Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-05-27; Planning Commission; Minutes, MINUTES .-- MEETING OF; PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: May 27, 1981 TIME OF MEETING: 7:00 P.M. PLACE OF MEETING: Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Marcus at 7:Ol P.M. ROLL CALL Present - Chairman Marcus, Commissioners L'Heureux, Friestedt, Rombotis, and Farrow. . Commissioner Jose arrived at 7:05 P.M. Commissioner Schlehuber arrived at 7:09 P.M. Ex-Officio member Dan Hentschke, Assistant City Attorne was also present. Staff members present were: Mike Holzmiller, Principal Planner Bill Hofman, Associate Planner Richard Allen, Principal Civil Engineer Charles Grimm, Associate Planner PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Chairman Marcus. PLANNING COMMISSION PROCEDURE Chairman Marcus explained Planning Commission procedures in its capacity as an advisory commission tc the City Council and identified those matters delegated to the Planning Commission for a final decision. Chairman Marcus further explained the procedure observe by the Commission during public hearing items. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. CT 81-2/CP-147, NEVIN. Request for approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map and Condo Permit to convert 40 apartment units to condominiums on the north side of Tamarack Avenue, between Jefferson Street and Hibiscus Circle, in the RD-M zone. With the aid of the overhead projector, the staff report was presented by Mike Holzmiller. He indicated that there may have been a misunderstanding either by Staff or the applicant regarding direction from the Planning Commission, when this item was previously considered and continued. He continued that it was Staff's feeling that the Commission directed the' applicant to work with Staff, in making some major comprehensive revisions to the proposed plan. Rather, only minor changes to the previously reviewed plan have been made. Mr. Holzmiller added that it appears that the applicant understanding of the Planning Commission's direction was just to attempt to revise the plan to meet the minimum storage area, and open recreation requirements of the Ordinance. He concluded that while these revisions may bring the project up to the technical, minimum square footage' requirements of the development standards, Staff does not feel that the project meets the intent of those standards. Further, Staff does not feel that the project satisfies the design criteria, pertinent to these and the overall amentities of owner- ship housing. Therefore, Staff is again recommending denial of this project. :OblMISSIONERS ' - ---- -r-’ -.- s x-!ass,- .-. “<+&&&& WINUTES - PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 2 Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 7:08 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Douglas Jensen, Attorney for the applicant. Mr. Jensen stated that it appeared that Staff's biggest concern was that of storage area. With the aid.of a wall exhibit, he pointed out that the new storage areas are located just off the patio for each unit, and also off the parking spaces for each unit. Mr. Jensen stated his opinion that the new storage areas, as set up now, are extremely convenient. Mr. Jensen also addressed Staff's concern that the units are not well integrated, and pointed out that the units are not built as small apartments. He stated the: are large three bedroom, two bath apartments, and briefly described the design of same. He explained thar these units were built to be converted to condominiums sometime in the future, and that is why they were built as such spacious units, Mr. Jensen continued, stating that with regard to storage area, recreation space, parking, and refuse, they not only meet all the requirements of the Ordinance, but they exceed those requirements. They also meet all the Uniform Building Code. requirements. He also indicated that they intend to do additional things to fix up the units, prior to their sale as condominiums. In conclusion, Mr. Jensen pointed out that the area of the Tamarack units are within the Coastal Commission, and currently they are requiring that one third of any converted units be sold to low income housing. Mr. Jensen also expressed the willingness to respond to any questions. The Commission recognized Cheri Sato, 1027 Malls, Carlsbad. Ms. Sato indicated she was a previous tenant in this apartment complex, and stated her opinior that it is apartment living. She spoke in opposition to the project, due to the problems with storage, and requested the Commission deny the request. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcus closed the public hearing at 7:17 P.M. In response to Commission query regarding deficiency of convenience, usability, integration, and access;.Mike Holzmiller explained Staff takes into consideration the location with respect to the units, and the size of the storage areas. He pointed out that the storage requirement is being met with storage in the carport areas, and Staff does not feel it is usable because of the narrow width. He further explained that the storage areas are also being placed on the front of the units, and Staff feels this is causing other design problems for the project. Therefore, Staff feels the applicant is not really presenting a plan that integrates the storage areas to the betterment of the project. Commissioner Friestedt pointed out that there are many previously approved condominium projects with a small storage area in the carport, and some other type storage area either in the unit, or adjacent to the unit, with- in the City of Carlsbad. , :OMMISSIONERS \; MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 3 Commission discussion reflected on the projects' compliance with the Uniform Building Code, and parking requirements.. Dick Corrigan, the project engineer, indicated that there was an error on the tentative map, in that the eight foot dimension should be eight and a half, with regard to the carport/storage area. Commission discussion then reflected the widths of the required parking spaces/carports. Commissioner Rombotis indicated that he was not satisfied that Staff or the applicant has presented a plan that is understandable, and suggested that a plan be submitted with the proper dimensions, .in order to make the finding that it does or does not meet the Condominium Ordinance. He suggested, due to the excessive width in the driveways, that the storage be enlarged and made usable. He concluded stating his feeling that the applicant has shown a lack of cooperation, and he concurs with Staff in that the storage is not usable for the majority of items that most people would store. Commissioner Jose indicated he concurred with the staff report,. in that this is somewhat of a band-aid approach to the solution of the problem, and feels the applicant has not arrived at a solution. Commissioner L'Heureux stated he concurs with Commissioner Jose. Commission discussion then reflected on the issue of amenities. Commissioner Farrow stated that in his opinion, the proposed storage does fit the requirements; and made reference to previously approved projects with similar type storage. He also stated he would like to see the applicant submit plans for the additional amenities such as barbeque pits, and some type of plot plan to indicate the type of landscaping on the project. Commissioner Friestedt stated that during the last Planning Commission meeting, the applicant was given very clear direction, and the Commission pointed out the need for communication between the applicant and the Staff. He inquired if the applicant had met with Staff since the last meeting. Dick Corrigan responded they have met with Planning members, not Planning staff; and he gave some backgroun on previous meetings with the Planning Department. He explained that the applicant feels they have done the best that they can, and that the project meets the criteria of the Ordinance as specified. Mr. Corrigan also indicated, in response to Commission request, that the applicant submitted a landscape plan for this project a year ago, and stated that Staff has it some- place. Mike Holzmiller responded that he was aware of the landscape plans, and indicated that they have attempted to make contact since the last meeting with the applicant, in accordance with the Commission's direction. He stated the only contact made was via telephone. :OMMISSIONERS y MINUTES -- l PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 4 .Mr. Holzmiller continued that Staff has indicated to the applicant the Commission's desire to see a comprehensive approach on the project; and explained to the applicant thatthe project would not receive a favorable staff recommendation, unless there was a comprehensive approach taken. He reiterated, that to his understanding, up to this time; there has only been t,elephone contac and further expressed the need for the applicant to sit down with Staff to work on the pla Commissioner Friestedt expressed to the Commission and the audience the willingness of the Commission to properly pursue good development in the City of Carlsbad. He added that when there has been a problem with an applicant ,or an application, and in meeting certain requirements, the Commission directs Staff to meet with the applicant in attempt to make the project meet the requirements for development, and be approved. He stated this was the intention of the Planning Commission if something can work. The Commission adopted the following Resolution, recommending denial of CT 81-2/CP-147 to the City Council based on the findings contained in the staff report: RESOLUTION NC. 1791, RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP AND CONDOMINIUM PERMIT TO CONVERT 40 APARTMENT UNITS TO CONDOMINIUMS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF TAMARACK AVENUE, BETWEEN JEFFERSON STREET AND HIBISCUS CIRCLE. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS: Chairman Marcus indicated.that the staff report would be presented for Agenda Item No. 2 (SP-180(A), KOLL COMPANY,) and then there would be questions from the Commission; then Staff would present the report for Agenda Item No. 3 (ZC-236/CT 81-10, KOLL COMPANY,) following questions from the Commission; at which time the public hearing would then be opened. 2. SP-180 (A), KOLL COMPANY. Request to amend Specific Plan 180 to relocate the commercial * area, to eliminate the mini-parks and make minor adjustments to the text. The staff report was presented by Charles Grimm, with the aid of the overhead projector. Mr. Grimm pointed out the following changes in the Specific Plan text, due to typographical errors, and several oversights on the part of Staff: Under the Table of Contents, on page ii, the reference to the Biological Resource should not have a line through it, as it will not be deleted. Also under the Table of Contents, on page iii, the reference to Figure 7 should not have a line through it, as it will not be deleted. On page 7 of the text, No. 2(b)(3), in reference to the final map, it should be underlined as it is new wording being proposed. # \ . :OMMISSIONERS Marcus L'Heureux Friestedt Rombotis Jose Farrow Schlehuber i WINUTES - -.- PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 5 On page 7a, sentence 2, the words "alternate connection should be replaced by the words "another additional connection;" and in sentences'2 and 3, the tiords "alternate and alternative" should be replaced with the word "connection." On page 27, which is the figure for the Vernal Pools, the "X" and the word "delete" will be eliminated, as Staff wishes to retain this particular figure in the Specific Plan text. The staff report was continued by Charles Grimm, with Bill Hofman using a wall exhibit to show the location of the proposal. The report was essentially as contained in the written staff report, with Mr. Grimm pointing out that the developer's proposal is anticipating the realignment of Los Monos Road, which is a future arterial shown on the General Plan. He also pointed out that at the last Council meeting, Council approved a sum of money for a study, to be done by the City Engineering Department, with regard to circulation of the entire City. It is anticipated that in the study, the realignment of Los Monos Road would be looked at very closely. 3. ZC-236/CT 81-10, KOLL COMPANY. Request for a. Zone Change from L-C (Limited Control) to C-M (Heavy Co&nercial-Limited Industrial) on approximately 194 acres of land, and a 115 lot industrial subdivision on 559.4 acres located west of El Camino Real and north of Palomar Airport Road. Bill Hofman referred to the memorandum of May 27, 1981, with regard to the revised conditions of CT 81-lO., Resolution No. 1810; which was distributed to“the Commission prior to the meeting. Chairman Marcus indicated there was an additional correction to Resolution No. 1810, on page 4, Condition No. 11; changing Lots 1, 2, and 5, 6; to Lots 1, 4, and 5, 6. Staff concurred. Bill Hofman then presented the staff report, with the aid of the overhead projector, essentially as in the written staff report. Mr. Hofman explained that the applicant has suggested to Staff a fire access road that will loop back to Street "N" (as was shown on the overhead projector,) from the end of the cul-de-sac. He continued that Staff feels that a loop street such as explained, is an acceptable alternative for access to lots along Street "B", if it is acceptable to the Engineering and Fire Departments. Mr. Hofman continued that if the Commission agrees, Staff would modify Condition No. 29 of Resolution No. 1810, which would require the installation of a loop street, prior to occupancy of any buildings on that street. Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 8:16 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Bernie Fipp, 7330 Engineer Road, San Diego; a Principal of the Koll Company. Mr. Fipp stated he was pleased to come before the Commission on the items, and indicated Bill Foley of Larry Seeman and Associates would comment on the items for discussion on the Specific Plan; and Bob Ladwig of Rick Engineerin] would comment on discussion of the tract map. :OHMISSIONERS, \ MINUTES I _-. t PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 6 The Commission recognized Bill Foley, of Larry Seeman and Associates, 500 Newport Center Drive, Suite 525, Newport Beach.; who indicated he was representing the Koll Company. Mr. Foley gave some background on the project, and indicated that working with the City Staff has been productive, and they are closer to a high quality-industrial park on the site than they were a year ago. Mr. Foley continued to address the location of the commercial, explaining that the issue came up as a result of discussions about the realignment of Los Monos Road, and Staff is correct, it was tied directly to the relocation of Los Monos Road. He stated at'the time they filed the application for the amendments, it appeared that the City was going to move ahead more quickly with the study of that possible realignment; however, the roadway question has been delayed. He stated their only request would be that some language was put in the Specific Plan that would create an either/or situation, to prevent that commercial that is currently there to be transferred automatically if Los Monos Road is realigned. He added that the applicant does agree with Staff, in that if Los Monos Road is not realigned, they would want the commercial t remain where it is currently. With respect to the mini-parks/park situation, Mr. Fole explained that the original Specific Plan called for th creation of eight small mini-parks scattered throughout the development. After some review, the applicant is convinced of the need for small recreation facilities, for employee lunching areas, and outdoor seating areas; and is fulfilled in most modern, industrial parks by private facilities that are installed by the industrial developers. The applicant feels it is needless to create separate areas outside the design of any individual lot, as they would also be difficult to maintain. He explained their original request to the Staff was not to reduce them, but to eliminate them altogether, in lieu that language be added to the Specific Plan that would encourage developers to provide private facilities. However, .Staff did not fee this was satisfactory. Mr. Foley continued to explain that the applicant feel' to put a large park in Phase I or II is a financial burden, and does not provide services or fulfil1 any needs that would not already be taken care of in the development of the park. He stated they would like to go back to the original proposal, and have the eight mini-parks; however, they are willing to discuss other alternatives in attempt to resolve the matter. He added that they are not willing to commit to putting in four half-acre parks, as Staff recommended, in lieu of eight 3000 square foot parks. On the noise issue, Mr. Foley indicated they do not feel any special agreements or requirements are necessary. He pointed out that the City's General Plan designated this as a special treatment area, and they feel the uses are compatible with the airport, which is an existing airport, and there is no residential. _ _. . - . :OMMISSIONERS ' MINUTES _ .-- _ - -.. I L PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 7 With regard to sidewalks, Mr. Foley indicated they woul like to request that sidewalks be built with one side- walk on one side of each street. He continued that at the same time that Staff is requesting sidewalks on both sides of "B" Street and College, they are adding language that will ban all parking on "B" Street and on College. He indicated they completely agree with this; their intent is to provide off-street parking. On the Vernal.Pools issue, he stated they are willing to work with Staff, and requested guidance from the Commission on same. Mr. Foley continued stating that the Specific Plan, and some of the conditions on the tract map refer to "maintenance by an association," and they are requestin that wherever this phrase occurs, it be replaced to read "maintenance by an association, or maintenance district." He explained they are still exploring the option of forming a maintenance district, which would have to be approved by the City; however, they would like the option open in the Specific Plan. Mr. Foley concluded by addressing the alternate connection down to Palomar Airport Road, stating that the Staff wording is somewhat confusing, and requested that it be addressed further. Mr. Foley stated they agree with all the other changes, and expressed the willingness to respond to any questions. The Commission recognized Bob Ladwig, of.Rick Engineering, 3088 Pio Pica Drive, Carlsbad. Mr. Ladwig referred to the tentative map conditions, and pointed out the following: On page 3, Condition No. 6, he indicated that they would like to add the ability to form a maintenance district, and stated they would conform to the City's policy on the formation of districts, and create public areas or easements adjacent to the right-of-ways, and include the area within the right-of-ways to be main- tained by a maintenance district. On page 4, Condition No. 12, Mr. Ladwig reiterated the comments of Mr. Foley with regard to noise, and stated they feel there is no need for this condition. On page 4, Condition No. 13, Mr. Ladwig referred to the last sentence, and indicated this is a brand new condition that has been implied by the City. He indicated they do not disagree with the condition, but are somewhat concerned, and would like to think about it further. On page 5, Condition No. 21, he indicated that they would agree with the dedication of access rights along El Camino Real; however, they would like to leave them off the map, adjacent to the commercial areas on College Boulevard; to'be placed on the map at the time, or dedicated to the City at the time the permit is required, or requested for development of those sites. - ~- --- -.- - MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 8 On page 5, Condition No. 22, Mr. Ladwig reiterated their request for sidewalks on one side only, as described by.Bill Foley. Mr. Ladwig stated they have talked with the City in the past about the possible deletion of medians on major circulation routes within the City, and feel there may be a change in the future that medians may not be required in all cases, and they would like the language inserted in the conditions of approval if possible so that if medians are not required in the future they would not have to come back and ,amend the conditions of approval. With regard to Condition No. 23 on page 5, Mr. Ladwig used a wall exhibit to show the connection that they are requesting. On page 6, Condition No. 29, Mr. Ladwig suggested alternative access routes, with the aid of a wall exhibit; and requested consideration of same. On page 7, Condition No. 36, he requested language be added to provide for a change in City policy, which would allow the deletion of medians. Also on page .7, Condition No. 38, Mr. Ladwig indicated their landscape architect, Tom VanDyke, suggested that the condition be amended to read, "All graded slopes lanted or hydro-seeded with a seed mix y the Parks and Recreation Department immediately after grading." Mr. Ladwig indicated the Fire Department had expressed concern over the response time to the project, and stated they have offered to the City, a portion of Lot No. 15, which could be purchased at the Koll Company's cost, for a future fire station site. He also stated his opinion that it is a key location for same. Mr. Ladwig concluded that they agree with the Staff's recommendations, and urged approval of the Specific Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and the Tentative Map. He also expressed the willingness to respond to any questions. Chairman Marcus inquired when the study of Los Monos Road would be completed, and Charles Grimm responded that Council had just approved the funding for the study, and they have to go through the process now of hiring a consultant, and setting a public hearing of the Planning Commission and City Council. Mr. Grimm gave a rough estimate of four to six months. The Commission recognized Brian Watson, Battalion Chief with the Carlsbad Fire Department. Mr. Watson stated that it is felt that a fire station in this general area of the airport is important, and is even better if Los Monos Road goes through. He also indicated that if Los Monos Road did not go through, it is still an ideal piece of property for fire department use. .~ - _... -- ..~~ - \ \ % A ? OMMISSIONERS I -*ei ,- I-._- ._*-._- --,-_ r*qlr-~v~rr ,..~.,~ ,“I__ “&,&l. l!VIBJ’UTES - ,---- -- PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 9 The Commission recognized Jim Hyatt, of Manhattan Beach; who indicated he does not feel comfortable with the plan, without access being provided to his property located adjacent to the subject site. The Commission then recognized Bill Mihalek, senior partner of El Camino Rental and Grading. Mr. Mihalek stated his opinion that this is a much needed develop- ment as far as the City is concerned, and feels the Koll Company has built some beautiful parks. Mr. Mihalek added that the area is very much in demand as far as industrial/commercial, and urged approval of the requests. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcus ciosed the public hearing at 8:58 P.M. RECESS Chairman Marcus called a recess at 8:58 P.M., and the Commission reconvened at 9:lO P.M., with all members present. Charles Grimm addressed the location of the commercial along El Camino Real, and the realignment of Los Monos Road; stating that these are significant enough issues to be handled separately. He reiterated that there is no guarantee that Los Monos Road will even be realigned, and feels it should be handled at the time that a change would be approved by the City Council. With regard to the mini-parks, Mr. Grimm explained that Staff's intention in the staff report relating to the 20,000 square feet was not that every park had to be 20,000 square feet, it was an approximate figure. He indicated that within the next week or so, something could be worked out with the developer on this particular issue. On the noise issue, Mr. Grimm indicated that Staff feels that the condition to hold the City and the airport harmless is an important condition. He stated that despite the applicant's comments that it is an industrial use and next to an existing airport, the reason for having a Specific Plan in this particular site, is due to the impacts of the airport. With relation to the sidewalks, Mr. Grimm indicated that Staff feels that sidewalks are important on both sides of the arterials, due to the price of energy; and the need for bus transportation is going to be much greater in the future. The City will attempt to encourage more people to travel by transit; therefore, along the arterials there will be transit routes, which will require sidewalks along both sides of the streets. On the Vernal Pools issue, Mr. Grimm indicated it probably would not be resolved at this meeting, and explained that the Army Corps of Engineers has eliminated their responsibility by not claiming jurisdiction, which puts it into the lap of the City of Carlsbad. He reiterated that no one on the Staff has the expertise to say they are insignificant, and the solution may be to work with the developer and have him hire a biologist to look at the Pools. :OT4!lISSIONERS ' -.. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 10 With regard to the alternate connection, Charles Grimm explained that Staff feels this is important, due to the fact that. the Coastal Commission may prohibit the connection of College Boulevard to the proposed project However, it is not Staff's intention to state that both the alternative route and College Boulevard will be developed; and the new wording is to reflect that College Boulevard will be developed sometime in the future. Dan Hentschke; the Assistant City Attorney, indicated that the Engineering Department had significant concern! with regard to the Los Monos Road connection; many of which were identified in the Environmental Impact Report. He continued to caution the Planning Commissior on making pre-commitments with regard to Los Monos Road, when the necessary preliminary reports such as Environmental Impact Assessments, and appropriate environmental documents have not been conceived of at this time. He added that the proposal to offer to the City the fire station site should be separated from the issue of Los .Monos Road. Mike Holzmiller indicated that even if the study shows that Los Monos Road should be realigned, the study may not recommend that it be a full intersection, and con- nect up with this development. He added that Staff's position is that there are so many "ifs," and they should not put flexible language in the Specific Plan at this time. He stated once everything comes together, if it is important for the developer or the City to have the connection, it should be on a separate Specific Plan Amendment at that time. With regard to the Vernal Pools, Mr. Hentschke- stated his opinion that the issue can not be resolved at this meeting; adding that he does not feel the environmental documents before the Commission are sufficient. Mr. Hentschke addressed the maintenance district, stat- ing that his office has not had adequate time to analyze the possibilities for use of a maintenance district for this project. He also suggested that the Commission not amend the Specific Plan to deal with a maintenance district at this time, due to this fact. With regard to the noise easements, Mr. Hentschke stated his office supports Staff's position. Commissioner Schlehuber indicated that he interpreted the maintenance district issue as an alternative on the part of the applicant. He added that he feels the language they are requesting is simply a potential alternative for the applicant to explore a maintenance district, and they want the alternative if it proves feasible. Dan Hentschke explained that there is a Council policy on this issue, and the Attorney's office has not had a chance to analyze the applicant's proposal carefully in relationship to the'council policy. He added that he is only attempting to advise the Commission that it does exist, and that it may be something the Commission may not want to pre-commit to without a further investigation. _ _.-. -~- t WINUT s - PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page, 11 Commissioner Schlehuber stated his opinion that it is reasonable to request a biologist at some future date to look at the vernal pools issue. Discussion then reflected on the individual Commissioner's feelings on the park issue. With regard to the question about mini-parks, Bill Foley stated they would work with Staff within the next 30 days, and most likely settle the issue in a half hour meeting or less. Bill Hofman then responded to some of the points brought out in Bob Ladwig's presentation. He.reiter- ated that Staff feels very strongly about having side- walks on both sides of a major arterial, for the reason of bus service, and he added that, they are attempting to encourage pedestrian circulation as much as possible Mr. Hofman addressed the requested revisions to the following conditions of Resolution No. 1810, as discussed by Bob-Ladwig of Rick Engineering: With regard to Condition No. 21, the applicant has indicated he would like to keep the access rights for the commercial property on College Boulevard. Staff would like to relinquish those access rights, because in this particular case, there is access off of Street "B", and there is secondary access from either cul-de-sacs or the loop street to the south. On Condition No. 22, Mr. Hofman had earlier discussed Staff's feelings with regard to the sidewalks; however, the applicant also indicated he would like a provision that would not require median islands, if they were not required by the City at a future date; and Staff has no problem with this. Condition No. 23 was one of the revised conditions passed out.to the Commission prior to the meeting, and the applicant indicated he agreed with the wording. Mr. Hofman continued that Staff has no problem with altering Condition No. 29, as requested by the applicant, dealing with the alternative access route, as long as it meets with the approval of the City Engineering and Fire Departments. With regard to Condition No. 36, Mr. Hofman indicated that Staff could live with the applicant's request to add wording to waive the medians if they are not required in the future. On Condition No. 38, Mr. Hofman indicated Staff agrees with the applicant's proposal to add the wording of "planted or hydro-seeded" to the condition. Mr. Hofman then addressed the comments on the El Camino Real intersection with the Fox property, and stated tha an access road design could be worked out at a future date, with the condition remaining as is. With regard to the access on the Hyatt property, Mr. Hofman indicated that the Commission might wish to consider how the property could achieve access. He added that at this time, Staff does not have a recommen dation, and ha&not looked at this in detail. :OI4NISSIONERS ' MINUTES , PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page.12 Commissioner Rombotis suggested providing a temporary access for this subdivision, with a permanent access comcng from the lower property. With the aid of a wall exhibit, Bob Ladwig responded to Commissioner Rombotis' suggestion, by showing an adjacent piece of property with a similar situation. Mr. Ladwig also indicated the applicant agrees with Commissioner Schlehuber, in that they are not asking fox a district; they just would like the language inserted that if they can meet the requirements, the maintenance district would be an alternative that the City would consider. Mr. Ladwig also explained that the applicant is not asking for the Los Monos connection; and indicated they had a traffic study prepared, and the traffic consultant feels it is a good location, and that the intersection spacing is adequate. Dan Hentschke, the Assistant City Attorney, stated he wished to point out something to the Commission with regard to both Los Monos Road and the maintenance district. He stated his position.was not one of opposition to either of those suggestions, but is simply pointing out to the Commission, as the Planning Director was not present at the meeting and there is no one else to give policy direction which he stated he should not be giving; however, the questjons are really major policy issues. He stated if the Commission d%d want to go a maintenance district route, it is a policy consideration; if they do want Los. Monos Road to go in, it is something that they consider great lengths before. Mr. Hentschke continued that there are times when once a condition is written into something, that becomes the way that it goes, and full consideration at the time of the original approval is not always given. He also pointed out to the Commission that our significant policy judges that have already been made by the City Council with regard to both of those issues. How the Commission resolves it, he does not have any recommen- dation one way or the other. With regard to previous comments on the easements or the agreement, Mr. Hentschke indicated that Condition No. 12 deals with that completely, and that is whenever the developer and the City Attorney's office work out as being satisfactory, whether it be an agreement in the CC&R's or an easement, it really does not matter. It is whatever is appropriate for this situation at that time. With regard to Condition No. 13, Mr. Hentschke stated there was not much he could tell the Commission; however, the comments made by Mr. Ladwig are true and he referred to the case of El Patio and the City of Santa Monica, in which it was said that cities can not impose conditions on the extension of tentative maps. He indicated it came as a .great shock to all the municipal attornies throughout the state, as they had always assumed that they could do this. The court specifically said that the City has the authority to deny extensions, and it does not have to be in the Code that extensions are permitted. OMMISSTONERS PINUTES - -.- PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 13 I Mr. Hentschke continued that the City can say that a tentative map will expire after 12 or 18 months, and there is no extension. He stated the reason they put that condition in, and it is part of a whole package tc deal with the El Patio case that will be going to the City Council very shortly; they do not know if it will work, whether it will be effective or not. He stated his office is of the opinion that the case was improperly decided. He added that it is a bad case decided on bad facts. had a condo conversion, It was a situation where they and they went through several procedures, and decided they were going to retroactive- ly apply rent control to it, and the Court saw that the City was being totally unreasonable, and that the developer was being totally reasonable. Because of this, the Court decided in favor of the develqper. Mr. Hentschke stated it was an uniortunate case from the City's standpoint, and there are discussions of legislative changes now to amend the map act to avoid that particular case. He continued that in the interim, what we are doing is coming up with a series of proposals including adding this condition in attempt to avoid the impact of the El Patio case, and they are also requesting that when extensions do come through, and the City does need to put new conditions on, that the developer sign an agreement basically waiving the rights that dre granted under El Patio. Mr. Hentschke explained that the only other choice that the City has is to simply do away with extensions of tentative maps. He stated this is a bad situation for developers, because at the end of the time period, they do not know what the economic situation or the development climate is going to be 1ik.e as they go through the proposal or the development of the project. When they get down to the end time, and don't have the necessary requirements to file their map, the map expires, and they have to pay all the fees, and go back through the whole thing all over again. He stated that is what they are trying to avoid by this condition Discussion then reflected access to the Hyatt property, and the sidewalk issue. The Commission recognized Tom VanDyke, a landscape architect, representing the Koll Company; who explained the reason they requested sidewalks on one side only was due to a communication with the North County Trans- it District on the matter. They responded that bus traffic through the project would be circulation through and not within. Traffic would be in one direction. Richard Allen explained that the engineering standards for public streets which have been approved by the City Council require a sidewalk on both sides of all public streets; therefore, the Planning Commission could recommend that those standards be changed. He added that Staff has been supporting deletion of sidewalks on one side on the local streets; however, on the main streets he feels the City should encourage pedestrian and bus traffic, and the maximum possible flexibility should be allowed, as we do not know what the future will be. Mr. Allen added that from a safety and engineering point of view, it is very important to have sidewalks on both sides. * \ :OMMISSIONERS . i t MINUTES - PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 14 Discussion reflected on the issue of noise impact, in relation to the advantages and disadvantages of grant- ing an easement versus a hold-harmless agreement; and the issue of 'the mini-parks. The Commission recognized Bernie Fipp, who addressed the issues of concern, noise and mini-parks; in relation to other Koll Company developments in San Jose and Orange County. He pointed out that in their experience they have not had one single complaint in ten years, from their developments, other than residential uses, around airports. With regard to parks, Mr. Fipp stated their biggest concern was with maintenance, and the probability that the parks will end up being trash collectors. He also pointed out that the kind of industry that will locate in the area will have to, in order to be competitive in their field, provide these kinds of facilities. The Commission recognized Tom VanDyke, who expressed concern over the mini-parks located so close to major arteries. He stated the traffic loads generated on those streets are sufficient to create an uneasy situation, and the applicant does.not feel that the locations are conducive to passive recreation because of the traffic movement. The applicant feels that locations on-site that are effectively designed and provided passive recreation are a more effective way of solving the problem. Charles Grimm explained that eventually there will be very few neighborhood parks in the City of Carlsbad, due to maintenance costs to the City. He stated that as a result, we% are going to have to turn more to private industry to provide the smaller type parks, and one of the recommendations that is being proposed in the Parks and Recreation Element is that developers do provide some type of passive recreation. Commissioner Friestedt suggested clarifying the Commission's position on each of the concerns brought out during the discussion, and taking action on the applications. The Commission concurred. With regard to SP 180(A), there was a request from the applicant to change the language with regard to the alignment of Los Monos Road. Commissioner Friestedt suggested that it become a separate amendment to the Specific Plan; therefore, not committing the City to any alternatives. When the study is completed and the decision is made where the alignment will go, the issue will be addressed at that time. The Commission concurred. With regard to the issue of parks, Commissioner Friestedt stated that if the Staff and the applicant can go along with the 30 days, the question can be resolved now. The concensus of the Commission was that the applicant meet with Staff, and come to an agreement on the eight mini-parks, or the three and two concept; and report back to the Commission on same. On the issue of sidewalks, Commissioner Friestedt indicated he agreed with Staff; and the Commission concurred. - \ \ % 4 :OMMISSIONERS \; MINUTES - . -- PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 15 On the question of Vernal Pools, as pointed out by the Assistant City Attorney, the environmental issues have to be re-raised as the Army Corps of Engineers are not going to address the issue or hold jurisdiction. Commissioner Friestedt indicated that in 30 days, Staff would come back with a recommendation, following a review by a biologist. The Commission concurred. With regard to the maintenance district, Commissioner Friestedt referred to Mr. Ladwig's request to change the wording in Condition No. 6, Resolution No. 1810, to "an owner's association, or maintenance district." He stated he had no problem with this, as this is not asking that we have one, or even consider it; but it is an alternative.. The Commission concurred. On the issue of noise, Commissioner Friestedt stated he agreed with the developer, in that historically industrial users do not file law suits against cities. He suggested that we require the easement for protectio of the City against liability. Commissioner Rombotis stated his opinion that the condition, as written, adequately covers any concerns dealing with the issue of noise. Following brief discussion, the Commission concurred with Commissioner Rombotis and stated the condition should remain. The concensus of the Commission was to go with Condition No. 13 as written. With regard to Condition No. 21, Commissioner Rombotis stated he agreed with the developer, in that it should be handled at the time of site development of that commercial property. The concensus of the Commission; however, was to go with the condition as written. On Condition No. 22, the Commission concurred with the developer, in that if the medians'are not required in the future, the developer will not have to put them in. On Condition No. 23, Bob Ladwig indicated the applicant agrees with the revised wording as contained in the memorandum of May 27, 1981 to the Planning Commission. With regard to Condition No. 29, Commissioner Friestedt reiterated Staff's indication that they were comfortable with the loop street and emergency access, provided same was approved by the City Engineer and the Fire Department. With regard to Condition No. 36, the issue of the medians was addressed earlier; to be determined by the City Engineer. On Condition No. 38, the request was to add the wording "planted or hydro-seeded," to which the Commission concurred. In response to Commission query regarding the consideration for a future fire station, and the cost of the property to the City, the applicant agreed to offer the property to the City for a period of up to one year. Since Staff has to go back to discuss some significant changes on two of the issues, the Assistant City Attor-' ney suggested that the Commission continue all of the applications. \ :OMMISSIONERS MINUTES - PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 16 Mike Holzmiller indicated that Staff agrees with every- thing that the Commission has decided, with the excep- tion of one. He continued that Staff has overlooked providing some sort of access to the Hyatt property, and since the desire of the Commission was to continue the applications, Staff would request the opportunity to explore access to the property. The Commission continued Items No. 2 and 3 (SP-180(A), ZC-236, and CT 81-10) to the Planning Commission meet- ing of June 24, 1981; and directed Staff to return with documents at that time supporting the conditions, findings, and requirements of the meeting with the applicant, as expressed by the Commission; together with a report on the access to the Hyatt property. 4. CT 81-lZ/CP-159/SDP 81-1, ANDEN GROUP. Request for a 69 unit Tentative Tract Map, Condominium Permit, and Site Development Plan on property located on the northeast corner of Alga Road and El Fuerte Street, La Costa in the RD-M(Q) zone. Bill Hofman gave-the staff report on the matter, and included some background information on the project. With the aid of a wall exhibit, Mike Holzmiller showed the location of the project during the staff report. Mr. Hofman indicated Staff would like to add two conditions of approval, the applicant: based on past discussions with 1.1 That the driveway entrance be realigned to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 2) That the location of the bomanite pedestrian crossings be located subject to the approval of the Planning Director. Chairman Marcus opened the public.hearing at lo:38 P.M. and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Mike Rosten, representing the Anden Group; who indicated that the conditions in the staff report are a result of numerous meetings with all departments of the City, as well as input from the neighbors in the community that they have met with. Mr. Rosten gave a slide presentation to show the different views from the site, and the available floor plans. Mr. Rosten indicated that the project architect and engineer were both present, and available to respond to any questions. Bill Hofman indicated there was one condition that Staff has discussed with the applicant, Condition No. 5 in which the applicant has requested that same be amended to read, "The applicant shall pay park-in-lieu fees to the City, prior.to the approval of the final map as required by Chapter 20.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal-Code, the anplicant h greements that fman stated that Chapter 20<,44 allows for that agreement; however, the applicant has ind?cated the condition makes him mor comfortable, and Staff has no problem with same. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcus closed the public hearing at lo:50 P.M. c \ :OWIISSIONERS Marcus L'Heureux Friestedt' Rombotis Jose Farrow Schlehuber MINUTES -.- ! PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 17 The Commission adopted the following Resolutions, recommending approval of CT 81-lZ/CP-159/SDP 81-l to the City Council based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the staff report, with the amendments made by the Staff: RESOLUTION NO. 1811, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR A 69 UNIT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND CONDOMINIUM PERMIT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ALGA ROAD AND EL FUERTE STREET. CASE: CT 81-lZ/CP-159. RESOLUTION NO. 1812, APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DEVELOP A 69 UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ALGA ROAD AND EL FUERTE STREET. CASE NO: SDP 81-l. 5. SDP 77-1(D), CUP-201, FOTOMAT CORP. Request for an amendment to the approved Site Development Plan and a Conditional Use Permit for a drive- thru film processing and sales facility in West Bluff Plaza in the C-l-Q zone. Mike Holzmiller gave a report on the matter, essential1 as contained in the written staff report. With the aid of a wall exhibit, Bill Hofman showed the design and location of the building during the staff report. Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at lo:54 P.M. and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Cecil Green, 11953 Sproul St. Norwalk; representing the applicant. Mr. Green pointed out that the facility would not take away any parking in the center, and would make use of a piece of propert that has no value to the center as it currently exists. He complimented Staff, and expressed the willingness to respond to any questions. Commissioner Friestedt inquired as to the frequency per day of cars that would pass by the facility. Mr. Green responded that the volume forecast for the facility is approximately 50 cars per day, during 10 hours of operation. The Commission recognized Herb Goffstein, a tenant in the West Bluff Shopping Center; who spoke in opposition to the request. He read a petition opposing the. installation of the Fotomat facility in the West Bluff Shopping Center, which he indicated was signed by every tenant in the shopping center. Mr. Goffstein pointed out that the main concerns of the tenants were with the traffic situation, which is an existing problem. He made reference to accidents that have occurred in th parking lot, and requested denial of the request, due to the problem of traffic movement within the parking lot. The Commission recognized Bob Brady, 6905 #E Quail Pl., Carlsbad; who indicated he had part interest in the Ranch0 Market, and a strong interest in the future of the shopping center. Mr. Brady stated he is strongly in favor of Fotomat coming in, and also indicated he is aware of other tenants, along with himself, that did not sign the petition referred to by Mr. Goffstein. Marcus L'Heureux' Friestedt Rombotis Jose Farrow Schlehuber MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 18 Mr. Brady continued to state his opinion that Fotomat will provide a valuable source of traffic flow to the center, and indicated that the vacancy rate is high due to the fact that the center does not have enough viable businesses. Mr. Brady addressed the parking problem, and stated it was created by the employees of the center, as they park in front of the businesses. Mr. Brady also stated he has talked with some of the tenants who did sign the petition, and indicated they were not aware of some of the staff recommendations, and do feel the project makes sense. He concluded by requesting approval of the request. Mr. Green reiterated that the project would not take up any of the center's parking spaces, and would not affect the traffic situation, due to the low use of the facility. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcus closed the public hearing at 11:lO P.M. Commissioner L'Heureux indicated he would vote in favor of the request; however, expresse'd concern over this type of use in a shopping center, and suggested that the Planning Department provide an information report to the Commission for the first few years of operation. Commissioner Friestedt suggested that the applicant provide, on a volunteer basis, a report as to the frequency of use of the facility, to serve as an indicator to the City for future uses. Mr. Green responded they would be happy to provide same to the City, and indicated that after a year if it was found that the facility is causing problems, they would remove same. Commissioner Rombotis suggested that the Commission sit down with Staff to review the parking requirements for this type of center at a future date. The Commission concurred. The Planning Commission approved the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director, and adopted the following Resolutions, approving SDP 77-l (D) and CUP-201, based on the -findings and subject to the conditions contained in the staff report: RESOLUTION NO. 1806, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A DRIVE-THRU FILM PROCESSING AND SALES FACILITY ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE WEST BLUFF PLAZA PARKING LOT NEAR THE CORNER OF DOVE LANE AND EL CAMINO REAL. CASE NO: SDP 77-1(D). RESOLUTION NO. 1807, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DRIVE-THRU FILM PROCESSING AND SALES FACILITY ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE WEST BLUFF PLAZA PARKING LOT NEAR THE CORNER OF DOVE LANE AND EL CAMINO REAL. CASE NO: CUP-201. By minute motion, the'Commission directed Staff to coordinate with the applicant a car count tally over a period of one year, and report back to the Commission at the end of a years time as to the traffic count through this facility, and any complaints. :OFlMISSIONERS Marcus ' L'Heureux Friestedt Rombotis Jose Farrow. Schlehuber Marcus L'Heureux Friestedt Rombotis Jose Farrow Schlehuber MINUTES - PLANNING COMMISSION May 27, 1981 Page 19 RESOLUTIONS OF APPRECIATION: The Commission approved the Resolutions of Appreciation for Commissioners Anna Leeds and Eric Larson. ADJOURNMENT By proper motion, the meeting was adjourned at 11:18 P.M. Respectfully Submitted, JAMES C. HAGAMAN- Secretary to the Planning Commission Ann R. Alleman, Minutes Clerk :OMMISSIONERS ' Marcus L'Heureux Friestedt Rombotis Jose Farrow Schlehuber