Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-01-15; Design Review Board; MinutesMINUTES Meeting of: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Time of Meeting: 5:OO p.m. Date of Meeting: January 15, 1986 Place of Meeting: City Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER: The Meeting was called to order by Chairman McCoy at 5:05 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Chairman McCoy, Members Marcus, Holmes and Schlehuber. Absent: None. Staff Members Present: Chris Salomone, Community Redevelopment Manager Dan Hentschke, Assistant City Attorney Marty Orenyak, Building Director Brian Hunter, Assistant Planner; Development Processing Division PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Chairman McCoy. PUBLIC HEARING: 1. RP/CUP 84-3A CARLSBAD INN Chris Salomone, Community Redevelopment Manager, gave update on request for an amendment to a major redevelopment permit to allow a restaurant with liquor license in a previously approved "retail" space. Mr. Salomone used displays depicting project as it as approved originally. With the help of slides Mr. Salomone described the project as it was approved in 1984. Issue was section that was deemec as retail section and during the construction phase an issue of a restaurant use arose and other issues Enclosed patio with deck above and interior retail on first and second floor is what is now at the site. Mr. Orenyak, Building Director addressed the Board stating that in early November 1985 it became evident that what was approved at the site was not what was being built. The first thing that came to his attention was an application form ABC for on sale liquor license. Also, it was noticed that a patio cover was under construction at that time. that it was more than a bakery and retail use. Mr. Orenyak stated that at that time he contacted Mr. Watkins, the owner. Mr. Watkins was under the impression that he could sell alcoholic bever- ages and light food fare. Mr. Watkins was notified that he would need to go before the Board and ultimately the City Council since this was a major amendment to the original redevelopment permit applicatiba- and prior approval. After going into the building was obvious _- MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1/15/86 PAGE 2 After researching the plans and folders for the approved proposal, Mr. Orenyak noted that the permit stated retail and gallery and that bakery goods would be served with a gallery and antique store upstairs. Third correction on the plans stated to show use of upstairs and downtstairs portion of front building since it was obvious that it was going to restaurant and bar, the correction in big block letters stated that it was going to be retail use only. Member Holmes asked what the original front set-back was. Mr. Hunter, Assistant Planner, responded with 47 feet. It was further noted by staff that it was 27 feet to the patio cover at this time. Brian Hunter, Assistant Planning assigned to Redevelopment, gave staff report, stating that major issue was parking with the changing of the use from retail use to restaurant. Restaurant use is 1 space per every 100 square feet of gross floor area. Retail is 1 space per 400 square feet of gross floor area. Second floor deck had to be included in calculation which was not previously approved. Staff calculated 57 spaces were totaled for combined retail and restaurant use. Applicant is asking is asking for a 15% shared, common parkinc reduction. Unfortunately there is a reciprocal parking agreement at this site. Staff added that if a 15% reduction were approved only 12 parking spaces would be required. Staff does not recommend that a 15% reduction be granded to due to the parkir problems that exist in the area. Mr. Hunter also stated that there was a conditional use permit as a part of this application that requires a bonafide restaurant on the premises. Finally an architectural question arose regarding building which extends 15 feet more into the front setback area into Carlsbad Blvd. and the style being the massiveness and large beams which also increases its impact on Carlsbad Blvd. Member Schlehuber asked if a count of the parking had been done. In response, Mr. Hunter stated that there are 224 numbered spaces in the under- ground parking facility, however, 13 of those are not so marked, stripped, 56 parking spaces on the upper lot for a total of 280 spaces on site. Member Holmes asked if during calculation if lower floor enclosed patio was taken into consideration. Mr. Hunter in responsed in stating that all gross floor area was taken into consideration. Member Schlehuber had question on patio that surrounded Fidel's. Mr. Hunter added that the tile deck outside Fidel's was approved during prior hearings. The wooden deck was never considered as part of eating area. v MEMBERS MINUTES Chairman McCoy opened Public Hearing: Mr. Jim Watkins, 335 14th Street, Del Mar, Owner of Carlsbad Inn. Mr. Watkins, updated the board on some of the processes and why some of the issues progressed. In reference to the staff report, Mr. Watkins statec that the wooden deck is in the homeowner's lot and is controlled by the homeowner's and has nothins to do with Fidel's. Also, the large kitchen up- stairs is in fact a bakery the kitchen is downstair: Secondly, the upstairs decking, the setback from the trellis has never been changed, what did happen was that the building department required a second exist out of that area so we felt it should come out somewhat and have a tin railing and to keep with the architecture it was done. Mr. Watkins stated that the Grunyon's Run, spa, etc., was presented to the building department. Mr. Watkins also stated that the Grunyon's Run facility is needed because the