HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-10-28; Planning Commission; Minutes-, -.
MEETING OF:
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE OF MEETING: October 28, 1981
TIME OF MEETING: 7:00 P.M.
\
% d PLACE OF MEETING: Council Chambers COMMISSIONERS
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Marcus at
7:03 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present - Chairman Marcus, Conrmissioners Rombotis,
Farrow, Jose, L'Heureux, and Friestedt.
Commissioner Schlehuber arrived at 7:18 P.M.
Ex-Officio Members James Hagaman, Planning Director; and
Dan Hentschke, Assistant City Attorney, were also
present.
Staff members present were:
Michael Holzmiller, Principal Planner
Bill Hofman, Associate Planner
Richard Allen, Principal Civil Engineer
Charles Grimm, Associate Planner
Joyce Crosthwaite, Assistant Planner
Patrick Tessier, Associate Planner
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Chairman Marcus.
PLANNING COMMISSION PROCEDURES:
Chairman Marcus explained Planning Commission procedures
in its capacity as an advisory Counnission 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.
NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. ZC-235, NEWPORT SHORES. Request for approval of a
Zone Change from C-l to RD-M on property generally
located on the southwest corner of Alga Road and El
Camino Real. .
With the aid of a transparency showing the location of
the project, Bill Hofman gave the staff report,
essentially as contained in the written staff report.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 7:07 P.M.,
and extended the invitation to speak. Since no one
wished to speak on the matter, the public hearing was
closed.
The Commission approved the Notice of Prior Environmental
Compliance, and adopted the following Resolution,
recommending approval of ZC-235 to the City Council,
based on the findings and subject to the conditions
contained in the staff report:
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
RESOLUTION NO. 1881, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A
ZONE CHANGE FROM C-l TO RD-M ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED ON TH SOIJTHWEST CORNER OF ALGA ROAD AND EL
CAMINO REAL. APPLICANT: NEWPORT SHORES
-.
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 2
COMMISSIONERS
2. CT 81-38/CP-184, CARLSBAD INDUSTRIAL ASSOC. LTD.
Request for a 22 unit industrial tentative tract
map and condominium permit to convert an existing
industrial building to condominiums on the north
side of the intersection of Camino Vida Roble and
Las Palmas Drive in the P-M Zone.
With the aid of a transparency showing the location of
the project, Michael Holzmiller gave a staff report on
the matter. He indicated that except for requiring some
upgrading of the landscaping and additional trash areas,
the only real change created by the approval of this map
and condominium permit will be the ownership of the spacer
within the building.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 7:lO P.M.,
and extended the invitation to speak.
The Commission recognized Mr. Wes Zicker, of Arevalo and
Safino, 8913 Complex Drive, Suite C, San Diego,
consulting engineers on the project. He indicated that
the applicant is in agreement with the staff report, and
expressed willingness to respond to any questions.
Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman
Marcus closed the public hearing at 7:ll P.M.
The Commission adopted the following Resolution,
recormnending approval of CT 81-38/CP-184 to the City
Council based on the findings and subject to the
conditions contained therein:
RESOLUTION NO. 1880, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR A 22
UNIT INDUSTRIAL TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND CONDOMINIUM
PERMIT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH
SIDE OF THE INTERSECTION OF CAMINO VIDA ROBLE AND
LAS PALMAS DRIVE. APPLICANT: CARLSBAD INDUSTRIAL
ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
3. CP-36(A), LA COSTA VALE, LTD. An amendment to an
approved condominium permit for a 336 unit
condominium project located on Piragua and Venado
Streets, west of Cadencia in the P-C Zone.
Bill Hofman gave the staff report, with the aid of a
transparency showing the location of the project. He
indicated there was a modification to Condition No. 17,
which he distributed copies of to the Commission.
Commissioner Friestedt referred to Engineering Condition
No. 34, and inquired how much of the street adjacent to
the subdivision the applicant will be required to
improve.
Richard Allen explained that it will be whatever remains
to be done, such as sidewalks and streetlight heads. He
added that most of the improvements are already in.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 7:14 P.M.,
an extended the invitation to speak.
