Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-07-08; Planning Commission; Minutes-.- MINUTES I- . t MEETING OF: PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: July 8, 1981 TIME OF MEETING: 7:00 P.M. PLACE OF MEETING: Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chairman Friestedt at 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Present - Vice-Chairman Friestedt, Commissioners L'Heureux, Jose, Farrow, Schlehuber, and Rombotis. Absent - Chairman Marcus. Ex-Officio members James Hagaman, Planning Director; and Dan Hentschke, Assistant City Attorney, were also present. Staff members present were: Michael Holzmiller, Principal Planner Bill Hofman, Associate Planner Richard Allen, Principal Civil Engineer PLANNING COMMISSION PROCEDURE Vice-Chairman Friestedt explained Planning Commission procedures in its capacity as an advisory Commission to the City Council, and identified those matters delegated to the Planning Commission for a final decision. Vice-Chairman Friestedt further explained the procedure observed by the Commission during public hearing items. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Vice-Chairman Friestedt. Vice-Chairman Friestedt indicated that there was a notice in the local newspaper that addressed Administrative Variances, to be heard at this meeting. He explained.that it was an error, and the hearing will be held in two weeks. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. CUP-198, CITY OF CARLSBAD. Request for a two-fold conditional use permit to allow construction of: 1) temporary modular office structures to be located in and replace the rear Carlsbad Civic Center parking lot, and 2) a paved parking facility located on a thru lot between Laguna Drive and Stratford Lane immediately to the north of the Carlsbad Civic Center. With the aid of the overhead projector showing the location of the project and the parking lot design, the staff report was presented by Michael Holzmiller, essentially as contained in the written staff report. He pointed out that the City has entered into escrow to acquire the property immediately to the east of the subject property on Laguna Drive. If the acquisition of this property goes through, the City would then request that the additional property be used for parking purposes, or an expansion of the parking lot. He continued that this would require coming back to the Planning Commission at a later date for an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit. Vice-Chairman Friestedt opened the public hearing at 7:06 P.M and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Jess Alvarez, 1220 Stratford Lane, ' Carlsbad. Mr. Alvarez spoke in opposition of the project, due to the number of small children that reside in the area. ' :OklMISSIONERS ’ MINUTES t PLANNING COMMISSION July 8, 1981 Page 2 Mr. Alvarez stated that he did some checking, and found that the City owns some property directly east of the Library parking lot, that could be utilized for the parking lot. He stated his opinion that this piece of property is much better suited for a police parking lot, than what is being proposed. The Commission recognized Moe Marlin, 1365 Knolls, Carlsbad; who indicated that he also owns property that abuts on Stratford Lane at the top of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Marlin stated his opinion that a parking lot is not compatible with an R-l zoned area, and feels there are more suitable places in the City for same. The Commission recognized Robert Cook, 1195 Stratford Lane, Carlsbad. Mr. Cook spoke in opposition to the project, and stated he felt there were more suitable places in the City for this type of use. The Commission recognized Hugh Singleton, 1235 Stratford Lane, Carlsbad; who indicated that he is also representing his wife, in opposition to the request before the Commission. Mr. Singleton read a letter from Vera E. Huffaker, of 1275 Stratford Lane, who was unable to attend the meeting due to an illness; in which she states her opposition to the use of R-l property on Laguna Drive and Stratford Lane for any purpose, other than residential use. Mr. Singleton continued, stressing that the property in question is R-l property, and requested that City Hall properties stay south of Laguna Drive. He stated his opinion that the request before the Commission is a bandaid approach, and with the aid of a wall exhibit, Mr. Singleton suggested an alternative to the proposed parking lot. In conclusion, he requested denial of the application. The Commission recognized Joy Crowell, 1236 Laguna Drive, Carlsbad. Ms. Crowell indicated that she lives next to the proposed parking lot, and is in opposition to same. The Commission recognized Lynn Alvarez, 1220 Stratford Lane, Carlsbad. Mrs. Alvarez read the requirements for granting a CUP, and stated that approval of this request will be detrimental to the residents of the area. She also expressed concern that the lighting from the parking lot will disturb some of the residents, along with the change of shifts at the police department. She referred to the project as an attractive nuisance, and stated it will create a hazard for the children