HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-07-06; Planning Commission; MinutesMINUTES
\ \
Meeting of: PLANNING COMMISSION
Time of Meeting: 6:00 p.m. % Date of Meeting: July 6, 1988 \\ 7 -; *
Place of Meeting: City Council Chambers COMMISSIONERS \ I %
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman McFadden called the Meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Chairman McFadden.
ROLL CALL:
Present - Chairman McFadden, Commissioners Erwin, Holmes, Marcus, Schlehuber, and Schramm
Absent - Commissioner Hall
Staff Members Present:
Michael Holzmiller, Planning Director
Charles Grimm, Assistant Planning Director
Gary Wayne, Senior Planner
Phil Carter, Assistant to the City Manager
Brian Hunter, Associate Planner
Ron Ball, Assistant City Attorney
David Hauser, Assistant City Engineer
Bob Wojcik, Principal Civil Engineer
Steve Jantz, Associate Civil Engineer
Chairman McFadden introduced the new Planning Commissioner,
Tom Erwin, to the staff and gallery.
PLANNING COMMISSION PROCEDURES:
Chairman McFadden reviewed the Planning Commission procedures on the overhead for the benefit of the audience.
COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE ON ITEMS NOT LISTED IN THE AGENDA:
There were no comments from the audience.
Charles Grimm, Assistant Planning Director, reported that Agenda Item 4, La Costa Townhomes CT 85-l/CP-307, has been withdrawn by the applicant. Ron Ball, Assistant City Attorney, advised that a motion was needed to accept the
withdrawal.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to accept the withdrawal of Agenda Item 4 (CT 85-l/CP-307).
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
1) ZC 87-l/CT 87-2/HDP 88-2 - CARLSBAD RANCH BUSINESS CENTER - Zone change from P-M, L-C, and R-P to reconfigure those designations and add an OS designation and Q-Overlay to the P-M area; Tentative Tract Map to create a g-lot subdivision; and a Hillside Development Permit for the proposed grading plan, on property located on the south side of Palomar Airport Road, east of Paseo de1 Norte, in Local Facilities Management Zone 5.
Gary Wayne, Senior Planner, reviewed the background of the request and stated that on June 15, 1988, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to take testimony on a
Erwin Holmes Marcus McFadden
Schlehuber Schramm
P T
MINUTES
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 2 COMMISSIONERS
proposal by the Carltas Development Company to divide a 56 acre parcel located south of Palomar Airport Road (PAR) and east of Paseo de1 Norte (PDN). The proposed subdivision
would create seven industrial lots, one office use lot, one
open space lot, and a remainder parcel. Development would
also require a zone change and a hillside development permit.
During the public testimony, it was learned that the notification list supplied by the applicant was not accurate and that one or more property owners who should have received
notification--did not. The Planning Commission, on advice from the Assistant City Attorney, voted to continue the
public hearing to July 6, 1988, in order to allow staff time to properly notify all property owners within 600 feet of the
proposed development.
Mr. Wayne reviewed the two major concerns raised at the June
15th meeting:
1) Mitigation of potential adverse effects on biological
resources, and
2) The potential impacts related to the reservation of an easement for a realignment of the PAR/PDN intersection.
The first issue, adverse effects on biological resources, staff memo to the Planning Commission dated June 15, 1988 recommended a modification of conditions to (a) require a redesign of the project to eliminate adverse impacts to wetlands, and (b) restrict grading operations to after the nesting season of the black-tailed gnatcatcher, an endangered species. Carltas (the applicant) and the California Department of Fish and Game have agreed to the modified conditions.
The second issue, reservation of an easement for a
realignment of the PAR/PDN intersection, concerned the owners
and lessees of property at the existing intersection since it
was felt that (a) the realignment would have adverse economic
impacts on the existing businesses and (b) they were worried
that approval of the easement reservation would constitute implied approval of the realignment without environmental review, adequate traffic study, and the required public noticing. The property owners went on record opposing the proposed realignment. At the June 15th meeting, staff stated that the requested easement did not prejudice the future
realignment of the intersection and that the realignment
would be a separate distinct project which would require environmental review and public noticing. Staff also indicated that the need for the realignment would have to be substantiated prior to the City accepting the easement and that the easement reservation was being requested in order to
allow time to study all aspects of the possible realignment;
this reservation would allow the Carltas project to proceed.
A second staff memo to Commissioners dated July 6, 1988
recommends modifications to page 5, paragraph 1, of the staff
report, Findings #l and f/2 of Resolution No. 2744, Conditions
1145 and #56c of Resolution No. 2746. Staff recommends
approval of ZC 87-1, CT 87-2, and HDP 88-2 with these modifications.
Chairman McFadden inquired about Commissioner Schramm's suggestion at the June 15th meeting to add the Planning Commission to Condition 822 on page 7 of Resolution No. 2746.
. .
-- , 7 -, P I
MINUTES
CORRECTED
\ ?
PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3 COMMISSIONERS July 6, 1988
Commissioner Schlehuber inquired about his suggestion at the June 15th meeting for clarification of the "A" Street interconnection with Paseo de1 Norte; the map included with the easement reservation materials was unclear and the streets did not appear to connect properly. Bob Wojcik,
Principal Civil Engineer replied that Condition H49 on page 10 covers the reservation and the street connection. Commissioner Schlehuber would like to see the map corrected
although he presumes the condition would take precedence.
Commissioner Erwin reported that he wishes to abstain from voting on this item since he was not at the June 15th meeting and a portion of the tape recording of the meeting was missing.
Commissioner Schramm inquired about Condition #40 of
Resolution No. 2746 and where does it show a denial or
approval of the two standards variances. Gary Wayne replied that the June 15 and July 6 memos both deal with the standards variance which is issued by the City Engineer.
John White, 4401 Manchester, Encinitas, representing Carltas
Development Company, applicant, addressed the Commission and
requested that the minutes of the June 15th meeting be
corrected on page 10, paragraph 4 to read ".14 acres of
wetlands" rather than "1.4 acres." Mr. White stated that
Carltas Development agrees with the staff recommendations,
however they are concerned about the condition which requires the dedication of a frontage road. Carltas feels that this dedication would send an incorrect message to the community since the parcel is not being developed at this time. Carltas feels that this issue is more sensitive than the intersection relocation. Mr. White commended staff on their excellent job.
Chairman McFadden opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
There being no persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman McFadden declared the public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members.
Commissioner Schlehuber requested staff's response to the applicant's objection on the frontage road dedication. Gary
Wayne replied that the dedication was included at this time
instead of with the development of the remainder parcel
because space needs to be reserved on the existing parcel map
and since disposition of the remainder parcel could take
several years, with the possibility of a change in ownership
of the property, the frontage road may be needed prior to
development of the parcel.
Commissioner Schlehuber feels that the 4 year easement
reservation period is too short and time could run out before
the study is completed. He would like to see a longer
period.
Commissioner Schramm inquired about stockpiling on the remainder parcel. Chairman McFadden requested staff to
clarify the reference to "no other entitlements" and
Mr. Wayne replied that regarding the suggested modification
to Condition #45 on Resolution No. 2746, a stockpile permit
would be included as well as storing large equipment and any
clearing or grading. Since the parcel has not been used for
.
c, ’ t P.
MINUTES
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 4 COMMISSIONERS
agriculture for the past five years it would also include an agriculture permit.
Commissioner McFadden inquired if siltation basins would be
excluded. Mr. Wayne replied that a siltation basin would not be excluded. An environmental review would be required to include a desiltation basin. Chairman McFadden's intent
is that the property not be disturbed in any way.
Commissioner Holmes inquired how the property owners and
tenants are compensated when a road realignment such as this
results in a loss of business. Gary Wayne replied that the
matter usually ends up in litigation and deferred response to
the attorney.
Commissioner Holmes repeated his question and Ron Ball, Assistant City Attorney, replied that litigation normally results with compensation paid to any property owner whose property or property rights are taken by the public entity. Appraisals and fair compensation are decided by agreement or by a court. Fair market value is established and compensation is then paid. Mr. Ball advised that this item cannot be considered in the planning issues of this project.
Commissioner McFadden agrees with Commissioner Schlehuber
about a longer time limit being needed for the easement
reservation; she thinks a minimum of five years is needed.
She can support the project with the modifications.
Commissioners Holmes and Schramm can support the project and the five years.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt Resolution No. 2744 recommending approval of the Conditional Negative Declaration issued by the Planning
Director with the proposed modifications included in the
staff memo of July 6, 1988.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt Resolution No. 2746 approving CT 87-2, adopt Resolution No. 2747 approving HDP 88-2, and recommend approval to the City Council of ZC 87-1, per Resolution No. 2745, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein and the amendments provided in staff memo dated July 6, 1988 with the incorporation of modifications suggested in the staff memo dated June 15, 1988, and extending the time period to five years for the easement reservation, and amending Condition #22, page 7, of Resolution No. 2746 to include review by the Planning
Commission.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
2) EXTENSION OF DC 87-l RATES - Request for an extension of
a large residential Daycare Permit at 4104 La Portalada Drive.
Charles Grimm, Assistant Planning Director, reviewed the
background of the request and stated that last year the Planning Commission approved DC 87-l to allow a large residential daycare facility for up to 12 children at 4104 La Portalada Drive. This permit was issued for a period
of one year since neighbors living on La Portalada, a
cul-de-sac, had concerns about parking. At that time, the
Erwin Holmes
Marcus
McFadden
Schlehuber
Schramm
Erwin Holmes Marcus McFadden Schlehuber Schramm
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
fl --J
MINUTES
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page ’ COMMISSIONERS
Planning Commission also added four special conditions:
(a) six foot fences were required on the side property lines, (b) applicant was required to ensure legal parking during drop-offs and pick-ups, (c) employees were required to park
on Porta Place, and (d) all children were required to be
under the age of 6 years. Staff recently visited the site
and found that all of the conditions have been complied with. Staff also contacted several of the neighbors who stated that the facility was operating smoothly and that there were no
problems. Since no complaints have been received during the past year and the daycare facility appears to be running smoothly, staff recommends a one year extension for this
project.
