Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-05-02; Planning Commission; MinutesPlanning Commission Minutes May 2, 2012 Page 1 Minutes of: PLANNING COMMISSION Time of Meeting: 6:00 p.m. Date of Meeting: May 2, 2012 Place of Meeting: COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Schumacher called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Scully led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Schumacher, Commissioners Arnold, Black, L’Heureux, Nygaard, Scully and Siekmann Absent: None STAFF PRESENT Don Neu, City Planner Jane Mobaldi, Assistant City Attorney Bridget Desmarais, Administrative Secretary Sabrina Michelson, Senior Office Specialist Gary T. Barberio, Community and Economic Development Director Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner Dave de Cordova, Principal Planner Jennifer Jesser, Senior Planner Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner Pam Drew, Associate Planner Chris Garcia, Junior Planner Mark Biskup, Associate Engineer Glen Van Peski, Engineering Manager APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairperson Schumacher asked if there were any corrections or revisions to the minutes of the meeting from April 18, 2012. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Siekmann, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission approve the minutes from the Regular Meeting of April 18, 2012. VOTE: 6-0-1 AYES: Chairperson Schumacher, Commissioner Arnold, Commissioner Black, Commissioner L’Heureux, Commissioner Nygaard, and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Commissioner Scully Chairperson Schumacher directed everyone's attention to the slide on the screen to review the procedures the Commission would be following during the evening's Public Hearing. Planning Commission Minutes May 2, 2012 Page 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA Patricia Sanchez, 6498 Franciscan Road, Carlsbad, stated she heard about a possible third railroad track near the Poinsettia Avenue Station. Commissioner Nygaard suggested Ms. Sanchez contact NCTD to find out further information. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING Chairperson Schumacher asked Mr. Neu to introduce the first item. 1. CDP 11-11(A) – GUGLIELMO HOME – Request for the approval of a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) Amendment to revise the site plan to locate the proposed home 5 feet closer to Juniper Avenue and enlarge a balcony of a previously approved CDP for the construction of a new 2,924 square foot, two-story, single-family residence with attached two car garage on an undeveloped 0.14 acre lot located in the R-3 zone at 160 Juniper Avenue, within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program and within Local Facilities Management Zone 1. Mr. Neu stated Agenda Item 1 would normally be heard in a public hearing context; however, the project appears to be minor and routine in nature with no outstanding issues and Staff recommends approval. He recommended that the public hearing be opened and closed, and that the Commission proceed with a vote as a consent item. Staff would be available to respond to questions if the Commission or someone from the public wished to pull Agenda Item 1. Chairperson Schumacher asked if any member of the audience wished to address Agenda Item 1. Seeing none, he opened and closed public testimony. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Siekmann, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission approve Agenda Item 1. VOTE: 7-0 AYES: Chairperson Schumacher, Commissioner Arnold, Commissioner Black, Commissioner L’Heureux, Commissioner Nygaard, Commissioner Scully and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Chairperson Schumacher closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 1 and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item. 2. CUP 10-10/SUP 10-03 – CARLSBAD KINGDOM HALL – A request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit and a Special Use Permit to allow for the construction of a 5,000 square foot church and 877 square foot ancillary caretaker/pastor’s unit for Phase 1, an overflow parking lot for Phase 2, and to approve the church conditional use without an expiration date on a 5.2-acre parcel located on the northeast and southeast corners of El Camino Real and Camino Vida Roble in La Costa Greens Community Facilities Area 1.2 of the Villages of La Costa Master Plan and Local Facilities Management Zone 10. Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 2 and stated Associate Planner Shannon Werneke would make the staff presentation. Chairperson Schumacher opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 2. Ms. Werneke gave a brief presentation and stated she would be available to answer any questions. Planning Commission Minutes May 2, 2012 Page 3 Chairperson Schumacher asked if there were any questions of Staff. Seeing none, he asked if the applicant wished to make a presentation. Mike Palacios, 13248 Mango Drive, Del Mar, stated he would be available to answer any questions. Commissioner L’Heureux asked if the applicant had any objections to landscaping the second lot in the first phase instead of waiting until Phase 2. Mr. Palacios stated the applicant’s preference would be to not install the landscaping during the first phase. Commissioner Scully asked how many members of the congregation there are. Mr. Palacios stated the facility will be used by 3 congregations with roughly 75 to 150 people in each congregation. The facility will be open for services on Sundays, and each congregation can use the facility one day during the week. Commissioner Siekmann asked about the plans for the caretaker parking. Mr. Palacios stated it is Staff’s recommendation to have a carport and the owner’s accept that recommendation. Commissioner Siekmann asked about the type of roofing for the carport. Mr. Palacios stated it can be the same as the caretaker facility or it can be more of a lattice type roof. Chairperson Schumacher asked if there were any further questions of the applicant. Seeing none, he asked if there any were members of the audience who wished to speak on Agenda Item 2. Donna Silvestre, 6456 Cinnabar Way, Carlsbad, stated she is concerned about exterior noise levels with the facility as well as the HVAC system. She is also concerned with the lack of landscaping for the parking lot and would like to see fire resistant landscaping for that area. Ms. Silvestre asked about the proposed easement on Jasper Way. She would like the curbs on that street be painted red. Finally she stated her concerns with the traffic generated by the facility as well as construction traffic. Commissioner Siekmann asked Ms. Silvestre if she was representing all of Solterra or was only representing herself. Ms. Silvestre stated she was speaking only for herself and her husband. Chairperson Schumacher asked if the applicant wished to respond to the issues raised during public testimony. Mr. Palacios stated in regards to the noise, the facility will not have any concerts, bands, outdoor events or social events. The air conditioning units will be small and the noise will be within acceptable standards. He stated that in terms of access to the site and maintaining the southern lot’s landscaping, the owners have tried to maintain the vacant lot as needed. Once the facility is built, that lot will be regularly maintained. Commissioner Nygaard asked Staff to clarify the issue regarding access to the site to the north of the proposed facility. Ms. Werneke deferred the question to Glen Van Peski, Engineering Manager, who stated there is no legal access to the Aspirations Day Care site. The owners of each site would need to work out an agreement as to obtaining a private easement. The single access to Camino Vida Roble is adequate and would not require a secondary access. Mr. Van Peski stated Jasper Way is a private street and that as far as he recalled, the southern parcel does not have access rights on the private street to go through the Solterra neighborhood. The Solterra development, however, does have access rights through the parcel along the easement to Camino Vida Roble because it is that project’s secondary access. Commissioner L’Heureux asked if there could be a sign posted to discourage traffic travelling from the church through the Solterra project. Mr. Van Peski stated he would need to verify what is included in the title report; however if it is true that the Solterra development has access rights, then that development, through the HOA, would have the right to post signs indicating the road is a private road. Commissioner Siekmann asked about construction traffic only using Camino Vida Roble, if the curbs can be red along Jasper, and if the landscaping on the southern parcel is mowed and free of debris. Mr. Van Peski, after reviewing the title report, commented that the southern parcel does have private access rights through the Solterra development to El Camino Real. As far as construction traffic, Mr. Van Peski stated Planning Commission Minutes May 2, 2012 Page 4 that is typically handled during a preconstruction conference and it is something that the Construction Manager can be made aware of. He further stated that the curbs on Jasper Way can be painted red and because it is a private street it is typically handled by the Solterra HOA. Staff can work with the HOA and the Fire Department regarding that issue. Ms. Werneke responded to the issue of landscaping of the southern lot. She stated a condition can be added to require a certain amount of the Phase 2 landscaping as part of Phase 1. Typically a property owner is required to maintain a lot for fire purposes. Commissioner Scully asked how often the property owner is required to currently maintain the lot. Mr. Neu stated the Fire Department does an annual weed abatement program through Fire Prevention. However, the Commission would need add additional language or modify an existing condition if they are concerned with the aesthetics. Commissioner Nygaard asked if the applicant would object to placing a sign directing members of the facility to not use Jasper Way. Mr. Palacios stated he would be agreeable to that as well as placing a temporary no construction traffic sign on Jasper Way. He further stated he would be agreeable to placing a