Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-01-04; Planning Commission; Minutesr Meeting of: MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION n \ Time of Meeting: 6:00 p.m. -9 0 Date of Meeting: January 4, 1989 Place of Meeting: City Council Chambers \ 4 COMMISSIONERS ’ CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Hall called the Meeting to order at 6:Ol p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Chairman Hall. ROLL CALL: Present - Chairman Hall, Commissioners Erwin, Holmes, Marcus, McFadden, Schlehuber, and Schranxn Staff Members Present: Michael Holzmiller, Planning Director Mike Howes, Principal Planner Gary Wayne, Principal Planner Bobbie Hoder, Senior Management Analyst Phil Carter, Assistant to the City Manager Ron Ball, Assistant City Attorney Bob Wojcik, Principal Civil Engineer Robert Johnson, Principal Civil Engineer PLANNING COMMISSION PROCEDURES: Chairman Hall 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. Commissioner Schlehuber arrived at 6:05 p.m. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 1) MP 175(A) BATIQUITOS LAGOON EDUCATIONAL PARR - Request for approval of an Amendment to Master Plan 175 (Batiquitos Lagoon Educational Park) to allow minor accessory structures within the rearyards of all Phase I single family lots (Planning Area "C") located on the west and south sides of Navigator Circle along the south facing Batiquitos Lagoon bluff edge and overlooking the desiltation basin in Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 9. Gary Wayne, Principal Planner, passed out a packet containing material from the California Department of Fish & Game, copies of the deed restriction on the Batiquitos Educational Park, and a title policy of one of the homeowners of a lot in question. In review, he stated that on November 16, 1988 staff presented a report to the Commission recommending approval of a Master Plan Amendment to allow certain structures in the rear yards of bluff top residences in the Batiquitos Educational Park. The Commission was concerned at that time that allowing the structures could preclude the placement of a bluff top trail which was to be a public access trail system along the north side of the lagoon. The Commission voted to continue MP 175(A) to tonight to allow staff to negotiate a trail location along the northerly side of the lagoon. At the November 16, 1988 meeting the Commission also voted not to allow any accessory structures if a trail location could not be negotiated. Staff has subsequently reviewed title documents (which were passed out) and has determined that a sufficient deed restriction exists which has been placed over the entire 45 p MINUTES January 4, 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 2 ft. setback area of all bluff top homes, including Lots 2-5, by the California Coastal Commission and in favor of the California Coastal Commission. The deed restriction has been passed to the titles of the individual properties and lots. Since November 16, 1988 staff has also received communication from the California Department of Fish & Game requesting that any decision on structures in the setback be postponed until staff can meet with them and other affected resource agencies, including the California Coastal Commission, to determine a probable location of the trail. Since the trail cannot be located yet, staff recommends that this item be continued until the first available meeting in February to reconsider the project. Staff will renotice the public hearing because a long time has lapsed since the first notification. It is hoped that by the time of the February meeting staff will have the environmental report on the Batiquitos Lagoon Enhancement Project out for public review; this document will address possible impacts of a trail regardless of whether it is located at the top or bottom of the bluff. Commissioner McFadden inquired if the letter from the California Department of Fish & Game regarding the negative declaration, introduced during the public commentary period at the last meeting, was ever received by staff. Mr. Wayne replied that the letter and staff response was distributed at the meeting on November 16, 1988 because it was received after the packets had been sent out to the Commissioners. However, since no action was being taken on the negative declaration at that meeting, it was not introduced into the record. Commissioner Holmes would like to have the next meeting scheduled only after all documents, including the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), pertaining to the Sammis property is available and Commissioners have had time to study them. Mr. Wayne replied that the Batiquitos project EIR will have no legal status or impact until action is taken on it and, thus, will be available only for information purposes until it has been certified. Chairman Hall opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak, noting that the item will probably be continued to a later date. There being no persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman Hall declared the public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members. Commissioner Marcus inquired if staff is recommending February 1st or 15th. Michael Holzmiller, Planning Director, replied that staff