Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-03-26; Planning Commission; MinutesL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CITY OF CARLSBAD March 26, 1980 NOT OFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED AT SUBSEQUENT MEETING OF THE CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Schick. ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Chairman Schick, Commissioners Rombotis, Leeds, Marcus, Larson, Friestedt, Jose. Ex Officio members present: Dan Hentschke, Asst. City Attorney, James C. Hagaman, Planning Director. Staff present: Bud Plender, Principal Planner; Bill Hofman, Associate Planner: Charles Grimm, Associate Planner, Richard Allen, Principal Engineer, Margaret Goldstein, Consultant. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance was led by Chairman Schick. r AGENDA ITEM COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Schick stated that Grosse had called him regarding PCD-21. He made mention that it was on the Agenda and had a general discussion. Mr. Grosse was not satisfied at the last meeting regarding the increase in traffic he believes the new addition at Weseloh Chevrolet might cause. Commissioner Marcus also had a call similar to Chairman Schick's and also Mr. Winter called her on Tuesday (the landlord). Commissioners Friestedt and Leeds also had a call from Grosse. Chairman Schick also stated that the flight at Palomar was not scheduled for a good date and has been postponed. A date in April will be confirmed later. Mr. Woods should be apprised that March 28 or 29 is not a good date. Chairman Schick also said that he had been apprised that ID cards should be available to members of the Commission. Com- missioner Jose is the only person who has one and he says it is useful when looking at a piece of property; James Hagaman, Planning Director, stated he would look into this matter. Also, Chairman Schick mentioned that calling cards should be made available; Mr. Hagaman suggested that the Personnel office would take care of this. It was stated by Chairman Schick that these items should be taken care of when new Commissioners come along. Chairman Schick explained to the audience the procedure of the hearing and advised the applicants of their right of appeal to the City Council. CONTINUED PUBL,IC HEARINGS, 1. CP-36, Shape11 Industries, 200+ unit condominium development on Piragua and Venado Streets. James C. Hagaman, Planning Director, stated that the applicant, with staff's concurrence, is requesting a continuance of the project to the April 23rd meeting. A motion was made to CONTINUE CP-36 to April 23, 1980. MOTION: Jose SECOND: Rombotis AYES: Schick, Rombotis, Leeds, Marcus, Larson, Friestedt, Jose 2. WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN James C. Hagaman, Planning Director, informed the Commission that members of the city staff and members of the water districts have met and desire to have this matter continued to the April 9 meeting. A motion was made to CONTINUE the WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN to April 9, 1980. MOTION: Jose SECOND: Friestedt AYES: Schick, Rombotis, Leeds, Marcus, Larson, Friestedt, Jose 3. EIR 80-1, Housing E.lement Staff Report: Revisions have been made to the Housing Element, according to suggestions made at prior meetings. At the public hearings on February 6 and March 5, the Planning Commission conducted a page-by-page review and tonight's meeting will include a check of the requested revisions. The Commission had received copies of these revisions earlier. Tonight's meeting is a public hearing and has been renoticed. Any public comments can be heard. If the Commission finds the changes are adequate, staff recommends that the Commission recommend by minute motion that the City Council certify EIR 80-l and adopt the Housing Element as approved by the Planning Commission. P, C, Minutes 3/26/80 Page 2 Y- .t- 'Joe Hastone, of Lake Shore Gardens .asked staff to define EIR and GPA; Staff explained. Chairman Schick stated this matter had been reviewed in detail and feels it is ready to forward to the City Council. He asked if there were any questions from the audience and none were forthcoming. A motion was made that Planning Commission recommend City Council APPROVE EIR 80-l. MOTION: Rombotis SECOND: Jose AYES; Schick , ,Rombotis, Leeds, Marcus, Larson, Friestedt, Jose 4. ‘GpA&4’, .Hou:s:i:ng: B:lae:nt S t,a'f:f' :r:ear t. : Charles Grimm summarized the staff report from the March 5 meeting and recommended that, if the Commission finds that the changes they advised staff to make are accurate, that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council that they adopt GPA-54. Chairman Schick stated that certain items were not corrected, and the Minutes of March 5 depict those very clearly. Commissioner Jose questioned page 17 relocation costs for hardship cases. His impression was that the Commission stated consideration would be given to relocation costs, but not just in hardship cases; Commissioner Marcus felt it was for hardship cases; Commissioner Jose felt the majority had ruled