The Commission recognized Mr. Ken Lipinski, Principle on
the project. Mr. Lipinski stated that the applicant is
in agreement with all conditions contained in the staff
report.
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 3 .
COMMISSIONERS ’ \
Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman
Marcus closed the public hearing at 7:15 P.M.
The Commission approved the Notice of Prior Environmental
Compliance, and adopted the following Resolution,
recommending approval of CP-36(A) to the City Council
based on the findings and subject to the conditions
contained therein; with the modification of Condition No.
17 as follows:
17. The following provisions shall be included in the
CC&R's required pursuant to Condition No. 8:
(a> No individual lots may be sold separately
unless they are sold in groups of at least
two lots and are contiguous.
(b) All lots shall be subject to the CC&R's in
perpetuity.
(c) A common architectural theme shall be
maintained for all lots.
(d) All lots shall share the common recreation
amenities.
RESOLUTION NO. 1882, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A 336
UNIT CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED ON PIRAQUA AND VENADO STREETS, LA COSTA.
APPLICANT: LA COSTA VALE, LTD.
4. SNC-17. Street name change from Cedar Avenue to
Christiansen Way.
With the aid of a transparency showing the location of the
proposal, Michael Holzmiller gave the staff report,
essentially as contained in the written staff report.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 7:18 P.M.,
and extended the invitation to speak. Since no one
wished to speak on the matter, the public hearing was
closed.
Commissioner Schlehuber arrived at 7:18 P.M.
Conuxissioner L'Heureux stated his opinion that
consideration should be given to formally adopting a
procedure for the naming of streets in commemoration of
various citizens of the community, as currently no such
policy exists. The Commission concurred.
The Commission adopted the following Resolution,
recommending approval of SNC-17:
RESOLUTION NO. 1885, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A
STREET NAME CHANGE FROM CEDAR AVENUE TO
CHRISTIANSEN WAY ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
NORTH OF GRAND AVENUE BETWEEN OCEAN STREET AND THE
AT&SF RAILROAD. APPLICANT: CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE.
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehuber
-.
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 4 COMMISSION
5. CT 81-l/CP-146, CALSO. Request for 60 unit
tentative tract map and condominium permit located
on the south side of La Costa Avenue between El
Camino Real and Nueva Castilla Way in the RD-M
Zone.
Bill Hofman gave a staff report on the matter, essentially
as contained in the written staff report, and indicated
that the project is approaching the one year time limit to
approve or deny a project, He added that it is important
that some action be taken before that time.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 7:21 P.M.,
and extended the invitation to speak. Since no one
wished to speak on the matter, the public hearing was
closed.
Commissioner L'Heureux inquired what the affect would be
to deny the project without prejudice.
Commissioner Rombotis explained that the applicant can
resubmit the application within one year; whereas, if it
was denied completely, he would be required to pay
another fee.
In response to Commission query, Bill Hofman explained
that Staff has called the applicant numerous times within
the last year, and in each case, the applicant advised
Staff that plans were being redesigned; however, were
not ready for submission.
Mr. Hofman continued that Staff last talked with the
applicant two months ago, and gave him a month deadline to
submit plans, advising him that otherwise they would
proceed with a denial without prejudice. The applicant
advised Staff that he would attempt to make it within the
months time; however, Staff has not heard from the
applicant since that time.
The Commission adopted the following Resolution,
recommending denial without prejudice on CT 81-l/CP-146,
based on the findings contained therein:
RESOLUTION NO. 1886, RECOMMENDING DENIAL WITHOUT
PREJUDICE OF A 60 UNIT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND
CONDOMINIUM PERMIT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF LA COSTA AVENUE BETWEEN EL CAMINO REAL AND
NUEVA CASTILLA WAY IN THE RD-M ZONE. APPLICANT:
CALSO LTD.
Commissioner Jose stated his opinion that Staff time has
been waisted, when it appears that the appliant had no
intention of following through with the project from the
beginning. He added that he feels the project should be
denied outright.
