HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-06-13; Planning Commission; MinutesPLANNING COMMISSIC-XINUTES CITY OF CARLSBAD
June 13, 1979
Page One (1)
r
I. CALL TO ORDER
c
11.
NOT 0: TCIAL UNTIL
APPRQVSD AT SUBSEQUENT
MEETING OF THE CARLSBAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
-
The meeting was called to order at 7:OO P.M. by Chairman
L'Heureux.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners present: Chairman L'Heureux, Commissioners
Marcus, Larson, Wrench, Schick, Jose, Rombotis
Staff present: Dave Abrams, Associate Planner; Bud Plender,
Assistant to the Planning Director: Dave Hauser, Engineering;
Les Evans, City Engineer; Dan Hentschke, City Attorney's Office.
111. AGENDA ITEM COMMUNTCATIONS
A. A memorandum from Dave Abrams regarding a training program for San Diego Regional Planning Commissioners was distributed. -
B. A copy of the minutes of the May 30, 1979 meeting of the General Plan Housing Element Citizens Committee was
C. Proposed wordins to be included in Plannins Resolutions regarding findings on public facilities was
passed out and discussed. It was decided that the Commission
should review the matter in greater detail and submit any
comments to staff .-
D. A memorandum from staff regarding V-290(2), Zipser,
was introduced, indicating that the problem of acceptable storage areas had been solved and therefore there would be no need for further Planning Commission action in this regards. Mr. Abrams further indicated that the applicant, Stanley Zipser, had appealed the decision of the Planning Commission denying V-290(1) and that the City Council public hearing on that
matter was set for Tuesday, June 19, 1979.
IV. CONTI'NUED PUBLIC 'HEARINGS
A. CUP-l63;De'an, Conditional Use Permit for an auto impound
yard on three non-contiguous lots. The lots are west of Tyler Street between Walnut Avenue and Pine. -
Commissioner Rombotis indicated that he would not be participating
in the discussion or vote on this item6 and left the room.
Dave Abrams presented the staff report, indicating that the
title search had not been accomplished and, further, that the applicant had asked that only those two lots with access to
PLANNING COMMISSION MIP"?ES
June 13, 1979
Page Two (2)
- Tyler Street, be included in this application for Conditional Use
Permit. Staff is recommending that the item be continued.
Mr. Don Agatep, 2921 Roosevelt, representing the applicant, indicated
that a title insurance policy is now in process, but they had re- ceived no written confirmation as of this time. He further indicated that the applicant would amend the CUP application if no satisfactory title action is received within one week. The applicant agrees with the staff recommendation for continuance of the item.
THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:20 WITH NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY BEING
GIVEN.
A motion was made continuing CUP7163 to the meeting of June 27,
1979 to afford the applicant sufficient time to complete the title
search.
CONTINUED
MOTION: Jose
SECOND: Schick
AYES : L'Heureux, Schick, Wrench, Marcus, Jose, Larson
ABSTAIN: Rombotis
B. CT 79-4, Ayers, Revision to previously approved subdivision CT 76-7, (Rancho La Questa, Phase 5, The Seaport). The property is located adjacent to the west of El Camino Real, north of the Batiquitos Lagoon.
-
Dave Abrams presented the staff report requesting that the item
be continued due to the fact that the problem of the desiltation
basin has not yet been adequately resolved.
Don Agatep, 2921 Roosevelt, representing the applicant, indicated
that the applicant has made every effort to comply with the terms
and conditions as contained in approved tentative map CT 76-7. He
stated that the tentative map was approved as to the City's design
requirements at the time of approval and now the desiltation and storm drain have been identified as a problem. He urged that the
Commission allow the applicant to proceed with the tentative map
at this time and predicate any final map approval on the future
provision of adequate erosion control and desiltation measures.
Commissioner Rombotis mentioned that no action could be taken prior to the Commission's receiving a map for the project.
Commissioner Schick related that he would not be opposed to the applicant's suggestion of allowing development at this time and conditioning the final map approval upon the provision of adequate
desiltation measures.
I THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:30 WITH NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY BEING GIVEN.
A motion was made continuing CT 79-4 to the meeting of June 27,
1979 to allow further research into the problem of desiltation.
PLANNING COMMISSION June 13, 1979 Page Three (3)
- CONTINUED
MOTION:
SECOND :
AYES :
MINr"?,S
Jose
Rombotis L'Heureux, Rombotis, Schick, Wrench, Marcus,
Jose, Larson
V. NEW BUSINESS
Due to the fact that there were numerous persons in the audience
wishing to participate in the discussion of CUP-9, South Coast
Asphalt, this item was taken out of order.
A. CUP-9, South Coast Asphalt, Noise complaints by citizens..
Chairman L'Heuruex indicated that this was not a public hearing
item, and further that he would not be participating in the
discussion or vote due to the fact that he is legal counsel for South Coast Asphalt. At this point he left the podium and turned the meeting over to Vice-chairman Schick.
Bud Plender presented the staff report relating that numerous
complaints had been received in the past regarding the noise
nuisance of the asphalt production. He introduced a letter recently
received from South Coast Asphalt indicating that they had purchased
sound suppression equipment which should effectively mitigate the
noise impact. He urged that the Commission continue the item pending
installation of said equipment and at that time direct staff to
perform further studies of the problem.
Commissioner Larson asked if the noise level or the hours of oper-
ation was the main problem.
Staff responded that complaints have been received in both regards.
Commissioner Jose commented that the last two hearings on this item had identified concerns dealing with hours of operation, noise and dust control. He suggested that specific controls be set and adhered
to.
Commissioner Rombotis commented that the dba charts show dba read-
ings on Haymar Drive (near the asphalt production site) less than
those taken on property North of the freeway, possibly evidencing
a cumulative effect from the freeway. Staff must determine how much
noise is actually coming from the plant, and how much from the freeway.
A motion was made continuing the matter for a minimum of 90-120 days, at which time staff should report back to the Commission as to the mitigating effect of the muffling equipment. It was specifically noted that another noise study should be made 30 days after installation of such equipment.
CONTINUED MOTION: Rombotis
SECOND: Wrench
AYES : Rombotis, Schick, Wrench, Marcus, Jose, Larson
ABSTAIN: L'Heureux
PLANNING COMMISSION MINbl'ES June 13, 1979
Page Four (4)
VI. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CP-6, Mort O'Grady, Condominium permit for 23 detached dwelling uz: Zamora Way, between Alicante Road and Almaden Lane. I
Dave Abrams presented the staff report, suggesting that another condition be included setting back the entrance gates
20' from the rear of the sidewalk or 25' from the face of the curb. He also asked that the proposed public utilities finding be included by the Commission.
Commissioner Jose questioned as to the necessity of both conditions
#5 and #6, as they appeared to be similar.
Staff responded that the conditions had been phrased by the City
Attorney's office in order to protect the City by expressly requiring
proof of sewer availaiblity prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, or final condominium plan approval by the Planning Director.
Commissioner Larson expressed concern as to the access through the
electrical gates in case of an emergency. He further questioned as
to improvements on Almaden Lane.
Staff indicated that no improvements were necessary along Almaden
Lane due to the landscaped bank.
Commissioner Schick asked about the availability of public facilities.
Staff responded that all necessary public facilities were available at this time, but that staff would like to include a disclaimer for
future entitlements.
-
THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 8:05 P.M.
Mort O'Gsady, the applicant, indicated that the owners of the
units had expressed a desire for a dog run for the express purpose
of exercising their pets. He noted that guests coming to the project
would dial the residents by using the last four d.igits of the
resident's phone number, and the resident could then open the gate. As to emergency situations, he indicated that a similar dial system
would be used to open the gates, at which time the gate would have
to be reset. Mr. O'Grady expressed concurrence with the conditions
as set forth by staff.
THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:lO P.M. WITH NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
Commissioner Wrench expressed his belief that this was a quality - project.
Commissioner Jose expressed concern as to the effective operation
of the electrical gates in case of emergency or power failure.