in the area. In conclusion, Mrs. Alvarez stated that there is a home on Stratford Lane that houses mentally retarded young people, and she is concerned for their safety. The Commission recognized Lowell Rathbun, 1266 Stratford Lane, Carlsbad. Mr. Rathbun pointed out that everything north of Laguna Drive is zoned low to medium density residen- tial, and feels that this is the begining of a situation that can continue. Mr. Rathbun inquired how much space the City owns on Elm Avenue, east of the fire station that might be utilized for parking. Bill Baldwin, Assistant City Manager, responded that there is a 50 by 70 foot strip, which the City is planning to put a modular unit on for use by the Fire Marshal's office. He . added that on the north side of Elm Avenue, above the Library parking lot, there is also a 130 by 40 strip of property that the City purchased with the intent of acquiring land to the 5 % . \ \’ ‘\\\ CA y ‘fl f$ (_?.! :O~lMSSIONERS % --~- -I MINUTES -.- ,f. : 5 PLANNING COMMISSION July 8, 1981 Page 3' north of that portion; however, were unable to do so, and it is not suitable for use as a parking lot. In conclusion, Mr. Rathbun requested denial of the request. The Commission recognized Robert Hoover, 1250 Stratford Lane, Carlsbad. Mr. Hoover explained that he purchased this property as it was in an R-l area, and is building his home at the present time. He stated he has two children, and feels the area is a very desirable residential area. Mr. Hoover inquired if the City has thought about leasing the property north of the Library. He added that he has information that the property east of the Library is 219 feet long, and 126 feet wide at one corner, and 66 feet wide at the other; which.was obtained from the City Clerk, Vice-Chairman Friestedt, for clarification purposes, explained that the issue before the Commission at this meetin is the discussion of the PUD, as opposed to the City leasing or acquiring other properties. The Commission recognized Bill Baldwin, 4036 Baldwin Lane, Carlsbad; Assistant City Manager. .Mr. Baldwin stated he wished to clarify that the City does not own the property referred to by Mr. Hoover. The City does own a small piece ,of property on the north side of Elm Avenue; however, it is not 219 feet long. The Commission recognized Edward Pearcy, 1270 Stratford Lane, Carlsbad; who requested to go on the record as opposing the whole application, including the parking lot. The Commission recognized Earl Sergeant, 1215 Stratford Lane, Carlsbad; who requested to go on the record as opposing the parking lot situation.'- The Commission recognized Diane Packard, 1240 Stratford Lane, Carlsbad; who requested to go on the record as opposing the application. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Vice-Chairma Friestedt closed the public hearing at 7:39 P.M. With regard to the space study and future of City Hall, Commissioner Rombotis inquired if there was a Master Plan for the area. He expressed concern that same is going to be a piece-meal type operation, and stated he could not justify it unless Staff could show that it is an interim measure. Ron Beckman, Assistant City Manager, addressed the Commission, and explained that the plan that went before the Council on July 6, 1981 indicated the proposal for modular facilities and development of the parking lot. He stated the price quoted was approximately $200,000; however, this included the cost.to purchase the modular facilities, furnishing the modular facilities, and remodeling City Hall. Mr. Beckman continued, explaining that the City proposes to expand the City Hall facilities to west of where they now exist, over the existing parking lot. This is to include in-structure parking, with office space on top of the structure. During the construction period, the 84 spaces that now exist in the parking lot, would be lost, and it is hoped to retain some of those spaces through the 62 spaces proposed.between the Laguna Drive and Stratford Lane area. \ . \ % i d :OflMISSIONERS MINUTES - PLANNING COMMISSION July 8, 1981 Mr. Beckman added that the expansion of City Hall would follow the acquisition of property and construction of a police facility. In response to Commission query, Mr. Beckman explained that they are proposing to build block wall on the north, east, and west sides of the parking lot, with controlled gates on the Laguna Drive frontage. They would be open during normal business hours, locked up at night, with access by police for their patrol vehicles. Commissioner Jose inquired what is proposed for the existing gas tanks at the police facility, if the modular buildings go in. Mr. Bec.kman explained they will attempt to relocate a larger facility on the property immediately north of the Parks and Recreation area. Commissioner Jose then inquired what the City intended to do with the piece of property east of the Library and north of Elm Avenue. Mr. Beckman indicated that all he can do is speculate; however, he hopes the City can do some land swapping with some adjacent property. He explained that the intent when the City purchased this property, was to purchase the adjoining property; however, as