ITEM OUT OF ORDER
Due to the number of GPA's to be heard at this meeting,
Chairman Marcus suggested that Item No. 16 be heard at
this time. The Commission concurred.
Michael Holzmiller added that this item should be
discussed at this time in case of a continuance on the
General Plan, as the Capital Improvement Program will be
forwarded to the City Council in the near future.
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehuber
-.
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 5
DISCUSSION ITEMS
16. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION FOR THE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP)
Michael Holzmiller gave a brief introduction on the
matter, indicating that Staff is requesting that the
Planning Commission find that nine of the projects that
are part of the proposed five year Capital Improvement
Program, are consistent with the General Plan.
With regard to the bicycle lanes, Commissioner Jose
inquired as to the cost of $207,960.
Joyce Crosthwaite explained that the cost is for
striping, and installing raised medians for the bicycles
to be separated from traffic lanes.
Director Hagaman added that these are merely General Plan
consistencies.
The Commission adopted the following Resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 1879, FINDING GENERAL PLAN
CONSISTENCY FOR A COORDINATED PROGRAM OF PROPOSED
PUBLIC WORKS.
ITEMS OUT OF ORDER
Chairman Marcus indicated that there was a request to
continue Items No. 6 and 7 for one week. She suggested
that if the Commission cannot conclude all the General
Plan Amendmgnts at this meeting, that the Commission
grant the continuance. However, if time permits, she
suggested that the Commission act on these items.
The Commission concurred, and Items No. 6 and 7 were
trailed to the end of the meeting.
8. GPA-59(B), SANTA FE COMPANY. Request to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan from
Neighborhood Commercial, Residential Medium Density
and Residential Low Medium Density to Planned
Industrial.
With the aid of a transparency showing the location of the
proposal, Charles Grimm gave the staff report,
essentially as contained in the written staff report.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 7:32 P.M.,
and extended the invitation to speak.
The Commission recognized Mr. Barney Rickett, Professor of
the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer
Science at the University of California at San Diego.
With the aid of transparencies showing the boundary
between the open space and the planned industrial, and
topographic contours; Mr. Rickett explained the
relationship between this project and the UCSD solar wind
radio antenna.
Mr. Rickett continued that he is concerned about the
possible interference by industrial users with this
sensitive radio antenna, and outlined sources of same.
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehuber
MINUTES
-
October 28, 1981 Page 6 4
COMMISSIONERS ’ \
Mr. Rickett continued that he feels the University has a
priority in the use of the antenna, as it was there
first and a number of other projects have met difficult
radio interference standards. He suggested that by
changing the zone boundaries, the developments could be
screened effectively. He added that they would also have
to request some measures in the Specific Plan.
Mr. Rickett extended an invitation to the Commission to
visit the antenna site.
In response to Commission query with regard to the effect
if the buildings are built in the line of sight, Mr.
Rickett explained that the effect depends on what
activity is occurring in the particular building;
however, the screening requirements would be much more
stringent if the building was in the line of sight.
Mr. Rickett continued that parts of the shredding station
of the Palomar Waste Transfer Station were in the line of
sight of the antenna, and that project did involve
specific steps to avoid the radiation.
Discussion reflected the feasibility of grading to bring
the buildings below the line of sight, as well as
shielding measures for those that may be within the line
of sight.
Mr. Rickett responded that it is not clear to him that
grading is a feasible solution; however, by avoiding the
line of sight, it would make it easier on the users of
this land.
Commissioner Rombotis stated his opinion that Mr.
Rickett's request is inequitable, as it is a request to
deny a use of an adjacent property owner. He added that
the antenna was poorly sited, and he cannot support Mr.
Rickett's contentions.
Mr. Rickett responded that the steps taken to make the
Palomar Waste Transfer Station compatible with the solar
wind antenna were a substantial percentage of the cost of
that project. He added that their rights and requests
were taken seriously, and suggested that their rights have
validity.
