Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-03-14; Planning Commission; MinutesCITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 14, 1979 Page One (1) I. I1 . 111. IV . NOT 2FICIAL UNTIL APPROVED AT SUBSEQUENT MEETING OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION CAbL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:05 by Chairman L'Heurmx. ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Chairman L'Heureux, Commissioners Rombotis, %arcus, Jose, Larson, Schick Commissioners absent: Commissioner Wrench AGBNDA ITEM COMMUNICATIONS A. B. C. D. Draft Redevelopment Documents were provided for all- Commissioners along with a memorandum from Jack Henthorn, Redevelopment Coordinator. (Exhibit I attached) A memorandum from staff to the City Council regarding Community Identity Signs, ZCA-107, was distributed.- Mr. Abrams announced that due to the lengthy agenda that possibly, in order to expedite the meeting, certain items should be taken out of order. (EXHIBIT 11)- Chairman L'Heureux reminded the Commission that Disclosure Statements are due this month. BUSINESS A. MS-392, Panhandle Lots, Frank Renn, applicant, as required by Section 21.10.080 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Mr. Dave Abrams presented the staff report. (EXHIBIT 111) in the width of the property. A1 Ruden, 2733 Mesa, Oceanside, the Engineer representing the applicant, clarified that the 242' figure was correct and that the driveway would be graded as shown on the map. Chairman L'Heureux asked if staff had consulted with the City Attorney regarding the wording of condition #9 regarding the covenant running with the land. Staff indicated that the condition was a standard condition of processing and had not been reviewed by the Attorney, hs it was staff's understanding that the question had been answered by the City Engineer at the meeting of February 28, 1979. PLANNING COMMISSIC- MINUTES March 14, 1979 Page Two (2) c A motion was made approving MS-392 based upon the findings and conditions as outlined in the staff report dated March 14, 1979, and with the further qualification that condition #9 be forwarded to the City Attorney for clarification and appropriate rewording. Commissioner Jose noted for the record that since he was not present at the February 28, 1979' meeting, and had not reviewed the tapes thereof, he would abstain from voting. Chairman L'Heureux indicated that the staff report as refer- enced above adequately addressed all the issues and summarized the actions of the February 28th meeting. He further indicated that if Commissioner Jose had read and reviewed the contents thereof, and felt knowledgeable on the subject, he may vote. RPPROVED MOTION: Larson SECOND: Rombotis AYES : Rombotis, Marcus, Jose, L'Heureux, Larson, Schick NOES : None V. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS A. EIR-528, Lake Calavera Hills Satellite Sewer Treatment Facility, Roy Ward, applicant. - Chairman L'Heureux related that due8'to the fact that he had a possible conflict of interest with this item he would abstain: from voting, and turned the meeting over to Vice-chairman Schick at this point. Mr. Charlie Grimm presented the staff report and distributed a copy of the comments submitted by Commissioner Wrench, and a letter from the Department of Health Services to be included in the EIR documents. Mr. Grimm then introduced Mr. Frank Grant and Ms. Jan Fahey of Montgomery Engineering, consultants for the EIR. Regarding the issue of sludge and capacity of landfills in the area, Mr. Grant related that the question of the adequacy of landfill sites is beyond the scope of their investigation. He pointed out that this problem is regional rather than local and if, in fact, there is a shortage of such areas, a detailed study should be made. He further pointed out that although sludge drying beds or deliquefying equipment will be used, the residue must still be trucked out. He noted that the residue resembles moist dirt rather than a liquid. Another main concern was salt and its effect on the groundwater basin. Mr. Grant related that the final amount of salt which is ultimately. added to the groundwater does not represent a significant problem. He stated that in other areas water with PLANNING COMMISSIC-YINUTES March 14, 1979 Page Three (3) a higher salt content is used for irrigation and agricultural uses with no appreciable side effects. He did indicate, however, that when the salt content is increased, it is often necessary to use more water. Based upon limited information available, it appears that existing groundwater quality may not meet the objectives that have been established for it. With the ability to apply reclaimed water with quality meeting the objectives, it then would be reasonable to expect that the quality of the basins may be maintained within the objectives established. No degradation relative to the objectives of the basin would occur. The fail safe lines are an integral