for relocation costs. Chairman Schick said that in action 7, concern was that they reflect the Council's current action and said they have cov- ered all the Council has done here. Commissioner Jose stated that in reference to the condo conversion, he feels that if a person is being evicted because of that he should receive compensation: Chairman Schick replied that when we get into the implementation, then they may implement how this will be done. The revision was left as is. Commissioner Friestedt stated that in consideration of the Element, the Commission is not making policy, but rather guidelines for the policy. Commissioner Rombotis concurred. P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 3 - Commissioner Jose related that regarding page 19, action 3, a number of people in the real estate business said, "Don't reduce the off-street parking, whatever you do." Commissioner Rombotis agreed basically with Commissioner Jose. However, some types of development are different. In a general development, he concurs. Commissioner Friestedt said that a case in point would be a senior citizens group. Chairman Schick stated the heading of this is "Policy" and these are trade-offs. He does not think we need a change in action 3. Commissioner Jose commented on action 3, page 20. He would like to see added to that in reference to suitable sites for mobile homes, "and designated zoning as a permanent zone.' Chairman Schick said that in action 1 under that subject which says, "contains sites suitably zoned", is sufficient. Commissioner Jose replied that sounds more like a housing development than mobile homes. He stated we don't have a zone per se on the books for mobile home parks. Staff stated'that the master plan is a function of the PC zone and action 1 does not cover tleentire city - just the PC zoned area. Commissioner Rombotis asked what staff would suggest as alternate wording; .Ms. Goldstein replied that on #3, to reflect the housing element review committee, their feeling was that mobile home parks should be encouraged in all cases, but their feeling was against specific designated mobile home zoning. Commissioner Jose stated the Council has directed staff to come up with a permanent zone for mobile home parks and he feels some reference to permanent zoning should be in the draft. James Hagaman, Planning Director, suggested that the words "master plan area" could be eliminated and substitue "city". Commissioner Friestedt suggested the wording, 'encourage the development of suitably zoned sites.' Mr. Hagaman said that "city-wide" would be better terminology than "master plan". Commissioner Larson stated no objection to changes suggested and recommends adding a second sentence stating, "consider zoning for mobile home and modular units." It was concurred that this phrase should be added. Recommendation for action 3, page 20: Add the phrase, "consider zoning for mobile home and modular units.' P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 4 Joe Bastone, Lake Shore Gardens, asked for the City Attorney's interpretation of section 65302 A and B; the City Attorney replied they mandate the provision of a housing element and says the city shall make adequate provision in the housing element for all economic sectors of the community and that the city shall consider all types of housing and adequate provision has to be made in the housing element for that. It doesn't mandate that we adopt any ordinances. Chairman Schick stated that at the top of page 28, was struck by a vote. It should be corrected from the content and should swl "the city is one of the major.,.". Ms. Goldstein will correct thispage. Commissioner Jose asked if they are going to retain that and send it forward; Chairman Schick said yes, but prefaced by the fact that it was struck. Page 29. Chairman Schick stated he had questioned "a copy has been filed," which should be "will be filed". Page A5. Chairman Schick thought we were going to have another column of figures; Ms. Goldstein will add these. Page A6. Commissioner Larson stated he had some objections to these figures according to that 1975 census and mentioned these were to be explained in a report. He felt uneasy with that explanation as it leads one to believe the problem with the figures was that they were dated. The date was not the problem. He feels the figures were never accurate and that the last four figures in that column should be disregarded, and the 43% non-response could put those figures greatly in error. Ms. Goldstein replied they could show the comparative by taking out the categories and put in the median income for 1975, then put in the median income estimate now - that would be just two figures, qualified as to source. Commissioner Larson is in agreement with this correction. Page AlO. Commissioner Jose thought the vacancies paragraph was to be reworked in chart form. Ms. Goldstein stated that this follows. The paragraph that is in parenthesis is to be struck. The new paragraph started with, "typical vacancy> surveys." Then the new table is on the next page. Commissioner Jose asked if