use designation of the General Plan. 2) That uses permitted in the P-M-Q zone are compatible and con- sistent with surrounding land uses and zones. 3) That the development standards of the P-M-Q zone will ensure compatibility with surrounding uses, especially planned resi- dential uses. 4) That the zone change will not cause any significant environ- mental impacts and a Negative Declaration has been issued by the Planning Director on July 1, 1*981, and approved by the Planning Commission on August 12, 1981. 5) That the Q-Overlay will ensure that development of the pro- perty is properly planned and designed for compatibility with surrounding land uses. 6) The applicant has agreed 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. 7) That the location of the properties on Palomar Airport Road makes access a difficult and important concern, and that the requirement of a Site Development Plan will ensure that access points will be limited and provided to achieve safe ingress and egress to both properties. 8) That the applicant has executed a joint use driveway agreement which has been signed by the owners of the property. Conditions 1)This project is approved upon the express condition that the applicant shall pay 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 pay- ment of said fee a copy of that agreement dated May 20, 1981, is on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference. If said fee is not paid as promised, this appli- cation will not be consistent with the General Plan and ap- proval for this project shall be void. PC RESO 1837 -2- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 e PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the city of Carlsbad, California, held on the 12th day of August, 1981, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairman Marcus, Commissioners Rombotis, Schlehuber, Jose and Friestedt. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners L'Heureux and Farrow. ABSTAIN:None. MARY MARCOS, Chairman CARLSBADf PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: dJ»ija-iiM»!S C. HASSMAtf,:/Secretary CXRLSBAD PLANNlNQy^OMMISSlON PC RESO 1837 -3- c STAFF REPORT DATE: August 12, 1981 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: ZC-239, KELLY - Request for a preannexational Zone Change from County C and R-4 to the P-M-Q Zone for property located on the south side of Palomar Airport Road. Continued from the Planning Commission meeting of July 22, 1981. I. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The Planning Commission will recall that this item was continued from the July 22nd meeting pending an interpretation of Section 21.34.070 of the Zoning Ordinance regarding its application in connection with the proposed preannexational Zone Change. This section reads: 21 .34.070; •Min imum Lot•Area. Every lot in the P-M zone shall have a minimum lot area of one acre unless a specific plan providing a smaller lot size has been adopted. (Ord. 9216 §1 (part), 1968: Ord. 9060 §1356). Staff feels that the intention of this section of the ordinance applies directly to the creation of new subdivision lots. The proposed Zone Change is not creating any new lot, and, is merely changing a non-conforming lot to the P-M Zone. There is, however, good planning reasoning behind maintaining large parcels of land in the P-M Zone which may not be applicable to other industrial zones. Among these are setback, landscaping, and lot coverage requirements. Staff's major concern with regard to future development on the two properties, is limiting access along Palomar Airport Road. The ideal plannJ^j approach is to allow only one access point, at the safest a^-ci, to serve both properties. • Staff believes the foll<^' -'.nt} alternatives for the rezoning of the properties are p* .--liable for Planning Commission consideration: 1) Require consolidation of the lots - a condition could be placed upon the Zone Change that prior to any development of the lot, the lots be consolidated. This is probably the best alternative from a planning perspective but the applicant's representative has indicated that this will be an impossible condition to fulfill since the applicants wish to retain and develop the properties under separate ownership. 2) Alternate Zone - The Commission could recommend applying an alternate zone such as M or C-M to the .78 acre piece. These zones do not have the strict minimum lot sizes found in the P-M zone and as such would not violate the ordinance. The Planning Department feels that this alternative is inappropri- ate, however, as all surrounding industrial properties on this side of Palomar. Airport Road are zoned P-M. One small parcel with different zoning is felt to be a "spot-zone". Also, the M and C-M zones could allow uses which would not be appropriate for this property. 3) Specific Plan - The Commission could recommend placing a con- dition upon the Zone Change that a Specific Plan be approved . for both parcels together prior to the development 'of either parcel. This Specific Plan would address the single access point as its major focus. The City Attorney's office believes this condition is inappropriate, as legally there are certain conditions under which a Specific Plan may be developed and that this case does not accommodate any of them. 4) Site Development Plan - The proposed zoning of P-M-Q requires a Site Development Plan be approved by the Planning Commission on both parcels to handle the development problems. At the time the site development plans are reviewed, although they may be submitted independently and at separate times on each parcel, the Commission could address the issue of a joint use driveway requirement. It should be noted that at this point the applicant has already submitted a joint use driveway agreement signed by the owners of both parcels to the Planning Department. It is staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt Alternative No. 4 in connection with the proposed rezoning to P-M-Q. This alternative, in connection with Site Development Plan review, should achieve all planning objec- tives. Additionally, staff recommends that the Commission make the following findings in the approving resolution: 1) "That the location of the properties on Palomar Airport Road makes access a difficult and important concern, and that the requirement of a Site Development Plan will ensure that access points will be limited and provided to achieve safe ingress and egress to both properties." 