Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-01-14; Planning Commission; MinutesMEETING OF: PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: January 14, 1981 TIME OF MEETING: 7:00 P.M. PLACE OF MEETING: City Council Chambers * COMMISSIONERS CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman Marcus. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Marcus, Commissioners Rombotis, Larson, L'Heureux, Friestedt, Jose, and Leeds. Ex-Officio member Dan Hentschke, Assistant City Attorney, was also present. Staff members present were: Michael Holzmiller, Principal Planner Bill Hofman, Associate Planner Richard Allen, Principal Civil Engineer PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Chairman Marcus. AGENDA ITEM COMMUNICATIONS Mike Holzmiller advised that staff had one item to discuss at the end of the meeting, concerning next weeks' workshop. Chairman Marcus indicated she had a communication that was sent to ‘her at her home from,the Planning Department, however, all Commissioners present advised they had also received copies. PLANNING COMMISSION PROCEDURE . . Chairman Marcus explained Planning Commission procedures in its capacity as an advisory commission to the City Council and identified those matters delegated to the Planning Commission for a final decision. Chairman Marcus further explained the procedure observed by the Commission during public hearing items. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. V-312, DOMINY - Request for variances to reduce the required front and side yards to allow tandem parking, and to exceed the 35' height limit by construction of a 41' - 6" condominium building on property generally located on the west side of Ocean Street between Beech. . Street and Cypress Avenue in the R-3 zone. Michael Holzmiller presented the staff report and advised that this item had been continued from the Planning Commission meeting of December 10, 1980, as the applicant was requesting approval of four variances to the zoning ordinances. He indicated that the applicant advised staff that the design would be revised to eliminate the need for the height variance. The other three requests for variances remain unchanged. He further explained that staff and the applicant have met with the Fire Department, who have indicated that they have no serious objection to the proposed reduced setbacks. Page 2 . January 14, 1981 Mr.,Holzmiller continued that staff is still unable to make the findings required for approval of the variances, and they are very concerned about the cumulative effect of the requested variances, when taken as a group on one individual property. Further, he advised staff recommends that the project be redesigned to bring it more into conformance with the zoning ordinance, and that staff.is recommending denial of the three variance requests. The Commission was provided with a revised copy of the elevation plan, which outlines the applicants' proposals to reduce the height of the building. In response to a question from Commissoner Friestedt, regarding the definition of "cumulative effect," Michael Holzmiller explained staff's feeling that the three requested variances were too much for one piece of property. Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 7:06 P.M. and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Mr. Ronald Knoll, Attorney for Hicks, Fletcher & Mack, 2124 El Camino Real, representing the applicant; who urged Commission's approval of the variances, and expressed the willingness to answer any questions. The Commission then recognized Mr. Lou Dominy, D.ominy & Bokal Architects, 244 Ninth Street, De1 Mar. Mr. Dominy explained what they did in response to the Commissions' comments and criticisms from the December hearing. He advised they have not modified the model. He explained what they did was remove the boxes from the top, they reduced-the floor to floor height to take out another foot, and they pushed it into the ground another 18 inches. He stated the net effect was to reduce the height of the project' by 6$ feet; and to eliminate that request for a variance. He briefly covered the Fire Department's memorandum, and expressed his willingness to answer any questions of the Commission. Commissioner Rombotis questioned if Staff had ever indicated specifically what they could do to redesign the project to meet their objections. Mr. Dominy explained he did not feel they did. He stated, that Staff could not accept the tandem parking, however, he did not feel a variance was necessary for tandem parking, and he indicated it never got past that point. Commissioner Jose questioned if any evaluation was done of the chimney, i.e., fireplace. Mr. Dominy responded that they spoke with the Fire Marshal and he had no objections to it. Mr. Dominy briefly covered the ordinances covering fireplaces, and the design of the fireplaces in the project. Chairman Marcus inquired if there were any members of the audience present to address the Commission regarding this matter. Since no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed at 7:15 P.M. Commissioner Friestedt