the "latest" means 1979 or 1980. Ms. Goldstein said it is 1979, but this data will be available in about a month for 1980. When this is received, it will be forwarded to the staff. Page A18. Chairman Schick had thought there would be a regional column. Ms. Goldstein understood that to mean, "including neighboring cities on percent of increase," which was not done on the table and asked if this is to be a median for P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 5 - neighboring cities or a low and high for neighboring cities; - Chairman Schick said it is just to state how we fit in; Ms. Goldstein said they can put in the low and high for the surrounding cities. Joe Bastone said he thought the mortgage payments were included 5 in these figures. Ms. Goldstein replied this has been changed. Joe Bastone said that the $400 figure is high; Chairman Schick replied that figure had come from-Joe, and this is reflected in the minutes. Page B15. Chairman Schick questioned second paragraph, "allo- eating 850 units". We added that additional allocations are being made by other districts. We didn't quantify that to say how many and we should include this. Commissioner Jose stated they wanted a breakdown of those districts. Staff replied the Building Department will get those figures and they will be added. Chairman Schick asked if there were any additional comments regarding this Housing Element. He thanked and complimented those responsible. Commissioner Rombotis would like to send a letter from the Commission, thanking them for their hard work. He stated staff could prepare this and asked Chairman Schick to handle it. The Commission unanimously requests such a letter be sent. Bob Ladwig, 3289 Donna Drive, Carlsbad. He understands that the Housing Element is mandatory and asked if the State had mandated a deadline for adoption. Chairman Schick replied that guidelines had been issued. Dan Hentschke, Asst. City Attorney, stated guidelines were set for Jan. 1, 1980 for all cities and we received a 3-month extension. He feels this will be accomplished soon. Bob Ladwig asked if the Housing Element is the last mandatory element that the City needs to adopt to fulfil1 the nine required mandatory elements. Mr. Hentschke replied we currently have all the required elements. Shirley Sato, 664 Tamarack, #l, Carlsbad. Ms. Sato said that on page 13 she understood that it was going to sound more definite on evaluating the possible conversion on the city's overall housing needs. She felt it would read something like, "Application shall be denied if no comparable vacancies, or if it has an adverse effect on the city's overall housing needs." Also, where it says, "consideration may also be given," that it would read, "applicant shall provide payment for relocation." If you say "hardship", please define "hardship." P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 6 Commissioner Friestedt replied that these cases should be done on a case-by-case basis. Chairman Schick said that it will be in the housing element a framework has been established. This will become more specific. Ms. Sato ,asked when this becomes Dart of the condo conversion requirements, Chairman Schick said no, will it read just like this. it will be changed-and things will be added. Ms. Sato asked how she would find out when this occurred. Mr. Hentschke said it would be noticed as a public hearing. Joe Bastone said there is some doubt as to whether there is a recommendation for a mobile home zone. Chairman Schick replied this was covered in page 29 where we added to action 3. Commissioner Larson stated it was said the city should consider zoning for mobile home parks and modular unit housing. Mr. Jack: Swern asked Mr. Hagaman what is Mobile Home Over1 y Zone. Mr. Hagaman replied it means you put a designation f a zone change essentially over a piece of property allowin' another use under certain conditions. That doesn't change P the underlying zone, but the overlay would allow, for instance, a mobile home park. Mr. Swern asked to read something that came from Mr. Hagaman's office and asked for clarification - does this mean rezoning present CUP mobile home parks or not? Or does it just app/ly to future mobile home parks, modular developments and so forth. "The proposed zone code amendment would permit mobile home' parks..... Once this overlay zone is used, no other use is permitted of the mobile home park. The extent and purposes of such zone is to provide locations where a mobile home Parke can be established..... .More specifically, the amendment woulb establish new definitions as to mobile homes....." Does that mean that present home parks will come under a new zone caBled mobile home zones? I Mr. Hagaman replied he did not know where that came from, 1 but indicated that the Commission is considering a Housingi Element. He stated he would be happy to discuss Mr. Swern's question in his office at any time, but it does not appear' to be part of the discussion tonight. Mr. Swern said that so far tonight he did not hear anythin about mobile home zoning. b Chairman Schick asked