Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-11-04; Planning Commission; ; VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT PACKAGE DISCUSSIONItem No. Application complete date: N/A P.C. AGENDA OF: November 4, 2020 Project Planner: Shelley Glennon Project Engineer: N/A SUBJECT: VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT PACKAGE DISCUSSION An informational presentation to receive community and Planning Commission feedback on potential amendments to the Village and Barrio Master Plan. I.RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission receive the informational presentation on the Village and Barrio Master Plan Amendment Package, provide feedback and receive feedback from the community. II.PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND Project Description As requested by City Council, the purpose of this report is to facilitate a discussion with the community and Planning Commission regarding items 2, 3, 4, and 8, described below, and any other concerns and issues the community may have with the Village and Barrio Master Plan. Feedback received by the community and Planning Commission will subsequently be forwarded to City Council for further discussion and direction. This report is for informational purposes only, therefore no action by the Planning Commission, other than discussion, is required at this time. Background On Aug. 20, 2019, the City Council accepted the California Coastal Commission’s suggested modifications to the Village and Barrio Master Plan. During the City Council meeting, there were 21 comment letters received from members of the community requesting that, in addition to the Coastal Commission suggested modification, the master plan be modified to address various concerns, summarized below. In response to the concerns raised by the community, the City Council directed staff to address the following eight items: 1.Decision-making authority for the entire master plan area to City Council 2.Permitted uses vital to a live, work and play community 3.Parking In-Lieu fees to be directed to a specific area for parking and the potential for public/private partnerships for a specific zoned parking structure 4.Traffic impact analysis and mitigation fees specific to the master plan area and roadway conditions outside of the Coastal Zone 5.Objective architectural, historical and design standards within the master plan area 3 VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT PACKAGE DISCUSSION November 4, 2020 Page 2 6. Solutions and options to avoid Housing In-Lieu fee payments in the master plan area 7. A specific inclusionary policy for the master plan area 8. Allow for general conversation regarding additional components of the master plan Staff is currently proceeding with master plan amendments regarding items 1, 5 and 6. Item 7 will be discussed with the community as part of the Housing Element update. Regarding items 2, 3, 4, and 8, on Dec. 10, 2019, the City Council directed staff to facilitate a community discussion about these items and to identify potential other master plan amendments that may be needed; the City Council agreed that the Planning Commission should be the forum for the community discussion. III. ANALYSIS Below is a discussion of items 2, 3, 4, and 8, as summarized above, as well as three additional items identified by city staff as issues with the Village and Barrio Master Plan. The items discussed below include a summary of the previous community, City Council and staff comments received (if applicable), background information, potential amendment options, and staff’s recommendation. Item 2: Permitted uses vital to a live, work and play community Previous Comments Received: During the Aug. 20, 2019 City Council hearing, there were 18 comment letters received from the community requesting the Village and Barrio Master Plan permit vital uses for a live, work and play community in the Village area. Background: Vital uses previously discussed include a post office, pharmacy, grocery store, hardware store, and farmers’ market. Except for the farmers’ market, the master plan permits these uses under the broad categories of “retail” and “public/quasi-public uses.” A farmers’ market is presently a conditionally permitted use in the Village Commercial (VC) District, the district in which the current market is held. Potential amendment options: The permitted uses table (Table 2-1 in the master plan) could be amended to specifically list desired uses. Other possibilities include revising the description of a district to note its appropriateness for a desired use or amending the master plan’s goals and policies to encourage or attract a particular use. An amendment also could propose a farmers’ market as a conditionally permitted use in an additional district or districts. Staff recommendation: As the Village and Barrio Master Plan already permits the vital uses specifically identified, no changes are recommended. Listing uses individually does not guarantee the uses will be developed, and it is highly unusual for a city to dictate or require specific use(s) to be developed. Item 3: Parking In-Lieu fees to be directed to a specific area for parking and the potential for public/private partnerships for a specific zoned parking structure. VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT PACKAGE DISCUSSION November 4, 2020 Page 3 Previous Comments Received: During the Aug. 20, 2019 City Council hearing, there were 18 comments received from community members requesting parking in-lieu fees be used to pay for a multi-level parking structure within the Village area. Some requested that the structure be funded through a public/private partnership. Background: The Village and Barrio Master Plan conditionally permits and has design guidelines for parking structures to recognize their potential, especially by private entities. A parking structure is not an identified capital improvement in Village and Barrio Master Plan Chapter 5 (Implementation), but programs to manage the existing parking system and resources are. Through its goals, policies and standards, the Village and Barrio Master Plan supports increased, efficient use of the existing parking system and resources, as well as mobility alternatives to the private automobile. As the master plan first targets the better use of the existing parking system, an amendment that favors construction of a parking structure, for example, would represent a shift in master plan policy and the strategies recommended by the Carlsbad Village, Barrio, and Beach Area Parking Study - Parking Management Plan (2017). Revisions to the master plan’s Parking In-Lieu Fee Program to benefit a specific area rather than the whole Village would also be a significant change. Below is an overview of the current policies in place. • Parking In-Lieu fee: Village and Barrio Master Plan Table 2-4 describes the purpose of the Parking In-Lieu Fee Program as enabling project applicants, upon city approval, to pay a fee in lieu of providing on-site parking. Fees collected by the city help develop and maintain shared public parking, resulting in better utilization and relatively lower costs in comparison to the cost of exclusive on-site private parking. A non-residential development on Village properties east of the railroad tracks (VC, VG, HOSP, FC and PT districts; see Attachment 1) may satisfy its parking needs entirely through payment of the parking in-lieu fee. Fees collected may be spent to develop or maintain public parking anywhere in the Village, including west of the railroad tracks in the Coastal Zone. Parking in-lieu fee payment and revenue for maintaining public parking within the Barrio (BP and BC districts) is not an option. Village and Barrio Master Plan Policy 1.5.2.B.6 promotes a broader application of parking in-lieu fees such as using the fees to pay for improvements and strategies that reduce parking demand such as promoting alternative ways to get around. • Public/private partnerships: The Village and Barrio Master Plan encourages public/private partnerships via two policies: o Policy 1.5.2.B.4: Encourage shared and leased parking arrangements among multiple users of private or non-city owned lots to maximize efficient use of existing off-street parking. VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT PACKAGE DISCUSSION November 4, 2020 Page 4 o Policy 1.5.2.B.5: Lease parking spaces from private entities and North County Transit District for public use. Shared and leased parking, whether between private entities or public and private entities, is also discussed in Village and Barrio Master Plan Section 4.5.2, Managing Parking and Increasing Mobility, and is an available parking option to non-residential uses per Village and Barrio Master Plan Table 2-4. • Parking Management: Village and Barrio Master Plan Section 4.5.2 incorporates key recommendations and strategies from the Carlsbad Village, Barrio, and Beach Area Parking Study - Parking Management Plan, accepted by City Council in Sept. 2017. The objective of these key components is “to address the demand imbalance and maximize use of available spaces…prior to construction of a new parking garage” as the following two master plan policies demonstrate: o Policy 1.5.2.B.2: Increase on-street parking through a Parking Re-Striping and Curb Lane Management Program, which balances competing curb lane uses (e.g., parking, ride share, bicycle lanes). o Policy 1.5.2.B.3: Improve on-street parking availability through proactive enforcement of time limits and other parking regulations.  