part of the basin plan alternative study back in the early 1970's and are integral components of satellite treatment facilities. The fail safe connection was originally conceived of as an emergency outlet in the event of a biological upset or other hazard occuring at the plant. However, it is also apparent that the failsafe connection may be used for discharge of excess reclaimed water and serve as a means of distributing reclaimed water to potential reuse areas. This flexibility is part of the recommended alternative. Flexibility may also be provided so that flow from the failsafe line may be directed either to the influent or affluent of the Encina plant. The corridor for the routing of the failsafe line is generally known. The line will proceed in the most direct route to the Encina facility, and ought to be laid to existing rights-of-way and where there will be minimal disturbance to sensitive flora and fauna. The Environmental review process is to examine potential environmental impacts and point out those areas which need special consideration during implementation of the project. Sensitive plants and erosion which would subsequently endanger sensitive have been topics raised in the EIR process. All reasonable means will be made during construction to avoid either direct or indirect disturbance of flora and fauna within the area. Regarding the Agua Hedionda Creek crossing, there is a bridge on El Camino Real which may serve as a potentially environmentally sound means of crossing the creek without disturbing sensitive areas. On the other hand, construction methods specified during the preparation of plant specifications, would prevent any excess silt being in the creek channel should the detailed engineering analysis determine that a creek crossing other than the bridge is the most cost effective alignment. Construc- tion could occur during summer months, when there is little flow within the creek, trucking away of spoils not suitable for backfill, prohibition of placing of excavation materials within the creek channel, housekeeping requirements, limitations of equipment employed within the channel, etc. PLANNING COMMISSIOL. MINUTES March 14, 1979 Page Four (4) ,+ The fourth major concern, that of odors, is understandable in light of the Encina situation. EIR studies throughout the country have found that the oxidation ditch type of treatment is remarkably odor free. Environmental Protection Agency studies report plants operating under this system produce a biologically stable sludge that could be handled without odor problems. Even those plants operating with problems are characterized by their lack of odor. Any odors resulting from malfunction would be controlled by pre cholorination or by sending waters to the failsafe line and out of the project area. Commissioner Jose questioned as to lagoon contamination. Mr. Grant answered that there would be no direct discharge into any lagoon. Water would be percolated into the ground- water recharge areas upstream of the beginning of the lagoons. Water then percolated into these areas would enhance the groundwater quality and this water would subsequently be pumped out for agriculture and other irrigation uses. There would not be any contamination to the lagoons. The only water that may enter the lagoons would be through goundwater movementc and after being treated, and percolated through many hundreds of feet of soil. commissioner Marcus expressed confusion regarding significant and insignificant impacts. Jan Fahey resDonded that a primary impact is one which is due to the facility itself. Insignificant impacts on landfills would be just from the sludges generated by the treatment plant. Secondary impacts deal with impacts of development in the area that would be allowed by having the treatment plant there, or those generated by the community. Commissioner Larson asked if sludge disposal might be mitigated by commercial sale of the sludge. Mr. Grant responded that marketing studies have been conducted showing a few marketing programs with sufficient quantities of sludge to bag and sell. Generally, however, the market is on a haul it yourself basis and is not shown to be cost effective. Commissioner Larson expressed concern regarding raw sewage being sent to Encina in event of a plant failure. hTr. Grant answered that the fail safe line would allow disposal of excess effluent, particularly during the rainy season, when the groundwater basin might be full. Regional Boards have developed enough standards and regulations requiring standby and backup facilities that the issue of transportation of PLANNING COMMISSIC" MINUTES March 14, 1979 Page Five (5) P actual raw sewage is no longer a real issue for most facilities. In case of malfunction there should be a provision that any inadequately treated effluent may be sent to the Encina plant. Commissioner Larson requested comment on the need for 400 acres of agricultural land. Mr. Grant indicated that although 400 acres seems like a lot of land, when considered as 3 feet per acre of irrigation requirement, the amount of effluent corresponds to that much area. Commissioner Larson asked if more stringent safety measures should be taken as the plant cound present a potential attractive nuisance to small children. .