Mr. Rickett continued that the project is funded by the
Federal Government, at approximately $150,000 per year,
and has been running for over ten years. He stated that
at the time of original siting, it was a remote piece of
property, and at that time a site survey was done of
possible interferring sources.
Commissioner Schlehuber expressed concern that the
University is suggesting that private funding provide
shielding measures.
In response to Commission query, Mr. Rickett estimated
that it would cost an equivalent of one or two years
of operating costs to relocate the solar wind antenna;
however, he indicated that they have not priced same.
Commissioner Friestedt responded that the Commission
respects the position of the University; however, he
concurs that the uses proposed by the applicant are
consistent with the General Plan.
-
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 7
Commissioner Friestedt continued that in order to make
both uses acceptable, the applicant would have to incur
significant financial loss. He added that he is inclined
to move approval of the amendment, and respectfully
indicate the Commissions' acknowledgement of Mr,
Rickett's concerns.
Charles Grimm explained that many of the things being
discussed are more functions of the Specific Plan than the
General Plan Amendment. He added that the issue before
the Commission is whether or not they wish to alter the
location of the open space on the map.
The Commission recognized Mr. Bob Ladwig, of Rick
Engineering, 3088 Pio Pica Drive, Carlsbad, representing
the applicant. Mr. Ladwig stated that they do object to
the requests of Mr. Rickett and the University for an
amendment to the open space areas.
With the aid of a transparency showing the cross sections,
Mr. Ladwig explained that the line of sight for part of
the antenna is not anywhere near the property, because of
the natural buffer existing on the outside of the property
itself. He added that Staff and the Commission do not
have the information to make any changes to the request at
this meeting, and it is an item that should be addressed
with the Specific Plan at a later date.
In conclusion, Mr. Ladwig urged approval of the request
as submitted.
The Commission recognized Mrs. Ida Dawson, Ranch0 Agua
Hedionda Via Los Monos, Vista. With the aid of a
transparency, Mrs. Dawson pointed out her land, and
expressed concern over the effects on her property if
development occurs on the slope to the north. She
requested that drainage not be allowed onto her property.
Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman
Marcus closed the public hearing at 8:02 P.M.
Commissioner L'Heureux suggested that before the Specific
Plan comes before the Commission, they go out and look at
the site, and learn more about the solar wind antenna.
Director Hagaman indicated that Staff would arrange a
tour of the antenna for the Commission.
The Commission recommended approval of GPA-59(B) to the
City Council.
9. GPA-59(C), OCCIDENTAL. A request to amend the Land
Use Element of the General Plan from Travel Service
(TS) to Community Commercial (C), from Residential
Commercial CRC) to a Combination District (Travel
Service and Community Commercial) and from Open
Space (OS) to Residential Medium (RM) Density.
With the aid of a transparency showing the location of
the amendment, Charles Grimm gave the staff report,
essentially as contained in the written staff report.
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehuber
-
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 8
With regard to the open space, Commissioner Friestedt inquired if it would be a dedication to the City, or an
open space easement required of the applicant.
Charles Grimm responded that same would be determined at
the time the project is adopted. The Parks and
Recreation Department and Commission has indicated that
they do not want any type of park site here. He added
that when the project comes, the open space may be
utilized to satisfy the'open space requirements of the
project.
Commissioner Jose inquired as to the proposed fire
station. Mr. Grimm explained that the Fire Department
has indicated this area is no longer important as a
potential site.
Commissioner L'Heureux inquired if there is going to be
some mechanism to ensure that when the site plans are
submitted, that they are done in an integrated fashion.
Mr. Grimm explained that the applicant has anticipated
the Commissions' concern, and on Area 1, the City has a
request for a zone change from C-2 to C-2-0, which would
give the Connnission the opportunity to review the site
development plan for that property. He added that it
would be for all of Area 1.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 8:14 P.M.,
and extended the invitation to speak.
The Conznission recognized Mr. Joe Sandy, P. 0. Box 594,
Carlsbad, representing the applicant. Mr. Sandy
expressed willingness to respond to any questions.
Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman
Marcus closed the public hearing at 8:15 P.M.
