Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-10-19; Planning Commission; MinutesPlanning Commission Minutes October 19, 2016 Page 1 Minutes of: PLANNING COMMISSION Time of Meeting: 6:00 p.m. Date of Meeting: October 19, 2016 Place of Meeting: COUNCIL CHAMBER CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Goyarts led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Anderson, Commissioners Black, L’Heureux, Goyarts, Montgomery and Siekmann Absent: Commissioner Segall STAFF PRESENT Don Neu, City Planner Ron Kemp, Assistant City Attorney Farah Nisan, Senior Office Specialist Scott Donnell, Senior Planner Chris Sexton, Planning Technician II Jason Geldert, Engineering Manager Glen Van Peski, Community & Economic Development Director APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any corrections or revisions to the minutes of the meeting of August 17, 2016. Chairperson Anderson stated that she would like to include the original errata language to the action of Item 1 which restricted only the owner of the property regarding bluff containment and that the restrictions would be put on the title. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner L’Heureux and duly seconded by Commissioner Siekmann to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 17, 2016. VOTE: 5-0-2 AYES: Chairperson Anderson, Commissioner Black, Commissioner L’Heureux, Commissioner Montgomery, and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Segall ABSTAIN: Commissioner Goyarts Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any corrections or revisions to the minutes of the meeting of September 21, 2016. CORRECTED Planning Commission Minutes October 19, 2016 Page 2 MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner L’Heureux and duly seconded by Commissioner Siekmann to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 21, 2016. VOTE: 5-0-2 AYES: Chairperson Anderson, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Goyarts, Commissioner L’Heureux, and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Segall ABSTAIN: Commissioner Montgomery Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any corrections or revisions to the minutes of the meeting of October 5, 2016. Commissioner L’Heureux stated a correction on page 7, first full paragraph, line 5 to say “a culture of bicycling”. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner L’Heureux and duly seconded by Commissioner Siekmann to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 5, 2016 as amended. VOTE: 6-0-1 AYES: Chairperson Anderson, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Goyarts, Commissioner L’Heureux, Commissioner Montgomery and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Segall ABSTAIN: None PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA Jeff Kassebaum addressed the Planning Commission concerning the need for a sign variance for his business. Mr. Neu stated that Mr. Kassebaum could visit the administrative office at Faraday to discuss signage and find a resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING Chairperson Anderson asked Mr. Neu to introduce the first item and opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 1. 1. CDP 06-23 – 5156 CARLSBAD BOULEVARD PROJECT – Request to deny without prejudice a Coastal Development Permit to demolish an existing single-family residence and construct a new 4,702 square foot two-story single family residence with a subterranean basement located at 5156 Carlsbad Boulevard within the Mello II Segment of the City’s Coastal Zone within Local Facilities Management Zone 3. The project site is not within the appealable area of the California Coastal Commission. Mr. Neu stated Agenda Item 1 would normally be heard in a public hearing context; however, the project has been on file for 10 years, the applicant requested to not take it forward to hearing and the applicant did not want to withdraw the request or have the Commission act on the permit. He stated that unless the applicant is available to address the Commission, he recommended that the public hearing be opened and closed, and that the Commission move the staff recommendation which is to deny the permit without prejudice. That would allow the applicant should he be ready to move forward to reapply substantially with the same design within one year of the Planning Commission action. Planning Commission Minutes October 19, 2016 Page 3 Commissioner Siekmann stated that she would like to recuse herself from the item if the item is heard before the Commission. Chairperson Anderson asked if anyone on the Commission would like to hear the item. Seeing none, she asked if the applicant or owner wished to address Agenda Item 1. Seeing none, she opened and closed public testimony. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner L’Heureux and duly seconded by Commissioner Goyarts that the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 7206 denying without prejudice Coastal Development Permit CDP 06-23 based upon the findings contained therein. VOTE: 5-0-2 AYES: Chairperson Anderson, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Goyarts, Commissioner L’Heureux and Commissioner Montgomery NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Segall ABSTAIN: Commissioner Siekmann Chairperson Anderson closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 1, asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item and opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 2. 2. GPA 16-01/ZCA 16-01/ZC 16-01/MP 14-01/LCPA 14-01 – VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN – Meeting to review Master Plan input to date from the community and Planning Commission and confirm the areas of the Master Plan to revise or study for potential revision. The Village and Barrio Master Plan would regulate land uses for the city’s downtown Village and adjacent Barrio. The Village and Barrio are generally located west of Interstate 5 between Tamarack Avenue and Laguna Drive. The railroad corridor forms the west boundary of the Barrio. Garfield and Ocean Streets generally form the west boundary of the Village. Parts of both neighborhoods are in the Coastal Zone. Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 2 and stated Senior Planner Scott Donnell would make the staff presentation. Mr. Donnell gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions. Mr. Neu recommended to proceed with public testimony first as it might help with the Commissions discussion as to what they might want to consider. Gary Nessim, 2987 Highland Drive, stated that staff has done a great job with getting more input on the Village and Barrio Master Plan than the General Plan and working on the parking study in getting an excellent plan. Mr. Nessim suggests moving some density around and not changing the overall density in the Village reducing it in the core commercial areas. Cindy Vigne, 3880 Hibiscus Circle, thanked staff and stated her concerns with parking and asked the commissioners to consider the transit area on Oak Avenue. Robert Wilkinson, 2911 State Street, Suite I, stated his concerns with trash pickups in the alleys and added that short term parking should be available for delivery services. He added that traffic calming, street trees, and having a clean and efficient areas throughout the Village and Barrio. He stated that the city should begin with the Mobility Element that is vital downtown and is needed in the Village. Sherry Alvarado, 3331 Tyler Street, stated her concerns with street lighting and the consideration of trees that don’t have messy droppings. She stated that a promenade on Grand Avenue would be wonderful and people from the neighborhood would love to see Pine Park completed with art or honorable seats purchased for passed family members. Ms. Alvarado stated that she would like to see Tyler Street going one way Planning Commission Minutes October 19, 2016 Page 4 from south to north, a crossing on Chestnut Avenue, supports succulents, consider a parking structure behind Garcia’s and thanked staff and the commission. Julie Adjour, 3537 Madison Street, stated that pedestrian and bike lanes would satisfy the community as well as a noise ordinance. Irene Patton, 2677 Garfield Street, stated that she has recently moved to Carlsbad and stated her concerns with the parking study boundaries. Ann Saurman Boyce, 4890 Alondra Way, stated that she is excited to see the redevelopment of the gas station moving forward near the freeway as it may be a great introduction to the city. Michael McDonald, thanked staff and stated that he is happy to see accurate information presented to the community from the Charrettes. He stated that the railroad trenching is not worth $80 million for safety purposes as there may be better reasons to spend that amount of money. Robert Wilkinson, 2911 State Street, Suite I, stated that the lease for the post office will end in 3 years and hopes to keep the services in the Village. Evan Gerber, 1044 Carlsbad Village Drive, thanked staff for their efforts and stated that the parking study is a step in the right direction that should be added in the Village and Barrio Master Plan. Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any other members of the audience who wished to speak on the item. Seeing none, she closed public testimony and asked staff to respond to the issues raised. Mr. Donnell replied stating that the city intends to release a study on trenching early next year and added that the proposed Master Plan presents a better list of commercial uses that would be possible on the Oak Avenue transit area than the current Master Plan. Mr. Donnell stated that staff concurs with alleys being available to service businesses and added that the Master Plan should provide guidance with setbacks and possibly secondary access ways. Chairperson Anderson asked if the trenching study will discuss whether and when a public vote will take place regarding a large capital expenditure. Mr. Donnell stated yes, anything over a million dollar expense would require a vote. Chairperson Anderson stated that it would be nice to find out sooner rather than plan for it 5 years from now. Community and Economic Development Director Glen Van Peski stated that there is a communications and a community engagement plan underway now concentrating on getting the reports to provide the basic information to begin the next phase. Commissioner Goyarts asked how other departments will be included within the process regarding the street trees, traffic, and art. Mr. Donnell stated that the Master Plan has been routed to other departments throughout the city to ensure consistency. Kerry Siekmann asked if the noise ordinance would possibly be a part of the Master Plan. Mr. Neu stated that the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt a noise ordinance during the General Plan update. The City Council considered the recommendation and decided that they did not want a noise ordinance. He stated that the City Council could reconsider the action however, as part of the Master Plan it would not be included. Mr. Neu added that should the city have a modified noise ordinance, it would be outside of the Master Plan included in the Municipal Code to apply city wide. Commissioner Siekmann asked how that would be initiated. Mr. Neu replied stating that it would be initiated by the City Council in response to a Planning Commission recommendation. Commissioner Siekmann asked how the Climate Action Plan would be involved with the Village and Barrio Master Plan. Mr. Donnell stated that there are some components in the Master Plan that start to address greenhouse gas emissions and ways that the city could combat that that are consistent with the Climate Action Plan with reference to electrical vehicles. He stated that the Master Plan could provide more guidance as implementation of the Climate Action Plan is an evolving topic. Mr. Donnell stated that the Climate Action Plan is implemented at the project level for the need to provide solar panels, electric vehicle charging stations or other means. Chairperson Anderson asked if the railroad crossing on Chestnut Avenue is proposed as a pedestrian and bicycle crossing. Mr. Donnell replied stating that the Master Plan embraces the idea of a crossing as well as at other streets that presently dead end at the railroad. He added that the Master Plan does not take a Planning Commission Minutes October 19, 2016 Page 5 stand on what it should be limited to however it encourages that it be open to pedestrian and bicycle crossings. Chairperson Anderson stated that she is concerned with the trenching of the railroad prolonging to 5 to 10 years and added that it