- Mr. Grant related that he was not aware of any such problems in similar plants. In general he believes the public is usually aware of the type of use involved and *heir: inherent dangers. Current practices seem to be adequate in this regards. Commissioner Rombotis read a letter from the Department of Health Services requesting that there be no delay in the construction of fail safe facilities. Mr. Grant stated that their evaluation was that the fail safe line primarily was a means of disposing of excess effluent and during the early stages of development there will be no excess, therefore, no immediate need for the line. They would recommend the delay of the line for about five years unless needed before that time. Commissioner Rombotis asked as to the difference in Type I and I1 wastewater and its suitability for discharge into the Buena Vista Creek. Mr. Grant indicated that Type I wastewater is water used as a replacement for non-wastewater, or a the use of waste- wate.r in lieu of clean water. For instance wastewater could be used for agriculture irrigation or park landscape water. Type I1 wastewater would be the use of water that would not normally be necessary except to accomodate the treatment plant. An example is irrigating an open space area that could survive without irrigation. Mr. Grant added that State of California policies prevent the discharge of any type of wastewater into any stream or body of water unless it can be shown that such discharge will enhance the area. c PLANNING COMMISSI\ MEETING March 14, 1979 Page Six (6) Mr. Grant continued by explaining that recently a water board in Los Angeles had approved a discharge permit for a dual water system for private use. This system does have some restrictions such as no faucets to prevent hose connec- tions, that the water go directly onto lawns, and irrigation not begin until after 7:OO P.M. THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 8:lO P.M. Mr. Dennis O'Leary, Lowrey and Associates, 3505 El Camino del Rio, San Diego, representing Lake Calavera Hills Associates, pointed out the difference between Type I and Type I1 wastewater reclamation. This is a distinction which exists in the regulations of the State Water Resources Control Board, The State Water Resources Control Board wants to give its grants, which amount to approximately 7%% of the project costs, to those projects which definately will provide an alternative water supply for waters now being used, this is Type I reclamation. You may also have Type I1 which gets a lesser priority but will not necessarily receive a grant. Therefore, the distinction is made between the two uses. This is not a grant project and so the distinction need not be made here. The distinction between Type I and Type I1 uses then leads to the conclusion that you must purchase land to assure the continuation of Type I1 uses, i.e. the purchase of 400 acres of land, thus increasing the cost considerably. In that regard, this land can be leased or some other form of long term commitment, in lieu of actual pruchase. In prac- ticality there is really no distinction between Type I and Type I1 uses, because there will be reclaimed water in San Diego County in massive doses, including landscape irrigation, open space irrigation, etc. It is suggested that the desig- nation of Type I and I1 be dropped. Mr. O'Leary went on to say that the basic plan of the Regional Water Quality Control Board very effectively pro- hibits the discharging of sewage into coastal lagoons and streams by the setting of standards for such discharge so high that it is economically prohibitive to try to meet them at the present time. There is currently much research into the area of reclamation and "live stream'' projects. Mr. Roy Ward, 3088 Pi0 Pico, the owner of Lake Calavera Hills, stated that the prime use of reclaimed water would be the urbanized area of Lake Calavera Hills. He stated that it would take 20 years of continuous production and treatment in reclaiming of water before any water would be wasted by sending it down the fail safe line into an escape channel, other than in an emergency or failure of the plant. Lake Calavera Hills, as the primary user of this water should be rated as Type I users along with agriculture potential that will be existent in Carlsbad throughout the development of the City. PLANNING COMMISSION M. JTES March 14, 1979 Page Seven (7) - P Mr. Ward clarified that the proposal, as presented, is two separate phases. Wastewater collection, treatment and disposal is separate from, and is costed separately fromthe process of reclamation of water and the improvement of that source. The collection, treatment