Mr. Swern, "What do you believe this document does for Carlsbad?" ~ Mr. Swern replied he feels Commission is subjecting the Council to something that they will pass right back to Commission or to the staff for more talk. He feels it does not apply to~the present, but only for the future. P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 7 Chairman Schick stated this encompasses the broad picture and identifies all the areas that this city must deal with. It recommends certain actions. Just in action 3 that we were talking about, it alludes to the fact that zones should be established for mobile homes. This document does not establish the zone for mobile homes. Staff is now compiling the informa- tion needed to make this so. Mr. Swern stated that to him it does not appear that the five mobile home parks in Carlsbad are protected. You are leaving them up in the air again. Chairman Schick replied that Council has demonstrated their good faith 'and has put a moratorium on this. They are going to clear the air and decide how your rights as a resident will be protected. Commissioner Rombotis said that without this enabling tool, you will not have the zone that you desire. You have to have a public hearing before that happens. Commissioner Jose added.this is a process of Planning, to make this a permanent zone. 30 days after Council makes a deci- sion, then the City may take action or your property owner may come in and apply for a change of zone to the new permanent type zone. That is beyond the perspective of what we're looking at right now. The public hearing closed at 8:30 p.m. Planning Commission Action A motion was made to ADOPT Resolution 1595 as presented and revised by staff and including those corrections and changes made by Planning Commission this evening. MOTION: Larson SECOND: Rombotis AYES: Schick, Rombotis, Leeds, Marcus, Larson, Friestedt, Jose 5. CT 75-9(B), (REVISION)', SANTA FE KNOLLS, LA COSTA LAND COMPANY Staff report: Presented by Bud Plender, who stated that one change from the last approval is that one street in phase 2 has access through phase 3, requiring offsite improvement and proven access. Also, school site and park site are addressed. Applicant Presentation. Bob Ladwig, La Costa Land Company, stated the revisions have been reviewed and accepted as written. ,r P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 8 Mr. Plender stated that there is a new Resolution #1615, replacing the one in the packet, There are no changes of substance, just some changes in the wording and format. Applicant has a copy of this. The public hearing closed at 8:50 p.m. Planning Commission Action Motion was made for ADOPTION of Resolution 1615 which APPROVES CT 75-9(B). MOTION: Rombotis SECOND: Marcus AYES: Schick, Rombotis, Leeds, Marcus, Larson, Friestedt, Jose 6. CT 7,9-:2-j~CCp-23: (a) : '-: FR.I$',.S. I 6 unit condominium development on La Costa Avenue, La Costa, Staff report was presented by Bud Plender. Staff recommends APPROVAL with one change - recommending that visitor parking space be moved up front and storage area be moved to the rear. Also, a revision to the Resolution was passed out tonight with two additional conditions. Condition 14 - applicant to submit plans on location of trash enclosure, which needs one centralized trash area. Condition 15 - applicant shall establish CC & R's to be approved by Planning Director and to prohibit the placement of any structure within sewer easement. Plannincr Commission Discussion. Chairman Schick asked if the purchaser can build a permanent fence across the sewer easement. Mr. Plender replied the Leucadia County Water District has indicated they would have no problem with the fences. If they had to use heavy equip- ment in the easement, they could remove the fences. Chairman Schick asked if there would be Mr. Plender replied that would be up to District, any restrictions on trees. Leucadia County Water Chairman Schick stated that if the back yard had to be torn up, the buyer would suffer an inconvenience because of building over an easement. Commissioner Friestedt asked if CC & R's can be requested to reflect easement to the sewer district. F- P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 9 Applicant Pre~sentiition. Harry Fries,, 33751 Paseo de Decoro, San Juan Capistrano. Mr. Fries stated he is trying to eliminate massive retaining walls and is keeping the patios within 8 feet. Chairman Schick stated the size of the back yard was favorable. Public hearing closed at 9:05 p.m. plann$fig: Cpm&s'sS:iQfi :&c:ti:m \ . . . . . . . . -.?.s.-....