The Commission recommended approval of GPA-59(C) to the
City Council.
10. EIR 80-7, RANCH0 CARRILLO. For certification of an
The staff report was presented by Patrick Tessier,
essentially as contained in the written staff report.
With the aid of transparencies, he explained the existing
and proposed General Plan alignments, the proposed
natural vegetation and unstable areas, and ultimate noise
exposure.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 8~28 P.M.,
and extended the invitation to speak.
Ms. Annette Sanchez of Larry Seeman and Associates
responded to Commission questions regarding weekly street
cleaning, home buyers being apprised as to influence of
the airport prior to close of escrow, transportation, and
bus shelters, as contained in the EIR.
Mr. Tessier explained that these are merely suggestions
and guidelines, as the Master Plan will contain the
revised mitigation measures.
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehuber
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 9
The Commission recognized Mr. Jim Goff, representing the
Daon Corporation, and all the property owners in the
Ranch0 Carrillo area, Mr. Goff explained that in the
draft Ranch0 Carrillo Master Plan, are, in Chapter 2, a
complete restatement of all the mitigation measures that
Mr. Tessier indicated the Commission would be discussing,
that have come from the EIR. He added that all of those
that the City intends to judge each subsequent development
from, they will adhere to.
Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman
Marcus closed the public hearing at 8:29 P.M.
The Assistant City Attorney suggested that the Commission
move on to the General Plan Amendment, and then take
action on the Environmental Review and the General Plan
Amendment at the same time. The Commission concurred.
11. GPA-59(D), RANCH0 CARRILLO. A request to amend the
Land use Element for the designation of RLM, RM,
RMH, C, RC, PI, and E.
The staff report was presented by Patrick Tessier, who
indicated that there has been some concern that because
the General Plan Amendment allows density in excess of
what the EIR has covered, that there could be some
conflict.
Mr. Tessier continued that Staff feels that if there was
a proposed amendment to the Master Plan requesting more
than 2,998 units, that it would invalidate the existing
EIR, and additional environmental studies would be
required.
With the aid of a transparency, Mr. Tessier explained the
comparison of the existing and proposed General Plan land
uses.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 8:37 P.M.,
and extended the invitation to speak.
The Commission recognized Mr. Jim Goff, representing the Daon Corporation, and speaking on behalf of all the other
property owners in the area. Mr. Goff stated that they
concur with the Staff recommendation, and that the deletion of the special treatment area should not be
deleted and should be retained in the General Plan
Amendment.
Mr. Goff continued that the draft Master Plan more than
adequately sets the safeguards in terms of mitigating
measures under the EIR, in terms of performance standards
in general for the development of those areas, to protect
the uses within those areas and the adjacent areas.
Mr. Goff urged that the public hearing be held at the
earliest date on the draft Master Plan, which restricts
the density in that area that is subject to the General
Plan Amendment.
In conclusion, Mr. Goff referred to the alignment of
Palomar Airport Road, and stated that before it becomes a
reality in a new location, they would like to come back
to the Commission and Council and present all the
appropriate arguments for retention of that alignment in
its present location.
- -
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 10
Since no one else wished 'to speak on the matter, Chairman
Marcus closed the public hearing at 8:45 P.M.
The Assistant City Attorney explained that his office has
some concerns with the General Plan Amendment. He
explained that the General Plan does not analyze the
density at the high end of the density range, which is th'
standard way to analyze a General Plan change. He added
that there is a complete lack of information with regard
to the impact of the high density.
Mr. Hentschke continued that in his opinion, the
Environmental Impact Report is not adequate to address
the General Plan Amendment; however, that does not mean
that it is illegal if the Commission chooses to approve
it, unless it is challenged.
Counnissioner Jose inquired if the Commission could state
that the EIR and the General Plan Amendment is limited to
the 2,998 units, and approval was based on that figure.
Mr. Hentschke explained that there is no way to condition
a General Plan Amendment.
Ms. Annette Sanchez of Larry Seeman and Associates
addressed the Commission, and exlained that at this time
they have not conducted any analysis on the additional
residential units.