Commissioner Schlehuber inquired about the confusion on
parking conditions at last year's meeting. Mr. Grimm
recalled that the applicant was against the employees parking
on Porta Place but finally agreed to it. That condition was
then included in the permit.
Commissioner Schramm inquired if any other letters had been received regarding this project. Charles Grimm replied that a letter had just been received from Herbert Falkenstein, 4108 La Portalada Drive, who stated that he would not oppose
the extension as long as the conditions remain the same. Mr.
Falkenstein was one of the neighbors who spoke in opposition
to the project last year. Mr. Falkenstein's letter is
included with these minutes.
Commissioner Erwin inquired how often staff visits a daycare
facility of this type. Mr. Grimm replied that staff would normally visit the site when a complaint has been received or when some type of action is requested such as this extension. Otherwise, it is up the State or County to maintain the licensing standards of the facility.
Commissioner Schlehuber inquired that should the extension be granted for a period of five years if that would mean that
staff would only visit the site in response to a complaint.
Mr. Grimm indicated that was correct.
Chairman McFadden opened the public testimony and issued the
invitation to speak.
Mr. Richard Kates, 4104 La Portalada Drive, Carlsbad, applicant, addressed the Commission and stated that the daycare facility has operated smoothly throughout the year, with no complaints. He has provided additional fencing over
and above the requirement by replacing a chain link fence
with a solid wood fence and has incurred extra expense in an
effort to shield noise. The two neighbors who were not home
when staff visited the site have indicated to him that they
are not opposed to the facility. He would like to have the
extension granted for a period of five years, if possible.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if the back wall was still 4 ft. or 6 ft. Mr. Kates replied that the 6 ft. fence goes to the edge of the play area and the 4 ft. chainlink fence was replaced with a 4 ft. solid wood fence.
Mrs. Thelma Pilcher, 3930 Trieste Drive, Carlsbad, addressed
the Commission and stated that she lives on the street.
directly above the daycare facility and is objecting to the
noise, which she also objected to last year. Since noise travels up, she sees no way of eliminating the problem. The
P rl,
MINUTES
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 COMMISSIONERS
adults correcting the children are as noisy as the children
themselves. She hopes that the extension will only be
granted for one year due to the past history of the Kates'
daycare facility when they cared for 15 children.
There being no other persons desiring to address the
Commission on this topic, Chairman McFadden declared the
public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion
among the Commission members.
Commissioner Holmes stated that since the facility is operating the way it was intended to operate, and since the neighbors seem happy, he could support a five year extension. He doesn't see the necessity for one year renewals if
complaints are investigated.
Commissioner Schramm feels the applicant has done a good job but would prefer to have the extension granted for one year.
Commissioner Marcus would also like to see the extension granted for one year. She thinks staff needs to visit the site at least once a year and that this should not be a burden. She would rather see staff query the neighbors before a complaint is made.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if all property owners within 300/600 ft. were noticed. Mr. Grimm replied that this item would not normally be a public hearing, however, in this
case, because of the emotion of last year, property owners
within 300 ft. were noticed.
Commissioner Erwin has mixed feelings regarding daycare. He realizes the need for daycare but does not necessarily like to see commercial ventures being conducted in a residential area. For these reasons, he can only support a one year extension.
Commissioner Schlehuber feels the permit should be reviewed
on an annual basis. He supports the one year extension.
Chairman McFadden feels that this CUP should be handled as any other CUP, enforced by complaint only. The State, who issues the license through the County of San Diego, has regular inspections and can cancel the license if the facility does not meet the requirements. She feels the Planning Director should be given discretion in this matter.
Commissioner Schlehuber feels that the State has different conditions than the City, i.e. our parking condition. He would like to see the State review their conditions and the City review our conditions.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to approve a one year extension of DC 87-1, a large residential Daycare Permit at 4104 La Portalada Drive.
3) CUP 88-5 FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH - Request for Conditional Use Permit to allow Victory Christian High School to operate out of modular buildings and to allow the church to conduct a preschool/daycare in the main church building at 3780 Pio Pica Drive, in Local Facilities
Management Zone 1.
Erwin Holmes Marcus McFadden Schlehuber
Schramm
X
.
. . - *‘ Ifi ,?
MINUTES
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 7 COMMISSIONERS
Gary Wayne, Senior Planner, reviewed the background of the
request and stated that in January of this year the Planning
Commission approved a CUP which allows the First Baptist
Church to use five modulars (which when fitted together make
one building) for storage, and also for overflow classroom facilities for their Sunday educational programs. The modulars had been placed on the site but were not habitable until certain improvements were made, such as installing foundations. The church is now requesting that the modulars be used by Victory Christian High School Monday through Friday (estimated enrollment of 90-120 students). The high
school has to relocate due to the expansion of the Carlsbad
Union Church. In addition, the church would like to conduct a preschool and daycare center in the main church building Monday through Friday (6:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) Staff is recommending some improvements such as (a) removal of signage, (b) installation of block walls to shield noise, and (c) conformity of the structures to local fire and building codes. Overall, staff feels that the findings can be made and recommends approval.