2) "A joint use driveway agreement has been signed by the owners of both parcels." -2- II. RECOMMENDATION It. is recommended that the Planning Commission APPROVE the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 1837, recommending APPROVAL of ZC-239, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. ATTACHMENTS Planning Commission Resolution No. 1837 Previous Staff Report dated July 22, 1981, with attachments PJK:wl 8/4/81 7 c STAFF REPORT DATE: July 22, 1981 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: ZC-239, KELLY - Request for a preannexational zone change from County C and R-4 to the P-M-Q Zone for property located on the south side of Palomar Airport Road immediately west of the SDG&E power transmission lines. i I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND. BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting prezoning to the P-M-Q zone in order to submit an application for annexation to the city on property located as described above. The applicant's intent is to annex into the city with no improvements to be made on the property at the present time. The zone change is requested on a long and narrow piece of property consisting of two parcels of land, 10.28 and .73 acres, resulting in a total area of 11.01 acres. The property is relatively flat and has a natural drainage course running lengthwise within its boundaries containing numerous live oak trees along its banks. The general plan designation for the property is planned indus- trial, identical to the industrial property to both the east (Birtcher Pacific) and west (Ukegawa). Present zoning on those parcels are P-M and P-M-Q respectively. The existing high slope bank running behind the property acts as a natural buffer between the subject property and planned residential uses to the south. The general plan designates non-residential reserve to the north, across Palomar Airport Road. The property.is located within a special treatment area (airport influence) of the general plan. The Land Use Element stipulates 'that parcels within this area undergo a specific plan, or if less than 25 acres, a site development plan for the proposed develop- ment of a site. II. ANALYSIS ' A. Planning Issues 1.1s the P-M-Q zone the most appropriate zone for the property given the general plan designation of planned industrial? 2* Is the P-M-Q zone compatible and consistent with surrounding existing and planned land uses? X W B. Discussion Staff feels that P-M-Q zoning would be appropriate on the subject parcels for several reasons: 1) This zoning is consistent with the general plan. 2) The development standards of the P-M-Q zone are appropriate given the location of the property on a major thoroughfare, Palomar Airport Road. For example, this zone requires a 50 foot front yard setback, allowing .an adequate area for land- scaping and screening. 3) All of the area to the south of the subject property is in- dicated for residential uses on the general plan. The P-M-Q zone would be the most compatible industrial zoning (both permitted uses and development standards) with this proposed residential area. Such standards as screening, setbacks, and site review through the site development plan should accomplish sufficient buffering between the two land uses. 4) Properties to both the east and west are presently zoned P-M, thus, the proposed zoning would be compatible with ex- isting surrounding zoning. 5) At the time that a site development plan for the property is approved, all necessary dedications and improvements of Pal- omar Airport Road can be addressed. 6) The P-M-Q zoning allows for flexibility in site design which will be of value in producing a site development plan ad- dressing the saving of numerous live oak trees found on the property. Overall, from a consistency and land use compatibility stand- point, staff feels that a zone change to the P-M-Q would be ap- propriate for the subject property. III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Director has determined that this project will not have a significant effect upon the environment and therefore has issued a Negative Declaration on July 1, 1981. c IV. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission APPROVE the Nega- tive Declaration issued by the Planning Director and adopt Plan- ning Commission Resolution No. 1837, recommending APPROVAL of ZC-239, based on the findings and subject to the conditions con- tained therein. ATTACHMENTS 1) PC Resolution No. 1837 2) Location Map 3) Background Data Sheet . 4) Disclosure Form 5) Environmental Documents PJK:ar 7/14/81 /O ""S CASE NO. CASE NO: BACKGROUND DATA SHEET ZC-239 APPLICANT: ROBERT C. KELLY _ . . RB.v-:jEST AND IDCATIO": Zone Change from C and R- 4 (County) to P-M-Q _ (Planned Industrial, city) , east of Laurel Tree Road, south of Palomar Airport Rpad and _|Tmnarl-i at-Aly wpgf- of j-.hp. pnwpr -t-i-anpJTni g^i on — lings. .. LEC=Mi DESCRIPTION: JThat portion of that certain parcel designation as "Description No. 3" filed Dec. 19, 1960 being that portion of Lot "9" -according to -Map Ho. 023 filed November 16, 109G. - : - ; — Assessors Parcel Kuniber:' 212 - 040 - 19 ,26 /•'.:'. ; . Acres 11.01 _ No. of Lots 2 _ ' . GENERAL PLSN KvD ZONING : General Plan Land Use Designation Planned Industrial • Density Allowed N/A _ Density Proposed Existing Zone C, R-4 . Proposed Zone P-M-Q Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: ' . • Zoning Land Use --,.'• North A-l(O) County Vacant South E~i~A County Vacant - . . • . ' • Eac-h P""M Vacant West P-M-Q . Industrial " PUBLIC FACILITIES ; :School District Carlsbad • • Water District Costa Real Sever District Palomar Airport Drainage Basin EDU's N/A Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated May 20, 1981 • (Other: .HW.ROMMENTAI. _ X_ _____ Negative Declaration, issued July 1, 1981 LO:J ^o. ZC-239 ___ E.I.U. Certified, dated ___ _ ______ Other, ___________ __ __ *_ o,f arter the informatio:*««<ou have submitted has been rpajewed, it is determined that further informati<(^i«s required, you will be so a^^T^ed.- APPLICANT: AGENT: MEMBERS: *APN: 212-040-19/Robert B. Kelly, sole owner **APN: 212-040-26/Tahnee Corp,, A California corporation Name (individual, partnership,.joint venture, corporation, syndication) * 16Q3 Tustin Ave., Costa Mesa, CA 92627 ** 3910 Chapman Street, San Diego, CA 92110 Business Address •* (714) 646-2214 ' . ... ** (J14) 223-2181 • ' • •Telephone Number LAND PLANNERS, Jean Jensen -C Altisma Way Carlsbad, CA 92008 Business Address (714) 438-0178 Telephone 'Number • , .• '.'"->'. .. .- SAME AS APPLICANT /Robert B, Kelly and Tahnee Corp, Name -(individual, partner, joint venture, corporation, syndication) Home Address Business Address Telephone Number Telephone Number Name Home Address Business Address Telephone Number Telephone Number (Attach more sheets if necessary) ""' 1/\tle declare under penalty of perjury that the information 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.