clarified the Commission's questions in reference to the chimney, and stated that at the time they were not familiar with the ordinance, and it was later found that the chimneys did not violate the code or the ordinance. OflMISSIONERS 1 UT Page 3 . Bill Hofman requested a clarification, that the applicant be put on notice, that in terms of the elevations and plans submitted to Staff, it does not meet the definition of building height as contained in the code. He stated the plans came in after the staff report was written. He further * indicated that if the Commission approves the variance, a condition be added stating that the applicant would have to meet the building height requirement, prior to the issuance of a building permit. Mr. Knoll explained that the drawings were done in a short amount of time, and that they intend to comply with the ordinance. Further, that they have withdrawn their application for a height variance. A motion was made to adopt the following Resolution, approving V-312, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein, with the addition of a condition that Staff returns the Resolution and findings with supporting conditions: RESOLUTION No‘. 1736, DENYING VARIANCES TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD, TO ALLOW PARKING IN THE REQUIRED FRONT AND SIDE YARD, AND TO PERMIT TANDEM PARKING FOR A CONDOMINIUM BUILDING GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF OEEAN STREET BETWEEN BEECH STREET AND CYPRESS AVENUE. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS . 2. CUP-193, CIRCUS VARGAS .- Request to hold an annual three- day circus event at the Plaza Camino Real Shopping Center in the C-2 zone. Michael Holzmiller presented the staff-report, and with, the aid of the overhead projector, explained location, 'parking, and access points. Commissioner Jose thought that the ordinance had been changed to allow Staff to approve circuses. Michael Holzmiller stated that Staff could only approve non-profit, charitable circuses and carnivals. Commissioner Larson expressed concern at the amount of the bond, stating that he felt $1,000. was a small amount, taking into consideration the large equipment used by the circus. He stated he was confident the applicant would take care of any damages incurred, however, he felt that he would like to see the City in a stronger protective position. Michael Holzmiller responded that this particular condition was taken directly off last years approval, and agreed that perhaps it should be increased. Commissioner Friestedt questioned if the City Engineer had a recommendation in reference to the bonding. Richard Allen indicated that the primary damage incurred would be from driving stakes into the asphalt, and agreed that the bond amount should perhaps be increased. Chairman Marcus openedsthe public hearing at 7:25 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Mr. Steve Eckles, Marketing Director for Circus Vargas, who expressed his willingness to answer any questions of the Commission. In reference to the bond issue, he explained that the average cost of repair is $1.00 to $1.50 per stake hole. He further indicated that Circus Vargas is covered with the property owners of the Plaza. :OMMISSIONERS Marcus Rombotis Larson L'Heureux Friestedt Jose Leeds Page 4 - January 14, 1981 . Mr. Eckles indicated that he had a few questions relating to the Conditional Use Permit; the first being Item No. 3. He stated that in the event of unforeseen problems, i.e., inclement weather, etc., they would like the protection of an additional 24 hour period to remove their equipment. He' indicated that this has rarely happened in the history of the Circus, but requested this understanding from the City, He further stated that their contract with the Plaza Camino Real Property and Merchants Association allows them to begin assembling 24 hours early,. Mr. Eckles then referenced to Item No. 9, he indicated that in the original application filed, along with their communications with the Police Department, it was understood that Circus Vargas'and the Plaza Camino Real would jointly provide ten personnel for traffic and crowd control, He added that it was the feeling of the Police Department that this was sufficient. Mr. Eckles also referenced to Item No, 4, he indicated that all of the parking spaces at the Plaza Camino Real are painted, and the area not accessible to the public will be secured off with temporary fencing. He further explained that all of the exits, aisles, etc., meet uniform fire codes, and indicated he was not sure whether Staff was requesting any- thing other than standard code. He expressed appreciation for the opportunity to hold the event in the City of Carlsbad, Since no:one else wished to speak, Chairman Marcus closed the public hearing at 7:33 P.M. Michael Holzmiller explained that the conditions that Mr. Eckles referred to do not cause any problems for Staff, Further, he referenced Commissioner Jose's point, explaining that Staff would have no problem from a Planning perspective if the Circus is held at the same location every year; if they are