right turn only sign to direct traffic onto Camino Vide Roble. Mr. Palacios added that during their public outreach with Solterra community, everyone was in favor of the project. Commissioner Black asked if the services will have a choir. Mr. Palacios stated no. Jane Mobaldi, Assistant City Attorney, clarified that if it is a private road but there is public access easement anyone can travel on that road legally. Chairperson Schumacher closed public testimony on the item. DISCUSSION Commissioner Nygaard commented that with a few adjustments, this will be a very nice project. She would like to see a sign placed on the site as well as maintained landscaping for the southern lot. In regards to painting the curbs red along Jasper Way, she feels that is the responsibility of the Solterra HOA. Commissioner L’Heureux stated he would like to see a requirement for no parking signs installed along with painting the curbs red. If there is a condition for red curbs, it should be the responsibility of the applicant and not the HOA. He stated Phase 2 needs to be landscaped at the same time as Phase 1 or he cannot support the project. Commissioner Arnold agreed about the no parking signs on Jasper Way and would like a directional sign along El Camino. He does not feel as strong regarding the landscaping for Phase 2. Ms. Mobaldi stated people other than the residents of Solterra will be able to use the road. Because it is a private road, the curbs and gutters are also privately maintained, therefore painting the curbs red is not the responsibility of the City and the Commission does not have the authority to request or require the City to paint those curbs red. Mr. Arnold stated he could approve the project with an added condition regarding no parking signs and a strong recommendation to the applicant to landscape the southern lot. Commissioner Black stated he is more concerned the strip of land between El Camino Real and the southern parcel. He stated that piece of land will not be landscaped and it is the most visible on El Camino Real. Commissioner Black stated he does like the architecture of the facility and he can support the project. Commissioner Scully stated the no parking signs are crucial to this project due to the amount of cars using the facility. She would like to see a condition requiring the second parcel be landscaped and maintained until the facility is constructed. Commissioner Siekmann asked what the typical requirements are for other projects when there are phases. Mr. Neu stated that normally there would be minimal landscaping. Often times, there is not a landscape treatment that adds a long term aesthetic view. Mr. Neu stated Staff drafted a condition regarding the issue if the Commission was interested in applying it that would require the applicant to develop a landscape plan for Phase 2 and have it installed concurrent with Phase 1. The condition would Planning Commission Minutes May 2, 2012 Page 5 leave it open to City Staff and the City’s consultant Landscape Architect to determine what is an appropriate type of landscaping for an area that will become a parking lot at a future date. Ms. Mobaldi stated she had also drafted a condition which requires the property be kept clean, free of debris and regularly mowed. Chairperson Schumacher stated he does not feel as strong regarding additional signage. Commissioner Nygaard asked if there is a trigger to cause the construction of the parking lot in the second phase. Mr. Neu stated that because there is a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) associated with this project, annual reviews will be conducted to ensure the project’s compliance with conditions. If there are issues regarding parking, Staff would contact the applicant to see if adjustments in the facility’s operations could be made or to see if acquiring offsite parking is possible. Mr. Palacios stated the facility in Encinitas has similar parking and the parking lot is only filled about twice a year. During the public outreach, the owners of Aspirations Day Care stated their parking lot could be used by members of the facility. Mr. Palacios stated they are agreeable to the additional landscaping condition. Commissioner L’Heureux asked what would trigger construction of the Phase 2 parking lot. Ms. Werneke stated there is no requirement to build Phase 2. It would be up to the applicant as to when they feel the need to begin construction for that phase. Commissioner L’Heureux asked if the City received complaints about the parking if that would trigger the construction. Ms. Werneke stated that as part of the CUP’s annual review, if complaints are received, she will contact the applicant and express the need to construct the secondary lot. Mr. Neu stated that this project meets the City’s parking requirement with the first phase of construction so the additional parking lot is truly only necessary should the operations of the facility show a need for it. Commissioner Arnold inquired about the vacant land between this project and El Camino Real. Mr. Neu stated that it is a separate parcel owned by another property owner who chose not to be included in the Villages of La Costa Master