Ms. Sanchez continued that when they originally started
this process, they were under contract to prepare it on
the Master Plan, and at that time there was no General
Plan Amendment. They prepared the initial screen check
preliminary draft on the Master Plan, and at that time
Staff decision was that there was a General Plan
Amendment required as a result of the Master Plan.
Ms. Sanchez explained that since that time, they have had
a revised Master Plan, as well as a revised General Plan
Amendment. They did not conduct further analysis, as the
intent of the developer was 2,998 units that was
specifically in the Master Plan, which was the primary
project that they were analyzing.
The Assistant City Attorney explained that the Commission
can approve the General Plan Amendment, and can certify
the EIR; however, they must recognize the risk, which is
not on the City, but on the developer.
Conznissioner L'Heureux stated while he sees the problem
in a conceptual nature, he does not feel it is a
practical problem.
The Commission adopted the following Resolution
recommending that the City Council certify EIR 80-7,
retained the special treatment area, and approved GPA
59(D):
RESOLUTION NO. 1871, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 031~ 80-7) FOR A
PROJECT GENERALLY INCLUDING A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT AND MASTER PLAN REVISION. APPLICANT:
DAON CORPORATION.
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehuber
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 11
RECESS
Chairman Marcus called a recess at 8:56 P.M., and the
Commission reconvened at 9:08 P.M., with seven members
present.
12. GPA-59(E), CARLTAS. Request to amend the Land Use
Element of the General Plan from Non-Residential
Reserve to Planned Industrial on the south side of
Palomar Airport Road, approximately 600 feet east
of Paseo De1 Norte.
With the aid of a transparency showing the location of
the proposal, the staff report was presented by Charles
Grimm.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 9:lO P.M.,
and extended the invitation to speak.
The Commission recognized Mr. John White, representing
the applicant. Mr. White stated that the applicant
supports the General Plan Amendment as written, however,
would like to request an amendment to the General Plan.
Mr. White continued that after some research, they
received a Certificate of Compliance for both lots in
August, and the applicant feels that the 1.3 acre parcel
on the west should be a commercial land use, and they
would like an opportunity to work with Staff to determine
if there is a way to obtain a higher use than planned
industrial.
Mr. White explained that the applicant feels he can
develop the smaller parcel commercially, without
requesting any additional ingress or egress onto Palomar
Airport Road.
In conclusion, Mr. White explained that are requesting one
of two things; they would like the property to be
considered for a higher commercial use under the same
application, and if that is not possible, they would like
to withdraw the 1.3 acre parcel, which is now a legal
parcel from the General Plan Amendment.
Mr. Grimm explained that Staff did look at the possibility
when the application was first submitted, of changing this
particular parcel to commercial; however, there is no
access to this parcel through the commercial areas. He
added that another reason Staff eliminated commercial as a
possibility is because it would further the appearance of
strip commercial along Palomar Airport Road,
The Commission recognized Mr. Don Agatep, 2956 Roosevelt,
Carlsbad, representing the applicant in a planning
context. He stated that the real question is whether or
not the City will allow additional access to Palomar
Airport Road from the lot. He explained that the
applicant is requesting the joint use of the driveway,
between the Growing Grounds and the 1.3 acre site, having
a secondary access through a loop street.
In conclusion, Mr. Agatep reiterated that the applicant is
not asking for additional access to Palomar Airport Road,
but would like an alternative land use to planned
industrial for this 1.3 acre parcel.
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 12
Mr. Grimm explained that whether or not the driveway is
shared, it would still put additional traffic onto
Palomar Airport Road.
In response to Commission query reference the disposition
of the parcel if it is deleted, Director Hagaman
explained it would remain non-residential reserve, or
could go as planned industrial.
Discussion reflected the individual Commissioners'
feelings with regard to the deletion of the 1.3 acre
parcel.