would be nice for something to happen with or without the trenching before that time as an interim improvement specifying pedestrian crossing only. She stated that she did not see any discussion on the name change of the Village and the Barrio and asked if it is intended to be changed or left as proposed. Mr. Donnell stated yes, it will remain as it is. Chairperson Anderson stated that based on public hearings and input, it seemed like that was the desire of the neighborhood. Mr. Donnell stated that there are people who are passionate about keeping the name as the Barrio and others who desire to change it. He added that it is hard to identify a majority that feel one way or the other and whether it is appropriate for staff to make or to recommend and whether that is a land use recommendation staff should make. Chairperson Anderson inquired about an alternative. Mr. Donnell stated that the City Council could make that decision in choosing a name that is more generic for both areas and not refer to the Barrio. He stated that another idea is to use the generic name and have a subset that recognizes the Barrio area somewhere in the plan. Commissioner Siekmann inquired about density change to the housing element of the city’s Master Plan. Mr. Donnell stated that the Barrio and the Village are important to the city because of all that they provide such as the proximity to transit, walkable area etc. and there are specific density ranges in the Barrio and the Village important for the city to demonstrate to the state that housing could be provided for all different income groups. Mr. Donnell added that as long as those density ranges are maintained in certain areas, there could be some flexibility in others that would be studied thoroughly. He concluded that staff would not want to reduce the amount of a certain density land that is important to maintain for compliance with state housing law. Mr. Neu clarified that staff is asking the Commission to adopt the resolution with the attachment that spells out the main areas that staff would focus on for revisions of the Master Plan. He added that the Commission would be voting on the list as a whole and staff would need some way to determine which, if anything, the Commission would like staff to add or subtract from the list. Chairperson Anderson stated that the Commission is beyond the point of the discussion and would provide staff direction. Mr. Neu stated that staff is targeting what the main areas of the Master Plan are that needed additional work and concluded that staff would be sure to spend time evaluating the issues that have frequently been heard. Chairperson Anderson asked if the Commission would like to discuss and make recommendations to Mr. Donnell that he revise the proposal as some areas are still ongoing with studies and reviews that can be evolving. Section B – Development Standards, Design and Character Commissioner Montgomery stated that he is appreciative that staff is eliminating the building height of 55 ft. height increase. He stated that the existing Master Plan allows the Village to propose structures that the Commission has seen in the last few years that the tools were not available to have verticality that seem to be contrary to community character. Commissioner Montgomery stated that the only way to attack the building height issue and be reasonable is that setback requirements are agreed upon or to have staff study tremendously. He commented that that would be the only way to control character and architecture of a building with a village feel. Commissioner Siekmann concurs with Commissioner Montgomery and agrees that the 55 foot building height limit be eliminated however, the other building heights that have been there for years. There should be no other changes to the building height, therefore if the building height changes for a commercial property owner that is financially committed to the property and knew what building height are allowed could be like a taking of property by not allowing them to build as what the property was purchased for. She stated that by putting setbacks in, that is a way for the Village not to look like the renderings and would a way for the property owners to build to the property heights that they were allowed to build to when the property was purchased. Commissioner Siekmann asked if the building height limit be decreased to 45 feet in a residential area. Mr. Donnell stated yes, there was a general statement that staff would look at the height limitations throughout the Village and Barrio. Mr. Neu stated that staff would like the ability to go back and see if the heights should be adjusted in some way as it has been a strong topic of discussion with the current projects reviewed under the current Master Plan and negative comments received. Commissioner Siekmann asked if staff is looking at setbacks. Mr. Planning Commission Minutes October 19, 2016 Page 6 Neu stated yes, as there is language in the Master Plan about how the building mass would be addressed for upper floors. He stated that staff has recognized as part of the building height or part of the design guidelines that there needs to be something similar to what Commissioner Montgomery suggested about pushing massing away from the street as the building gets taller. Commissioner L’Heureux stated that another word or concept for the word ‘transect’ would be helpful to understand outside of professional planners. He stated that a lot more ability is needed to encourage, preserve and protect the community design and character, however it is done, related to height, setback or verticality. Commissioner Black asked Mr. Donnell’s what his definition of ‘Village’ is. Mr. Donnell replied stated a smaller downtown that many cities would have and Carlsbad’s downtown is a good example of a size of what would constitute a Village and concluded that it also depends on the context, what is a Village here is not a Village in other parts of the country. Commissioner Black stated that the Planning Commission’s guidance is to not judge on the design architecture primarily on the zoning and the ordinances that may apply. Commissioner Black stated that the only thing that the Commission could argue on is compatibility to other surrounding buildings. He encourages staff to give the Commission guidance, leeway and latitude