it exists now it is very narrow and not readily usable for parking. In response to Commission query, Mr. Beckman explained that if the Commission denies the use on the lot, it would be appealed to the City Council; and if.Council upheld the Commissions' decision, they would have to come up with another plan. However, he added that there are no other reasonable alternatives in an area that would be convenient to the police facility. Commissioner L'Heureux requested information on the two modular structures. ,Mr. Beckman explained that they propose to build, purchase, and install facilities similar to the one that Personnel and Building are currently in. He passed around a site plan for the Commission to review, which showed the location; and explained the uses of same. Commissioner L'Heureux referred to Condition No.' 3 of Resolution No. 1814, and inquired if the intent was that the CUP shall expire five years from the date of the Resolution or when permanent facilities are completed, "whichever occurs first." Staff responded that it was their intent. Commissioner L'Heureux also inquired as to the meaning of "permanent facilities," in Condition No.. 3 of Resolution No. 1814; and Staff explained that it dealt with the expansion of City Hall. In response to Commissioner query regarding lighting, Mr. Beckman explained that they have not completed the.design plans until they receive approval of the CUP; however, the intent is to put low level lighting, similar to that in the Library parking lot. Discussion reflected the individual Commissioners' feelings on the application, and the possibility that the use may not be terminated in five years. The concensus of the Commission was the concern that the City has no plans or commitments for long range expansion, other than the proposed "bandaid" approach. NLINUTES .- -.- PLANNING COMMISSION July 8, 1981 Page 5 The Commission inquired if the Police Department could operate with the modular facilities alone, without the parking lot. Police Chief Jimno responded that they would have to, otherwise they would have to separate units of the Police Department into other areas of the City; separating the efficiency factor of the Department. He added that they have no choice, as they are in need of the space. The Commission directed Staff to bring back a Resolution approving the modular units for five years. The Commission directed Staff to bring back a Resolution of denial for the parking lot located between Laguna Drive and Stratford Lane. The concensus of the Commission was that they did not concur with Findings No. 1 and 2, as contained in Resolution No. 1814. RECESS Vice-Chairman Friestedt called a recess at 8:06 P.M., and the Commission reconvened at 8:12 P.M., with six members present. 2. ZC-238, PONDEROSA HOMES. Request for'a zone change from P-C to O-S north of Cayenne Lane and La Golondrina Street in La Costa. ._ With the aid of the overhead projector showing the location of the project, the staff report was presented by Michael Holzmiller, essentially as contained in the written staff report. Vice-Chairman Friestedt opened the public hearing at 8:14 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized George Putnam, 2082 Business Center Drive, Irvine; Senior Regional Vice-President of Ponderosa Homes. Mr. Putnam stated the General Plan and the zoning is consistent, and they believe the application satisfies the conditions of the Tentative Tract Map. In conclusion, Mr. Putnam expressed the willingness to respond to any questions. The Commission recognized Mary Holcomb, 2713 La Golondrina, Carlsbad; Treasurer of the Homeowners Association. She stated that the area they want to zone open space was never deeded to the Homeowners Association, as called for per all of their escrow instructions. Therefore, the Homeowners Association will not maintain or preserve the open space as called for in Section 3, Item 3 of the Ordinance. Ms. Holcomb continued to explain that Item 5 of Section 3 of the Ordinance is an agreement that the City made with Ponderosa Homes in 1974, where the open space zoning was for an easement deed. She stated that this has not been complied with. Further, Unit 2 was not started by April 1978 and the Homeowners Association feels the agreement is not . valid, and does not feel it should be zoned open space now. \ - \ % d . :OtlMISSIONERS Friestedt Jose L'Heureux Rombotis Schlehuber Farrow Friestedt Jose L'Heureux Rombotis Schlehuber Farrow MJNUTES / . I I t ! j. ‘1 D PLANNING COMMISSION , July 8, 1981 Page 6 Ms. Holcomb stated that the City was granted a deed easement in 1978, and there is a question as to the validity of that easement. She indicated that at that time, the land should have been owned by the Homeowners Association; however, it was never deeded to them. In conclusion, Ms. Holcomb stated that the Homeowners Association is requesting that the City postpone any decision as they have hired an Attorney who is looking into the matter. The Commission recognized Steve Walsh, 6437 Cayenne Lane, Carlsbad. Mr. Walsh stated his opinion that the area that is to be rezoned to open space, is not usable as open space. He indicated