Chairman McFadden introduced a letter into the record from Mr. and Mrs. William Tuck, 1055 Magnolia Avenue, who oppose
construction of the proposed block wall between their
property and the church since they feel it will inhibit the breeze and block their view.
Commissioner Marcus requested staff to point out the Tuck property on the map.
Commissioner Marcus then inquired what project had been approved for the CT-Q site. Mr. Wayne replied that a motel had been approved and a block wall is required between the residential and the motel.
Commissioner Schlehuber inquired if the motel is required to
have a block wall east and west as well as north and south. Mr. Wayne replied that the property has not yet been developed but is conditioned for block walls in both directions.
Commissioner Schlehuber inquired on the status of the motel and Mr. Wayne replied that approximately a year has passed since approval, which was almost at the expiration of the mandatory time limits.
Chairman McFadden inquired about the 75 child capacity and
the fact that the applicant states they will have a maximum of 60 children. Mr. Wayne replied that the applicant has applied for a license for 60 children only at one time.
Chairman McFadden inquired about Condition #15 on page 5 requiring the applicant to obtain required State licenses prior to occupancy. Mr. Wayne replied that the applicant has applied for the required State licenses but they must receive the CUP approval in order to obtain the license. Mr. Wayne is unaware of the coordination between the two approvals.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if an environmental review was made of the effect on the children of the freeway noise and pollution. Mr. Wayne replied that no technical studies were made since St. Patrick's school already exists adjacent to the proposed site and there have been no complaints received.
P 7
MINUTES
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Erwin inquired if the City can come back at a later date for noise abatement and pollution filtration. Mr. Wayne replied that a condition could be added.
Commissioner Schramm requested clarification of the R-l site
and if the modulars would be located on the R-l. Mr. Wayne
replied that they would.
Chairman McFadden opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
Pastor Jack Long, 3111 Via Premio, Carlsbad, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and stated that the church would prefer not to build a block wall (Condition #14) due to the expense involved and referred to the letter from the Tuck's indicating that they would prefer not to have a
block wall built. He stated that another neighbor who has a
dilapidated fence would like a new one, and the third
neighbor doesn't care one way or the other. Regarding CUP
87-12, they have applied for and received Coastal Permit No. 618826. Paperwork is in process to amend the existing permit to comply with Condition #17 on page 5.
Chairman McFadden inquired if the church is coordinating their efforts with the State daycare licensing agency. Pastor Long replied that they were. One aspect of the State license requires the issuance of the local CUP. They are also working on compliance with fire and building codes and are almost ready for an onsite inspection.
Chairman McFadden inquired about the 60 child stipulation and
Pastor Long replied that it was correct. He then asked
members of the gallery from the church who are in favor of the high school/daycare operation to stand. There were 17 persons in the gallery who stood up.
Commissioner Holmes inquired if the block wall would impose a financial hardship. Pastor Long replied that the block wall would cost between $6,000 to $8,000 and would cause a financial hardship.
Commissioner Holmes inquired about the significance of the
real estate sign in front of the church. Pastor Long replied
that the church is running out of room for Sunday meetings and is looking to relocate within 18 months to two years. Victory Christian and the daycare facility would move with the church, if and when they move.
Wayne Van Der Linden, 3961 Scott Drive, Carlsbad, representing Victory Christian High School, addressed the Commission and gave a short history of Victory Christian, stating that it was formed in 1973 and has been providing a good Christian education to local students since that time.
They are looking forward to their new home with the First
Baptist Church and would appreciate the Commission's
approval.
There being no other persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman McFadden declared the public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members.
Chairman McFadden inquired how long the CUP is for and Mr. Wayne replied that Condition #9 states three years.
+. ?
MINUTES
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page g COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Schlehuber stated that he can support the
project; he can see the problem about the block wall and
would accept a wood fence for the short time the church plans
to be there.
Commissioner Erwin stated he is concerned about a school and
daycare so close to the freeway due to emissions. He is also
concerned about approving something which will stay with the
property after the church moves. He would like to have the
approval contingent upon the time the church is there.
Chairman McFadden replied that the CUP is for a three year
period and it goes with the land. Commissioner Erwin can
accept the three year period.
Commissioner Marcus likes a daycare at this type of location
and feels it will be an excellent use of this property. She
assumes that a new buyer would probably need CT zoning at
this location so, for that reason, she could accept a lesser wall. She can support the project.
Commissioner Schramm can accept a wooden fence for a three year period. She inquired about zone requirements for other
uses. Mr. Wayne replied that almost any other use would require a zone change and also approval with the local coastal program. Commissioner Schramm likes the idea of the high school and daycare at this location.
Commissioner Holmes can accept a wooden fence over the block wall for three years. He would like the wood fence to be solid wood.