resort is a full facility resort and is needed to provide room service and breakfast service so the larger kitchen was needed. In April 1985 a letter was submitted to the City in detail exactly what they were doing. In concept it was submitted from the day one. Mr. Watkins felt if there was a problem the City should have said so nine months ago. Mr. Watkins stated that he was under the impression that everything was being done as it was approved. The Grunyon's Run is half restaurant and half retail. Mr. Watkins noted that he did go to the City and asked about food service. Applicant noted that the use has not changed in his estimation. Mr. Watkins asked that the Board reconsider the 15% reduction in parking because it is in the code and it was felt that there is enough on site parking to take care of any potential parking problems. Mr. Watkins further identified parking on site and reasoning for 15% reduction stating that there are 198 spaces for patrons of hotel which will probably be eating breakfast etc. on site plus Fidel's does not serve breakfast so there is another 49 spaces. Most significant factor noted was that any hotel of this nature form 10-4 in the afternoon the parking is virtually empty. Mr. Wakins stated that in the evening most of the people at the resort use the facilities ( of which parking is assigned). During the evening the retail shops are basically closed. Mr. Watkins felt that the parking was adequate and not asking for consideration outside scope of the code. Member McCoy asked if parking space was sold with time-share. Mr. Watkins stated that each time share condo had one parking space, totally controlle when time share not used parking space could be used by other. Mr. Watkins noted that they do meet all criteria for mixed use, shared parking as needed for reduction in parking requirement. Chairman McCoy asked if there was any further testimony. MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1/15/86 PAGE 4 Mr. Howard Meecham, Director of Development for Winner's Circle International. Mr. Meecham stated that the railing and stairs were the only additions that alter the original approved elevations of the trellis structure. The stairs and railing were carefully designed. Mr. Meechum further spoke on overall design of parking facility on site. Mr. Bill Canepa, President, developers of Tamarack Beach Resort, 442 8th Street, Del Mar., stated that the project would benefit area and spoke in support. Sarah Marquez, 2958 Garfield St., Manager of Town Square on Carlsbad Boulevard, spoke in favor. Glenda Simpkins, House of Frozen Yogurt, stated that the cross uses will support each and Grunyon's Run will be vital to her business. Also that she is tenant in retail section of Carlsbad Inn and is not permitted to park on property nor are her employees. Rene Templin, has business in Carlsbad Inn and supports amendment, also does not park on property. Member Holmes asked where tenants do park. Ms. Templin in response stated that she parks off site. George Ludwig, Retail Beach and Gift Store, feels that it would be beneficial to the area. Supports the project and sees no problem. Denise Jean, Salon in new retail center former owner of Greco's on Jefferson Street, spoke in favor of the project. Carol Watkins, owner of Grunyon's Run and wife of Jim Watkins, applicant. Spoke in support of project. Mrs. Watkins spoke on retail uses and noted that the project would be a show case for the area. Daniel DiGivanni, Owner of Henry's Restaurant, north side of Elm Avenue across from Carlsbad Inn, spoke in favor of project. Feels parking problem could be solved. Chairman McCoy asked if there was any further testimony for or against project. Mary Miledio, 159 Hemlock, stated that she had brought up the problem of parking during the initial hearings on this parking. Stated that at the time MEMBERS 1 MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1/15/86 PAGE 5 of initial review by the Board and City Council there was no mention of a restuarant. Witt Rollett, Carlsbad Pipeline stated that it was an excellent project but the parking is very much a problem. He has spent months trying to get a two hour parking regulation in front of his business on Carlsbad Boulevard due to the limited parking spaces in the area. Mr. Rollett feels that there is a solution but it needs to be dealt with prior to approving the amendment to the permit, Also, by asking employees of Carlsbad Inn not to park on the premises would cause a greater problem with on street parking. Norma Grumwald, 3080 Lincoln Street, feels that there is enough parking for the facility. Richard Pitchford, 2409 Jacqueranda, Manager Carlsbad Inn, spoke in favor stating that he felt that there was not a parking problem. Since no one else wished to speak public hearing closed. DISCUSSION: Member Marcus stated she understood discussion to be that basis of figures presented that at the most successful time of the Inn there would be approximately 75% occupancy and there would be ''x" amount of parking available underground that would normally be used for the hotel. Looking down the road further, assuming that we agree that project does meet requirements, how could applicant determine that people would use underground parking facility. Mr. Orenyak of the City staff stated that there will be more directional signs to the underground parking, many people do not realize that there is underground parking. Staff feels that people visiting the complex will use the most convenient parking. Member Schlehuber stated that it wasn't a question of the quality of the project, the problem is that there is some real parking problems in the beach area. Feels that employees should be parking in the facility. Everyone realizes that this