PLANNING COMMISSION MIhuIIES
June 13, 1979
Page Five (5)
A motion was made approving CP-6 for the reasons as set forth in
the staff report, dated June 13, 1979, and subject to the conditions contained therein, with the addition of condition #21 that the driveway gates be set back 15' from the property line and subject to the additional condition that the electrical gates' opening mechanism be approved by the Fire Marshall prior to installation.
APPROVED
MOTION: Rombotis
SECOND: Schick
AYES : L'Heureux, Rombotis, Schick, Wrench, Marcus,
Jose, Larson
A TEN MINUTE RECESS WAS CALLED AT 8:15 P.M.
Chairman L'Heureux called the meeting to order at 8:25 P.M.
B. ZCA-111, Adult Entertainment, amending Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code by the amendment and addition of
various sections to provide for the orderly regulation by
Conditional Use Permit of various uses and by the addition
of Chapter 21.43 to provide for the regulations of certain
"adult entertainment" uses. -
Jack Henthorn presented the staff report and introduced Dan
Hentschke of the City Attorney's office who would be available to respond with legal interpretations of the proposed Ordinance, Exhibit A, dated May 29, 1979.
The Commission questioned the definitions of the words "bowling
alley", "antiques", "thrift shop", "charitable organization",
"minor", and ''classes" of people.
Staff responded that these definitions were either presently
contained in the Zone Code or General Plan, or could readily be
provided in accordance with accepted terminology.
Commissioner Larson asked if the Ordinance is meant to eliminate
pool halls or billiard rooms; why such "adult entertainment" uses are to be sited in the PU zone; if the public beach is deemed a 'Ipark"; and what is the definition of "parcel".
Staff replied that if an establishment is primarily a bar, then it
cannot be a pool hall, it must be one or the other. The primary
emphasis of the business will determine the definition of the use.
As to the reasoning behind the siting of such uses within the PU
Zone, after careful consideration it was found that a significant
portion of the City, within which these uses could locate, happen
use does not meet the spacing requirement, or any other condition
of the ordinance, it cannot locate within the PU Zone.
- to be designated PU. Staff further pointed out that if a proposed
PLANNING COMMISSION MINT-YS
June 13, 1979
Page Six (6)
Staff went on to say that the definition of "park1' is to include
any area where children would normally congregate. If, in fact,
beaches are not specifically defined as park type uses, staff
will proceed to identify such areas in the ordinance. As to
the definition of "parcel" staff related that such is defined in
the subdivision ordinance and is, in fact, a lot.
Commissioner Jose asked why it is necessary that an artist studio
issue certificates of graduation or diplomas in order to be deemed
legitimate.
Staff explained that this section deals with a place where an
individual may come and pay for the provision of a model to paint.
A potential problem exists if you don't narrow the definition of who is legitimate and who is not legitimate. It is not the intent
of the ordinance to place under strict regulations, legitimate art
institutions. Staff believes that it will be much more difficult
to deal with the use once established, if it becomes an adult use
as defined herein, than it would be to deal with it on a case by
case basis conditioned on a Conditional Use Permit.
Commissioner Jose asked if this condition could be circumvented
by the establishment stating that such a studio would be established,
giving diplomas (which are in effect worthless) and applying for a
license. -
Staff indicated that such an establishment must meet the require- ments of the State Educational Code.
Commissioner Marcus suggested that the term "collectible" be added
along with "antique", and further questioned as to the placement of
such establishments in the PU Zone.
Staff responded that the when the PU Zone allocation was removed
the areas in which these establishments could locate was signifi-
cantly reduced. The ordinance cannot basically exclude these uses,
because it may then be rendered unconstitutional. The feeling was
that if the PU Zone is included (which is generally a single use
zone for public utilities) there aren't going to be residences,
parks, schools, and other such institutions located in that zone
as they are not compatible. There is nothing incompatible about
having a sexually related, adult use in that particular zone. He
reminded that any applicant for such a use must still meet the various spacing requirements.