is recommending the first available meeting since they are attempting to schedule a workshop at one of those meetings and are unsure at this point when the workshop will be. Commissioner Schlehuber feels that the item should be continued to a specific date such as February 1st and then continue it, if necessary. Ron Ball, Assistant City Attorney, concurred that it would be preferable to continue the item to a date certain and continue it again, if necessary. f- MINUTES /I January 4, 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3 COMMISSIONERS v Commissioner McFadden would like to see the item continued to February 15th to allow enough time for staff to be completely prepared since many people are traveling a long distance to be here. Mr. Wayne replied that the workshop has been tentatively planned for February 15th and since both items are lengthy, there would not be enough time to do both at that meeting. Staff would feel most comfortable recommending February 1st with a possible continuance. Chairman Hall inquired if March 1st was considered. Staff feels that it would be preferable to take some action prior to that time since there will be a meeting in January with the agencies. Michael Holzmiller suggested that in the past, items that were not ready were just tabled with renoticing. Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to table MP 175(A) with renoticing. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 2) SDP 85-8(A) KUBOTA - Request for approval of a Site Development Plan Amendment to extend and revise a previously-approved Site Development Plan on the west side of Pio Pica Drive between Buena Vista Avenue and Las Flores Drive in the RP-Q Zone and Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 1. Mike Howes, Principal Planner, showed a slide presentation of the site and surrounding area. He then reviewed the background of the request and stated that in 1985 the Commission approved SDP 85-8 which permitted construction of two office buildings on .48 acres in the RP-Q zone. The first building to the south was completed in March 1987 and an extension was subsequently granted for the second building to June 1988. The applicant is requesting approval of a lot split and revision of the northerly building to remove the drive-thru and provide a driveway for parking access. The size of the building has been slightly decreased and parking increased to comply with current parking requirements of 11250. Architecture of the new building will be similar in design to the present building. The project meets all requirements. Staff recommends approval. Commissioner McFadden inquired if the separate parcels each meet the parking requirements as well as the joint parking. Mr. Howes replied that the joint parking, as well as the access, meets the requirements and that the joint access and parking agreement ensured that this parking and access would always be available. Commissioner Erwin inquired if the lot split had any negative impacts. Mr. Howes replied that it did not. Commissioner Erwin would like to see a block wall fence constructed between the building and the freeway for noise attenuation. Mr. Howes replied that property on the west side of the freeway has a slumpstone wall. If the Commission agrees, this project could be conditioned for a block wall. Erwin Hall Holmes Marcus McFadden Schlehuber Schramm /I MINUTES January 4, 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 4 . COMMISSIONERS ’ \ Commissioner Schramm inquired if the property to the north (which will share the driveway) will still have to provide their own parking. Mr. Howes replied that they would. Chairman Hall opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak. Bill Booth, 2979 State Street, Carlsbad, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and stated that they have no objection to the block wall but does not feel that it will accomplish anything since the windows in an office building are normally closed which provides an acoustical buffer that meets the State requirements. He feels that the sound waves will glance upwards and over the wall and building. Chairman Hall inquired if any soundproofing materials had been incorporated into the first building. Mr. Booth replied that he did not believe that any intentional effort was made to install special materials to control noise. Jack Kubota, 2585 Pio Pica, Carlsbad, addressed the Commission and stated that the existing building has been completely soundproofed with insulation and double glazing of all the windows on the freeway side. Many comments have been made about how good the acoustics are. On occasion, noise is a problem if the windows have been opened to expend tobacco smoke. He does not feel that a block wall will reduce noise and he would prefer the landscape plan as presented. Chairman Hall inquired if the same soundproofing which went into the first building will be incorporated into this building. Mr. Kubota replied that it would be done. There being no other persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman Hall declared the public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members. Commissioner Erwin acknowledged that the block wall will not reduce noise to the second story but feels that it will reduce noise to the first