and disposal of wastewater is complete and, as proposed, works. For the long range, the potential of water reclamation becomes an important part of the total planning process for the entire basin and County of San Diego. Mr. Ward reminded the Commission that the condition had been added to the Master Plan that in the event that the wastewater treatment facility was approved, a dual water system would be required as part of the conditions of every map to be filed on the property in the future. A reference was made to the higher costs of the operation of satel- lite treatment facilities versus a regional plant type facility. Mr. Ward pointed out that for the Encina plant to be expanded it is necessary for Encina to incorporate, to a degree, secondary treatment to get the proper approvals from the Environmental Protection Administration. Therefore, the same cost factors which would apply to the satellite treatment plant would also apply to Encina. P The fact that these facilities, in effect, take care of themselves with the minimum of skilled, technical service and support from trained personnel was pointed out. As evidenced on the recent field trip, the plants were operating efficiently with few employees required. In reference to the field trip of March 9, 1979, Mr. Ward indicated that the Ramona facility had been designed by Montgomery, and reminded the Commission that one of the key factors in the lack of odor at that plant was due to the sludge digestor and dewater equipment. This digesting equipment has been incorporated into the plans for the proposed satellite sewer facility. Mr. Steve Lamprides, 1245 Hornblen, San Diego, an interested student, addressed the Commission. He asked how the total plan would be affected if, in fact, regulations insisted on the construction of the fail safe line at the outset of development rather than allowing it to be constructed at a later time. Mr. Grant replied that, if the project were all build immediately, under requirements and regulations, there may not be sufficient funding available, as addressed in Chapter 10. It certainly would make a difference to the proposed developer. Staff distributed a letter from the Carlsbad Unified School District correcting the number of students affected in the study - area. THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:39 P.M. WITH NO FURTHER TESTIMONY. PLANNING COMMISSION MI-TES March 14, 1979 Page Eight (8) !- Commissioner Jose commented that although he had been absent from the last meeting he had, in fact, thoroughly reviewed the pertinent documents. Commissioner Larson asked if other EIRs would be prepared for future development of this project. Staff replied that a full EIR would not be completed but supple- ments would be made as necessary. Commissioner Rombotis asked where the archaeological siting informa- tion was found, as some of the sites noted were over two miles from the proposed project. Ms. Jan Fahey indicated that such information is provided by the San Diego County Museum and the Museum of Man. A motion was made certifying that EIR-528, for a satellite sewer facility, meets the intents and purposes of the California Environmental Qualify Act and recommending approval by the City Council. This certification in no way implies approval of any proposed siting for the satellite sewage treatment plan. CERTIFIED MOTION : Rombotis SECOND : Jose AYES : Rombotis, Marcus, Jose, Larson, Schick ABSTAIN : L I Heureux NOES : None At 8:35 P.M. a brief recess was taken. The meeting was re-convened at 8:50 P.M. by Chairman L'Heureux. A motion was made approving a Resolution of Appreciation for City Engineer, Tim Flanagan, who is leaving the City. The motion passed unanimously. VI. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CUP-l24A, Montessori School, Jeff Crisman, applicant.- Mr. Dave Abrams presented the staff report. (EXHIBIT IV) Commissioner Jose commented on the staff report which stated that the project would not generate significant air pollution. He stated that with the increase in students, the number of auto- mobiles would increase, thus affecting the air pollution. He further indicated that several conditions of the original CUP-124 assigned gates, and litter on the grounds. He felt that periodic inspections should be made by the City in order to assure compliance with such conditions. t had not been complied with by the applicant including the use of .PLANNING COMMISSION MJ-TTES March 14, 1979 Page Nine (9) General questions were discussed including an increase in noise pollution, the placement of playground equipment, the use of the temporary building, and busing of students. Jeff Crisman, 3485 Valley, Carlsbad, the applicant, replied that the playground had been situated close to the street in order to mitigate the noise element and in accordance with the Fire Department requirements for fire access. He indicated that the temporary building was for the relocation of students during the