PLANNING COMMISSION MII 'ES
June 13, 1979
Page Seven (7)
-
Mr. Hentschke pointed out some proposed changes, to accomodate
proposed revisions to the massage section of the ordinance. These
revisions are the product of the City Attorney's office and will
be presented with this ordinance at the time it goes back to the
City Council. No actual action is required by the Planning
Commission but the Commission is asked to review and approve the concept so that staff can then amend the ordinance prior to
the City Council hearing.
pg. 3 - 21.04.266 should be deleted. This will be taken
care of in a later section.
pg. 5, line 18 - delete the word ''and" and subsection "AA", as the entire regulation IIAA" will be deleted on page 7. This will remove massage parlors from regulation by CUP, with amendments to the definition
of "message establishment" (pg 11, item 13) to read:
"Any massage establishment regulated by chapter 5.16
of this code". This definition does not include
athletic clubs, health clubs, school gymnasiums,
reducing salons, spas, or similar establishments for
message or similar manipulation of the human body as
offered as incidental or accessory services.
pg. 12, item 21 - will be deleted as not necessary.
pg. 13, section 21.43.050 - delete subsection 3. That will
effectively deal with complete regulations of massage
establishments consistent with this ordinance.
Chairman L'Heureux asked how this ordinance will affect existing operations, such as card parlors, billiard rooms, etc.
Staff responded that those establishments will only be affected
at such time as they should cease to operate, desire to reopen or
to relocate or expand. Any existing uses not sexually oriented will
be handled as non-conforming uses and may then be set for abatement under present restrictions.
Chairman L'Heureux asked if the definitions were consistent through-
out the ordinance, Zone Code and Building Code.
Staff commented that such consistencies must be verified prior to the ordinance being codified.
Chairman L'Heureux commented on the regulation of antique shops and
the applicability of regulating consignment selling. He went on to say that it is his belief that consignment shops
in the City would be beneficial to the community.
PLANNING COMMISSION MIT,-"ES
June 13, 1979 Page Eight (8)
"11.
Staff indicated that the sale of antiques are not regulated at this time. "Second hand/thrift" stores are to be regulated by CUP. In addition, police power requires that any application for such a use be supplimented by a financial intent statement and criminal record of the owner/operator. Also the ordinance
would not allow goods to be sold on consignment within the City
in order to assure proper control over such goods.
THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AND CLOSED AT 9:45 P.M. WITH NO PUBLIC
TESTIMONY.
A motion was made recommending that the draft Resolution be forwarded to the City Council with appropriate comments for staff consideration, indicating that the Commission has studied the proposed Zone Code Amendment 111, taken public testimony and recommends approval.
APPROVAL RECOMMENDED MOTION: Wrench SECOND: Rombotis AYES : L'Heureux, Rombotis, Schick, Wrench, Marcus,
NOES : None Jose, Larson
NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED)
A. SUP-3, Irv Roston, Special Use Permit to allow construction of a condominium project, partially within the flood plain overlay zone, located in the La Costa area on the south side of Costa Del Mar Road, just east of El Camino Real-
Dave Abrams presented the staff report requesting an additional
condition, setting forth that the granting of this Special Use
Permit does not guarantee approval of a Condominium Permit or other
entitlements necessary to develop the property. He also suggested
that the proposed public utilities finding be included by the
Commission.
Commissioner Marcus asked how grading would affect the channel.
Les Evans, City Engineer, indicated that the property is in Zone
1 of the County Flood Control Area and that the County Flood
Control District had indicated that there would be no problem
in this regards. It had previously been the opinion of staff,
that this method of development would not work.
A motion was made approving SUP-3 pursuant to the findings and conditions as contained in the staff report, dated June 13, 1979,
in accordance with Exhibits A and C, dated April 12, 1979, and with - the added condition that this approval does not guarantee further
development .
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 13, 1979
Page Nine (9)
-
APPROVED
MOTION: Larson
SECOND : Marcus
AYES : L'Heureux, Rombotis, Schick, Wrench,
Marcus, Jose, Larson
B. PCF-18, Bruce, to allow an 8 foot wall around a spa as required in Section 21.46.130. The subject property is
located on the west side of Cacatua Street between El
Fuerte and
Dave Abrams presented the staff report recommending denial based
on the fact that approval of such a project would set a poor
precedence.