On January 28, 2020 – City Council adopted a resolution approving the addition of two full-time Community Service Officers, and one marked police vehicle outfitted with mobile license plate readers for the purpose of enforcing timed parking restrictions in the Village area. Enforcement of the timed parking restrictions is currently active. Potential amendment options: • The master plan’s Parking In-Lieu Fee Program could be revised to specifically direct funds to a specific purpose and/or area of the Village. • The amount of the parking in-lieu fee could also be reviewed in comparison with current construction costs and community preferences or a yearly cost increase index or CPI could be added. • Master plan policies and standards could be revised to emphasize, incentivize or support a certain parking improvement or shared parking arrangement. Staff recommendation: Further direction is needed regarding the specifics and desired outcomes of the two components that make up this item: “parking in-lieu fees to be directed to a specific area for parking” and “the potential for public/private partnerships for a specific zoned parking structure.” Item 4: Traffic impact analysis and mitigation fees specific to the Village and Barrio Master Plan area and roadway conditions outside of the Coastal Zone Previous Comments Received: No comment letters were previously received that addressed this item. At its meeting on Aug. 20,2019, the City Council requested that staff include this item within the amendment package to address multimodal access and pedestrian safety impacts caused by public transit and vehicles at locations where most of these impacts are created. City Council specified that roadway conditions should be analyzed outside of the Coastal Zone to VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT PACKAGE DISCUSSION November 4, 2020 Page 5 avoid potential negative impacts to the public infrastructure projects currently being planned within the Coastal Zone. Background: As described below, the transportation impact analyses required of Village and Barrio projects primarily evaluate impacts to pedestrian, bicycle, and transit levels of service versus vehicular level of service. However, a General Plan policy requires City Council approval of street improvements that reduce vehicle capacity below the acceptable level of service (LOS D), even on streets where the vehicle is not the evaluated mode. • Evaluation of transportation in the Village and Barrio: As described in the General Plan Mobility Element, all streets in Carlsbad (except Interstate 5) are intended to safely move all modes of travel, whether by bus, vehicle, bike, or foot. For Village and Barrio streets, an emphasis is placed on enhancing mobility for pedestrians and bicyclists, and, near the train station on efficiently moving vehicles and buses to/from transit centers. This contrasts with the purpose of other streets such as Palomar Airport Road, where the priority is the efficient moving of vehicles and buses, rather than pedestrians and bicyclists. Prioritizing one mode of travel over another is based on the city’s “livable streets” strategy. Livable streets strategy recognizes each street within the city is unique given its geographic setting, adjacent land uses, and the desired use of the facility. As identified in Table 3-1 of the General Plan Mobility Element, implementing a comprehensive livable streets network that serves all users of the system – vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles and public transit, requires maintaining a Level of Service (LOS) D or better for all modes that are subject to this multi-modal level of service (MMLOS) standard (excluding LOS exempt intersections and streets). A General Plan Mobility Element policy requires City Council to approve street improvements that reduce vehicle capacity below the acceptable level of service (LOS) D, even on streets where the vehicle LOS is not evaluated. Projects in the Village and Barrio Master Plan area are evaluated against multi-modal level of service (MMLOS) standards to maintain and enhance travel by bike, foot and transit rather than by vehicle. The intent of these standards, however, is not to degrade service levels for any travel mode. • Impact Mitigation and Traffic Impact Fees: When a development project will result in significant impacts to a prioritized mode of travel (i.e., pedestrian, bicycle and transit in the Village and Barrio), potential mitigation measures could include construction of a fair share contribution toward the financing of feasible capital improvement projects related to pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. Where applicable, a project could contribute towards local or citywide transit capital improvements or participate in transportation demand management (TDM) measures that support transit operations. VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT PACKAGE DISCUSSION November 4, 2020 Page 6 Impacts to vehicle levels of service are not evaluated when development is proposed in the Village and Barrio (because the vehicle is not a priority travel mode in the Village and Barrio); therefore, mitigation for impacts to vehicle levels of service is not required. However, all projects, including changes of occupancy, are subject to payment of a traffic impact fee. This fee varies among uses and is typically higher for uses that generate more traffic. Even though the vehicle is not a prioritized travel mode in the Village and Barrio, new development is required to pay a traffic impact fee based on the vehicle traffic the development will generate. The fee is not Village and Barrio specific and funds circulation improvements citywide. Village and Barrio Master Plan Section 5.4.1 recognizes that due to the multiple property owners, numerous small lots, and the frequent reuse of existing buildings (versus new construction) in the Village, it is more likely the city will take the lead on implementing street or other public improvements. This is particularly true for large- scale projects such as the Grand Avenue Promenade or reconfiguration of State Street. Funding of public street improvements may come from the city, federal or state programs, grants, or possibly through public-private partnerships. Examples of funding sources include the General Fund, the Gas Tax and Transit Funds. More funding source information is provided in Village and Barrio Master Plan Chapter 5 and Appendix C. • Roadway conditions outside the Coastal Zone: Throughout the Village and Barrio, roadway conditions, in terms of service levels for pedestrians, bicycles and transit, are evaluated as part of development proposals and the city’s mobility monitoring. Also, there are two city policies that address roadway conditions, in terms of vehicle LOS, in the Village and Barrio Master Plan area, both policies are applicable within and outside the Coastal Zone: 1) Village and Barrio Master Plan Policy 1.5.2.A.11 states that road improvements to Carlsbad Boulevard and Carlsbad Village Drive that “reduce vehicle capacity resulting in or worsening an