*..x_ . Motion was made to APPROVE CT 79-20/CP-23(A) - FRIES by ADOPTION of Resolution 1616, adding wording to reflect that potential buyers shall be informed of CC & R's. MOTION: Friestedt SECOND: Rombotis AYES: Schick, Rombotis, Leeds, Marcus, Larson, Friestedt, Jose 7, V&3'0:1,: jSApJDy,, Request to reduce front and side yard setbacks and to exceed the height limitation on property located on the west side of Ocean Street at the- end of Cedar Avenue in the R-3 Zone. Commissioner Rombotis WITHDREW from the hearing of this item. Staff report was presented by Bill Hofman who stated that the request is for three separate variances of the code. Staff recommends that the Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 1618 approving Variance 301 subject to findings and conditions contained therein. Planning Commission Discussion. Chairman Schick asked for more information on the structure height. Bill Hofman replied that the structure would be 14 feet in height from the street, the one to the north is presently 28 feet in height from the street, and the one to the south is 12 feet in height. This development would be consistent with the surrounding develop- ments in terms of height. Commissioner Larson asked if the other buildings which exceed the variance in height - were those building measurements taken only from the street. Bill Hofman replied affirmative. Commissioner Larson asked if simply because those were built previous to current measuring method, is that the basis for the variance on the height. Mr. Hofman said no, the basis is the finding that the topography of the site constitutes - P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 10 - .- C exceptional circumstances. Also, other variances have been granted in the area. Mr. Hofman stated that the height in the entire vicinity is consistent in that area. Commissioner Jose stated that when Don Agatep was Planning Director, this very point was resolved as far as where do you measure the height from. His question is that with that area being so compact there could be a parking problem. He sees nothing in the plan on parking. Staff replied that parking was not addressed because the application was for a variance and that issue would be brought up at the time the applicant applies for building permits. Applicant Presentation. Don Agatep, representing Tony Howard Jones. Mr. Agatep stated this is actually a second phase of the existing project. The project to the north exists and the parking for that facility and this one is directly across the street. Applicant has read the report and basically agrees with staff. The Coastal Commission was desirous that this project be done this way because of view to the beach being kept visual and because they are dedicating and improving public beach access along the south side. The public hearing closed at 9:20 p.m. Planning Commission Action. Motion was made to ADOPT Resolution No. 1618, approving Variance 301 subject to the findings and conditions contained therein. MOTION: Jose SECOND: Marcus ABSTAIN: Rombotis AYES: Schick, Leeds, Marcus, Friestedt, Jose NOES: Larson 8. CT 79-26/P-42 - MORROW/GOODMAN - Request for a 17 unit condominium permit and tentative map located on the east side of Romeria Street between La Costa Avenue and Gibraltar. Staff Report was presented by Bill Hofman. Staff discovered an error in the legal description on the public notice for this project. Because of this error, staff has renoticed this item and brings it back before the Commission for adoption of the resolution. Staff recommends adoption of resolution 1605, recommending APPROVAL of CT 79-26/CP-42. ,/- P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 11 /L Applicant Presentation. Applicant not present. The public hearing closed at 9:25 p.m. - Planning Commission Action. Motion was made to ADOPT resolution 1605, APPROVING CT 79-26/ CP-42 - MORROW/GOODMAN, subject to the findings and conditions contained therein. MOTION: Jose SECOND: Rombotis AYES: Schick, Rombotis, Leeds, Marcus, Larson, Friestedt, Jose I 9. PCD-21, WESELOH CHEVROLET. Staff report: Mr. Hagaman stated that at the March 12 meeting this was approved. The driveway requested on Cannon Road with in and out access was denied. Applicant has asked for recon- sideration and proposes a right turn in driveway with no right turn out. Mr. Bud Plender added that this is not a public hearing. If there are any questions of what was discussed March 12, staff will review. Commissioner Rombotis stated he did listen to the tapes and did review it. Commissioner Friestedt wished a review. Bud Plender reviewed what took place at the last meeting. The General Plan indicates that on major arterials such as Cannon Road, access should not be permitted unless there is no other access available. There is an alternative access on Paseo de1 No&e, so to keep Cannon Road free of conflict, the City Engineer has recommended denial. The applicant wishes the Commission to reconsider Planning Commission action and permit ingress only to site. Richard Allen, Principal Engineer, mentioned two points in the applicant's letter regarding traffic volumes. There is a chart attached, Exhibit B, page 2 of 2, which gives average daily trips. He assumes this is accurate and accepts it as today's traffic volume but Cannon Road is now a dead-end street and it is proposed to be a major arterial. One suggestion was that, if there is a problem with cars slowing down to turn right, perhaps a separate right turn lane just to turn into this property might be proposed. That could be donec but there are two problems with it. There will be a bicycle