Mr. Bruce, 2902 Cacatua, the applicant, indicated that the structure
is already existing and it would be almost impossible for him to
lower the wall to the six foot maximum allowed.
A motion was made approving PCF-18 based upon special circumstances, topography and the location of the lot.
The motion died for lack of a second.
A motion was made finding the project inconsistent with the intent and purpose of Section 21.46.130 of the Zone Code, based on the
"- findings included in the staff report, dated June 13, 1979.
DENIED
MOTION: Marcus
SECOND : Jose
AYES: L'Heureux, Rombotis, Schick, Wrench,
Marcus, Jose, Larson
Commissioner Schick pointed out that there appeared to be poor
monitoring in the original construction of the pool in an
inappropriate quadrant of the property.
C. CUP-42G, Sparks, request for Planning Commission direction as to the development of a 14 acre recreational facility at Carlsbad Raceway/Skatepark.
Dave Abrams presented the staff report.
-
Commissioner Schick asked why the Commission had not yet received
a Master Plan on the total project.
Commissioner Jose expressed concern regarding increased traffic
potential of the project.
Don Agatep, representing the applicant, indicated that the traffic
Any internal changes in the recreational facilities themselves won't effect the traffic. Mr. Agatep asked the Commission if it was
- pattern had been approved with the original Conditional Use Permit.
PLANNING COMMISSION MIJ!” ‘ES
June 13, 1979
Page Ten (10)
.- their intent that each individual minor alteration or change
within the originally approved CUP come before the Commission with an additional CUP. He further indicated that the Master Plan and a further traffic study was to be completed for any
development beyond the 14 acres indicated by CUP-42G. It is the
intention of the applicant to outline those specific 14 acres as
recreational uses, with the freedom to modify or alter those
particular, individual recreational elements within the 14 acre site, without having to apply for additional Conditional Use
Permits for each change.
Staff reminded the Commission that the original CUP expires in
April of 1982 at which time a Master Plan will be required. At
that point the Master Plan should indicate the future anticipated development of the entire property.
Commissioner Jose reminded the applicant that in the past the applicant has not lived up to the conditions outlined in the various
CUPS.
Mr. Agatep indicated his intent to be personally bound to assure
compliance with all conditions applicable to the CUP.
Commissioner Rombotis asked if there was any problem from a
planning point of view in the separation of the 14 acres from the - balance of the raceway project area.
Staff indicated that the 14 acres could be a viable planning
increment as an initial phase of the Master Plan.
Commissioner Larson stated that he believed there should be no problem in this regards. A new CUP would afford review of the development and a study could be taken of the traffic situation
with changes made as necessary.
Chairman L’Heureux indicated that staff should attempt to create
a new CUP for the 14 acres (CUP 42E recinded, CUP 42G substituted)
with additional conditions for: no more than number of persons
per day, number of uses, hours of operation, etc.
Commissioner Jose asked if the County has plans to widen Palomar
Airport Road.
Staff reported that there are no such plans at this time.
A motion was made directing staff to accept the application CUP-42G, in lieu of a Master Plan and traffic access study.for the entire 150 acre property. Conditions..- should be applied so that the project can be treated separately from the rest of the raceway, in terms of
expiration time and review periods.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINL I.ES
June 13, 1979
Page Eleven (11)
APPROVED
MOTION: Larson
SECOND: Jose
AYES: L'Heureux, Rombotis, Schick, Wrench,
Marcus, Jose, Larson
VIII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. A motion was made approving the minutes of May 23, 1979
as corrected.
APPROVED
MOTION: Jose
SECOND: Larson
AYES : L'Heureux, Schick, Wrench, Marcus, Jose, Larson ABSTAIN: Rombotis
B. A motion was made approving the minutes of June 4, 1979 as
read.
-
IX.