existing or future vehicular level of service (LOS) E or below at one or more intersections or segments (with or without proposed development), requires a quantitative analysis and City Council approval;” 2) General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.15 (applicable citywide) also requires City Council approval for any road diets or vehicle traffic calming improvements that would reduce vehicle capacity to or below a LOS D; this also applies to streets where the vehicle is not subject to the MMLOS standard. Potential amendment options: • Make no changes, which means street improvements would occur as properties develop and capital projects are approved and built. • Refine the Implementation Action Matrix if appropriate; street improvements and mobility for all users could be prioritized. • Based on the matrix, develop a financing strategy for Village and Barrio programs and capital projects. Staff recommendation: Further direction is needed on the desired outcomes regarding evaluation of transportation impacts to various modes of travel, impact mitigation and mitigation fees, and roadway conditions outside of the Coastal Zone. VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT PACKAGE DISCUSSION November 4, 2020 Page 7 Item 8: Allow for general conversation regarding additional components of the Village and Barrio Master Plan Previous Comments Received: In addition to the potential amendment topics described above, there were several other comments received by community members during the Aug. 20, 2019 City Council hearing regarding the Village and Barrio Master Plan, including: - Creation of a historic designation - Comprehensive street tree program - Inclusion of a Downtown Center manager - Elevate the importance of festival streets/shared space streets - Implement a pedestrian and decorative lighting program - Add urban-type businesses in the Village Commercial (VC) District and identify specific areas for where these urban-types of businesses can be located, and - Provide the entire master plan in the Spanish language Background/Staff Recommendation: As directed by City Council during its Dec. 10, 2019 meeting, staff is now requesting feedback from the community and Planning Commission on all the items outlined in this report, as well as any other components of the Village and Barrio Master Plan. Additional Items Identified by City Staff In addition to the items discussed above, city staff has identified the following to be included in the Village and Barrio Master Plan amendment: a. Village Center (VC) Supplemental District Standard - Section 2.7.1.I Ground Floor Street Frontage Uses. Background: Village and Barrio Master Plan Section 2.7.i.1 states: New ground floor street frontage uses permitted within the boundaries of the use restriction area identified on Fig. 2.2. shall occupy more than one-half of the habitable space developed on the ground floor and shall span at least 80% of the building frontage. In the Coastal Zone along Carlsbad boulevard and Carlsbad Village Drive, new ground floor street frontage uses shall have a minimum average building depth of 25 feet. When implementing the above standard, Planning staff has found this standard to be especially restrictive for mixed use development projects. Requiring more than one-half of the habitable space located on the ground floor to be commercial uses is difficult to achieve for mixed-use development projects. Most of the habitable space needs to be used for residential uses to meet the density/density bonus requirements. The requirement for commercial uses to “span at least 80% of the building frontage,” is also difficult to meet for mixed-used projects that have two frontages on an access-restricted site with not enough space outside of the building frontage area to provide : 1) adequate residential parking for the number of dwellings required per minimum density, 2) driveway access, and 3) other ancillary uses such as utilities and trash enclosures. VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT PACKAGE DISCUSSION November 4, 2020 Page 8 Currently, to address the above issues, project applicants can request a standards modification (see Village and Barrio Master Plan Section 2.6.7) or a standards waiver (see Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) 21.86.060). However, the findings required to qualify for the standards modification/waiver are subjective in nature and open to interpretation. Potential amendment options: • Consider the depth of the habitable space from the frontage that is being used for commercial uses instead of requiring more than 50% of the total habitable area be used for commercial uses. • Allow for more building frontage exceptions such as utilities, driveway access, etc. • Allow for more flexibility for corner lots with two frontages and no rear or alleyway access. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends modifying this standard to allow more flexibility to accommodate mixed use development projects. b. Village and Barrio Master Plan Section 6.3 - Permit Requirements Background: Village and Barrio Master Plan Chapter 6, Section 6.3, provides the permit requirements for development projects in the Village and Barrio Master Plan area. Staff has found that this section does not provide requirements for amendments to previously approved permits, which causes uncertainty on how to process permit amendments. Additionally, clarification is needed for when a minor site development plan (SDP) or an amendment to the original SDP is required, specifically, for when the project has not yet been constructed. Currently, Village and Barrio Master Plan Section 6.3 provides direction for when changes in “permitted land uses” require a minor SDP permit or are exempt from requiring a permit, however, it does not define what a “permitted land use” is, making this process unclear. Permitted land uses can mean projects with approved discretionary permits or projects with approved building permits. It can also refer to permitted (allowed) land uses as listed in Village and Barrio Master Plan Chapter 2, Table 2-1 “Permitted Uses.” Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that Village and Barrio Master Plan Section 6.3. be amended to include a subsection for amendments to existing permits and to clarify the process for proposed changes to projects after receiving approval of a SDP but before project construction. c. Inclusion of House Keeping Fixes and Clarifying Statements Background: Since the adoption of the Village and Barrio Master Plan, staff has been able to review the document more thoroughly and have found some minor errors and/or determined some items needed further clarification. For example, on Page 2-8 Footnote No. 3: “Section 5.3.2.1” was incorrectly identified and should state, “Section 6.3.3.A.” The plan also makes no distinction between condominium and apartment complexes, therefore a statement clarifying that all condominium conversions are subject to current condominium building standards should be included. VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT PACKAGE DISCUSSION November 4, 2020 Page 9 Potential Amendment Options & Staff Recommendation: Incorporate all house-keeping fixes identified in the master plan and provide any appropriate clarifying statements as discussed above as part of the proposed amendment package. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This report is categorically exempt from environmental review as per CEQA Guidelines Section 15306, which states that information collection activities are exempt from the provisions of CEQA. ATTACHMENT: 1. Village and Barrio Master Plan Area District Map (master plan Figure 2-1). 2. Public Comments ATTACHMENT 1 COMMUNITY INPUT ON THE VILLAGE-BARRIO MASTER PLAN 10-2020 This request askes that you make a recommendation to the Council to have a Comprehensive Street Tree Plan be prepared for the area covered by the Village-Barrio Master Plan. As the Village matures with its semi urban environment in core area districts, street trees will be, more and more, a significant element in the atmosphere and appearance of our public corridors. Due to this it is best that we devise a plan that takes in to consideration what our forward thinking objectives are and define specific criteria to best achieve those objectives. Even though there are trees along most of these streets their inclusion has not been and are not now guided by a common set of fully considered objectives. These core area districts are unique to all of the Carlsbad and require a separate and distinct set of guidelines for actions we take on this important design element in the our downtown Village’s public realm . To illustrate where we are today, allow me to provide some examples; Grand Avenue, as we all know has many trees, yes over a dozen different verities line this relatively short corridor. From the distant past, the grandeur of the Eucalyptus, oversized with many nearing the end of their life span. Then we planted the Indian Laurel (Ficus) trees with their muscular structure, spreading roots, heavy canopy and over abundance of fruit. Each of these may be viewed as producing a significant presence that may be held in esteem by some of the community. However any objective evaluation of these trees would show them as inappropriate for use as trees to be repeated along the streets in a semi urban environment. This fact elicits my standard mantra of, “Carlsbad we can do better than this” Page 1of3 ATTACHMENT 2 A few other examples of our current efforts with street trees tied to new redevelopment in the Village; GRAND MADISON (built) The City stuck with a small to medium size trees even though their canopies will grow to block signs for the street level businesses in the new building, complaints will surly follow. These trees will also do nothing to buffer the height of this new building. GRAND JEFFERSON (unbuilt) Another mixed use building which is what we want. However, it’s a 50ft tall building where the City required street tree be a dwarf verity of tree (selected to help solve a engineering problem). A tree that under ideal conditions would reach a height of some 20ft in a 20 year span. I am sure we all know that street trees in semi urban areas are not ideal growing conditions. SEA GROVE (built) At the north end of state, at the time the plans were approved and prepared the City said “we don’t do street trees”, so developer you must put some (just a few) trees along the street right next to your building. If you have not viewed this development please go by and see how awkward this looks. It goes without saying that street trees have not been a standard part of street improvements, more like an unwanted stepchild that we will just have to look after. MIXED USE - STATE & OAK (built) This mixed use building presents the classic solution found on many street in the Village. This where the development selected a “project theme street tree”. This project at its corner site so it planted their theme tree to wrap around on both streets. These trees identify the project not the streets, they do not place the new building into the neighborhood, into the community rather they did all they could to stand alone. Trees should provide a design theme element for the public corridor, for the street not for the individual developments along their reach. The City wide Landscape Manual has a standard for theme street trees on the major arterial roadways throughout the City, I know as I am the one that originally put that standard in the first manual back in the 80s. The current Village-Barrio Master Plan has only mild standards for the architectural appearance of new buildings. Even as we ask for additional guidelines on architecture to be added to the document there will continue to be a verdant mix of architectural styles framing our public spaces. Today and to a greater extent in the near future this will produce a visually active street scene. An atmosphere that will seem visually busy and even chaotic for many of us. To counter this, the design of the public realm should attempt to unify these corridors with common design elements. One of the most effective at producing this desirable effect are the trees we place along each route. If we agree on this primus we should all see that we have been off the mark on a number of important Village core corridors, State and Grand being the most prominent examples of the problem. The process we currently have in guiding our action on street trees uses too narrow a set of criteria in making decisions on this important element of our downtown atmosphere. Hence we need to stop and cycle back to produce an effective tool, a plan, to better guide our actions, A Comprehensive Street Tree Plan is needed for the Master Plan, please make that recommendation to the Council. PARKING IN OUR DOWNTOWN VILLAGE - 5th edition Sept 29, 2020 This is not the typical complaint of not having enough parking for patrons, employees and residents in the village. However, it is a request for better management for parking, specifically temporary parking of vehicles servicing the businesses that are so critical for a thriving downtown environment in Carlsbad. This should be viewed as “best practice” management by the City to improve business activity and the safety of all. A management effort, perhaps with the VBA assisting, for the betterment of both business and their community of customers. Clearly, you see this on any 6 out of 7 days of a typical week, trucks sitting in an area not meant for this use. Typically, unloading supplies in a painted median on Grand, in a bike lane on CVD or the Boulevard or travel lane on any one of the side streets. A few years ago the Council was presented with and approved of the concept of “Complete Streets” giving it their full support. The 2018 Village-Barrio Master Plan also calls for more and more from streets in this neighborhood. The parking study prepared in support of the master plan identified this very issue, stating “ the community has complained about trucks parked in travel lanes” and then identified what could be done to solve this problem, in part that is “curb management”. We ask that you direct action on a comprehensive management practice to implement the master plan and parking study solving this current problem. Service vehicles parking in an inappropriate location that cause conflicts with modes of travel. We whole heartedly support the redevelopment that brings new businesses along our downtown streets. However, each new business must be required to identify the type, size and frequency of service vehicles for the type of business they plan to have . They need to identify where these vehicles will do their temporary parking. Beyond that, all existing businesses (maybe as part of new business licenses) should also do the same, that’s identifying vehicle size, frequency and the location for temporary service vehicle parking for their business. As we all know, the Village is fortunate to have a number of alleys in its core area. These were meant just for this reason and each should be made right and managed for use by service vehicles as their primary function. Where there are no alleys other parking locations must be identified, some developments may have room on site. Many others may need to use street curbs. These could be identified as service only for a certain time period, say 6AM to 3PM, then use these areas for later day drop off /pickups of patrons or evening valet use. Photo of the typical situation I am an active cyclist who rides with others in and through the village every week. Riding many of the city’s arterial roadways we are very appreciative of the improvements the City has made over the last number of years reducing auto lane widths to enlarge bike lanes and adding buffer areas between the two and / or adjacent parking . Anyone riding on most streets knows well the inherent danger that comes with this activity, riding side by side bike to auto. There is a substantial increase in overall bike use in Carlsbad. The E-bike has spawned this increase in use, from first timer (scary tourist), to full families, to our youth riding to and from home to the beach on their fat tires E- bikes complete with surfboard rack. And that is great it is exactly what we should want to see, Carlsbad residents using passive power to move from their neighborhoods to our coast line and all points between. Delivery trucks in bike lanes make gamblers of all those riding, old and young, will motorist allow me to move into their auto lane, or must I stop? Many if not most of the streets in the Village are oversized in width. This provides a great opportunity. All of this public land to re-imagine, re- engineer for all modes of travel as per “complete streets” and meeting our climate action objectives. Supersize our arterial roadways throughout the city just not the roads in the area we call a “Village” as that is a contradiction in terms, use and atmosphere. Please let’s put together a management program to provide the appropriate location and space for the temporary parking for all service vehicles that removes the current hazardous condition. We can and should provide a grace period for some businesses due to the current need for expanded outdoor space at some curbs. However, we must not use that transition period as an excuse to not act now on this management task. “We can do better”! From:Scott Engel To:Planning Subject:Public Outreach Date:Wednesday, November 4, 2020 2:16:52 PM I desire to have my comment read into the record at the Planning Commission meeting. The overwhelming majority ofcitizens disapproved of 4 storybuilding heights and theirinput was categoricallydismissed. What's differentnow? Scott Engel4220 Isle DrCarlsbad, 92008 CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Sondra and Brian To:Planning Cc:Sondra Morison and Brian Watts Subject:VG Zone in Village Date:Wednesday, November 4, 2020 12:41:03 PM Please read this into the record at today's Planning Commission meeting. We oppose designating our neighborhood VG. Your description of allowed uses can bedescribed best as a poorly considered pile of jelly beans. It is a "hodgepodge" toward no discernable goal. Essentially you are proposing that our quiet and peaceful enclave become a runover zone forincompatible uses. If you believe that more parking lots, fast food restaurants and laundomats are compatible, then you should volunteer to desecrate your own neighborhoods, not ours.You would be well advised to send this back to staff, instructing them to consider whether the allowable uses proposed are really how we want to define our city, the Village, and thisneighborhood. Except for hazardous uses like dynamite factories you will effectively destroy our homes when that is not necessary. Consider protecting our neighborhood--your job--rather than destroying it for the benefit of afew developers. Our well established neighborhood, from one lot east of Roosevelt to Jefferson, is made up of single-family and multi-family residences as well as professional office buildings. These usesare, and have been, compatible. At least make an effort, please. Sincerely, Brian Watts and Sondra Morison2664 Madison Street CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 1 November 4, 2020 To: City of Carlsbad Planning Commission (planning@carlsbadca.com) City of Carlsbad Senior Planner Scott Donnell (scott.donnell@carlsbadca.gov) Dear Planning Commission, Thank you for all you do for our wonderful community, and for the opportunity to write to you today about preserving the historical roots of the City of Carlsbad, of which I am on public record, from previous public comment. Whilst our City must accommodate the affordable housing need, and rightly so, I am concerned we might lose any remaining small-scale historic buildings unless we have a well-defined historic preservation course of action. I, like many community members, in my experience, believe that the charm and character of our Village and Barrio are much enhanced by existing historic structures, which provide a rich and fascinating narrative of the development of our city. The potential loss of all of those historic resources risks the charm and character that our community highly values, as well as our ‘sense of place’, community identity and cultural heritage. In my understanding, The Village and Barrio Master Plan ‘recognizes and supports the historical roots’ of the City, and calls for a program to encourage preservation. The Village and Barrio Master Plan, however, still needs to define this program and identify any historic resources, if it is truly committed to preserving historic resources. I am requesting Planning Commission consideration of designing such a program and identifying historic resources at this time. Further, apparently, there are few historic properties remaining (only about 12 historic properties remain of the 19 historic properties listed in the 1991 Historic Resource Inventory that were approved by City Council prior to 1990, per the Historic Preservation Library Staff). It appears that Carlsbad’s Historic Preservation Commission has not designated any historic properties for preservation since the 1993 appeal of the 1991 Historic Resource Inventory. However, community member public comments regarding the maintenance of community character in the Housing Element survey appear to have a wealth of opinion in favor of community character, as well as historic preservation, and including ideas of how to develop additional housing and preserve historic buildings, as well. It may that our community would be willing to identify local historic properties to place on a cultural resource inventory list. Does the City have a definition of ‘community character’ and a mechanism for the Planning department to use to maintain ‘community character’ in Carlsbad? Are any of the historic properties on the pre-1990 list being impacted by the proposed housing element site selections? Please consider requesting this list from Historic Preservation Library Staff. 2 Could historic district regulations be adopted to protect vulnerable, valuable buildings/parks/trees, etc., from being demolished? Would the designation ‘historic cultural resources’ constitute an objective standard? Thank you for considering my request(s) and addressing the above questions and I look forward to your consideration on this important topic of historic preservation. Sincerely, Mary Anne Viney Planning Commission Meeting November 4, 2020 Village and Barrio Master Plan Improvements Mobility and Parking 1.5.2 Observations and suggestions; Those that visit the Village notice the many new residential projects under construction and coming before you. 2,000 residential units will add to the need for parking. Additional restaurants are adding to that need, and soon NCTD will close its’ parking lots for development. Already individuals park on every corner blocking pedestrian access and the view for pedestrian and bike traffic to traverse the village. This is the opposite of mobility improvement. Attached is a photo of 800 Grand, an upscale residential development where the opportunity was missed for a public private partnership for a privately built and maintained municipal parking garage. The project did not go underground but could have fit a 100 space municipal garage costing about 2.5 million. This garage would benefit project residents with parking for guests at no cost to them. Who wants to visit a village resident when no parking within a reasonable distance is available? I strongly suggest including several paragraphs encouraging developers to request funds from our parking in lieu fund for such a purpose. The developer can propose such an addition with a little encouragement from our planning manual. Photos of Old World Center and our citys’ Roosevelt Street Parking lots which, if developed following other recent projects, would waste valuable space underground. We need to encourage a public private partnership to add municipal parking and not just collect funds expecting land to be created in addition to the will to have the city build and maintain a municipal garage. From:Planning To:Planning Commission Cc:Shelley Glennon; Don Neu; Ronald Kemp; Melissa Flores Subject:FW: Comments on Amendments for VBMP Date:Tuesday, November 3, 2020 5:26:58 PM     From: T. j. Childs <childst777@yahoo.com>  Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 4:28 PM To: Planning <Planning@CarlsbadCA.gov> Subject: Comments on Amendments for VBMP       Please read this at the 4 Nov 2020 Carlsbad Planning Commission meeting. 1.       Paragraph 2.3.3 Development Site Spanning Multiple Districts.  Needs to be rewritten so it pertains only to the Blazer Trailer part, which spans east to Roosevelt and west to State.   2.       When citizens inquired  what properties paragraph 2.3.3 would pertain to; they were told it only applied to the Blazer Trailer park. But right before the vote on the VBMP was to be taken, citizens were told it changed, and that paragraph2.3.3 could now apply to any property within the VBMP area.   3.       When asked why this was, we were told it was too late to make the citizenry aware of the changes. The city produced six errata’s why was something so important as this, not incorporated into one of them.     4.       Paragraph 2.3.3 needs to be rewritten so it pertains only to the Blazer Trailer Park.   5.       If this fails to happen a person or entity can buy up properties at the edge of a district. change the zoning classification,  then continue purchasing more properties until the zoning of many and maybe most of the properties in that district have changed. Thus, allowing them to nullify the zoning classification of a particular zone.     6.       This is an especially egregious issue for residential districts, where the properties within the district , can be changed  property by property  to a mixed use or business zoning classification.   7.       There has not been an update about the lighting contract for the Barrio. By now the contractor was supposed to hold meetings with the residents to get our input about possible lighting schemes.     8.       There are still no stop signs on Roosevelt or Madison streets. Residents have asked that  there be stop signs put on Roosevelt and Madison streets to stop speeding cars.   9.       First citizens were told a request to have stops signs rotated so they face towards Madison and Roosevelt Streets had to be submitted to Caltrans for approval. Then we were told that the two stop signs on the shorter east west streets could not be taken down. Because switching the directions of the signs was considered to be a “taking.”  But that two additional stop signs could be added to the other corners of the intersections.   10.    So far nothing has been done, even though Digital Traffic Requests have been submitted. How long do we have to wait for such a simple fix?     11.   There are approximately 30 intersections in the Barrio.   Many of  which have no red curbs at the corner of the intersections and or  have well-worn hardly visible crosswalks. Since the initial approval of the VBMP plan, additional red curbs have been added to some intersections in the Barrio, but there are several which need red curbs. The city has been notified multiple times in multiple ways and in multiple venues, about these hazards.  How long do we have to wait for such a simple fix?  Digital traffic requests have been submitted to address these issues.   12.    A contract was let  to install traffic circles in the Village and Barrio. Residents were told as part of this contract the contractor would be holding meetings,  where they could address additional traffic concerns.  So far no meeting and little improvements.   13.   In the second draft version of the VBMP plan, there were several design styles approved for  proposed development  in the village. There was a great deal of community support for these design styles. They should be brought back and reincorporated in the VBMP as guidelines for new buildings in the village.      T. J. Childs   CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Planning To:Melissa Flores Subject:FW: Date:Tuesday, November 3, 2020 12:57:28 PM -----Original Message----- From: Barbara <sunngirl67@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 11:36 AM To: Planning <Planning@CarlsbadCA.gov> Subject: Re: Yes, that would be ok to read my letter. Thanks Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 2, 2020, at 8:21 PM, Barbara <sunngirl67@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thank you for your quick response. > My answer is I’m thinking about it. > I will get back to you. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Nov 2, 2020, at 8:40 AM, Planning <Planning@carlsbadca.gov> wrote: >> >> Thank you for your comments. Are you requesting these comments be read during the planning commission hearing? They will be forwarded to the planning commission and the planner working on the project. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Barbara <sunngirl67@gmail.com> >> Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2020 9:44 AM >> To: Planning <Planning@CarlsbadCA.gov> >> Subject: >> >> Planning commission...master plan...community input....I’ve been living here in Carlsbad for 14 years. For the last 5 or so, I’m completely disgusted with Carlsbad’s transformation. The whole attraction for me was the feeling of a small town and unique businesses. It’s ok to add and bring in some new businesses , but the new construction of multi story buildings in and around the village is absolutely disgraceful. You have completely changed the entire character and feel of the town with your large and greedy developers. Parking structures????? Really? What are you thinking? It’s NOT appealing. It’s NOT a “ small beach community” feel. Those who make money, including those responsible for this change, are happy. But I can tell you that I’m not the only one disgusted, disappointed, and angry about what is happening. And over the years, I’ve given input and requested responses to some important safety concerns, but the powers that be do whatever they want anyway. >> I love living by the coast, but as a senior and homeowner, making a change is not the answer. >> Hope this gets read and shared. >> Thank you >> Barbara Segal >> Sent from my iPhone >> CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Planning To:Planning Commission Cc:Shelley Glennon; Don Neu; Ronald Kemp; Melissa Flores Subject:FW: Revisiting Village Barrio Master Plan- please read at Wed Nov 4 meeting Date:Tuesday, November 3, 2020 8:18:30 AM     From: michaelajd <michaelajd@yahoo.com>  Sent: Monday, November 2, 2020 7:39 PM To: Planning <Planning@CarlsbadCA.gov> Subject: Revisiting Village Barrio Master Plan- please read at Wed Nov 4 meeting   Dear Planning Commission, Thanks for revisiting this plan. Please eliminate 3.2.2 the clause that subtly invalidates all districts.   Please have design standards if possible now.   Several projects have been built since this plan went through.Hopefully some things have been learned about the right & wrong way to do "infill" building in neighborhoods that are already packed with residents and businesses. This was understandably something new in Carlsbad. I could list the projects that have been obnoxious towards their neighborhood during the building process  ( here's looking at State & Oak...)  or suggest a different strategy.     The construction at the northwest corner of Oak & Madison is an example of a builder making an effort not to block the sidewalk, hog the parking, put the porta potty under the neighbor's window, leave debris in the street to flatten people's tires,put plywood over a ditch where the sidewalk should be, etc. for months at a time.    Make some plans so other builders follow this one's standards. It can be done - no need for the  maximum disharmony. You have a role model - use it.    All the best,    Julie Ajdour ,barrio resident           Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Penny Johnson To:Planning; City Clerk; Council Internet Email Subject:Planning commission discretionary voting Date:Monday, November 2, 2020 7:34:19 PM The members of the planning commission should not be allowed to vote on anything that is a final decision. They were not voted into their positions by the citizens of Carlsbad. They were appointed and were appointed by the city council members that were seeking planning members who would vote according to their views on pro development . This has led to overbuilding and traffic problems that have lessened the quality of life in Carlsbad . Penny Johnson Old Carlsbad resident 43 years 760 729 4689 Sent from my iPad CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. GRAND PROMENADE - VILLAGE to the PC July20, 2020 We, “Imagine Carlsbad”,. (Start Video1) would like to reintroduce you to the idea of the “Grand Promenade” in the Village. From this reintroduction we ask that you our Planning Commission make a recommendation to the Council to follow through on the study listed as a phase one action item in the Implementation Section of the Village-Barrio Master Plan. Our recommendation is that this study of the Grand Promenade be placed, as a fully funded action item, in the current CIP. An action item to be started no later than next year. The primary goal of the study is to produce the optimum balance of efficiency and safety allowing the three main modes of movement (mobility), pedestrians walking, cyclists on bikes, and motorist in vehicles to share this corridor as equals. IC has continued to study this idea, and from our recent work we present to you two issues that we believe warrant further review now from a City-sponsored study. We all understand that year 2020 has brought us challenges, both unexpected and painful. Budgets may have tightened however, the work we are requesting, focused just on mobility, should have a cost that is modest when compared to other recent city studies. And we are now all aware of the attractive benefits of social activities and dinning held outdoors , year round like at the Village, like on the pedestrian Rambla, like in our mild, Pacific influenced, climate. Performing this study now may well establish the required ground work preparing the GP to qualify for federal grants from a new (socially oriented) infrastructure funding program. We all know Grand Ave, as of today, is one of just two east - west thoroughfares that cross the rail corridor doing so at grade in the Village. Hopefully that will change some time in the near future as the Village matures. At its full length of just two thirds of a mile it’s a thoroughfare held solely within the Village core, from it’s east end cul de sac at Interstate-5 to Ocean Street at the Pacific. SERIES OF NUMBERED GRAPHIC EXHIBITS ) (1) Like us, you may have asked yourself what is a 100 foot wide street r.o.w. doing in an area referred to as a Village? However, we are fortunate that those who laid out this thoroughfare many years ago, when the car was becoming king, super sized its width. (2) Now this allows us to utilize that excessive width to re- imagine, and to re-purpose this public land re- prioritizing it from people in cars (3) to people without cars plain and simple. The idea is a vibrant/active corridor, that once confirmed as a planned improvement, will become a catalyst (4) for further redevelopment, and once built it becomes an exciting enhancement for this neighborhood and for the full Carlsbad community. (5) Imagine Carlsbad came to the idea of the Grand Promenade around 2007 and (6) generated our first plan for it before 2010. (7) We, like many of us, understood how unique our Village is with its proportion as well as scale when most villages in (8) our coastal area that are linear along the highway. We saw how Grand Avenue’s width could become a linear open space pulling pedestrians and social activity east from the Boulevard & State St tying the full Village together. (9) We pitched the GP to the city and requested that the Village get a completely new master plan to better guide re-development of private property and to also the enhancement of the public realm. (10) Both request were a struggle. Finally a decision came for a new Master Plan and we got the idea of the GP into that document. As an iterative planning process, I.C. considered the ideas for the GP in the new MP. Initially we did not accept the idea of a “cycle track” (11) as the best option for the network of routes that support cycling mobility in and through the Village. Studying the corridor further we could not find a superior solution. Grand Avenue has many intersections to cross in its relatively short run. The many intersections in every solution even our original design with (12) roundabouts always present potential conflicts for novice cyclist. We believe the separated environment of the cycle track may produce a quickened cycling pace that will carry along these short blocks and through the many intersections.(13) Inherent in these full function intersections are the vehicle turning movements they provide. This produces the potential problem from all the southbound turns that will cross the dual directional cycle track. (14) This is where the un-attentive motorist who does not pick up on all there is to deal with in making a simple turn south may cause a car/bike accident. I.C.s solution, (15) picking up on an option mentioned in the MP, is limiting turning movements by having one way auto travel for a three block stretch on Grand, from State to Jefferson Streets. (16) This solution reduces turning movements south across the cycle track and should also allow for increased curbside parking along the northern street edge. (17) This lead our study to a 2nd issue, circling back to another feature of our original proposal. That is placing the GP on the south side of the corridor. One of the benefits from placing it there is the ease of staging special events on the GP that we’d like to see take place on most days of the week. This is made much easier with vehicle access provided by the mid block alleys. However, we now recognize these points of access are a double-edged sword for the GP. (18) Great for staging events but not so great for both the day to day pedestrian environment on the Rambla and safety for the cycle track users. We now propose these points of access from alleys be clipped at the northern end for anything other than staging events. Making this decision produces complications requiring further study. It should go without saying that what the idea of a GP does at its foundation is put pedestrians and cyclist on par with motorist. Did you fell that, did you just fell the earth move?, yes some of us will have difficulty with this premise, change can be hard, so please expect some to push back on this. IC comes to the issues of circulation and mobility as a novice offering our work from the point of view of a landscape architect & urban designer. We propose that further study of these issues be aided by other disciplines, namely traffic & civil engineers, either staff or consultant. 19) We highlight these two issues, limiting potential conflicts between non-auto and auto mobility as reasons enough to take the idea of a GP to the next level of study. To not take this requested action now would mean we are not serious about the idea, that it is just words and exhibits on paper. (20) With success on this request, IC wants to re-focus our attention on the “Rambla” with its pedestrian oriented enhancements (20.5) and amenities. Currently we break the Rambla into three general areas. (21) First, the 15ft or so adjacent to the private property edge. This area should have a strong relationship to those buildings and the businesses they house. This is where the majority of al-fresco dining should take place. (22) Second the middle area is where most of the pedestrian movement will take place and where plaza type features will be located, (23) third is the edge next to the cycle track where we place elements to buffer that movement and areas for bicycle parking. (Vidoe2) It should go without saying that this neighborhood, The Village, represents our best opportunity on creating a vibrant neighborhood that is viewed as our downtown, as our Town Center by all of Carlsbad. In response to that vision we should do all we can to make the Village a great place to live & work. And also a destination for a day’s long outing that all of us visit often, pointing to it with pride as our community’s point of focus, our downtown, our Town Center. That potential will be greatly enhanced if Carlsbad makes the correct decision and selects the existing City Hall site as the location for our new Civic Center. The creative redevelopment of this site into our new flagship facility can be a meaningful and important element for our downtown Village and act as an anchor at the eastern end of the Grand Promenade. To make this investment in our town center “world class” it will be best if we can tie these two important downtown elements together via a new pedestrian tunnel under Interstate-5. The idea of a tunnel is also in the new Master Plan. As we say, “a destination for a day’s outing” for the full Carlsbad community’s enjoyment. To make that vision come alive we all should understand the importance of a Town Center to our community and wrap our arms around the Village to make it all it can be for all of Carlsbad! Once again, the primary goal of the requested study is to produce a plan for an optimum balance between efficiency and safety allowing the three main modes of movement, pedestrians walking, cyclists on bikes, and motorist in vehicles to share this corridor equally. From:Penny Johnson To:Planning; City Clerk; Council Internet Email Subject:Grand promenade Date:Sunday, November 1, 2020 7:07:46 PM I am impressed and I favor of a Grand promenade much like was presented by Mr Nessim. His vision is very well done and kudos to him for his hard work and vision. The video looks and has the feeling of what a promenade should look and feel like. To accomplish such a vision there should be nothing higher than 2 stories .......period !!!!! Promenades are to be wide and open for the pleasurable activity of being outside and reveling in nature and in space. In order to appreciate the experience that makes people want to linger in this environment , it cannot be hemmed in by 4 story buildings that would give the feeling of imprisonment in a canyon with a sterile ,cold , depressing experience. You are not creating a pleasurable environment that would draw people ,both residence and visitors, if you are taking away the envelopment of the ocean and sky that become as one when you are in downtown Carlsbad ..........that is the karma of Carlsbad !!!!!!! My friends and I were enjoying sitting outside at Mas Finas last nite at around 5:30 and marveling at the beautiful pink and blue clouds that were being lit up by the setting sun. I realized that we could enjoy this natural beauty because the building across the street on State St. was only one story tall. I imagined another three stories added to that and it was a rude and depressing realization that we would not be able to see and enjoy such a vision of nature with a 4 story building blocking the entire view. Is this what “Envision Carlsbad” is all about ? With your pushing 4 story buildings for Carlsbad, the very least that should be done is leaving the 4 story buildings out of the core of downtown Carlsbad.......a max of 2 stories would keep the ambiance of the “ charm “ of Carlsbad and also give the Grand promenade the openness that would make it a credible promenade. Penny Johnson resident of Old Carlsbad for 43 years 760 729 4689 Sent from my iPad CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:simon angel To:Planning Cc:don.neu@carlsbadcs.gov Subject:Item #3 Village and Barrio Master Plan amendment package, November 4, 2020 Date:Sunday, November 1, 2020 6:14:46 PM The staff report regarding this item is severely lacking to the point of being pointless in that it fails to adequately address not only the 8 items presented to the City Council originally but it fails to address the items in its own staffreport. Items 1, 6, and 7 are not addressed at all. No mention is made of the Design Review Committee, dual zonesites among other matters. I think it would be appropriate for staff to review the record of previous City Councilmeetings regarding the 8 items referred back to staff for amendments to the VBMP and to conduct public meetingsin accordance with City Council discussions regarding amendments to the Plan for inclusion in an amendmentpackage. This package was to be submitted to the City Council and the California Coastal Commission forcertification. For this reason I request this informational meeting be postponed to a later date to provide meaningfulcommunity input regarding a complete and detailed package as directed. The last time the planning commission addressed the VBMP deciding to send it to the City Council for approval iterred. Within 6 months of it being approved, 8 items were presented initially to modify and amend this plan. Let usnot make the same mistake again. There are numerous changes that have been called for to the VBMP. The items inthis informational report fail by a long shot. Do not compound the problem with no community input. Simon AngelBarrio Carlsbad Community AdvocatesCAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Barbara To:Planning Date:Saturday, October 31, 2020 9:44:09 AM Planning commission...master plan...community input....I’ve been living here in Carlsbad for 14 years. For the last 5 or so, I’m completely disgusted with Carlsbad’s transformation. The whole attraction for me was the feeling of asmall town and unique businesses. It’s ok to add and bring in some new businesses , but the new construction ofmulti story buildings in and around the village is absolutely disgraceful. You have completely changed the entirecharacter and feel of the town with your large and greedy developers. Parking structures????? Really? What are youthinking? It’s NOT appealing. It’s NOT a “ small beach community” feel. Those who make money, including thoseresponsible for this change, are happy. But I can tell you that I’m not the only one disgusted, disappointed, andangry about what is happening. And over the years, I’ve given input and requested responses to some importantsafety concerns, but the powers that be do whatever they want anyway.I love living by the coast, but as a senior and homeowner, making a change is not the answer.Hope this gets read and shared.Thank youBarbara SegalSent from my iPhoneCAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:brendel4776@gmail.com To:Planning Subject:Village and Barrio Master Plan Date:Friday, October 30, 2020 5:23:19 PM Questions for Nov 4 meeting: 1) please explain the plans for turning Grand and Madison into pedestrian thoroughfares. We are in support, as long as proper planning is done to not attract skateboarders and the unsheltered population. The idea could be wonderful if properly planned, or a disaster if not throughly thought out. 2) please explain why the public lots in the Village do not have overnight parking restrictions. We think that there should be. 3) will there be public art included in a future parking structure. We think there should be. What is the location being proposed for the structure? We think it should be near the train tracks. Hopefully, the structure will not be conducive for skateboarding, crime and the unsheltered population. The top of the structure could be a wonderful lookout spot, miniature golf course, or restaurant - lots of other fun ideas. 4) does the plan address the negative impact to businesses, residents and tourists of unsheltered people in the Village and Barrio? We think solutions are needed. 5) does the plan address cleanliness and unsightly landscaping in the Village? We think it should. Trash, dirty benches, overflowing trash cans, dead plants, portable toilet havens for crime, dirty sidewalks. 6) is public art included in the overall plan? We think it should be. Things like decorative sidewalks and pedestrian areas, benches, tile work, etc. 7) infrastructure, facilities, and businesses that serve live, work, play would be fabulous Please seize this opportunity to make The Village and Barrio really special places, to be proud of, for tourists and residents alike (they aren’t now). Thank you, Cathy and Steve Brendel Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Lisa Potter To:Planning Subject:Village and Barrio Master Plan Amendments Date:Friday, October 30, 2020 2:13:46 PM Morning, Thanks for the opportunity to weigh on the amendments to the Village and Barrio Master Plan. The piece that caught my eye was mention of creating parking structures in these areas. I understand the need for more parking to support downtown businesses and activities (like the street fairs), but a typical parking structure is an incredible eye sore and will definitely subtract from downtown’s character and appeal. The parking structure in Oceanside by their train station is ugly, poorly lit, has too-skinny parking spaces making it hard to park and get in and out of your vehicle, and dead ends at the top with a difficult turn around. Definitely poorly planned and a terrible use of almost beach front land. We should definitely not repeat those mistakes. If a multi-story parking structure is truly needed, it should be on the eastern outskirts of the village by the highway so as to not impede with the village character and walkability. This is still an easy walk for most and during certain seasons a shuttle could run between a few key points like the beach or street fair, Sr. Center and the parking structure. Thanks for your consideration, KR, Lisa Lisa Potter CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.