in that area to use design as a reason not to accept or to accept projects. He stated that he agrees to eliminate the 55 foot building height proposal and added that he does not want to see tall buildings in a Village environment. Commissioner Black commented that building heights can appear to be larger in many respects than they really are and design have a lot to do with it. Chairperson Anderson added that the Commission share the same concerns about the nature and character of the architecture in the Village and preserving the Village feel. She stated that she loves the idea of setbacks. Section C – Streets, Parking and Circulation Commissioner L’Heureux stated his concerns with the effect on public safety during trenching and added that there should be more discussion. He stated that he is hoping that the parking study will analyze where the best place in the city would be for a parking structure. Commissioner L’Heureux commented that he did not see any discussion about beach improvements, beach access, handicap access and how it relates to parking. He stated that underground utilities should be addressed. Mr. Donnell commented that the Master Plan contains discussion on the idea of a portion of the railroad be covered as the study on the trenching is released early next year, it will give staff more solid information to refine what the Master Plan says. Commissioner Siekmann stated that the idea of the double tracking and trenching should be analyzed as one project at the same time. Commissioner Montgomery stated that he suspects the parking study will come back to the Commission with findings that suggest no parking garages will be required. He added that he does not want the thought process of parking garages to be eliminated as it could draw a better downtown. Commissioner Montgomery stated that he would love to freshen up the entry monuments into the Village on all major streets. Commissioner Black stated that he concurs with Commissioner Montgomery regarding parking structures and stated that he is not a big advocate of roundabouts. He stated that he is in favor of the bulb-out roundabouts located on Kelly Street. Commissioner Black stated that he would not allow the idea of a road offering transportation to vehicles, pedestrian and bicycles the overriding decision. Commissioner Goyarts stated that he agrees with his fellow commissioners and stated that parking structures should be discussed separately and street signs should be clear directing drivers to available parking. Chairperson Anderson stated that parking is a major issue in the Village. She asked if the Commission would support entry monument enhancements and stated her concerns with the Chestnut Avenue pedestrian crossing moving forward with or without the railroad trenching. CORRECTED Planning Commission Minutes October 19, 2016 Page 7 Section D – Land Use Chairperson Anderson asked how bike lanes are affected by curb cafes. Mr. Donnell stated that it would be evaluated at each individual curb café and the bike lane would take priority. Commissioner L’Heureux stated that the concept of the Grand Avenue promenade should have its own special number in the section. Commissioner Montgomery commented that an uncovered trench would divide the city and he would only support it if a promenade would benefit the community. He stated that he would not support the rail road trenching if it only contained a few pedestrian crossings. Commissioner Black agrees with Commissioner Montgomery and stated that the drawings of the trenching had a few covered areas where a park was available to keep the tie between east and west. Commissioner Montgomery wanted to emphasis land use and stated preserving the commercial core of the true inner downtown of the village would advocate for more store fronts to emphasis a walkable area. Mr. Donnell replied stating that the concept of a walkable downtown is clearly understood and supported in the Master Plan. Commissioner Goyarts asked what protections the city has in place as the cost of commercial space is going up to keep the historic commercial core the way that it is. Commissioner Siekmann stated that the cost per square foot will increase if the building height decreases and stated that she believes that the building height should be kept at 45 feet. Commissioner L’Heureux stated that the Commission is trying to differentiate 2 or 3 stories of residential occupation habitable area. Mr. Donnell stated that there is not a story limit in the Village Master Plan, just building height. Commissioner Siekmann asked what the 45 foot height limit allows and stated that she does not want to see it increased to 55 feet and also requiring setbacks. Mr. Neu stated projections above the height limit are limited architectural features and cannot be useable floor space. He stated that it varies by some of the zones and staff is proposing to evaluate some of the stories and the height limits in the different areas of the Master Plan to see what would be appropriate. Commissioner Siekmann stated that it would be great to leave it up to the staff to make the recommendation. DISCUSSION Commissioner Montgomery thanked Mr. Donnell thought that the Commission should be involved with the community meetings as they might be able to confirm certain citizen’s requests that might resonate. He stated that it would be positive for the community to allow the Commission to be their voice to take action and direct staff in the right direction. Commissioner Montgomery stated that the process is going well, likes the direction and the ability of the Commission to be a spokesman to the city to shape the Village and Barrio. Commissioner Black concurs with Commissioner Montgomery and thanked the public for their input. He stated that he would be happy to attend the next public meeting and is happy to see the work put into this plan. Commissioner Goyarts stated that it should move forward as heard from the community, the businesses and thanked staff and the community for their input. Commissioner Siekmann also thanked staff and the community and stated that the Master Plan is ready to move forward. Commissioner L’Heureux stated that staff has been listening to the community’s concerns demonstrating to the public and to the Commission that they have a good grasp on what the community’s real concerns are.