APPROVED
MOTION : Jose
SECOND: Rombotis
AYES : Rombotis, Schick, Wrench, Marcus, Jose, Larson
ABSTAIN: L'Heureux
APPROVAL OF RESOLUTIONS
A. No. 1523, CT 79-3/CP 79-3, Von Elten
A motion was made approving Resolution No. 1523 as read.
APPROVED MOTION: Larson SECOND: Jose
AYES: L'Heureux, Schick, Wrench, Marcus, Jose, Larson ABSTAIN: Rombotis
B. No. 1524, SDP 78-3(A), Burnett
A motion was made approving Resolution No. 1524 as corrected.
APPROVED MOTION : Jose SECOND: Schick
AYES : L'Heureux, Schick, Wrench, Marcus, Jose, Larson ABSTAIN: Rombotis
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
June 13, 1979
Page Twelve (12)
C. No. 1510, ZC-203, Roy Ward, Lake Calavera Hills
A motion was made approving Resolution No. 1510 as read.
APPROVED
MOTION: Jose
SECOND: Larson
AYES : Rombotis, Schick, Wrench, Marcus, Jose, Larson
ABSTAIN: L'Heureux
D. No. 1525, PDP-2, Roy Ward, Lake Calavera Hills
Mr. Bud Plender indicated that staff proposed that conditions
#10 and #13 be corrected to read as follows:
-
"10.'Any appurtenances not part of this application or approval
necessary for reclamation, storage, or use of the plant
effluent shall be subject to Planning Commission review and
approval. At the time of review the Planning Commission shall
determine if such appurtenances will have a significant adverse
effect on surrounding property. If it is determined that the
appurtenances will have a significant adverse effect, a Conditional Use Permit shall be required.
13. The applicant shall be responsible for the funds to construct
the facilities as approved. Any reimbursement agreements must be
approved by the City prior to submittal of any application for
project not already approved or in process of acquiring discretionary approval. Any expenditures by the applicant in advance of a final agreement with the City is at the risk of the applicant."
In addition, staff referenced some clerical errors and proposed a new condition #17 as follows: (staff is merely suggesting that
the proposed condition #17 be reviewed for informational purposes,
and is not recommending Planning Commission adoption this evening)
I
- Commissioner Schick asked staff if these proposed changes had been
thoroughly covered with the applicant.
Staff responded that the applicant had been appraised of said revisions this evening. -
PLANNING COMMISSION MI' TEES June 13, 1979 Page Thirteen (13)
-
Mr. Ed Hayworth, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission. As to condition #9, the applicant is responsible for construction on
property which he has no control over. If this is going to be a condition there should be some provision that not only makes the applicant, but also the City responsible.
Mr. Hayworth further indicated concern regarding the status of the application if, in fact, the property owner should decide not to allow Mr. Ward to use the property.
As to condition #14 what happens if the City does not adopt either a sewer allocation permit process or a growth management program. Again, does this create a situation where the applicant has no basis of control in terms of being able to submit applications.
They would like to suggest that, if the City indeed is going to
require this condition, that some sort of time allocation to allow
the applicant some security against not being able to process any
applications until such time as the City take action. Possibly
an allocation of 60-90 days from the date of approval of the
application by the City Council could be set.
As to #17, there seems to be an overkill. Almost two years have
passed since the original tentative tract for a portion of this was approved. That tract contained a condition that the applicant
development. That time seems to be getting close, and it now
appears that some of these conditions indicate that the applicant cannot proceed further until the plant is constructed and/or an agreement made. There ought to be some means of at least starting to process or to continue the processing of these applications and planning for these projects, and particularly the next phase in which the applicant is attempting to coordinate not only another tract but also one in the area which the City Council has been suggesting, i.e. affordable housing. It would appear that non of this could'take place at this point until this agreement has been established. He
suggests that the original #17 be utilized, omitting the first part
of the sentence to read: "NO dwelling unit shall be granted a
certificate of occupancy or shall be allowed to be offered for sale
until such time as a satellite treatment plant is operational and accepted by the City". As the new #17 reads the applicant cannot
even continue the processing of the original tract map 76-12. It
would not appear that the stopping of the processing of that tract map would create any particular problem for the City.