construction phase. He assured the Commission that there would be no increase in student load until after completion of the construction and that the temporary building would be removed prior to occupancy of the new building. As far as the busing of students is concerned, Mr. Crisman related that there is a car pool system at the present time, and they see no necessity for busing at this time. Commissioner Larson asked if condition #2, regarding the one year deadline for commencement of construction, began upon the final approval is granted, or from the start of construction. Staff replied that the one year limitation upon the start of construction. c Mr. Crisman related that he felt the restrictions regarding the moving of the playground were unreasonable in that a precedent had been set, as many playgrounds in the area did not conform to said conditions. He further indicated that condition #16 was oppressive and he would like an extension of time within which to comply with this condition. THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AND CLOSED AT 9:20 P.M. WITH NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY. Commissioner Rombotis expressed concern regarding condition #14, limiting the number of students on the playground at one time. A motion was made approving CUP-124 (A) to raise the maximum student level from 34 to 124, with a building expansion of 3088 square feet, and to locate a permanent building temporarily on the property, in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in the staff report dated March 14, 1979, with the follow- ing modifications: Condition #2 will be revised to read: "Unless the use is commenced no later than one year from the date of approval of Planning Commission Resolution #1496, is diligently pursued thereafter, and completed within eighteen months of approval of said resolution, this approval shall automatically become null and void." PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 14, 1979 Page Ten (10) ? Condition #4 shall be revised to read: "The temporary building is approved only to accommodate the existing use and student load during the construction phase of the project. The temporary structure shall maintain all required yard setbacks, and shall be removed prior to final occupancy of the permanent school addition." Condition #13 regarding the relocation of the playground should be deleted. Condition #14 should be revised to read: "That no more than 54 students be presebt on the playground area at one time except in emergency situations and for fire drills." i- Condition #6 shall be rewritten as follows: "The Planning Director shall conduct an investigation of the project's operation on or before September 30, 1979, and again on or before March 31, 1980, and shall report the results of his investigation to the Planning Commission thereafter. His report shall include any citizen complaints made concerning the use of traffic hazards created, and general compliance with the appropriate conditions of CUP-124 and CUP-l24(A). The Planning Commission may, upon receipt of the report, conduct a public hearing in accordance with Chapter 21.54 of the Municipal Code to consider amendments to or revocation of the Conditional Use Permits." An additional condition should be added stating that: "It is specifically understood that at no time during the construction of this project will the school enrollment exceed 34 students. APPROVED MOTION: Rombotis SECOND : Schick AYES: Rombotis, Marcus, Jose, Larson, Schick, L'Heureux NOES : None VII. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) A. V-287, George Smith, applicant. ." - 31,. Mr. Dave Abrams presented the staff report. (EXHIBIT v) Commissioner Jose asked if ZCA-104 regarding yard encroach- ments would alleviate the necessity of the Planning Commission hearing items such as this. r Staff responded that a Zone Code Amendment is currently being PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 14, 1979 Page Eleven (11) - ,". researched and that it is not clear at this time exactly what types of encroachments would be involved, nor how they would be handled. THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 9:45 P.M. Mr. George Smith, 5401 Los Robles, Carlsbad, the applicant indicated that the patio in question was originally approved by the City inspectbrs. The-structure is there with a- 6' wall around it and latticework overhead. Staff indicated that the enclosing of such a patio is not allowed under the present zoning and that, in addition, all applicable findings must be met in order to grant the variance. THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:50 WITH NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY. A motion was made denying V-287 due to the fact that the circum- stances do not meet the criteria for the necessary findings. DENIED MOTION : Larson SECOND : Rombotis AYES: Rombotis, Marcus, L'Heureux, Jose, Larson NOES : Schick The Commission reminded