Chairman McFadden can support the project. She can accept
the solid wood fence but would like to leave the need for a
block wall up to complaints since the modulars will be
located so close to the property line.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt Resolution No. 2752 approving the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and adopt Resolution No. 2751 approving CUP 88-5, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein, except that
the condition regarding the block wall will be changed
to a 6 ft. solid wooden fence, unless complaints are received.
RECESS
The Planning Commission recessed at 7:17 p.m. and reconvened at 7:28 p.m.
5) SDP 88-4 CARLSHAD HYUNDAI - Request for auto dealership
for new and used sales and service of Hyundai cars in
the Car Country Expansion, CT 87-3, in Local Facilities
Management Zone 3.
Gary Wayne, Senior Planner, reviewed the background of the request and stated that in December 1987 the Carlsbad City Council approved CT 87-3 and SP-19(C) for the Car Country Expansion, east of the existing Car Country and south of Cannon Road. The project received Coastal Commission approval in February 1988 and the final map is currently
being processed. The proposed project is a Hyundai dealership on a 4.6 acre site in the Car Country Expansion, CT 87-3. The site is higher than the dealerships now located on Paseo de1 Norte and will be visible from I-5. The
Erwin Holmes Marcus
McFadden
Schlehuber
Schramm
.
. . . ;
MINUTES
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 10 COMMISSIONERS
building will incorporate a split level floor plan to
accommodate the approximate 5% slope of the property.
Mr. Wayne reviewed the findings and conditions regarding
signage, parking, grading, architecture, and compatibility with the surrounding area. Staff recommends approval.
Chairman McFadden inquired about Condition i/8 on page 3. Mr. Wayne replied that the sentence needs to be reworded to
read " . ..approval of the final map for CT 87-3."
Chairman McFadden inquired about the wall height around the
lunch enclosure. Mr. Wayne replied that he thought the wall
would be 42 inches high and that can be confirmed by the
applicant and/or his architect.
Chairman McFadden inquired about the EIR and if the ADT calculation included test driving of vehicles. Mr. Wayne replied that it is included.
Commissioner Marcus inquired whether Condition 1118 on page 4 regarding school fees is a standard condition. Chairman McFadden replied that this condition is included in all new
commercial development. Commissioner Marcus does not know
how a commercial development will overcrowd the schools and
thinks the condition should be reworded. Chairman McFadden
replied that this condition is to relieve the overcrowded
condition and was added at the request of the City Council.
Commissioner Schlehuber thinks it is meant to cover school children of employees living in the area.
Chairman McFadden opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
John White, 4401 Manchester, Encinitas, representing one of
the joint-applicants, Carltas Development, addressed the
Commission and stated that the other joint-applicant is the
Hyundai dealer, Pacific Coast Automotive Group. Carltas
concurs with the staff report and urges approval of the
project. Mr. White reported that grading is almost complete
on the Car Country Expansion and the permits have been issued for the public improvements. Final map has been submitted. The lots are expected to be completed by October 1st and timeliness of the approval is important. Mr. Ellergard, the Hyundai franchisee, and Mr. Dan Rancourt, the architect, are present to answer questions.
Chairman McFadden inquired about the height of the wall
around the lunch enclosure. Dan Rancourt, Project Architect
from Escondido, replied that the floor is t,wo and one-half
feet above grade and the wall will be up to that point with a
42 inch handrail for protection.
Chairman McFadden also inquired about the trash enclosure; she would like to see it moved to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Mr. Rancourt replied that it could be moved nearer to the parking but it had been placed there because it was near the source of the trash.
Commissioner Holmes is also concerned about the trash enclosure and does not feel that the trash enclosure is large enough to accommodate this large dealership. Mr. Rancourt replied that the enclosure would accommodate four bins and since body work would not be done there, he feels it is adequate. The trash enclosure would be primarily for boxes
P * T
MINUTES
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page l1 COMMISSIONERS
and a few vehicle parts which are being discarded. The trash
will be picked up twice a week.
There being no other persons desiring to address the
Commission on this topic, Chairman McFadden declared the
public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion
among the Commission members.
Commissioner Schlehuber feels the project is a good one and can support it. He sees no problem with the wall around the
eating area.
Commissioner Erwin likes the project and is pleased that there is adequate off-street parking.
Commissioner Marcus thinks the building is good looking and can support it.
Commissioner Schramm likes the project and the architecture.
Chairman McFadden likes the building and noted that it can be
viewed by the residents across the Agua Hedionda Lagoon. She
can support the wording change to Condition t8. She would
like the trash enclosure moved away from the eating area, to
the satisfaction of the Planning Director. With these
changes, she can support the project.
Commissioner Schlehuber inquired if there will be a noise problem with loud speakers. Mr. Wayne replied that it was a good point and that perhaps a condition should be added
regarding the design of the sound system so that it will not
conflict with existing uses. The noise problem occurs when the speakers are not facing the right way. Commissioner Schlehuber would like to hear from the applicant on this issue.
Allen Rich, 2141 Palomar Airport Road, Carlsbad, speaking on
behalf of the applicant, addressed the Commission and stated
that they can accept the sound condition and moving the trash
enclosure a reasonable distance.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2756 approving the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2755 approving SDP 88-4 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein, and moving the trash bin away from the
eating area, the fence height around the eating area
adjusted, if necessary, and the sound system being designed
to maintain the sound on the site, all to the satisfaction of
the Planning Director, and rewording Condition #8 to include
the words "final map."
6) LFMP #8 - KELLY RANCH - Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 8.
Phil Carter, Assistant to the City Manager, reviewed the background of the request and stated that the Local
Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) for Zone 8 was authorized by the City Council in August 1987. Using an overhead
display, he described the zone located north of Palomar
Airport Road and west of El Camino Real and stated that the
zone encompasses three property owners: Kelly Ranch area containing 433 acres, the Kurgess property containing 22
acres, and the City of Carlsbad which owns the Macario Canyon
Erwin Holmes Marcus McFadden Schlehuber
Schramm
X
.
. .- r. 7
MINUTES
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page l2 COMMISSIONERS
Park containing 276 acres. Kaufman & Broad was authorized by the City Council to prepare the LFMP for the property owners
in that zone. Staff accepted the Zone 8 plan for review on November 16, 1987 and has continued since that time to
prepare the plan for presentation to the Commission.
Although both City staff and the applicant's consultant have
devoted considerable attention to the plan, staff recommends
denial without prejudice since the plan has not been
completed and the State mandated limits are expiring. The findings are outlined in staff memo to the Planning Commission dated July 5, 1988.
Chairman McFadden opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
Brian Milich, Director of Forward Planning for Kaufman &
Broad, addressed the Commission and stated that his firm has
worked diligently with staff in an attempt to meet all of the
issues; however, they have been unable to accept all of the
conditions requiring financial guarantees for sewer and
circulation improvements within the zone which actually
benefit the entire quadrant. Kaufman & Broad is concerned
about the delay since they have volunteered to assume the
costs of preparing the plan. In conclusion, he stated that
Kaufman & Broad feels that the issues identified by staff are significant but not insurmountable.
There being no other persons desiring to address the
Commission on this topic, Chairman McFadden declared the
public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion
among the Commission members.
Commissioner Erwin would like a staff response to
Mr. Milich's comments. Phil Carter replied that Mr. Milich
came prepared to discuss specific conditions contained in the
zone plan which the Planning Commissioners have not had the
opportunity to review and be prepared to respond to. He
agrees that Mr. Milich is frustrated with the requirements for completing an LFMP as well as receiving cooperation of all the property owners. He recalled that the plans for Zones tll and i/12 were required to guarantee approximately $40 million of infrastructure while the Zone #8 plan requires guarantees of only l/4 to l/5 of that amount. Phil Carter feels the main issue is that the plan is yet incomplete and although Kaufman & Broad has agreed to pay for the plan in order to develop Kelly Ranch, that was a specific requirement of the City Council when they authorized Kaufman & Broad to do the plan. He feels that denial without prejudice is a positive recommendation because it allows Kaufman & Broad to
begin working on the plan again until it is finished.
Chairman McFadden inquired if fees are forgiven in a denial without prejudice. Phil Carter replied that when the Growth Management Plan was adopted, the City Council made a provision to recover staff costs for processing zone plans. If denial is approved by the Planning Commission and accepted by the City Council, staff would invoice Kaufman & Broad for staff costs. They would then pay a new fee when the plan is again accepted for review.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if "without prejudice" means that no one is responsible and that the applicant can come back and start again where they left off. Phil Carter replied that staff has advised Kaufman & Broad that a denial without prejudice does not indicate negligence on their behalf. A
. .
.* -, ?
MINUTES
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page l3 COMMISSIONERS
denial without prejudice would enable Kaufman & Broad to
resubmit at any time.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt
Resolution No. 2759 denying LFMP 8 without prejudice based
on the findings attached therein.
RECESS
The Planning Commission recessed at 8:12 p.m. and reconvened at 8:15 p.m.
INFORMATION ITEM
7) PACIFIC RIM COUNTRY CLUB AND RESORT PHASE I OAK TREE PRESERVATION PROGRAM
Charles Grimm, Assistant Planning Director, reviewed the background of the request and stated that when the Pacific Rim Master Plan was approved in November 1987, the Planning Commission added Condition iI33 which required that the
developer submit a tree relocation plan for the Oak trees on
site. The applicant has submitted this plan which has been
reviewed and revised by staff. Staff had some concern with
the original proposal and subsequently visited the site to
examine each tree and question the consultant regarding the
relocation. In determining feasibility for relocation, three
items were considered: (a) minimal health and vigor necessary to withstand the transplantation process, (b) structural integrity necessary to allow successful transplantation, and (c) size of the tree relative to being able to ensure survival if transplanted. Exhibit "A" to the staff report identifies all trees, tree condition, tree size, box size required for relocation, and unit cost per tree relocation. The cost for relocation of the 20 identified
trees ranged between $5,000-$45,000 per tree, with a total
relocation cost of $346,000. In addition, Hillman Properties
has agreed to mitigate oak trees to be lost to development by
either a 2:l or 3:l basis depending on trunk diameter and box
sizes. Using an overhead projector, Mr. Grimm reviewed the
tree replacement plan proposed by Hillman Properties. Based on the mitigation plan, staff recommends approval.
Commissioner Erwin would like to know the tree diameter in
relation to the box size. Mr. Grimm replied that the tree expert can better respond to that when he makes his presentation.
Chairman McFadden noted that she does not see any mention
imm
made of replacing trees that fail. She feels that
replacement for failed trees is very common. Mr. Gr
replied that a condition could be included for tree replacement of failed trees.
Chairman McFadden noted that the staff report states that most trees lost to development are located in the Alga Road corridor and the applicant would like to complete the compaction grading this year so that construction for the road could begin next year. However, Exhibit "A" states that Alga Road is on an accelerated schedule in response to community, public facility, and school district needs. She recalls that Alga Road is only needed in this particular zone
Erwin
Holmes
Marcus McFadden Schlehuber Schramm
: 1, p MINUTES T?
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page l4 COMMISSIONERS
plan and inquired if staff concurs with the accelerated time
line. Mr. Grimm replied that the mitigation plan is better,
in staff's view, than if the Alga area trees were saved. He
concurred that a delay on Alga Road would not shut down any
zones; however, traffic movement would be improved and staff
would like to see Alga completed as soon as possible.
David Hauser, Assistant City Engineer, added that completing
Alga Road would extend the useful life of La Costa Road and
since, after grading, it takes 8 months for the ground to
settle, Engineering would like to see the tree relocation
program begin as soon as possible. The Carlsbad Unified
School District has requested that Alga be accelerated so
that they can begin building the new school there.
Chairman McFadden inquired about the difference in the time line for those trees which would be completely removed. Mr. Grimm deferred answer to the applicant.
Larry Clemens, Vice President and General Manager of Hillman Properties, applicant, addressed the Commission and stated that they have hired renown specialists for the tree relocation project to ensure that the oak trees will be preserved. He introduced Jack Nakawatase, a specialist in
urban forestry, and Jim Borer of the Valley Crest Tree
Company, an oak tree specialist. Jim Borer was the
contractor involved in relocating the oak trees in the Carlsbad Airport Center on Palomar Airport Road.
Jack Nakawatase, 0 & A Landscape Architects, 1551 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, a ddressed the Commission and stated that
California oak trees are a precious commodity and especially
to the Pacific Rim project. Prior to starting his own
company, he was a principal with the firm that did the
Carlsbad Airport Center and was very involved with the oak
tree relocation as well as the entire landscape project. He
stated that in 18 years of business, Valley Crest Tree
Company is the only tree contractor that he has worked with
with confidence in relocating large oak trees. Mr. Nakawatase described the process of tagging each tree on the Pacific Rim property and how the specimen trees to be moved were incorporated into the landscape scheme.
Jim Borer, 2821 Caminito Sebastian, Cardiff, representing Valley Crest Tree Company, addressed the Commission and stated that his company was contracted to relocate the oak trees on the Pacific Rim property. Using a series of slides,
he described how each tree is excavated, boxed and relocated.
Chairman McFadden inquired about insurance for failed trees.
Jim Borer replied that great care is taken in moving each individual tree and of the 44 trees moved, only one tree was lost at the Carlsbad Airport Center. Since the trees on the Pacific Rim property are larger and more mature, there would be no tree insurance.
Chairman McFadden inquired about the number of trees to be relocated in the Alga Road corridor and Jim Borer replied that there were four trees.
Commissioner Holmes inquired if there is a relationship in
size of the root ball to the diameter of the oak tree. Jim
Borer replied that there are many factors in determining the box size but no specific formula. Two trees with the same trunk size could have different box sizes depending on the
L
., .
.
MINUTES
CORRECTED
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page l5 COMMISSIONERS
tree structure, different canopies, the amount of foliage, as well as the soil condition.
Commissioner Holmes inquired how long a tree can be
maintained in a box and Jim Borer replied that a boxed tree
could be kept for as long as five years; however, it is
better to get them back into the ground so they can reinitiate the growth process. Other types of trees can be
kept even longer.
Commissioner Holmes inquired why the replacement trees are so much smaller than those being preserved. Jim Borer replied that replacement trees are nursery-grown specimen trees which are of a juvenile size to augment mature trees. Charles Grimm added that this was the reason the replacement trees are being provided on a 2:l basis.
Commissioner Schramm inquired why some of the trees which received a black dot designation and were healthy were not
saved. Jim Borer replied that those trees in the black dot
category were determined to be d~$~ggk6/6fifdd/ls)gB/f4 f&S&% too difficult to box. The largest tree ever moved by Valley Crest is the one at the entrance of the Palomar Airport Park.
Commissioner Schramm noted one 24 inch tree in the black dot
category which looked to her like it could be moved. Jim Borer replied that sometimes growth and form also prohibits a tree from being moved and he felt this was the case with the tree Commissioner Schramm identified. Also, some of the smaller trees have odd shapes which are difficult to
incorporate into the landscape design. In addition, he added
that some trees with an unusual structure have been known to
collapse.
