Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-10-22; Planning Commission; Minutes.CITY OF CARLSBAD Minutes of: PLANNING COMMISSION - Date of Meeting: October 22, 1980 Time of Meeting: 7:00 P.M. Place of Meeting: City Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER was made by Chairman Schick at 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL PRESENT: CHAIRMAN SCHICK COMMISSIONERS ROMBOTIS, FRIESTEDT, LARSON, LEEDS AND JOSE ABSENT: COMMISSIONER MARCUS Ex-Officio member Dan Hentschke, Assistant City Attorney, was also present. Staff members present were: Mike Holzmiller, Principal Planner Bill Hofman, Assoc,iate Planner Richard Allen, Principal Civil Engineer Joyce Crosswaithe, Assistant Planner Larry Dossey, Principal Civil Engineer Charles Grimm, Associate Planner - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Chairman Schick. AGENDA ITEM COMMUNICATIONS Mike Holzmiller indicated there was one mistake in the agenda. Item No. 8 is actually a public hearing item. However, with the concurrence of the Commission, Staff would prefer to handle other items and take this one last. Mike Holzmiller also advised that Staff had several discussion items to bring before the Commission at the end of the meeting. Chairman Schick advised he would comment at the end of this meeting on a meeting called by the City Manager relative to the drafting of a handbook for Boards, Commissions and Committees. PLANNING COMMISSION PROCEDURE Chairman Schick explained the purview of the Planning Commission in its capacity as an advisory commission to the City Council and identified those matters delegated to the Planning Commission for a final decision. Chairman Schick further explained the procedure - observed by the Commission during public hearing items. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. CT 80-15(A)/PUD-17(A), SHAW, TALBOT, BUDGE 6 DAVIS - Request for approval of the second phase of a Planned Industrial Development on Avenida Encinas between Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road in the P-M zone. Mike Holzmiller advised that this item had been continued in order to allow the applicant time to make minor revisions and to date these have not been completed. A further continuance is recommended for one month to November 26, 1980. Chairman Schick inquired if the applicant was present but there was no response. The Commission continued this item to November 26, 1980. MOTION: ROMBOTIS SECOND: JOSE AYES: CHAIRMAN SCHICK, COMMISSIONERS ROMBOTIS, FRIESTEDT, LARSON, LEEDS AND JOSE. 2. CT 80-21/CP-99, BEHRENDSEN - Request for a 10 unit condominium project on property located on the southwest corner of Garfield Street and Juniper Avenue. A report was presented by Mike Holzmiller who indicated this project has been considered at Commission meetings of July 23rd and August 27th, and it was continued on both occasions to allow the applicant to redesign the project. He advised that Staff recommended approval of the project as redesigned with one minor modification to condition No. 18 on Page 5 of the resolution. It is recommended that the addition be made of the section number of the Municipal Code, 17.04.060, pertaining to posting No Parking in the driveways. With the aid of wall map exhibits, Bill Hofman presented the Staff report indicating the changes which had been made and showing the improvements to the project. As redesigned, the project has increased from 8 to 10 units and includes a swimming pool and jacuzzi. Chairman Schick then opened the public hearing and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Gerald Behrendsen of 2355 Colgate Drive, Costa Mesa, the applicant, who advised that he had nothing further to add to the presentation and was very pleased with the improvement in redesign. Since no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Jose expressed concern about the parking on Garfield rC Street, which is a major concern of the Commission, and expressed the hope that when selling the units the developer would advise tenants to park on Juniper or in their garage. Page 2 Based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein, with the modification to condition 18, the Commission adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION NO. 1671, APPROVING A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP AND CONDOMINIUM PERMIT TO DEVELOP 10 UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF GARFIELD STREET AND JUNIPER STREET. MOTION: ROMBOTIS SECOND: LARSON AYES: CHAIRMAN SCHICK, COMMISSIONERS ROMBOTIS, JOSE, FRIESTEDT, LARSON and LEEDS. NEW PUBLIC HEARING 3. CT 80-39/PUD-23, .ROMBOTIS - Request for a 7 unit tentative tract map and Planned Unit Development located on the west side of Valencia Avenue between Park Avenue and Sevilla Way in the PC Zone. Commissioner Rombotis indicated he would abstain from discussions on this application. An introductory statement was presented by Mike Holzmiller indicating minor changes to Condition No. 6 on Page 3 of Resolution No. 1714. He explained that while a Homeowner's 7. Association is normally required in a Planned Unit Development, it is not felt necessary in this particular case because of the nature of the property and the fact there are only 7 homeowners and no common recreational facilities. It was felt that the condition should be amended to provide that the applicant shall establish CChR's approved by the Planning Director prior to final map approval, and that a further condition of the CCGR's should prohibit RV parking anywhere but in the side yard setback area. The Staff report was presented by Bill Hofman, with the aid of wall map exhibits, and he reminded the Commission that previous approval had been given to the same applicant for a similar request immediately adjacent to the north, This is merely an extension of that development to Park Drive. He detailed the Staff report of October 22 and pointed out that the only concern was in the amount of grading required, Since this was considerable, staff is recommending an additional condition requiring immediate planting of slopes after grading. In response to a question from Commissioner Larson on who would be responsible for maintaining the banks once hydroseeding and an irrigation system is established since there will be no Homeowner's Association, Mr. Hofman advised that the indi- vidual property owners would be responsible. Chairman Schick raised the question of the length of time required for compaction in view of the large amount of grading Page 3 C - and in reply Richard Allen advised that it would be immediate upon soil being properly placed with the correct water content and use of the appropriate machinery according to specifications. As soon as grading is completed, it could be built on. Chairman Schick further queried whether the City would keep a regular check on whether the work is being done to specifications. Richard Allen advised that this would be one of the first projects under the City's new grading ordinance and since grading would be in excess of 5,000 cubic yards it would be defined as controlled grading with the applicant required to have an on site Civil Engineer to observe the work. This engineer would be required to submit to the City Engineer compaction and progress reports and it will be his responsibility to ensure that anything not according to specifications be reported to the City Engineer so that corrections can be made. Chairman Schick opened the public hearing and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Marty Rombotis, a Partner of Kamar Construction, the applicant, who advised they had reviewed the Staff report and agreed with it 100%. He also advised that their CCeR's already have the provision that RV parking is not permitted in the front yard setback. Since no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Based on the findings, and subject to the revision to Condition 6, the Commission adopted the following resolutions: RESOLUTIONS NO. 1713 AND 1714, APPROVING A 7 UNIT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF VALENCIA AVENUE BETWEEN PARK DRIVE AND SEVILLA WAY IN THE PC ZONE. MOTION: JOSE SECOND: LARSON AYES: CHAIRMAN SCHICK, COMMISSIONERS FRIESTEDT, LARSON, LEEDS AND JOSE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONER ROMBOTIS 4. CT 80-38/PUD-22, BIRTCHER - Request for a 20 lot tentative tract map and Planned Unit Development on property generally located on the south side of Palomar Airport Road in the PM Zone. Mike Holzmiller, in his introductory report, expressed the fact that the development meets all standards of the PM zone and also appears comprehensively designed and compatible with the rest of the development in the Palomar Airport Business Park. Mr. Holzmiller indicated two minor concerns. The first involves pro- hibiting parking on the private street system, and it is suggested that the CCGR's actually have wording indicating parking to be prohibited and that they include enforcement of the prohibition. Page 4 The second concern is the intersection of Street A with Palomar Airport Road. It is recommended that this be restricted to right turns only becuase of the proximity of the proposed College Blvd. It is therefore suggested that modification be made to Condition No. 11 of Resolution No. 1716 by additional wording stating that if the future alignment of College Blvd. is located at least 2600 feet to the west or a distance acceptable to the City Engineer, then a signalized left turn in and out access is provided, the applicant shall install a traffic signal to the satisfaction of the City Engineer at that time. Mr. Holzmiller then detailed one further addition which has to do with facilities for reclaimed waste water should the City adopt a policy and standards relating to this. Bill Hofman then detailed the Staff report of October 22, describing lat sizes, giving reasons why the applicant is using the PUD process for the development of this project, and detailing the additional facilities of a private lake, equestrian and jogging trails and other recreational facilities. He also further raised the subject of the access on Palomar Airport Road. In response to a query by Commissioner Larson regarding Condition 9 on page 3 of Resolution 1716, Richard Allen indicated that the applicant would be required to provide curb along the entire frontage of the subdivision and provide landscaping for half the full length. In response to further inquiries from the Commission regarding - Palomar Airport Road, the question was raised about asking the applicant to participate in the Bridge study over I-5 and Richard Allen advised that, after re-reading the letter from the State, the City Engineer realized that a second condition is required. The first involved the City paying $10,000 to start an initial study and the second that the City Council pass a resolution that, in the event the State has no money to build the bridge, then the City would build it at its own expense. This would, therefore, indicate that the entire project is dead and it is understood that the previous requirements by the Commission for several applicants to fund this study will be deleted by the City Council. Chairman Schick noted a change was needed in Condition 9 on page 3 of Resolution 1717, and Mike Holzmiller advised this should read Public Resource Code Section 30170(E). Chairman Schick opened the public hearing and extended the invitation for the applicant, or his representative, to speak. The Commission recognized Bob Campbell of 27611 La Paz Road, Laguna Niguel, the applicant, who advised they had no problem with the reclamation condition attached to this project but since they are presently in discussions with both San Marcos and Carlsbad relative to the clear water line coming through their _- property, he expressed concern about whether that direction is Page 5 in keeping with the policy the City is beginning to establish or whether there might be'some other element which they should consider. Since Staff was unable to answer this, it was suggested that they would keep the applicant informed of progress in the establishment of City policy in this regard and, in the meantime, the applicant could possibly be furnished with a copy of the study completed by the Consulting firm. Mr. Campbell advised that it was their intent to save as many of the oak trees as possible, although he would point out that there are sometimes difficulties in retaining these trees because of shallow roots. He then commented on the access to Palomar Airport Road and appealed to the Commission to allow them right and left turns, If this request was not granted then he would ask that the Commission direct Staff to proceed immediately in identifying placement of College Blvd. so it could be placed satisfactorily to allow them the entry requested. Since there were no other persons wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion centered on the proposed location of College Blvd., and the necessity of providing access to properties on Palomar Airport Road. Questioned on this, Richard Allen advised that there was no way of determining where College Blvd. would be since City Council would be making that decision. However, he suggested the possibility that the Commission direct Staff to prepare a study for the recommended alignment. The Commission felt the applicant should not be penalized since a study may not be completed in the near future, and thus, stated a right and left turn lane could be permitted by Palomar Airport Road. Based on the findings, and subject to the addition of the two conditions recommended by Staff, together with an additional condition regarding oak tree preservation in Resolution 1716, and the deletion of condition No, 11 which should be reworded by Staff allowing for left turns in and out and signalization, the following resolutions were adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 1716 AND 1717, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A 20 LOT TENTATfVE TRACT MAP AND A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, EAST OF YARROW DRrVE IN THE PM ZONE. MOTION: LARSON SECOND: ROMBOTIS AYES: COMMISSIONERS ROMBOTIS, FRIESTEDT, LARSON, LEEDS AND JOSE NOES: CHAIRMAN SCHICK RECESS The Commission recessed at 8:05 P.M. and reconvened at 8:20 P.M, Page 6 NEW DISCUSSION 5. MS-491, PACKARD - Request for a minor subaivision creating two lots, one of which will be a panhandle lot on property generally located on the south side of the intersection of Alder Avenue, Sunnyhill Drive and Monroe Street in the B-1-15,000 zone. Mike Holzmiller presented a statement on the matter and outlined the project. Bill Hofman made the Staff report nith the aid of wall map exhibits, and indicated that because of the dangerous manner in which the exit had been placed in the original proposal, the applicant had carried out a request to alter this by purchasing property from an adjacent owner to correct the problem and the project now meets all requirements. In response to a query by Chairman Schick regarding sidewalk requirements in the area, Richard Allen commented that the existing sidewalk near the sohool is a block away and it was not felt necessary this should be added at present. However, a condition requiring sidewalks to be added in the future has be8n included in the approval of the tentative parcel map. - dhairman Schiek then extended the invitation to the applicant, or his representative, to speak. The Commission recognized Bob Ladwig of Rick Engineering who advised that they were in accord with the conditions on this application and urged approval. Based on the findings, and subject to the condition regarding sidewalk, the Commission adopted the following resolution: W-491. PACKARD, RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CREATION OF ONE SPANHANDLE LOT AS PART OF A MINOB SUBBIVISION LOCATED ON THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF MONROE STREET, SUNNYHILL DRIVE AND ALDER AVENUE IN THE R-l-13,000 ZONE. MOTION: JOSE SECOND: LEEDS AYES: CHAIRMAN SCHICR, COMMISSIONERS BOMBOTIS, PRIESTEDT, LARSON, LEEDS AND JOSE. 6. PCD-3(E) - General Plan Consistency for a fj year Capital Improvement Program. Mike Holzmiller introduced this item and advised Joyce Crosswaithe would make the Staff presentation. - . _,_’ > c : ’ , .I .I,.’ !, .’ - _ ..’ : I , : ‘, .r-. Page 7. Ms. Crosthwaite opened by mentioning the deletion of ST16, a traffic signal, since part of the location is in the County. She outlined the Planning Commission's responsibility to determine if objectives are consistent with the General Plan as stated in the Staff Report. Should any project be altered or changed in any way it would come before the Planning Commission for determination. She then advised that she and Larry Dossey were willing to answer questions. Various aspects of the program were discussed and clarification sought concerning Signals ST1 and ST12, to which Larry Dossey replied that they were projects proposed and deleted for various reasons such as lack of funds. Commissioner Jose questioned the absence of a report on CF6 Aerial Truck, as shown on the diagram, and Ms. Crosthwaite advised this was part of the Capital Improvements Plan but it was debatable whether funds would be taken out of Capital Improvements or Capital Outlays. If it was eventually from Capital Improvements this would come to the Commission later. Further discussion then ensued regarding developer funded traffic signals and those coming out of the Capital Improvement Program. Chairman Schick referred to Parks, and in particular the Equestrian Trail system PR12. He mentioned the extent of the system as originally envisaged and the lack of guidance in this area to the Commission. Ms, Crosthwaite informed hiti that Parks 6 Recreation had given a very rough sketch of the proposed trail system and, - since they are now interviewing consultants, it will be brought before the Commission in the future when Staff has something definite to report. Larry Dossey then informed the Commission that there is no assurance that because a project is on this list it will ultimately be constructed since each item is subject to budgetary discretion of the City Council. Based on the Staff report and Commission discussion, the Commission adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION NO. 1718, APPROVING FINDING GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FOR A COORDINATED PROGRAM OF PROPOSED PUBLIC WORKS. MOTION: ROMBOTIS SECOND: JOSE AYES: CHAIRMAN SCHICK, COMMISSIONERS ROMBOTIS, FRIESTEDT, LARSON, LEEDS AND JOSE 7. REVISIONS TO CT 7945, RANCHEROS Bill Hofman presented the Staff report covering the two minor modifications to this project as approved by City Council and, with the aid of Exhibits X and Y, detailed the changes requested by the applicant. Since the time of Staff report, however, the City Attorney had advised this would require a Public Hearing so although their planning changes seem minor there does appear to be Page 8 a legal problem. The Assistant City Attorney said action on this item cannot proceed because there is a legal problem. The Subdivision Code firstly does not make any distinction between a major or minor change and, secondly, to revise a tentative map you must go through the process again and have another public hearing. At this point Chairman Schick expressed the opinion there might be a way to expedite the process and save the applicant time and money. The Assistant City Attorney said he had no argument with the changes proposed by Staff but the original conditions were very clearly stated and cannot be revised without a new public hearing. Commissioner Bombotis asked what sort of time frame would be required if a public hearing were to be scheduled and Mike Holzmiller advised the earliest would be the first meeting in December. Commissioner Larsen then asked what the time frame would be to change City code to permit minor changes to a tentative map without a new public hearing. Mike Holzmiller commented it would not save this applicant any time but might save time for future applicants. Chairman Schick then invited the applicant to speak. J3.m Qoff of La Costa Land Company expressed the feeling that a mountain was being made out of a molehill and quoted the State Map Act to the effect that a subdivider does not have to indicate the order he has to file his phases. He then raised the suggestion that a condition be placed on the approval to the effect that at the filing of the final map for Phase 1 if Alga Road and Melrose are not in then the applicant must make the connection. The Assistant City Attorney commented that,while this may alleviate some concerns the Commission or City Council may have, the problem with this application is that under present City procedures you cannot do it. The City of Carlsbad has an ordinance which says a developer must indicate some scheme of phasing and this scheme is clearly stated in the conditions. The Commission decided to take no further action on this application but recommended the item be returned as a Public Hearing as expeditfously as possible. NEW PUBLIC HEABING 8. MP-149(E). LA COSTA LAND COMPANY - Public Hearing Amendment to the Master Plan. With the aid of the overhead projector, Charles Grimm presented the Staff report detailing phases of development and pointing out increased densities a developer may be permitted under the Master Page 9 Plan concept compared with the standard development procedure. He expressed one area of concern regarding the difference between the 2% Public Facility Fee Counoil adopted and the 3.41% recommended by Staff to cover 100% funding of public facilities. The Staff report recommends the developer provide all street improvements up to and including secondary arterial roads, dedication of park land, and payment of the 28 Public Facilities Fee. A second concern is the issue of whether sohool sites should be dedicated in the Master Plan or whether existing City policy should be continued. He then went into detail regarding the four school districts in the area and their requirements for developers. Staff feels that the present system operated by Carlsbad School District of the school availability letter is adequate for La Costa and that sites be reserved rather than dedicated. A minor point Mr. Grimm raised dealt with the number of model homes in a development. It is felt that this section should read "A model of each type up to a limit of 4 with any over that number requiring approval by the Planning Director." Regarding the section concerning a library, Mr. Grimm commented that an inconsistency exists regarding the two year period for purchase of the site by the City since the Calavera Master Plan allowed a 10 year period. This may be excessive so possibly a f; year period oould be considered. Commissioner Friedstedt sought clarification on whether school sites should be dedicated or reserved and Mr. Grimm replied that, with the school availability letter, reservation will suffice. In response to a question from Commissioner Friestedt on the Density Bonus, the discrepancy between the Density Bonus in the housing element and the La Costa Master Plan, Mr. Grimm said these will both be considered by City Council and one or both will be changed so they agree. Commissioner Larson raised the question of allowing plans to be accepted by the Planning Director without evaluation by the Architectural Committee and queried that if this were accepted would they still need approval of the Committee. In reply Mr. Grimm advised that this was done to assist in any emergency situation encountered by the developer after which it would go back to the Architectural Committee. There was no intent to bypass the Committee. Commissioner Friestedt sought clarification on where the 50$ Density Bonus in the housing element came from as he recalled the Commission did not specify a figure but called for language that would provide for an increase in density. Mr. Grimm responded that the 50% increase was an arbitrary number selected by staff and may be changed by the City Council. - Chairman Schick commented on the good report and opened the public hearing. The Commission recognized Jim Goff of La Costa Land Company who expressed his pleasure with the manner in which this had been carried out and offered his full support of the Staff report. He felt that the modification to 5 years for the library site was acceptable as was the requirement for model homes. He further commented that he would await the City Council policy determination on the Public Facility Fee and he concurred with the conditions in the Staff report. Since no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. The Assistant City Attorney raised the subject of language in the text and felt there was a need for exactly saying what is intended. He felt that if the Commission were to approve the plan tonight they would allow staff to make some revisions with the applicant so the plan can accurately reflect what was detailed in the Staff report. &s further offered a recommendation that any increase of model homes from 4 to 6 should also require approval to be given by the City Attorney. D'iscussion ensued regarding clarity of verbage in the report and it was felt Staff would consult with the City Attorney to see this was adequately covered. It was also confirmed that when the resolution was brought back for approval by the CommisiaSon before going to the City Counoil it would have the addition of items disGussed this evening. - Based on discussions the following motion was approved: RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF MP-149(E), ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT A, DATED OCTOBER 10, 1980, REVISED SUBJECT TO T6E FOLLO'UJING CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND, IN ADDITION THERETO, THE ADOPTION OR CONSIDERATION OF THE REVISIONS AS PROPOSED BY STAFF FOR THE COMMISSION'S CONSIDERATION, PRIMARILY FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLARIFYING CERTAIN POINTS-OF CONCERN. MOTION: JOSE SECOND: BOMBOTIS AYES: CHAIRMAN SCHICK, COMMISSIONERS, ROMBOTIS, FRIESTADT, LARSON, LEEDS AND JOSE. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS Chairman Schick advised that sinoe this would be his last meeting he would like to take the opportunity to thank everyone for the experienoe of serving on this Commission and for their cooperation during his term as Chairman. Chairman Schick further commented regarding the development of a handbook for the City of Carlsbad. He advised he had been given a document which should be returned by the 29th along with review comments from the Commission in order to consolidate for a meeting on approximately November j. Probably in January there will be a Page 11 meeting and workshop of all Boards and Commissions within the City to discuss a finalized edition of the handbook. He felt this document would be of great value to citizens of this City in the discharge of their duties when they volunteer to serve. He advised he would submit the document back to the Commission in about a week with whatever changes he recommended in order to give other members an opportunity to make their oomments. The subject was then raised concerning the appointment of a Vice Chairman for the Commission and details were given of the duties required for this position. The nomination was then put forward by Commissioner Friestedt, and seconded by Commissioner Bombotis, of Commissioner Jose for the position. AYES: CHAIRMAN SCHICK, COMMISSIONERS ROMBOTIS, PRIESTEDT, LARSON, LEEDS AND JOSE. Mike Holemiller raised the question of a member of the Planning Commission acting as a representative on the Agricultural Advisory Committee. In this regard Commissioner Larson volunteered for this position and it was agreed that Commissioner Friedstedt would act as an alternate. Mike Holzmiller advised that there were items not involving speoific projects on whioh Staff feel the need of guidance from the Commission, and requested that at the November 12 meeting, in view of the light agenda, it would be appreciated if the Commission would be willing to hold a workshop session either prior to or after agenda items. It was agreed that the Commission would be willing to hold a workshop session after the regular agenda items at the November 12 meeting. The Assistant City Attorney advised that there has been some significant new legislation this year affecting the planning Their office is in the process of reviewing all these ~~?%'city Council and it was assumed that the Commission would wish to be included in the distribution. In the next week or two the Commission would be receiving a detailed document discussing these new laws and,the new responsibilities the Planning Commission will need to undertake in this respect. Mike Holtmiller raised the suggestion that this was something which could be discussed during the workshop at the November 12 meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES September 24, 1980 Page 9 - Commissioner Jose indicated that the number of the deleted condition was missing from Resolution No. 1700. Page 12 Page 16 - No second was shown for Resolution No. 1395(A). The Minutes of the meeting of September 24, 1980, were approved as corrected. MOTION: JOSE SECOND: LARSON AYES: CHAIRMAN SCHICK, CO!'IMIS3IONERS BOMBOTIS, FRIESTEDT, LARSON, LEEDS AND JOSE. October 8, 1980 Page 8 - Commissioner Jose indicated that no second was shown for approval of the Minutes of September 16, 1980. By proper motion the Commission adjourned at 10.10 P.N. until November 5, 1980, when discussion of the General Plan amendments will take place. Respectfully submitted, - JAMES C. RAGAMAN Secretary to the Planning Commission Page 13