path in the street later and if there is a right turn lane, cars will have to cross the bicycle lane to get in. P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 12 ,- Also, this right turn lane could trap someone coming from the freeway and forced to turn right into the lot. Staff feels strongly that this design inconsistent with the General Plan in no access to land. It could also set Staff recommends denial. is a problem. It is that there should be an undesirable precedent. Planning Commission Discussion. Commissioner Larson asked if the Planning Commission did agree with the applicant and approved a right turn in only, what would the Engineering Department suggest to ensure that was a right turn in only and remain that way and not an exit. Staff replied the best they could do is to have a curved alignment on the entrance and a sign saying "no exit". This would not ensure that no one would use this for an exit. Commissioner Larson stated that once the curb cut is there, it would be basically impossible to enforce the right turn only. Commissioner Rombotis asked if the State standards differ from the City regarding the access. Staff replied that Cal Trans is only interested in restricting access to the freeway. They feel that once it's off the freeway, it's the city's problem. Commissioner Friestedt asked what is the exact distance from the stop sign to proposed -ingress. Staff replied 268 feet from the freeway-stop sign. Applicant Presentation. Mrs. Rus.sell Grosse, representing Weseloh Chevrolet and the owners of the property, Messrs. Winter and Daly. Applicant felt the proposed compromise would be an equitable one and would be advantageous to the circulation pattern. Customer parking on the property would be primarily on the western end of the property-and as such by the ingress only at Cannon Road, would facilitate people getting into that property, parking, looking at the merchandise, and then leaving the property by Paseo de1 Norte. Mrs. Grosse mentioned that Cannon Road is a major arterial and that other major arterials include Tamarack and prime arterials would include Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real. Within this past year, there was an exception to this road design standards application. There is an access for the commercial plaza located just north of Alga Road. The rate of speed on Cannon would not be as fast. P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 13 Chairman Schick asked if there were any projections of traffic at Weseloh. Mrs. Grosse replied that it was presently between 1200 and 1500. There are 100 employees making four trips daily, that is 400 trips right there. There were 90 service slips registered Monday morning, making 180 trips. People coming in for parts are additional and this did not include sales and customers. It was estimated 1500 and the proposed use would add 500. Commissioner Larson asked Mrs. Grosse how they could assure that this would be maintained as ingress only. She replied the curb contour would be sufficient. This would be designed and built as an obstacle and be posted. She does not think "tire jabbers" would be necessary, but that if they put a sign "entrance only", most people would abide by it. Commissioner Rombotis asked what is the term of the lease. Mrs. Grosse replied 15 years. Applicant Presentation. Wi,"i;m Daly, 1282 Cress Dr., Encinitas. Mr. Daly stated the things mentioned tonight was about Car Country that having restrictions on this property, but this is not a part of Car Country property. It was kept out of that part and parcel for specific reasons. This property does not belong to Weseloh Chevrolet. It will be leased to them if we can resolve issues about access - then it would be leased for 15 years. As owners of the property, Mr. Daly does not feel this is necessarily the best use of this property. But if he is denied access to this property at this point, he feels it would be virtually impossible to come back in 15 years and ask for ingress. All they are asking is a fair access to their property. They ask for a fair access to the property and would like to be able to get in the 'property off Cannon Road. That's the only way they feel they can develop this property to its potential. If there is no other way to obtain access than the tire-destroying spike, they will have to do that, but would rather not. They feel the curb and entrance can be designed so that people who obey signs will conform. They ask for reasonable access to the property and feel the only reasonable access is for a minimum of ingress on Cannon and ingress and egress on Paseo de1 Norte. Commissioner Jose asked Mr. Daly if he would not feel that after 15 years - whoever is there would want to stay there. Mr. Daly replied yes, but if that's not the best use at that time, he won't have them then. P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 14 Commissioner Jose stated they could put in slow-down bumps. Commissioner Friestedt said that the safety factor he sees is that if someone leaves the stop sign at the offramp and begins to accelerate....... so