is a quality facility but there are some problems in the area. Will have to go with staff report but does feel there are some alternatives. Member Holmes stated that the Carlsbad Inn is delightful but feels that the key to whole operatioi is liquor and in order to have that you have to have a "bonafide" restaurant. Member Holmes also stated that he went over the file and nowhere does it state "restaurant" it states "retail". Concern is over the tenants having to park off-site. MEMBERS \ MINUTES _- DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1/15/86 PAGE 6 Member Holmes mentioned that after much thought he has come up with five alternatives. Alternative were as follows: 1) Remove kitchens 2) Bakery kitchen for take out only; lower kitchen for room service and time share only. 3) Keep kitchens and dining rooms and use unuse, time share parking (that of time share units that are currently not built) for that and assign those to the restaurants and work out parking problem at a later date. or valet parking. 4) Purchase a site in the area for employee 5) Out and out denial for yard encroachments. Member Marcus stated that she liked alternative No. 4 best. Member Schlehuber mentioned that Mr. Watkins could appeal to Council or go back to staff and try to work something out if time frame was constraint. Chairman McCoy agreed as far as the employee parkin The outdoor eating area at Fidel's and at the restaurant and he saw, counted 80 tables and chairs Don't believe there all going to come from the hotel an felt that the parking was going to be a problem and cannot support amendment to permit until the parking was improved. Mr. Watkins added that there is a provision in the code and was not asking for anything outside that provision, did not know where to go from here due to time constraints. Mr. Salomone stated that the Housing and Redevelopment Commission could be called for a public hearing. Mrs. Watkins stated that the liquor license imposed a problem in that it has been noticed twice and could not afford another time delay. After further discussion the Board felt that there was a solution perhaps if the applicant considered the possibility of delaying the construction of the next 68 units of the hotle. Member Schlehuber stated that the findings go beyond the CUP. Applicant questioned when building could be used. In response, Assistant City Attorney, Dan Hentschke stated that the building as it now exists can be used as retail use, if to be used for other than that use a permit is needed. MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1/15/86 PAGE 7 Member Schlehuber stated that the application for amendment to redevelopment permit would still need to be forwarded to Housing and Redevelopment Commission. Motion made for denial.of RP/CUP 84-3A Carlsbad Inn. Request for approval of an amendment to a major redevelopment permit, and a conditional use permit to allow a restaurant with liquor license in space previously designated for retail use. 2. RP 86-1 WAVE CREST I1 Chris .Salomone, Community Redevelopment Manager presented staff report stating that item was request for a minor redevelopment permit to remove existing one story building on northwest corner of Elm Ave. and State Street and construct a temporary sales information facility on site. Mr. Salomone showed slides of site as it exists at present, location of old Joe's Transmission. Mr. Salomone added that the transmission business has been relocated and the building on the northwest corner has been vacant since. The building is in a major intersection of the downtown area. Proposal before board is to remove building and replace with sales office for Tamarack Beach Resort. The new owner of the site has brought in conceptual plans but realizes that it would take a year or better to accomplish. The owner has found a tenant to occupy the site in the interim, proposal before board. An 18 month limit for this use is requested to be imposed for this temporary facility. The large rectangle building currently on site will be replaced and site cleared of all old existing transmission site. Staff feels that this gives an opportunity to clean up this major intersection. Member Marcus recommended that access be limited to alley on Elm Avenue. Member Holmes had question on interpretation of temporary use. Staff pointed out that the use would have an 18 month limit. Chairman McCoy had question regarding the island. Staff member Salomone stated that as the project is proposed, concrete island is serving as a base for shade arbor. Chairman McCoy asked if lessee had anthing to add. Mr. Bill Canepa, Tamarack Beach Resort, added that one of the things they need is easy accessability to the site. Mr. Canepa didn't feel that there would be any type of congestion there. McCoy Marcus Holmes Schlehuber - X X X X MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1/19/86 P E8 Member Holmes asked if applicant would consider removing existing islands that they will not be using. Mr. Canepa stated that if its something that can be easily removed, also asphalt will be fixed. Motion . Approved RP 86-1 with change. East existing driveway be closed on Elm Avenue. RP 86-1 WAVE CREST I1 - RESOLUTION NO. 065. Request for a minor redevelopment permit to remove an existing one story structure on the northwest corner of Elm Avenue and State Street and construct a temporary sales information facility for Tamarack Beach Resort. Off Agenda Item. Discussion held on Design Review Board/staff workshop. January 30, 1986 at Beach Terrace Inn. By proper motion meeting adjourned. Respectfully Submitted, CHRIS SALOMONE Community Redevelopment Manager BIB1 LEAK Secretary II/Redevelopment Acting Minutes Clerk MEMBERS ’ McCoy Marcus Holmes Schlehuber