story and surrounding outside area. He feels the wall would improve the entire neighborhood. Commissioner Holmes inquired where Commissioner Erwin envisions the wall to be placed. He replied that he would like to see it on the freeway side. Commissioner Holmes does not feel it will accomplish much and would prefer landscaping since sound does not pose a problem to the applicant. Commissioner Marcus agrees with Commissioner Holmes. She does not feel a block wall will add to the decor. Commissioner McFadden inquired if there is a sound level requirement for office buildings similar to residential. Mr. Howes was unaware of a requirement for office buildings but felt that, if there is one, it would not be as strict as residential. He stated that the Building Department would probably know the requirement. She does feel that a block wall will reduce the noise, however she can support the project without a wall. Commissioner Schramm stated that she would normally agree with a block wall; however, since listening to the applicant, she does not feel it will make much difference in this case. She would prefer to see the open space but could s . ’ l p MINUTES -? CORRECTED \ ? January 4, 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 5 COMMISSIONERS accept a block wall if it also had plants on the freeway side. Commissioner Holmes noted that thermopane glass and insulation provides very good soundproofing. Commissioner Schlehuber inquired if permanently sealed windows on the freeway side might eliminate the window problem. Commissioner Holmes does not feel that permanently sealed windows would do much. Commissioner Schramm suggested the possibility of double insulation on the freeway side. Mr. Kubota replied that the windows of the current building are double glazed and it is very quiet inside; some windows are fixed and some are openable; the building is entirely air conditioned. He noted that the freeway travels the full length of Pio Pica and he doesn't understand the concern for noise abatement for this small parcel, especially since the present building has no problem with noise. Commissioner Schlehuber inquired if the project were conditioned f&/d/66 to some CNEL interior noise level, could it be done without a block wall. Mr. Booth, the architect, replied that it would be no problem and that standard dual glazing would meet the requirement with standard insulation. The problem occurs if windows are opened. Commissioner Schlehuber inquired if the windows could be sealed. Mr. Booth replied that they could, however a potential tenant might want the psychological effect of opening a window for fresh air. Commissioner McFadden inquired if Commissioner Schlehuber is interested in sealing all of the windows or just the freeway windows. His reply was the freeway windows. Commissioner Holmes noted that Cal Trans requires a chain link fence. If we require a block wall with trees and shrubbery between it and the chain link fence, a maintenance problem would be created in caring for the shrubbery. Commissioner Schlehuber inquired about the CNEL level for residential properties. Mr. Howes replied that it is 45 CNEL for residential. Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to approve the prior compliance issued by the Planning Director and adopt Resolution No. 2808, approving SDP 85-8(A), based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein, with the addition that windows on the west (freeway) side of the building be permanently sealed and that the interior space meet a noise attenuation of no more than 45 CNEL. 3) SNC 88-3 KANE STREET NAME CHANGE - Request for approval of a Street Name Change from Gozo Place to Las Brisas Court for a cul-de-sac generally located off of Fosca Street, northwest of Ranch0 Santa Fe Road in Local Facilities Management Zone 6. Mike Howes, Principal Planner, reviewed the background of the request and stated that the residents of Gozo Place have requested a name change of this street to eliminate humorous references and project a more dignified image. They have requested that the name be changed to Las Brisas Court which is in conformance with the City's street name policy for Erwin Hall Holmes Marcus McFadden Schlehuber Schramm * > ’ ” ” MINUTES January 4, 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 COMMISSIONERS ’ Spanish names in south Carlsbad. The request has been reviewed with the police and fire departments who have no objection with the name change. The change will affect 11 homeowners who reside on Gozo Place. Staff recommends approval. Chairman Hall inquired if the applicant was the City. Mr. Howes replied that the application was by letter from one homeowner and the letter was signed by eight other homeowners. Chairman Hall opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak. There being no persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman Hall declared the public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members. Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt Resolution No. 2809 recommending approval of SNC 88-3 based on the findings contained therein. 4) SDP 88-l BLONSKI - Request for a Site Development Plan for a maximum 355 room hotel on property generally located at the southeast corner of Palomar Airport Road and Carlsbad Boulevard in Local Facilities Management Zone 22. Gary Wayne, Principal Planner, advised the Commission that the applicant was in agreement with the continuance and that staff is requesting the continuance to a date uncertain in order to allow the applicant time to resolve outstanding project issues with staff. Commissioner Schlehuber inquired if staff keeps track so that the project will not be approved by default by not bringing it back to the Commission in a timely manner. Mr. Wayne replied that the project is tracked and March 2, 1989 is the six month cutoff. If necessary, staff will request a go-day extension at that time. The applicant has been informed and is willing to comply with that requirement. Chairman Hall opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak. There being no persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman Hall declared the public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members. Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to table SDP 88-l. Ron Ball, Assistant City Attorney, noted that this item must be renoticed since it was continued to a date uncertain. Erwin Hall Holmes Marcus McFadden Schlehuber Schramm Erwin Hall Holmes Marcus McFadden Schlehuber Schramm !- MINUTES January 4, 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 7 COMMISSIONERS Commissioner Schlehuber requested staff to track this item because it must be removed from the table well in advance of March 2, 1989 in order to be renoticed. Mr. Wayne accepted that responsibility. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 5) PCD/GPC 88-4 CITY OF CARLSBAD - To consider Planning Commission Determination/General Plan Consistency of proposed street improvements to Manzano Drive on property generally located at Manzano Drive, between Carlsbad Boulevard and El Arbol Drive in Local Facilities Management Zone 1. Gary Wayne, Principal Planner, reviewed the background of the request and stated that the California Government Code requires that a General Plan Consistency Determination be made for major public projects. This public project consists of the construction of the remaining half width street improvements to Manzano Drive, between Carlsbad Boulevard and El Arbol Drive. Manzano Drive is currently improved to City standards with asphalt pavement, curb and gutter, along its northern side. This project will complete street improvements including sidewalks along the southerly side of this street abutting the State Parks & Recreation property. The project meets the goals and policies of the General Plan elements and is consistent with the local coastal program. The State has funded a portion of the cost and it is possible that the remaining funds will be the responsibility of the City, however negotiations are still pending. Commissioner Erwin inquired that if the project is put off to a later date, it will no doubt cost the City more money to complete. Mr. Wayne replied that he was correct. Commissioner McFadden requested staff to define a "major public project." Mr. Wayne replied that a major public project is defined as one that requires funding of more than $50,000. The budget for Manzano Drive is in the neighborhood of $75,000. Commissioner Schramm inquired what portion of this project the State will pay. Mr. Wayne replied that the State has currently allocated $60,000 for completion of the improvements. Staff is attempting to negotiate with the State for them to fund the entire cost. There were no requests from the public to speak. Commissioner McFadden inquired if any of this money will include improvements to the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard, i.e. signage, crosswalks since there have been many public concerns about pedestrian safety at this intersection. Mr. Wayne replied that the intersection is not included in the project. Commissioner Erwin inquired if the funds could be used for another purpose. Mr. Wayne replied that, to the best of his knowledge, the funds could not be used for any other purpose. Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt Resolution No. 2807 finding that the proposed street improvements to Manzano Drive, located in Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 1, are consistent with the General Plan. Erwin Hall Holmes Marcus McFadden Schlehuber Schramm , *I 1. January 4, 1989 !- MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 COMMISSION ADDED ITEMS AND REPORTS: Commissioner Holmes extended a warm thank you to past Chairman McFadden for her excellent year of leadership and presented her with a framed resolution. MINUTES: Commissioner McFadden requested changes to paragraph three, page 11, and paragraph three and nine, page 12, of the minutes of December 21, 1988; Commissioner Erwin requested a change to paragraph three, page 5. The Planning Commission approved the minutes of December 21, 1988 as corrected. ADJOURNMENT: By proper motion, the meeting of January 6, 1989 was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Planning Director BETTY BUCKNFR Minutes Clerk MINUTES ARE ALSO TAPED AND KEPT ON FILE UNTIL THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED. Erwin Hall Holmes Marcus McFadden Schlehuber Schramm Erwin Hall Holmes Marcus McFadden Schlehuber Schramm K K K K K K K K K K K K K K