rather than have the egress close to the middle, why not move it closer to the stop sign or closer to Paseo de1 Norte, Then it would be much the same as Alga into the West Bluff Plaza. Would that be a more acceptable solution? Staff replied the distance is only 150 feet and did not know whether this would improve the situation. Commissioner Rombotis stated that option is not available because the State owns that triangular portion. Bud Plender stated this request is part of the city's specific plan for Car Country. That plan indicates that development can occur only after approvals are granted, making sure that all aspects of the specific plan are met. Commissioner Larson asked if this was approved for right ingress., would the Engineering Department want to be party to specific design and specifications to ensure that was an angled entrance. Staff replied yes, we would like a condition stating that improvement plans be submitted subject to the approval of the city engineer. ,- Commissioner Friestedt stated he felt a better location for ingress could be determined by the Engineering Department for safety purposes. He feels uncomfortable with the location of it. Commissioner Larson stated he did not feel a better location could be found. Commissioner Rombotis stated he has a hard time with the applica- tion of staff's policy. In looking at the Safeway store at Tamarack and Adams, if you strictly apply the policy you would take all access from Adams. He sees nothing wrong with a right turn in and would leave it up to the engineer to approve design and location. Chairman Schick said.he found no fault with a one-way access. Planning Commission Action. Motion was made to ADOPT Resolution No. 1612 based on the find- ings, with an additional finding No. 6 to read, "Access off Cannon Road shall be a right turn in only. It is necessary to access to the lot and to ensure good circulation on the lot", and subject to the conditions, with the modification of con- dition No. 3 stating, "Right turn in only shall be allowed on Cannon Road with provisions to be approved by the City Engineer concerning signing and the design specifications of the angled entrance to the lot." P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 15 MOTION: Larson SECOND: Rombotis AYES: Schick, Rombotis, Leeds, Marcus, Larson, Friestedt NOES: Jose 10. PCD-22, NORTH COUNTY LINCOLN-MERCURY: 25.5 Ft. Freestanding Sign. Staff report was presented by Bill Hofman, who stated that the sign is going to replace an existing 8 ft. monument sign. Staff recommends adoption of the resolution approving this PCD. Staff did add one condition, that the sign can not be freeway- oriented. Commissioner Rombotis questioned condition 4 and said he felt intent was not to have 2 signs on the property simultan- eously. Staff said that if they did not have that condition, applicant could theoretically erect his sign and keep the existing monument sign also. Bill Hofman stated that condi- tion could be modified. Chairman Schick agreed that condition 4 needed clarification and could say, "On erection of the sign, the monument sign will be removed." Applicant Presentation. Henry Hague, Attorney, 810 Mission Avenue. Regarding condition no. 4, applicant must go through the Coastal Commission to get approval of this sign and they might require a building permit. If this could be reworded so that it is clear that only one sign is to be placed on the property at any one time, he would be more comfortable. Planning Commission Action. Motion was made to ADOPT Resolution No. 1617 approving PCD-22, subject to rewording of condition no. 4, per discussion of Planning Commission. MOTION: Rombotis SECOND: Marcus AYES: Schick, Rombotis, Leeds, Marcus, Larson, Friestedt, Jose APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion was made to APPROVE Minutes of February 27, 1980. MOTION: Marcus SECOND: Leeds AYES: Schick, Rombotis, Leeds, Marcus, Larson, Friestedt, Jose P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 16 C. - /- Motion was made to APPROVE Minutes of March 5, 1980. Chairman Schick requested inclusion of statements he had made at March 5 meeting regarding the pedestrian situation in the City of Carlsbad and the condition of the automotive repair shop at State and Elm. These are to be included in the record. (However, these comments were made at Mar. 12 meeting, & are included in those Minutes.) MOTION: Jose SECOND: Rombotis AYES: Schick, Rombotis, Marcus, Larson, Jose ABSTAIN: Leeds, Friestedt ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS Motion was made to APPROVE Resolutions #1609, 1610, 1611, 1614 and 1613. MOTION: Jose SECOND: Marcus AYES: Schick, Leeds, Marcus, Larson, Jose ABSTAIN: Rombotis, Friestedt Commissioner Jose made a suggestion regarding the new procedure of approving Resolutions. He would like to include in the Resolutions those that were present. There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at lo:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ,James C. Hagaman Secretary to the Planning Commission lr 7 P. C. Minutes 3/26/80 Page 17