willing to comply with all the conditions of approval, it could be renewed by Staff. Dan Hentschke, Assistant City Attorney explained that he had some problem with that proposal, but he agreed with the concept. He stated if this was going to be done, it should be put into the code, however, it should not be added as an additional item without further consideration. Mr. Hentschke added that it would have to be done under appropriate procedure. Commissioner L'Heureux questioned Item No. 2, stating that the wording of the condition somewhat confused the hours of the Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Eckles responded he felt that section dealt with the hours of performance. He further explained that the closing performance would finish up on January 29, 1981, no later than 10 P.M., and they fully intend to have vacated the property by 2 A.M., barring unfore- seen circumstances. A motion was made to approve CUP-193, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein, with the modification of Condition No. 2, that the CUP approval shall apply only to the following performance times; Delete Condition No. 4; and Condition No. 10, that a bond shall be posted as per the City Engineer. C 7- , OMMISSIONERS 1 Marcus Rombotis Larson L!Heureux Friestedt Jose Leeds Page 5 -- January 14, 1981 * \ 3. ZC-220, SIE - Request for a zone change from R-1-7500 to RD-M on property generally located on the west side of Roosevelt Street between Chestnut Avenue and Acacia Avenue The staff report was presented by Michael Holzmiller, essentially as contained in the Statement of the Matter,' Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 7:40 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Mr. Bill Bradley, of Bradley an Associates, San Marcos; who spoke in favor of the request and expressed his willingness to answer any questions. The Commission recognized Mr. Roy Sanchez, 3482 Roosevelt; Carlsbad; speaking against the project. Mr. Sanchez indicated he had a petition with 16 signatures of property owners in the area. Mr. Sanchez stated his opposition to the zone change, with reference to traffic problems, pollution, and accidents. Mr. Sanchez concluded that he felt this would not be an asset to the City, and urged Commission's disapproval of the project. The Commission recognized Mr. Hugo Utter, 3510 Roosevelt, Carlsbad; who explained that he agreed with Staff that they have high density residential around the area, but feels that this project will intensify it. He stated he could under- stand the property owner's request, but feels the property could be put.to better use. Mr. Bradley added that they are willing to work with Staff to make the area livable, without making it over crowded. Since no one else wished'to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcus closed the public hearing at 7:48 P.M. Commissioner Friestedt questioned if there was a review by the Fire Department, or the City Engineer regarding a traffic analysis. Staff responded they had not received any comments relative to that, but stated it would be looked-at in more detail when a project was proposed. Commissioner L'Heureux stated he concurred with comments from the residents relating to the traffic problems, however, he feels the City has the appropriate vehicle to insure what is ' built there will be compatible, and will not.adversely impact the traffic and the surrounding neighborhood. He explained that when subsequent development comes in, upgrading of the street may be necessary, or different types-of. improvements, to accomodate the higher density. A motion was made for approval of ZC-220, and adoption of the following Resolution, based on the findings and conditions contained therein: RESOLUTION NO. 1749, APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE FROM R-1-7500 TO RD-M ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ROOSEVELT STREET BETWEEN CHESTNUT AVENUE AND ACACIA AVENUE 4. ZC-222/CuP-189, JACK-IN-THE-BOX - Request for a Zone Change from R-P to C-2 and a Conditional Use Permit to construct and operate a drive-thru restaurant on property generally located on the southeast corner of Elm Avenue and Harding Street. The staff report was presented by Michael Holmniller, essentially as contained in the Statement of the Matter. pr OM~IISSIONERS \ Marcus Rombotis Larson LlHeureux Friestedt Jose Leeds Page 6 - January 14, 1981 . He stated that Staff is recommending approval of the ZC-222, to the C-l-Q zone, for the applicant's entire property, rather then the C-2 zone, as requested. Regarding the Conditional Use Permit for the drive-thru restaurant, Mr. Holzmiller indicated that Staff had concerns with both of the plans. submitted by the applicant. Bill Hofman then explained the plans in greater detail with the use of the mounted plans, along with the concerns that Staff has, in respect to the designs. He also covered the problems of access onto Elm Avenue, and indicated that Staff and the applicant have reached an impass. Staff strongly recommends against any access onto Elm Avenue, and also recommends a continuance on this item to redesign the project. Commissioner Jose expressed concern over the driveway access points, and use of the alley as an exit. Further, he questioned the following points on the Environmental Impact Report: Item No. 6, he disagrees with the noise factor; Item No. 13 a, b, d, and f, are marked "maybe," and feels they are. strong yeses; Item No. 22 a, b, and d, he feels these should be answered yes. Mr. Jose then referenced the Environmental Analysis Report, Item No. 19, and Item No. 24, he stated these are incorrect as a CUP is required. Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 8:08 P.M., and extended the,invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Mr, Lee Curry, 14250 Madgepoint Dr,, Poway, agent for the applica,nt. With the aid of wall exhibits, Mr. Curry explained that the top plan was two parking spaces short. He made reference to the two accesses at the present facility,' and stated that they would be cutting down to one. Further, he stated that he agreed that any alley access or-exit would cause further congestion.. Mr, Curry stated that traffic will increase whether or not the existing building is left as is, or upgraded, He added that' their peak hours do not coincide with peak traffic hours. Chairman Marcus questioned if the applicant had any problem with the C-l-Q that Staff is recommending. Mr. Curry responded they did not.' Commissioner Friestedt questioned if the applicant was prepared to continue the item, in order to attempt to do a redesign. Mr. Curry responded that the top diagram was their ideal situation, and stated he does not feel they could redesign the project to make it functional, and practical for their intents and purposes. He feels that any other design would make parking even more deficient. The Commission indicated they did not have copies of the bottom plan in their packets. Staff responded the reason two plans were submitted is that Staff had problems with the top plan, However, since that went to the Redevelopment Committee and they wanted the plan forwarded to the Commission with their minutes, that was included in the packet. Staff indicated they have concerns with the lower plan, although they feel it better than the top one. Mr. Holzmiller stated the applicant went through a number of redesigns, and the lower plan was the one they felt was the best. Mr. Holzmiller stated that both plans are unacceptable from Staff's standpoint. .- OMMISSIONERS \; Page 7 - . January 14, 1981 The Commission discussed different means of access at length. Dan Hentschke explained to the Commission that if they were considering continuance of the public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit, the Zone Change could also be * continued as it is all part of the same project. The Commission recognized Mr. Burt Freehoff, 3030 Harding St., Carlsbad. Mr. Freehoff stated he is Jack-In-The-Box's neighbor for both his residence and business. He stated he agreed with Commissioner Jose on the alley, as it is a severe problem. He stated that if the project is approved, he still intends to be their neighbor, and move his office next door, between the Community Center and Jack-In-The-Box. He continued that he acquired traffic flow diagrams for this area, and found that the number of accidents over the last three years is very minor. He stated in terms of noise level, his bedroom faces the drive-thru portion of the restaurant, and it is not objectionable. He feels the applicant is assisting in beautifying the City by upgrading the restaurant, and to restrict the access into the business is unfair in his opinion. Commissioner Jose made reference to the application a few years ago of McDonalds, to locate in the Van's Shopping Center. They werd'turned down because they could not provide adequate parking spaces, and a workable drive-thru facility. Commissioner Larson questioned Staff as to what the City's plans for a median divider are on Elm Avenue. Richard Allen responded that he was not sure if the Redevelopment Committee had come to a decision on this matter as of-this time. Jack Henthorn, Housing and Redevelopment Director, explained that at this time the circulation planning for the. redevelopment area is relatively complete up to Madison Avenue. He stated they were out with additional studies that will ultimately encompass what will happen with Elm Avenue. It is rather doubtful that the studies will be completed within the time of the continuance. A motion was made for approval of the Negative Declaration. The Commission recognized Mr. Robert Radtke, Real Estate Manager for Jack-In-The-Box. He stated that it was very important to the project that they have ingress and egress from Elm Avenue. The Commission discussed, at length, parking and access problems. A motion was made for a continuance of ZC-222/CUP-189 to February 11, 1981 OkMISSIONERS \; Marcus Rombotis Larson L'Heureux Friestedt Jose Leeds Marcus Rombotis Larson L'Heure_ux Friestedt Jose Leeds Page 8 January 14, 1981 . RECESS Chairman Marcus called a recess at 9:04 P.M., and the Commission reconvened at 9:20 P.M. 5. CUP-178(A), BANK OF AMERICA - Request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the establishment of a branch bank on the southwest corner of El Camino Real and Camino Vida Roble within Palomar Airport Business Park in the P-M zone. A brief staff report was presented by Michael Holzmiller, who indicated Staff feels that all findings required for the approval of a Conditional Use Permit can be made, and that all issues involved with the request have been adequately addressed and resolved, and Staff is recommending approval. With the aid of the overhead projector, Bill Hofman explained the project design and access points. Commissioner Jose questioned Staff as to the construction of the median along El Camino Real. Staff indicated it was their understanding the median was to go in right away. Michael Holzmiller added there is a new requirement through Parks and Recreation concerning planning of the median islands, in that they are now attempting to include it as part of approval of every project. Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 9:2'8 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Mr. Thomas Brighten, Project Manager for Bank of America. Mr. Brighten explained that the Commission had approved a Conditional Use Permit for the applicant for a temporary facility approximately six months ago. Mr. Brighten indicated in generai the applicant is very pleased with the results of the analysis and review, however, he expressed concern with three of the conditions. Mr. Brighten made reference to Planning Condition No. 12, in that he did not agree with the elimination of the pedestriar walkway. He stated pedestrian traffic would have to use the main driveway to enter the branch if the walkway was eliminated Mr. Brighten then made reference to Planning Condition making a provision for a four foot wide sidewalk along easterly side of the branch. He stated disagreement w i condition, in that he feels the landscaping would grow and vehicles would block it. The applicant is request i both the above conditions be removed. No. 13, the th this over it, ng that Bill Hofman responded that the purpose of Condition'No. 12, wa: that Staff had concern with people parking on Camino Vida Roble instead of parking in the parking lot. He added that the purpose of Condition No. 13 was to allow a sidewalk, so pedestrians would not be in the traffic lanes. Mr. Brighten then addressed Engineering Condition No. 26, calling for hydroseeding prior to issuance of building permits. He explained that the banks had been hydroseeded four times, and it apparently isnot the solution. Mr. Brighten is requesting this condition be amended to the effect that the bank must be protected 'from erosion. Commissioner L'Heureux expressed concern over the 24 hours tellers, due to the topography of the branch, as to provisions for security. Mr. Brighten explained they would provide guard service in the evening; and the patio area where the teller machines will be located, will have cameras. \ i 1MMISSIONERS c Page 9 - January 14, 1981 . The Commission recognized Mr. Don Goldman, an architect working for the applicant, who explained the landscape plan in detail. Commissioner Jose expressed concern over the visibility'of the roof equipment from the west side of the building. Mr. Goldman responded that the equipment is approximately thre' feet below the roof. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcos closed the public hearing at 9:48 P.M. Commissioner Larson stated he agreed with the applicant to de:lete Conditions 12 and 13'; further he has no objection to amending No. 26, to read that the bank be landscaped immediately to insure that the bank is protected; to the satisfaction of the .Parks and Recreation Department. A motion was made to approve the negative declaration, and Marcus adopt the following Resolution; with the changes suggested Rombotis by Commissioner Larson: Larson RESOLUTION NO. '1746, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT L'Heureux TO DEVELOP A BRANCH BANK FOR THE BANK OF AMERICA ON Friestedt PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF Jose EL Cy;NO REAL AND CAMINO VIDA ROBLE. Leeds 6. V-316, ZANDER - Request for a variance to allow construction of a six foot high wall withing the front yard.setback on property generally located on the west side of Gibraltar Street between Jerez Court and San Marcos Canyon in the RD-M zone. Michael Holzmiller presented a brief staff report, indicating Staff feels that the four mandatory findings for a variance can be made, therefore, Staff is recommending approval. With the aid of the overhead projector, Bill Hofman explained project location and design. Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 9:49 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Mr. Michael O'Hara, the developer, who indicated he was in total agreement with Staff. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcus closed the public hearing at 9:50 P.M. Commissioner Jose stated he felt the four findings-were somewhat weak, and this was something that should have been done in the design stage. Commissioner Larson stated he agreed with Commissioner Jose, and feels an additional finding should be added, to substantiate that they are rear yards, due to elevation, privacy and security. A motion was made to adopt the following Resolution, approving V-316, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein, with the addition of the above finding, as stated by Commissioner Larson: RESOLUTION NO. 1747, APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX FOOT HIGH WALL WITHIN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF GIBRALTER STREET BETWEEN JEREZ COURT AND SAN MARCOS CANYON. \ :OMMISSIONERS 1 Marcus Rombotis Larson L'Heureux Friestedt Jose Leeds Page 10 - . January 14, 1981 7. V-315, ELSNER - Request to allow two porch covers to encroach four feet into a required five foot side yard setback on property located on the east side of Roosevelt Street is the R-P zone. The staff report was presented by Michael Holzmiller, who indicated Staff was unable to make the four mandatory findings for a variance; specifically A and D. He referred to the staff report, under discussion, and stated there is a correction to the last paragraph, findings 1 and 2 should be A and D. With the aid of the overhead projector, Bill Hofman explained the project in more detail. Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 9:55 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Mr. Dave Clark, partner and co- owner of the duplex. Mr. Clark expressed dissatisfaction with the recommendation of the Planning Department, and stated he feels they have.met the two findings in question. On finding A, he made reference to the size of the lot, and stated he felt this should have been dealt with years ago when the zoning took place. He further added that the covers serve somewhat as a privacy screen to attract possible buyers. In reference to finding D, Mr. Clark indicated he does not understand how these small pieces of lattice work can be detrimental to other properties in the vicinity.. He added that they have tried to contribute to the community. Bill Hofman explained that he was unaware what the applicant was told upon application of the variance request, however, he stated it did not come to their attention that these patio covers were built until occupancy of the units was requested.. The patio covers were built already, and a building permit was never issued for any of the porches. Further, he stated the applicant has supplied a bond for their removal; in the event the variance is denied. The Commission recognized Mrs. Ione Elsner, co-owner of the - property. Mrs. Elsner explained that the covers were built without their knowledge that a building permit was required, as they considered them lattice work. She stated she felt they added to the property. Commissioner Jose questioned Mrs. Elsner if they went ahead and built the slab and lattice work , prior to getting approval from the Planning or Building Departments. Mrs. Elsner responded that the slab was on the original plans, but the lattice work was not. The Commission recognized Mr. Reuben Gastelum, who stated he concurred with the findings of Staff. He feels if this is approved, it will open.the door for future building additions, and further that provisions should be made for such additions in the original planning stages. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcus closed the public hearing at 1O:lO P.M. COMMISSIONERS \ Page 11 January 14, 1981 . The Commission briefly discussed their feelings that this is a unique situation. Bill Hofman read comments from the Fire Department. A motion was made to adopt the following Resolution, approving V-315 based on the findings as follows: a) There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property in that the lot is 25 feet by 140 feet, and itwas created in 1888. b) Other properties do share a similar right which is deniec to this property, due to the fact they are on lots. c) The variance does not adversely affect the General Plan. d) It is not detrimental to other properties in the vicinity, as other properties enjoy 50 foot lots. Also this property does not enjoy the privacy as do the other properties. RESOLUTION NO. 1748, APPROVING A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE SIDEYARD SETBACK FROM FIVE FEET TO ONE FOOT GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF ROOSEVELT STREET. 8. CUP-185, MCROSKEY - Request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to develop a drive-thru bank building and temporary banking facilities during construction on the southeast corner of Palomar Airport Road-and Yarrow Drive in the P-M zone, The staff report was presented by Michael Holzmiller, who indicated Staff feels that the four findings required for a Conditional Use Permit can be made, and with one exception, the overall site design, building, and circulation layout is acceptable. The exception involves the proposed driveway onto Palomar Airport Road. Staff is also suggesting one addition to the conditions of approval; a requirement that the temporary bank obtain a building permit, and while the temporary bank is in use, ' sufficient parking per the ordinance requirements be provided. With the aid of wall exhibits, Richard Allen explained the primary objections to the driveway, as proposed. Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at.l0:30'P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Mr. Jack McRoskey, owner of the property, who expressed his appreciation to the Staff. Mr. McRoskey addressed the right of access to Palomar Airport Road. He presented a packet to the Commission, containing parcel maps and a copy of a letter, dated in 1975, from the City Engineer of Carlsbad. With the aid of wall exhibits, Mr. McRoskey described two proposals, ti;o solving the problem of access. Mr.. McRoskey explained he had engaged a traffic consultant to come up with the best solution to the problem. :OtlMISSIONERS ’ Marcus Rombotis Larson L'Heureux Friestedt Jose Leeds IYUNUT Page 12 - January 14, 1981 . The traffic consultant, Federhart and Associates, indicated that the joint driveways straddling the property line between McRoskey and his neighbor, can be approved without fear of safety or congestion problems, as long as an eight foot wide median and raised curb at the gutter line of the street,. straddling the property line is constructed between the two successive driveways; which was proposal B of the wall exhibits. Mr, McRoskey stated he would provide the median, which is only two feet wide, and would be constructed on the half of the street that has already been widened. Commissioner Friestedt questioned Mr. McRoskey, as he recalled that the access was to be for fire protection only. Mr. McRoskey responded that in the reports from Birtcher Pacific, there was no mention of this at all. The Commission and Staff discussed the alternatives to the plans proposed by Mr. McRoskey, concerning driveway access. Richard Allen indicated Staff was attempting to establish a uniform policy all along Palomar Airport Road. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcus closed the public hearing. A motion was made to approve the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director, and adopt the following Resolution, approving CUP-185, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein; with added conditions regarding the temporary building, and prohibiting access on Palomar Airport Road when the permanent building is developed: RESOLUTION NO. 1743, APPROVING A CONDITiONAL USE PERMIT TO DEVELOP A DRIVE-THRU BANK BUILDING AND TEMPORARY BANKING FACILITIES ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD AND YARROW DRIVE. 9. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE The Assistant City Attorney gave a brief staff report. Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 11:25 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. Since no one wished to speak on the matter, the public hearing was closed at 11:25 P-M A motion was made to adopt the following Resolution: RESOLUTION NO. 1742, ADOPTING A CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE APPLICABLE TO THE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION PURSUANT TO THE POLITICAL REFORM ACT OF 1974. . NEW DISCUSSION 10. RESOLUTION OF INTENTION NO. 167 A motion was made to adopt the following Resolution: RESOLUTION OF INTENTION NO. 167, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL A.RECLASSIFICATION IN ZONE FROM R-1-7500 TO R-P ON PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF ARBUCKLE PLACE BETWEEN MADISON STREET AND JEFFERSON STREET. . \ :OMMISSIONERS _ Marcus Rombotis Larson L'Heureux Friestedt Jose Leeds Marcus Rombotis Larson L'Heureux Friestedt Jose Leeds Marcus Rombotis Larson L'Heureux Friestedt Jose r Leeds UT Page 13 January 14, 1981 . 11. PCD-28, GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY FINDING OF REDEVELOPlMENT PLAN. A motion was made for a finding of conformity. Commissioner Rombotis indicated he abstained, due to a conflict of interest. ELECTION OF VICE-CHAIRMAN A motion was made to nominate Commissioner Friestedt as Vice-Chairman of the Planning Commission. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of December 10, 1980, were approved as submitted, with one correction; under Item No. 4, Dominy, correct spelling of name is Null. Minutes of December 17, 1980, were approved-as submitted. ADJOURNMENT By proper motion, the meeting adjourned at 11:30 P.M. Respectfully Submitted, JAMES C, HAGAMAN Secretary to the Planning Commission \ i lMMISSIONERS Marcus Rombotis Larson L'Heureux Friestedt Jose Leeds Marcus Rombotis Larson L'Heureux Friestedt Jose Leeds Marcus Rombotis Larson L'Heureux Friestedt Jose Leeds Marcus Rombotis Larson L'Heureux Friestedt Jose Leeds .- :- CORRECTION FOR MINUTES OF JANUARY 14, 1981 Page 7, Paragraph 1: Staff asked for a decision from the Commission in regards to access onto Elm .Avenue. Each Commissioner was individually questioned on this matter and the majority felt that access could be allowed on Elm Avenue only if it was a right turn exit only driveway. The Commission felt it would be best if this driveway exit was used for the drive-thru land only and not the parking lot.