the applicant that unless appealed, this decision was final. They also noted that they were sympathetic to the problem involved herein and urged staff to proceed with the Zone Code Amendment providing for such instances as unusual topo- graphical and technical intrusions into rear and sideyard setbacks, assuming adequate access can be provided. This will not be con- strued to mean wholesale room additions or including of a room for all weather use, but rather a simple means of processing patio covers, decks, etc. Staff asked if projects such as Mr. Smith's should be included in that zone code amendment and Commission replied no, this is not their intent. B. CT 77-18 (A) /cp-1, Sandtrap Condominiums, G. Linquiti, applicant. Mr. Dave Abrams presented the staff report. (EXHIBIT VI)- THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AND CLOSED AT 10:05 P.M. WITH THE APPLICANT INDICATING HIS CONCURRENCE WITH STAFF'S OPINION AND HIS WILLINGNESS TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. A motion was recommending approval of CT 77-18 (A)/CP-l under the terms and conditons as contained in the staff report dated I- PLANNING COMMISSION MI"TES March 14, 1979 Page Twelve (12) r March 14, 1979. APPROVED MOTION: Larson SECOND : Marcus AYES : Rombotis, Marcus, L'Heureux, Jose, Schick, Larson NOES : None At 1O:lO P.M. a brief recess was taken. The meeting was called to order at 10:15 by Chairman L'Heureux. VI11 .OLD BUSINESS A. SDP 78-3, Burnett Shopping Center. Mr. Dave Abrams presented the staff report. The Commission questioned staff regarding parking, parking enforce- ment, and fire lanes. Staff remarked that the parking spaces indicated were adequate for the uses and square footage indicated. Striping and signage would be required for fire lanes and possibly some sort of parking endorcement by the Fire Department or Police Department could be reviewed. - Chairman L'Heureux asked if the project were allocated sewer at a later date would a larger project be allowed. Staff replied that in the event a sewer allocation were obtained, no expansion of the project would be allowed without an amendment to the application. Staff went on to say that they are taking steps to provide for an additional bus stop, but that the Transit District had not yet replied to their letter. Mr. William Burnett, 523 W. 6th Street, Los Angeles, the applicant, indicated his agreement with staff's position but questioned the necessity of a sidewalk off of La Costa Avenue. Mr. Robert Haugaard, the architect for the applicant, assured the Commission that adequate screening would be provided for rooftop equipment and indicated that, in regards to rear elevations along El Camino Real, decorative wall treatment would be used in con- junction with small tile roof, false arches, etc. He stated that the name of the market in the project would appear on the side of the building. Mr. Burnett noted that the sign criteria for the project would be of a wooden type. He proposed a center identification sign and r- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 14, 1979 r Page Thirteen (13) A motion was made approving SDP 78-3 in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in the staff report dated March 14, 1979, and with the following conditions: That adequate screening of the market loading dock area be provided to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. An elevation on the north side of the market shall be submitted to the Planning Director prior to approval of the final site development plan. This elevation shall carry forth the architectural motif as shown on Exhibit B and shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director. Any additional uses requested for the site must maintain current parking ratios. Fire lanes and no parking areas shall be designated by curb painting, striping and signing to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshall. APPROVED MOTION: Rombotis SECOND : Jose AYES: Rombotis, Marcus, Jose, L'Heureux, Schick, Larson NOES: None A minute motion was made requesting that the Traffic Safety Committee look at the problem of parking in no parking zones particularly in shopping centers within the City of Carlsbad, and report back to the Commission with findings and conclusions as to ways to alleviate the problems. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission stated for the record that it is their opinion that a study should be conducted regarding the diminishing capacity of landfill areas. PLANNING COMMISSIOY-IINUTES MARCH 14, 1979 Page Fourteen (14) c IX. A motion was made approving the minutes of February 28, 1979 as corrected. APPROVED MOTION : Marcus SECOND : Larson AYES : Rombotis, Marcus, Larson, Schick ABSTAIN: L'Heureux, Jose X. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11: 30 P.M. Respectively Submit , Fd "ARGAFJ~'T SACKRIDER Recor ng Secretary ATTEST : JAMES C. HAGAMAN, Secretary CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION