Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-06-11; Planning Commission; MinutesMEET I NG OF : CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE : JUNE 11, 1974 TIME: 7:30 P.M. PLACE : CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER: ROLL. CALL. '1. Comnissioners Casler, Little, Jose,. Barrett and Forman Commissioner Dominguez I """""""""""""""""""""""""""""". APPROVAL.OF MINUTES 2. The minutes of May 14, 1974 meeting were ipprovec with correction of Circulation Element adjourned to regularly scheduled meeting -of June 25, 1974. to a work session The minutes of May 23, 1974 meeti ng were approve( as presented. The Minutes of May 28, 1974 meeting were approved with correction .- add that Jose made , motion.on Item 4 with Forman absent. Correct .. last paragraph on Page 4 to repd $he Land Use Element was not closed, but ad'fi-urhed to the June 6th Planning Commission Meeting. Correct Page 5 to read adjourned to Public Hearing on June 6, 1974. """""""""""""""""""""""""""""". WRITTEN COMFIUNICATIONS: 3. .The Planning Director referred to a letter from .Perry Lamb, of which a copy was given. to the * Commission, regarding Mr. Lamb's comments to '. . the Coastal' Land Environment Element. The Planning Director merely wanted Commission to accept the letter as it had been reviewed for . . its .contents. """_""""""""""""""""""""""""" ORAL. COMMUNICATIONS: 4. None 7. _. PUBLIC HEARINGS: CASE N0:GPA-28 - LAND USE ELEMENT: The Planning Directoi ghve the Staff Report. Chairwoman Casler explained to the audience that only new testimony ,would be taken, if any. The following hearings were held by the Planning Commiss- ion and recommendations of which are indicated under each hearing with residents names and testirnony,.if any: This was for con'sideration of Revision of the Land Use Element of the Carlsbad General Plan. The Planning Commission finished a series of five public hearings during which the proposed revision of the land use element of the General Plan was considered. The' Planning Commission is ,forwarding the revised Land Use PRESENT ABSENT Motion Ayes Absent: Abstain Motioh Ayes Absent AbstaSn Motion Ayes Absent Abstain X X x X X X X I- X X X X X 4 - X X X X i - X X X CITY OF CARLSBL5 CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION June 11 , 1974 Element of the General Plan to the City Council with a recomnendation of approval. 'The following ten issues werl also forwarded with recommendations: 1. Bedroom Densities: Public input, regarding residential densities, suggested that the normal dwelling unit density be changed to a restriction of the number of bedrooms that would be permitted within a given density range ie., 2 d.u/ acre would equal 8 bedrooms per acre. Because of the complexity of identifying a bedroom in a manner where bedroom densities would be monitored, the Planning Commission felt the item should . be a matter for the City to investigate at some future date. 2. Densities in the Inner City: Chairwoman Cas1 er ' asked if anyone in audience was in favor or against densities in this area. Mrs. Jane Skotnicki, 3684 Adams, Carlsbad, spoke regarding the sewer situatio and wanted to know if the Commission was sure we had the facilities to handle the situation in the downtown area. Tony Davila spoke on changing the zone and Chairwoman Casler informed him we were not discussing zones but general densities and advised him that would be taken up at another time. Gaylen Nornhold spoke in favor of proposed density in this area. He asked a question as to why at Laguna and Jefferson, east of Jefferson, the three lots, why didn't they draw the orange line down to the apartments on Kreymeyer Circle. The Plannii-ly Director explained a great Portion of that area was excluded west of Jefferson because it was already developed. It would be non-conforming to general plan, and that the densities in areas that would develop in foreseeabl future that would accommodate the downtown program are being considered now, 4 I Tina Robinson asked a question stating she was curious why the orange area was enlarged to include the red zone and was it because the developer couldn't build in the area due to it not being economically feasible. Chairwoman Casler answered yes this was the reason. Jim Bree of Cortez Development Company, Vista stated he was here to discuss general area densitie Made the comnent that he had bought a piece of property and held it hoping for a change. Stated his property on Tamarack had been bought in good faith and wanted his 16-unit ordinance back and intended to let it sit for a while longer, and leave to the Comnission what is fair in setting densities in general plan. Mr. Lewis Chase, Carlsbad, asked the question why the "inner city" does not include the Bluff at the Ocean. He was told it could conceivably expand to that. Public testimony on density ranges were specificall: Use Element recommends a maximum of 24 d.u./acre directed at the ''inner" city. The revised Land -2- -- . T c: C CITY OF (IARLSBP.3 MEETING OF: CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE : June 11 , 1974 in the High Density category.. Several residents and property owners are of the opinion that 24 dwelling units per acre is economically unfeasible. Staff is of the opinion if the inner city is to be revitalized and if it is going to support any comnercial activity west of the freeway, an economic analysis of residential densitie is essential to "inner" city's success. Staff recommende that an additional statement be added to the General Plan which would "permit increased densities at such t.ime a specific plan was developed for the inner city." The Planning Comnission accepted the inclusion of the above statement and additionally identified the inner city as the area represented by the Land Use Committee. Motion was made to adopt the Land Use as designated by Land Use Committee I""""""""""""""""""""""""""""-""" 3. The Bressi Ranch: The Planning Director gave the staff report. Public hearing was opened with Byron White speaking as Attorney for the owners of the property. He stated he had not seen.map until the meeting tonight but concurred with staff recomendation. The property owners of the Bressi Ranch requested that a portion of the property be designated as non-residential reserve because of im- pacts generated by Palomar Airport. The property owner, Staff and Planning Comnission agreed to revise Bressi Ranch to include areas designated as Non-Residential Reserve and Open pace. The remainder of the Bressi Ranch remains as shown on the Land Use Comnittee recommendations. Motion was made that Exhibit A of Land Use be adopted to be included in the final draft'of Land Use Element making two changes Non-Residential and Open Space. """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""- 4. Carl sbad Raceway Area : The Planning Director gave the staff report. Public hearing was opened with A1 Kern, 1651 Highland, Solana Beach, speaking in favor of non-residential for and including the Raceway property. Property owner requested that the Land Use designation of the Raceway be identified as Recreational-Commercial. The adjoining Carrillo Ranch requested that their lands north of Palomar Airport Road be designated as non-residential reserve. The Land Use Committee had originally re- commended that the entire area north of Palomar Airport Road be Low Density-Residential with special treatment. The Staff is of the opinion that the Raceway use, currently under a C.U.P. expiring in 1982, will decrease its automobile related activities. However, recreational uses for the property are still valid specifically with the advent of moto cross, bicycling and other forms of recreational activity. The Planning Comnission is recommending that the entire area be designated as Non- Residential Reserve. At this point a motion was made to designate.entire area as'Non_Residential Reserve. .. ,_""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" -3- Motion Ayes Abstain Absent Motion Ayes Abstain Absent Motion Ayes Abstain Absent X X X X K X X X X X X X X X X P P ;tr X X X X X X CITY OF CARLSBL MEETING OF: CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE : June 11, 1974 5. Roosevelt St. between Oak and Walnut: The Planning Director gave Staff Report. Public hearings were opened with Tony Davila speaking for Commercial zoning in this particular area. Stated he had been in business in the area since 1920. He wanted to know what type of business he could build in the future where he has the old business. It was explained that this area was being considered for some type of professional office land use which would permit limited commercial uses and also permit residential development above the first floor. Ronald Navarez, 3147 Roosevel t, Carlsbad, asked if the new zoning would be on Master Plan. He was advised there would be a new zone to define it very clearly. He stated he would give the Comnission in letter form a list Of names in the area that he was speaking for. The property owners in this area are requesting a Land Use designation not currently defined in the General Plan nor in the Zoning Ordinance. The request is for some type of professional office land use which would permit limited comnercial uses and also permit resi- dential land uses of the inner city from the identified commercial zones in the downtown. The Planning Commissic is recommending that the new land use category be es- tablished and that a subsequent action be taken which would create an appropriate zone ordinance. Lou Sciarra. 3100 Tyler., representing the Boys Club stated he would 1 ike to see the area remain as residential and thought it would improve the downtown area if it was residential. Motion was made that the Land Use reconmendation for this area be changed to allow a new designation of Office-Professional , Limited Commercial-Residential above second floor. ,""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" 6. Pi0 Pic0 Between Elm and Las Flores Drive: The Planning Director gave Staff Report. Public hearings were opened with Robert Cook, 1195 Strat, . ford Lane, spoke in concern over the possibility of- high-rise buildings being constructed near their residential area if density changed. Mr. Gaylen Nornholdfstated he would recommend that Pi0 Pic0 remain as a business area. Mrs. Jane Hunt, 1239 Stratford Lane, Carlsbad spoke agreement with proposal of Staff. Tracy Nornholdt, 4025 Baldwin Lane, Carlshad, spoke favor of Staff recomnendation. in in Kay Cook, Stratford Lane, Carlsbad was against having density changed to allow business buildings to be constructed. Did not want to see motels and apartments go in the area. Additionally she said it would bring more traffic. She asked if sidewalks would go -in if this happened. She was told by the Commission they would be put in. - 4- . I ., .,I_ ~. , . Motion Ayes Noes Abstain Absent \L -. - PiAlJf%Jr;;C - CITY OF CARLSB.LTi COMMISSIZiE?Z MEETING OF: CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION DA JE : June 11, 1974 Mrs. Ortega, Stratford Lane,, Carlsbad, spoke against change of density in the area. She stated she was not in favor of anything professional other than a one stor? that would be compatible to nearby homes. Jack Kubota, P.O. Box 1095, Carlsbad, stated we need to make a designation so that in the future like two or three years from now when someone moves to this City and wants to know what is planned for this area we can give them an answer. Also so that we may move ahead to something concrete and permanent. The impact of 1-5 and the Frontage Road, (Pi0 Pic0 Drivc caused several property owpers to seek other forms of land use they now represem't in the Land Use Element. The land Use Element recommends low density-residential land use for the subject properties, however, the Staff feels Professional-Administrative land uses could act as a buffer between the impacts of the freeway and the residential area to the east. The Planning Comnission is of the opinion that the entire area surrounding the Las Flores intersection as .well as Pi0 Pic0 Drive shoulc be subjects of future planning studies which would specifically identify land use alternatives, Because of this the Commission is recommending that no action regarding Pi0 Pic0 land use be taken and that future iar use programs be generated that would amend the general plan. Additionally, the Commission recommends that in the event future developments are proposed in the area, the general plan would be reassessed at that time, Motion was made that the Land Use on Pi0 Pic0 shown in Pink remain as Residential. """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""". 7. North Shore of Agua Hedionda Lagoon The Planning Director gave staff report. Public hearings were opened by Nick Sauer, 2965 Rooseve' speaking for several persons owning property along the North Shore. He urged the Commission High Density along the North Shore of the Lagoon. He represented the following property owners: Paul Ecke, Jr., C. P. Van Herzen, M. P. Mauer, J. W. Vernier, Charles McCarver, Ruth Vogel, John Knight, Ray Winters and C. V. Nee1 ey. Captain P,ash, Carlsbad, made the comment he did not think the present recommended density can stand -all hurd it will have to go over. Stated we could not drive property owners out of their rights. He also said he would like to see Adam Street made into a Scenic Drive. John McGill, asked that the Commission consider:the position on Highland if the polls were reversed. He wanted the Commission to think about the considerable amount of taxes the property owners pay if density was changed and think about their needs and obligations. 1 Motion Ayes Noes Abstain Absent -4 I Y a 9 I i ' CITY OF CARLSBk3 co~~~vilss\~~~~.