Commissioner Schick indicated that it would appear that any further issues deal with the finer policy points which must be dealt with at the City Council level. He suggests that the record be forwarded to the City Council, coupled with the final changes
as proposed by staff, and the indication that those areas now in
contention are policy areas which we, as a Commission, do not feel that we can totally accept or reject.
I was to achieve an appropriate sewer facility for this particular
-
PLANNING COMMISSION MIP 'ES
June 13, 1979
Page Fowrteen (141
"
Mr. Ed Hayworth, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission.
As to condition #9, the applicant is responsible for construction on property which he has no control over. If this is going to be a
condition there should be some provision that not only makes the applicant, but also the City responsible.
Mr. Hayworth further indicated concern regarding the status of
the application if, in fact, the property owner should decide not
to allow Mr. Ward to use the property.
As to condition #14 what happens if the City does not adopt either a sewer allocation permit process or a growth management program. Again, does this create a situation where the applicant has no basis of control in terms of being able to submit applications.
They would like to suggest that, if the City indeed is going to
require this condition, that some sort of time allocation to allow
the applicant some security against not being able to process any applications until such time as the City take action. Possibly an allocation of 60-90 days from the date of approval of the
application by the City Council could be set.
As to #17, there seems to be an overkill. Almost two years have
passed since the original tentative tract for a portion of this was approved. That tract contained a condition that the applicant
development. That time seems to be getting close, and it now
appears that some of these conditions indicate that the applicant
cannot proceed further until the plant is constructed and/or an
agreement made. There ought to be some means of at least starting
to process or to continue the processing of these applications and
planning for these projects, and particularly the next phase in which
the applicant is attempting to coordinate not only another tract but
also one in the area which the City Council has been suggesting, i.e.
affordable housing. It would appear that none of this could take
place at this point until this agreement has been established. He
suggests that the original #17 be utilized, omitting the first part
of the sentence to read: "NO dwelling unit shall be granted a
certificate of occupancy or shall be allowed to be offered for sale
until such time as a satellite treatment plant is operational and
accepted by the City". As the new #17 reads the applicant cannot even continue the processing of the original tract map 76-12. It
would not appear that the stopping of the processing of that
tract map would create any particular problem for the City.
- was to achieve an appropriate sewer facility for this particular
Commissioner Schick indicated that it would appear that any
further issues deal with the finer policy points which must be
dealt with at the City Council levei. H;! suggests that the record
be forwarded to the City Council, coupled with the final changes
as proposed by staff, and the indication that those areas now in
contention are policy areas which we, as a Commission, do not feel -
-
PLANNING COMMISSION MI1 'ES
June 13, 1979
Page Fist&*- (1.5) '
Commssioner Rombotis indicated sympathy for the applicant's position
and concurred that these final issues are matters for the Council.
#9, dealing with City participation in the offsite problem, may
necessitate the use of the power of eminent domain by the Council,
and therefore is totally a matter for their discretion. He suggested
a minute motion be made indicating the Commission's consideration
of such matters and setting forth the Commission's cuncurrence with
whatever ultimate decision the Council may reach on such policy issues.
A motion was made approving Resolution 1525 with the suggested
revisions to conditions 10, 13 and 23 as noted by staff, and
forwarding same, together with the comments and desires of the
applicant, as well as the proposed revision to condition #17 to
the City Council for further action.
APPROVED MOTION: Marcus SECOND : Jose AYES: Rombotis, Schick, Wrench, Marcus, Jose, Larson ABSTAIN: L'Heureux
Chairman L'Heuseux reminded the Commission to review the proposed
wording for the public facility finding and to submit any - comments thereon to the staff.
Mr. Abrams asked that the Commissioners consider attending
the seminar sponsored by CPO.
X. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:30 P.M.
Respectfully Submitwd, M+& Marga t Sackrider
Recording Secretary
ATTEST :
James C. Hagaman
Secretary