For clarification purposes, Mr. Grimm explained that the
non-residential reserve is a holding category, and if the
Commission approves a section of this, it would be a
planned industrial section that has two areas of non-
residential reserve on each side. Therefore, it is
possible that the parcel changed to planned industrial
could be developed without providing proper access to the
non-residential reserve to the west; and access may
have to be granted directly onto Palomar Airport Road in
the future.
Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman
Marcus closed the public hearing at 9:30 P.M.
The Commission approved the Negative Declaration issued
by the Planning Director, and recommended approval of
GPA-59(E) as originally proposed to the City Council.
13. GPA-59 (H . . .>, CITY OF CARLSBAD. Request to change the
Lana use designation of the Land Use Element of the
General Plan from Planned Industrial (PI) to a
Combination District comprised of commercial travel
services (TS)/Professional (Office) and Related
(0).
With the aid of a transparency showing the location of
the proposal, the staff report was presented by Charles
Grimm, essentially as contained in the written staff
report.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 9:34 P.M.,
and extended the invitation to speak.
The Commission recognized Mr. Andrew McReynolds, owner of
part of the property in this proposal. Mr. McReynolds
stated he does not object to the zoning which would
promote development that would best serve the wishes of
Alta Mira; however, stated he does have some concerns
with regard to the multiple recommendation as it effects
the potential development of his property on the east
side.
In conclusion, Mr. McReynolds stated he would like to see
a proper blending from the road back to the industrial
portion, with progression from office buildings to
industrial. He suggested same be made possible by
retaining the office portions of the PI designation.
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehuber
-i
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 13 COMMISSIONERS y%
The Commission recognized Mr. Jim Hicks, 7316 El Fuerte,
Carlsbad. Mr. Hicks indicated he was neither speaking in
favor of or in opposition to the proposal, and inquired
what zones will be used to implement the travel service,
and the 0.
Mr. Grimm responded that there is no direct zone which
implements office use; however, generally the R-P zone is
used and it allows residential. Staff is proposing that
the area be zoned C-T, since a Specific Plan is required
on the site as a result of the combination district being
utilized. It can be utilized as a vehicle to indicate
that any of the area can go office, C-T, or layout
specific locations for office uses.
The Commission recognized Mr. Tom Landers, 1626 N. Santa
Fe, Vista. Mr. Landers inquired if garden office
condominiums could come under planned industrial.
Mr. Grimm responded that they could be allowed under the
0 designation.
Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman
Marcus closed the public hearing at 9:46 P.M.
The Commission approved the Negative Declaration issued
by the Planning Director, and recommended approval of
GPA-59(H) to the City Council.
14. GPA-59(I)', HIEATT. Request to amend the Land Use
Element of the General Plan from Non-Residential
Reserve to Planned Industrial.
With the aid of a transparency showing the location of
the proposal, Charles Grimm gave a staff report on the
matter.
In response to Commission query regarding access, Mr.
Grimm explained that access will not be provided through
the Koll property, but will be provided through the
Signal Landmark property which is to the west. He added
that Staff has seen a preliminary proposal on same, and
it will be a requirement of the Signal Landmark Specific
Plan.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 9:50 P.M.,
and extended the invitation to speak. Since no one wished
to speak on the matter, the public hearing was closed.
The Commission approved the Conditional Negative
Declaration issued by the Planning Director, and
recommended approval of GPA-59(I) to the City Council.
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehuber
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehuber
-, -
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 14
15. GPA-59(J), CITY OF CARLSBAD. Request to amend the
Land Use Element o the General Plan by creating a
new, higher density residential designation.
Michael Holzmiller gave the staff report, essentially as
contained in the written staff report.
Commissioner Jose expressed concern with regard to the
impact upon existing transportation systems with the
increase in density.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 9:52 P.M.,
and extended the invitation to speak. Since no one
wished to speak on the matter, the public hearing was
closed.
The Commission approved the Negative Declaration issued
by the Planning Director, and recommended approval of
GPA-59(J) to the City Council.
Commissioner L'Heureux indicated he would abstain on
Items No. 6 and 7, as he is Counsel for the adjoining
property owner.
6. EIR 81-5, SHERMAN. For certification of an
Environmental Impact Report.
With the aid of a transparency showing the location of the
proposal, Charles Grimm gave a staff report on the matter,
indicating that the applicant has requested a continuance,
as neither the applicant or his consultant could be
present at this meeting.
Mr. Grimm added that the EIR did not address noise from
the South Coast Asphalt plant, although it did address
noise from Highway 78. He explained that the reason was
that the actual plant operation is not adjacent to the
subject parcel; however, South Coast Asphalt does own
property which is not in use for the asphalt operation at
the current time, but is adjacent to the subject
property.
Mr. Grimm indicated he spoke with a representative of
South Coast Asphalt, Mr. Boyce, who informed him that
even if this site was utilized for collecting materials
for the production of asphalt, the actual operation of
the plant would remain on the existing parcel.
In response to query regarding the applicant on this
project, Mr. Grimm explained that the applicant was given
the required notice that the public hearing was to be held
this date. Mr. Grimm added that it has been evident for
some time that the hearing would be held October 28,
1981.
Mr. Grimm continued that another problem is that the
applicant changed agents during the processing, and the
property owner was notified by regular notice. The agent
was not notified until two days after, which was still
plenty of time to allow someone to attend the hearing.
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehuber
.
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 15
Mr. Grimm added that the agent has complained they did
not have time to attend the DCC meeting. Mr. Grimm
indicated he spoke with the applicant via telephone and
agreed to set up a meeting any time prior to this hearing,
and the response was, "We don't have time."
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 9:59 P.M.,
and extended the invitaion to speak. Since no one wished
to speak on the matter, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rombotis suggested that the matter be
continued to the next General Plan hearing.
Director Hagaman indicated that the next hearing on the
General Plan Amendment will be held in-May or June, 1982.
He added that in speaking with the consultants on this
matter, they opted for the continuance knowing they would
have time to deal with some issues they were concerned
with; however, they did appreciate the possibility that
the Commission might make a decision at this meeting, and
indicated they would deal with it. Mr. Hagaman suggested
that the Commission take action on the matter.
The Assistant City Attorney indicated that an EIR must be
certified within one year from the date that a project is
submitted.
The Commission recommended that the City Council certify
EIR 81-5.
7. GPA-59(A), SHERMAN. A request to amend the Land
Use Element of the General Plan from Residential
Low Medium (RLM) to Residential Medium Density
(RM), Professional and Related Commercial (0) and
Neighborhood Commercial (N).
Charles Grimm gave a staff report on the matter,
essentially as contained in the written staff report,
with the aid of a transparency.
Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at lo:07 P.M.,
and extended the invitation to speak. Since no one
wished to speak on the matter, the public hearing was
closed.
The Commission denied GPA-59(A).
Mr. Grimm indicated that the City Attorneys' Office has
requested the addition of the following finding, as
Finding No. 6, to the Resolution, and the Planning Staff
agrees with same:
"The amendments approved under GPA-59 are consistent with
the City's Housing Element, as there is no oral reduction
in the City's ability to provide suitable land use designations for housing."
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehuber
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehuber
. * .
MINUTES
October 28, 1981 Page 16
Commissioner L'Heureux voted for the Resolution; however,
abstained on Items No. 6 and 7.
The Conxnission adopted the following Resolution, with the
addition of Finding No. 6, as proposed by the City
Attorney, and the Planning Staff:
RESOLUTION NO. 1884. RECOMMENDING CERTAIN
AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL
PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CARLSBAD SPHERE OF
INFLUENCE.
\
5 \ %
COMMISSIONERS “s1
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Minutes of the Regular Meeting, held September 23, 1981,
were approved as submitted.
ADJOURNMENT
By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 1O:ll P.M.,
to Wednesday, November 18, 1981 at 7:00 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
JAMES C. HAGAMAN
Secretary to the Planning Commission
Ann R. Alleman, Minutes Clerk
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehube
Marcus
Rombotis
Farrow
Jose
L'Heureux
Friestedt
Schlehube,