~ " MEETING OF: CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE I June 11, 1974 Property owners along the North Shore of Agua Hedionda Lagoon are requesting a definition of Medium High Density Residential 10-16 dwelling units per acre as opposed to the Land Use Committee's recomnendation 4-10 units per acre. The Planning Commission is recomnending the Land Use Committee's recommendation be upheld. A second part of the motion adopting this land use designation was to request the City Council to actively pursue all avenue available that would eventually lead to the public purchase of land along the north shore of the Lagoon. Motion was made that Commission adopt the recommendation of the Land Use Committee and incorporate in draft and plans submitted to City Council making absolutely sure density is 4-10 units per acre. A separate motion was made that the Commission adopt a letter to the City Council concerning this Land Element and propose that we approve a plan that we purcha this property with a possible alternative of making this into a Park area. """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""- 8. Group 10 Pr0pert.i es The Planning Director gave Staff Report, stating property owners requested'that their holdings be designated Medium Density-Residential 4-10 dwelling units per acre as proposed to the low density-residential 0-4 dwelling units per acre as recommended by the Land Use Committee. The rationale for the increase is that topography and vegetation could be respected if Planned Community zoning was utilized. The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that low density 0-4 dwelling units per acre be maintained. The Planning Commission is forwarding the entire Land Use text plus the map and the eight previously mentioned recommendations to the City Council with a recommendation of approval; One item that has not been forwarded to the City Council is a section of the General Plan text which discusses and recommends a growth monitoring program. The Commission is going to explicitly state their positio on growth monitoring at the June 25th meeting. Assuming action will be taken that night, their recommendation for its inclusion in the Land Use Element will be forwarded on June 25th. Motion was made to accept the recommendation of the Land Use Committee that 0-4 dwelling units per acre be maintained and Land Use Map and Text be adopted. Second part of motion is that the Commission explicitly state their position on growth monitoring at the June 25th meeting. ................................ -6- Motion Ayes Noes Abstain Absent Motion Ayes . Absent Motion Ayes Abstain Absent X X X X X : - X X X - X X X i c 4 7 X X 8 9 Q !A . , . .. . .. . PLANNING ' CITY OF CRLSBAD MEET1 NG OF : CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE : JUNE 11 , 1974 CASE NO.ZC-140, EIR-234 and MP-153 - VAL (Loker Propert-y) : Requested a chanqe ofL~o~~R~~om R-A-1' (City) and' A-1-8 (County) to P-C & P-M. (Planned Industrial). The Planning Director gave Staff Report. The Commission heard Mr. A1 Kern explain the proposed pre-annexational change of zone to Planned Community and Planned Industrial on approximately 640 acres north of Palomar Airport Road , east of the Airport. He also displayed a large model of the property being discussed. After hearing public testimony from Mr. 8. Mrs. Dawson, property owners in the area, a motion was made to table the consideration of the MP-153 until such time as the City Council has taken action on the proposed Land Use Element revision. Motion was made to approve EIS-248 together with transcriDt of testimony taken at this meeting and give inclusion of topographical map showing the property in questian and adjacent properties and recommend to City Council for acceptance. Motion was made to approve ZC-140 as modified and approve the rezoning .request to P-C (Planned Community) P-M (Planned Industrial from R-A-10 (City)and A-1-8 (County). CASE NO. V-240 - HUGHES AIRCRAFT (Systems Capital Corp.) Requested a Variance from Standards of MuniciPal Code Sections 21.44.160 (1) and 21.44.210 in order'to reduce size stalls: The Planning Director gave Staff Report that the justification for a Variance for the parking standayds-as requested by Hughes Aircraft is improper and that a more rational approach to the parking problem in the Planned Industrial zone would be for the Commission to pass a Resolution of Intention announcing its intention to hold a public hearing on a proposed revision to the parking requirements of the P-M (Planned Industrial ) zone. The Staff had requested that Industrial and Commercial zones be included in the parking evaluation. The Planning Commission, by 6-0 vote passed a Resolution of Intention to hold a public . hearing on July 9th for the purpose of considering.an amendment to the parking provisions of the P-M Zone only Mr. Wrench abstained because he is an employee of Hughes Aircraft . ""-"""""""""""""""""""""""""""". CASE NO.Vr241 L. Huffman: Requested a Variance from Standards of Municipal Code Section to allow constructiol .of an open Aluminum Awning within the rear yard setback. The Planning Director gave the Staff Report. Motion was made to approve V-241 as outlined in,,'Staff Report with conditions, to permit the intrusion of a patio cover of a rear set back. ............................... CASE NO. ZC-144 - A. 0. Kelly: Requested a Pre- Annexational Change of Zone from E-1-A (County) to R-A-1( on property located northeasterly of the Rancho Carlsbad Mobile Home Park. The Planning Director gave Staff A.O.Kelly which would permit 225 acres to be annexed 'Report to Planning Commission on a request submitted by -7- - COMMISSIONERS Motion Ayes Absent Motion Ayes Absent Motion Ayes Absent Motion Ayes Abstain Absent Motion Ayes Absent, X X X X X \ - X X X K K X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X MEETING OF: CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JUNE1 1 , 1974 -4 COMMISSIONERS @\ to the City of Carl sbad as R-A-10,000. Motion was made that ZC-144 based on justification, in Staff Report 1-4 be approved.. CASE NO. EIS-248, SP-116, and CT 73-2 SANTA FE GLENS: An application for acceptance of the Final E.I.R., Adoption of Specific Plan and Consideration of Tentativ Map CT 73-2 (not a public hearing). The La Costa Land Company requested the Planning Commission consider the acqeptance of'an E.I.R. and adoption of a Specific 'Plan and Tentative Map for properties in the southern part of La Costa. Staff reported to the Commission that because of the inability of La Costa Land Company to enter into a park ordinance agreement by annexation ordinance for La Costa , a1 1 subsequent requests for discretionary acts presented to the Plann- ing Commission will be withheld until such time that tt Parks Agreement has been satisfactorily entered into. Mation was made at this point to continue'EIS-248, SF-116, and CT .73-2 to July 9, 1974, meeting. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: CASE NO. CUP-93, CARLS' JR. RESTAURANT: The Planning Director.gave brief report. Commissioner Wrench stated he would like to see a more unique type business go on that property. As an.alternative Commissioner Jose stated the best use may be to build a professiona type building there instead'of a restaurant. It was decided the Planning Commission will present a written report -to City Council on the Council decision to grant an appeal for Carls' Jr. Restaurant CUP-93. The Planning Commission is of the opinion that the Conditional Use Permit Ordinance requires the Commission to make certain findings which address the desirability and the necessity of land use proposals. It is the Commission's considered opinion that the Carls' Jr. Restaurant proposal suggests the pro1 iferation of drive-thru and short-order restaurants and encourages the proliferation of standard franchise retail operations. The Commission felt if the in- dividuality of Carlsbad is to be retained, a unique character which would, in essence, separate it from the main stream of today's suburban communities. NEW BUSINESS: A letter was su.bmitted to the Planning Commission by Mr. Roy Lynd, requesting that the Planning Commission clarify an ambiguity in the parking ordinance. Mr. Lynd has recently constructed a ware- house for antique furniture in the Ponto area. Recent City actions rezoned all the Ponto area to RD-M, the existing uses .developed under the C-M Zone, to be non-conforming. As a result of the non-con- formity, the property owner is not permitted to increas the degree of non-conformity. The Staff is of the -8- Motion Ayes Absent Motion Ayes Absent X X DATE : JUNE 11 , 1974 opinion that the issue of ambiguity submitted to the Planning Commission is inappropriate. The Planning ' Commission accepted the report and instructed the staff to report to Mr. Lynd, the circumstances of his non- conforming use and the inappropriateness of the request. ............................... ADJOURNMENT By proper motion, the meeting of June If, 1974, was adjourned at 00: 54 a.m. in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted , Recording Secretary -9- Motion Ayes Absent X X