Commissioner Schranxn inquired if replacement trees are the same type of oak tree and Jim Borer replied that they would be the same variety of Coast live oak.
Commissioner Erwin requested Jim Borer to advise the tree diameters of the replacement trees since only box size is given in the exhibit. Jim Borer replied that a 24 inch box would contain a tree 2 inches in diameter; a 36 inch box would contain a 3-4 inch tree, and a 48 inch box would
contain a 4-5 inch tree.
Chairman McFadden inquired how fast the replacement trees
grow and Jim Borer replied that they normally grow about one
foot per year.
Commissioner Schlehuber inquired how long it takes to know if the tree will survive, once it has been excavated, and Jim Borer replied that it is usually immediately since the trees are boxed and stored temporarily.
Commissioner Schlehuber inquired if large trees are more
vulnerable and Jim Borer replied that the smaller trees are
more vulnerable since large trees are usually over-boxed.
Chairman McFadden inquired why some trees are too large to
move and Jim Borer replied that Valley Crest uses the largest
crane available and some of the trees are still to heavy for
that size crane.
Chairman McFadden noted that she still thinks that failed
trees should be replaced. Mr. Clemens replied that Hillman
could accept a condition to replace failed trees.
?
MINUTES
July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION Page l6 COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Erwin would like to see tree sizes used
throughout the reports.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt
a minute motion approving the Pacific Rim Country
Club and Resort Phase I Oak Tree Preservation Program,
with an additional condition which would require
replacement of any failed tree within 12 months from
the date of planting.
ADDED ITEMS AND REPORTS:
Chairman McFadden reported that Commissioner Marcus has been
appointed as an ex-officio member of the Historic
Preservation Commission to replace the vacancy created by the
resignation of former Planning Commissioner Kip McBane. She
should contact Chris Salamone for meeting times and details.
Chairman McFadden announced appointments to Planning
Commission subcommittees as follows:
Noise Element - Commissioners Erwin and Schlehuber
Building Height - Commissioner Schlehuber
Norht Beach Plan - Commissioner Erwin
General Plan Update - Commissioners Hall
Michael Holzmiller reported that three Planning Commission representatives will participate in the Citizens Committee to Study Growth, that the meetings are very thorough and staff is attempting to answer all questions, large and small.
Michael Holzmiller reported on the open space issue and the Citizen's Initiative. After reviewing the initiative, the City Council has appointed City Councilmembers Pettine and Larsen to draft an alternative initiative to lock in the open space provisions of growth management as well as an open space map. The map is yet incomplete. The City Clerk has determined that the Citizen's Initiative has received enough signatures and will be going to the City Council in two weeks. There are some wording change legalities which still
need to be addressed as well as some question regarding the
213 vote. The Alternative City Initiative will be provided
when it is ready.
The Open Space Subcommittee has not yet been able to meet with the SOS Committee and a meeting has been scheduled for Thursday, July 7th, to review the map. Members of the subcommittee are Councilmembers Larsen and Pettine and Planning staff members Grimm, Carter, Orenyak and Holzmiller.
MINUTES:
The Planning Commission approved the minutes of June 15, 1988 with corrections on page 10, paragraph 4
( . ..approximately .14 acres of wetlands...) and page 12, paragraph 3 (... so there would be no impact...).
Erwin Holmes Marcus McFadden
Schlehuber
Schramm
Erwin Holmes Marcus McFadden Schlehuber Schramm X
. ._
8. (’ L /?
MINUTES
Page l7 COMMISSIONERS
-4
\ ’ July 6, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION
ADJOURNMENT:
By proper motion, the meeting of July 6, 1988 was adjourned at 9:03 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Planning Director
BETTY BUCKNER Minutes Clerk
MINUTES ARE ALSO TAPED AND KEPT ON FILE UNTIL THE MINUTES ARE
APPROVED.
l-
Erwin Holmes Marcus McFadden Schlehuber Schramm
\ -1 1
K
K
K
K
K
K
MR. & MRS. WILLIAM TUCK
1055 Magnolia Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008
July 5, 1988
CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008
ATTENTION: CITY COUNCIL
We as residents of 1055 Magnolia Avenue, Carlsbad would like to
document our request to the City Council..
We are referring to the City request of the Baptist Church to construct a 6’ (six foot) block wall between the residential and church property line.
We feel this is unnecessary construction. We as residents have
already constructed fences to separate the properties. The con-
struction of the proposed block wall will inhibit the breeze on our property and will block our view.
We would appreciate your support.
Sincerely,
_ - ._- _,-_- ---F4w-.;-I -,---
v- .~ fi .+- - -- +) -q
I
HERBERT B. FALKENSTEIN
4108 LA PORTALADA DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
I, JyPe
hkF.- i-aTf.s -De $374
_. .’ >
,_ .’ / _ ’ .*
,’ _ .-
I, .: JUL 1988
__ PlANNiNG DEPAi3Wh’ CITY OF CAiUSAT,