Plan. It is constrained with a number of easements for utilities and will be difficult to develop. Ms. Werneke stated the width of the property is approximately 10 or 15 feet at the intersection of El Camino Real and Camino Vida Roble. Ms. Werneke directed the Commission’s attention to a slide depicting the property lines. Commissioner Arnold stated he feels the Commission should not require this applicant to completely landscape the southern lot because of this strip of land that will remain unimproved. Commissioner Siekmann suggested that the additional landscape condition be added to the project’s conditions. Ms. Mobaldi commented that in regards to having no parking signs along Jasper Way, the road is privately owned in terms of the improvements, and therefore it would be appropriate to get the approval of the Solterra HOA before the applicant installs the signs. The no parking signs would restrict parking for everyone, not just members of the congregation. Commissioner Scully commented that she would like wording added to the condition which states prior to the construction of the development that the southern lot is maintained. Chairperson Schumacher clarified that the proposal for additional landscaping would be concurrent with the construction of the first phase and it would be the minimal, reasonable landscaping and keep the entire southern lot clean. Commissioner Scully stated she would like the property to be maintained now, prior to construction. Commissioner Nygaard commented that if the property is not being maintained, currently the City would contact the property owner for compliance. Anytime there is a complaint, City staff will respond. Mr. Neu stated that before the permit is activated or used, the property is subject to the existing City ordinances in terms of fire prevention and property upkeep. Mr. Neu stated his interpretation is that until the applicant uses the permit it does not trigger the conditions the Commission has placed on it. Planning Commission Minutes May 2, 2012 Page 6 Ms. Mobaldi stated that Commission could condition the project to be maintained and clean now because once the applicant receives the permit, there are entitlements on the property. It is a Conditional Use Permit and the Commission has a great deal of leeway in terms of conditioning the project. Commissioner Black asked for clarification regarding minimal landscaping. Chairperson Schumacher stated he was referring to the language proposed by Staff. Mr. Van Peski stated that the existing southern portion of the property is currently graded 5 feet below the adjacent vacant dirt lot. The Commission can require landscaping but unless it is over 5 feet tall, it will not be seen from El Camino Real. Chairperson Schumacher asked if the Commission was agreeable to the condition proposed by Staff for landscaping. Four Commissioners stated yes. Chairperson Schumacher asked if the Commission was agreeable to the condition for the southern lot being maintained prior to development, mowed and free of debris. All Commissioners agreed. Chairperson Schumacher asked if the Commission was agreeable to requiring no parking signage on Jasper Way subject to the approval of the Solterra HOA. Five Commissioners agreed. Chairperson Schumacher asked if the Commission was agreeable to having Staff work with the applicant regarding a right-turn only sign at the exit for Phase 1. All Commissioners agreed. Commissioner L’Heureux asked for clarification regarding the request for directional signage on El Camino Real. Commissioner Arnold stated on northbound El Camino Real before the entrance into the Solterra neighborhood. Mr. Neu stated that the type of sign described by Commissioner Arnold would be considered an offsite sign which is not allowed and is not recommended. Ms. Mobaldi stated the motion should include the draft landscape condition as proposed by Staff, that the property be mowed and kept free of debris prior to development, that the applicant work with Staff regarding the installation of a right-turn only sign when exiting the church and installing no parking signs on Jasper Way if the Solterra HOA is in consensus. In regards to the no parking signs, Commissioner L’Heureux asked if it permissive or required. Ms. Mobaldi stated that the Commission direction is to require it so long as the property owner allows it. Mr. Van Peski stated that is considered a fire lane by the City and is already marked as no parking. Ms. Mobaldi then requested the Commission withdraw that part of the motion. Chairperson Schumacher suggested the remaining issue of parking signage be handled by Staff. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Siekmann, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6880 and 6881 approving Conditional Use Permit CUP 10-10 and Special Use Permit SUP 10-03, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein including the draft landscaping condition, that the property be mowed and kept free of debris prior to development, and that Staff work with the applicant for a right-turn only sign at the exit to the church and any other necessary signage. VOTE: 7-0 AYES: Chairperson Schumacher, Commissioner Arnold, Commissioner Black, Commissioner L’Heureux, Commissioner Nygaard, Commissioner Scully and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Chairperson Schumacher closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 2 and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item. Planning Commission Minutes May 2, 2012 Page 7 3. CDP 11-07/CUP 11-02 – HOME PLANT LIFT STATION & FORCE MAIN REPLACEMENT – Request for approval of a Coastal Development Permit and Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a new sewer lift station and associated piping, located at 2359 Carlsbad Boulevard, within a portion of Maxton Brown Park, and within public rights-of-way of Carlsbad Boulevard, State Street, Laguna Drive and Jefferson Street, in the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program within Local Facilities Management Zone 1. Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 3 and stated Associate Planner Pam Drew would make the staff presentation. Chairperson Schumacher opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 3. Ms. Drew gave a brief presentation and stated she would be available to answer any questions. Chairperson Schumacher asked if there were any questions of Staff. Commissioner Black asked if there are any known failures with the type of odor control mechanism being proposed. Ms. Drew deferred the question to Associate Engineer Mark Biskup, Mr. Biskup stated Point Loma has similar systems installed and he is not aware of any failures with this type of mechanism. Commissioner Nygaard asked if there would be any conflicts regarding the construction of the proposed traffic circle. Mr. Biskup stated there should not be any conflicts between the projects. Commissioner Siekmann asked for an explanation regarding why this project did not need a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). Ms. Drew stated the project does not have any environmental impacts with this project and is therefore exempt from CEQA. Commissioner L’Heureux asked if there will be any issues for the residents coming and going during the construction. Ms. Drew stated the residents are notified prior to the start of construction and they will receive contact information should any issues arise. Typically the driveways are not blocked and at least one lane of traffic remains open for travelling. Commissioner L’Heureux asked if any resident would be prevented from using their driveway. Mr. Biskup stated that typically the contract has provisions to coordinate that type of work with the property owners. City staff as well as the contractor will inform the property owners prior to the start of construction. Commissioner Scully inquired about the construction timing of the project and if it will impact the businesses during the summer tourist season. Mr. Biskup stated the construction will be around June or later and should not have much impact to the summer tourist season. Chairperson Schumacher asked if there were any members of the audience who wished to speak on Agenda Item 3. Seeing none, Chairperson Schumacher opened and closed the public testimony on Agenda Item 3. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Siekmann, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6877 and 6878 approving Coastal Development Permit (CDP 11-07) and Conditional Use Permit (CUP 11-02) based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. VOTE: 7-0 AYES: Chairperson Schumacher, Commissioner Arnold, Commissioner Black, Commissioner L’Heureux, Commissioner Nygaard, Commissioner Scully and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Planning Commission Minutes May 2, 2012 Page 8 Chairperson Schumacher closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 3. RECESS Chairperson Schumacher called for a 10-minute recess at 7:30 p.m. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Chairperson Schumacher called the meeting to order at 7:40 with all Commissioners present and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item. 4. GPA 07-02 – ENVISION CARLSBAD – Land Use Concepts Community Feedback – Staff presentation and Planning Commission discussion on the Envision Carlsbad Land Use Concepts Community Feedback report (attached to this report and available at www.carlsbadca.gov/envision) and Envision Carlsbad Citizens Committee (EC3) recommendations on a preferred land use plan. Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 4 and stated Community and Economic Development Director Gary Barberio would make the staff presentation. Chairperson Schumacher opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 4. Chairperson Schumacher acknowledged receipt of letters from Archstone, Westfield, and Integral Communities. Mr. Barberio gave a brief presentation and introduced the project consultant Rajeev Bhatia, with Dyett and Bhatia. Mr. Bhatia gave a detailed presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions. Commissioner Black inquired as to the light blue color depicting employment intensification as shown within the Palomar Airport Corridor focus area. Mr. Barberio explained that what Focus Area 7 shows is two shades of blue. The darker blue indicates areas that are either vacant or underdeveloped. The concept is that industrial office development will continue but it will intensify on those vacant sites or those underutilized sites. As discussed in Working Paper No. 2, the employment growth that will occur in the city over the next 20 to 30 years will be primarily focused in this area. Mr. Bhatia clarified that the use of the two shades will help Staff understand where development or change will occur; however the final land use plan will not show the distinction in color. Commissioner Black asked why the Visitor Commercial Serving areas are not shown in Zone 7 of the Draft Preferred Plan. Mr. Barberio stated that the current practice in the industrial park is that there are certain visitor-serving uses, such as hotels or designated commercial areas to serve the business parks, and those are allowed and permitted through a Conditional Use Permit. Staff anticipates continuing that use with the new zoning code. The underlying zoning for those uses is industrial but the use has been allowed through a Conditional Use Permit. The intent is that they are conditionally serving the tenants and employees of the business park. Chairperson Schumacher opened public testimony on Agenda Item 1. Cynthia Eppeldauer, 3 MacAurthur Place, Santa Ana, representing Archstone, asked the Commission to consider zoning the lot at Palomar Airport Road and El Fuerte in Bressi Ranch as multi-family residential. William Stone, 17140 Bernardo Center Drive, San Diego, representing Excel Trust, the new owner of La Costa Town Center, requested that residential zoning on the site be zoned as high density residential. He stated the retail and office space will remain. Geoff Reeslund, representing Hughes Investments, 23 Corporate Plaza, Newport Beach, strongly supports the Plaza Camino Real revitalization and would like the Carlsbad Plaza and Carlsbad Plaza South centers to remain zoned as commercial. Gil Miltenberger, representing Integral Communities, 2235 Encinitas Boulevard, requested a land use change to high density residential to the site at Palomar Oaks Way. Planning Commission Minutes May 2, 2012 Page 9 David Landes, 1035 Loretta Lane, Carlsbad, is requesting Concept A for the areas within the La Costa Resort and Spa property. He would like the sites to be zoned for medium density residential. Shelly Hayes-Caron, stated the Buena Vista Creek Valley already has all the characteristics that Envision Carlsbad is trying to achieve. She feels the proposal for the Quarry Creek site should be scaled back to preserve the panhandle. Kasey Ciancarelli, 2727 Lyons Court, Carlsbad, commented that for the Mandana site and the Quarry Creek site one of the alternatives should have shown the entire sites as open space. She also commented that if the site at the Oaks North Lot 1 is zoned as residential, there will be edge effects on the habitat and therefore that option should be removed. Mel Vernon, 1044 North Ivy Street, Escondido, San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, stated his support of the open space on the Quarry Creek site. Todd Galarneau, 2780 Womble Road, San Diego, representing the McMillin Companies, stated that the Master Plan for the Quarry Creek site is in the review process and the plan currently provides for 56% of the site as natural open space, the HMP boundary has been expanded by 11%. Mr. Galarneau stated that 30% of the site will be devoted to residential development. Bruce Bandemer, 6341 Allson Street, Carlsbad, supports the preferred Draft Plan, however he opposes the Archstone proposal of high density residential as it will have a detrimental effect on the area. Terry Chalfant, 450 Marlynn Court, Escondido, stated she would like to see the property at Walnut and Roosevelt zoned as mixed use. Margie Caruso, 6624 Brookite Court, Carlsbad, representing the residents of the Bressi Ranch and La Costa Greens areas, stated their opposition to the proposed high density residential. De’Ann Weimer, representing Friends of Aviara, stated she would like to see the panhandle at the Quarry Creek site preserved as open space. Diane Nygaard, 5020 Nighthawk Way, Oceanside, representing Preserve Calavera, stated the development at the Quarry Creek site will add 10,000 more people to the community, and it will add hundreds of units back into the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. She stated the increased open space on the site is not enough and is not in the correct places. Ms. Nygaard commented that 3 of the focus areas (Mandana, Murphy and Quarry Creek) were selected by the Open Space Committee for acquisition. Gabriel Retzer, 3845 Nautical Drive, Carlsbad, stated that a pier would drastically change the coast and wanted to know what impacts a pier would have on the surf. Gil Alvarado, stated that he is very excited about what is happening in the city. Chairperson Schumacher asked if there were any other members of the audience who wished to speak on the item. Seeing none, he closed public testimony on the item. The Commission and Staff briefly discussed the issues raised during public testimony and continued the item to the next meeting on May 16, 2012.