that there is a severe embankment, with 8 foot weeds; and added they have had the Fire Department out to look at same, however, they will not deem it a fire hazard as the weeds are still green. Mr. Walsh continued to explain that at the time they bought this property, Ponderosa Homes indicated that the banks would be maintained by them, until such time as they were turned over to the homeowners in a presentable condition. He added that as far as he is concerned, Ponderosa has made no attempt to maintain the property for the past three years. Mr. Walsh stated his opinion that if the development is going to be zoned open space, the open space should be usable. In conclusion, he requested a postponement on City action, until the Homeowners Association can come to an agreement with Ponderosa Homes. The Commission recognized Mary Holcomb who inquired if it is zoned open space, will the City give up its' easement. For clarification purposes,,. the Assistant City At-torney explained that an easement is a particular property right to use property in a particular manner; and the underlying fe' ownership is in A. D. Realty or Ponderosa Homes. The owner- ship of the easement grants the right to the public to have the open space in perpetuity. He added that the question of zoning is a different issue from the question of ownership of the easement of the underlying fee. Vice-Chairman Friestedt explained that an easement itself does not constitute an ownership or a fee to the property, but provides a right to the users of the public. The Assistant City Attorney continued, with regard to the transfer from Ponderosa Homes to the Homeowners Association, of the underlying fee, the easement will show up on the title report, but should not be an impediment to the transfer of the underlying fee. The deed will transfer subject to that easement. Mr. Hentschke stated that assuming the Homeowners Association gets title to the underlying fee, the easement itself may not be an impediment to the transfer to the individual home owners, but the original condition of approval on the subdivision tract would be an impediment. Mr. Hentschke explained that even if the Homeowners Association owned the land, there would be little they could do with the land zoned P-C, becuase of the original condition, of approval on the Tentative Map, and the Site Plan for that area. -- : \ :OMMISSIONERS -- c- ..z.. L-. I k I i i i i i I i i f ? i t M.INUTES - -.- PLANNING COMMISSION July 8, 1981 Page 7 The Commission recognized John Griffith, 2718 La Golondrina, Carlsbad. Mr. Griffith indicated that the home owners have' some issue.s to resolve with Ponderosa Homes, and they are not part of the Cityis problem. However, he stated once the zoning is changed, the home owners feel they will have'very little control over getting the embankments into a condition that would be acceptable to the individuals who live along them, and who will end up having to pay to maintain them. In conclusion, Mr. Griffith stated that their concern is that they do not want Ponderosa to procee,d, until these issues are resolved. Vice-Chairman Friestedt explained that the zoning by the City would have no affect on the deeding or ownership of the property ing,question. With regard to the maintenance, he explained that the City is not at issue with the Homeowners Association or Ponderosa Homes. Mr. Griffith requested that the Commission table-this item until the people affected here feel that they have been able to get the matter resolved with Ponderosa Homes. The Commission recognized Athis Genestris, 6435 Cayenne, Carlsbad; who explained that the reason the home owners came before the Commission was due to the fact that they thought that the City had something to do with the approval of development of Unit 2, which is what they are attempting to delay, until they reach an agreement with Ponderosa Homes. The Assistant City Attorney explained that the issue before the Commission at this meeting is the issue of whether as a planning matter, the land in question is more appropriately zoned open space, or more appropriately zoned planned community. He continued that the issue of the final map is not before the Commission at this meeting, and is approved by the City Council, assuming that all the conditions of the Specific Plan and the Tentative Map have been substantially complied with by the subdivider. Vice-Chairman Friestedt reiterated that the matter before the Commission at this meeting is the rezoning, and the concerns that the home owners have directly with the applicant, Ponderosa Homes, should be addressed to them. The question of this causing automatic approval of the final map is not correct; as Ponderosa Homes must come before the City Council and demonstrate that they have complied with the conditions of approval on that map, at which time they will request through application that the final map be granted. He continued that that would be the time for the home owners to express their concerns regarding the final map. The Commission recognized Ed Labigay, 6435 Fiamengo, Carlsbad; President of the Ranch0 Carillo Homeowners Association. He referred to lots 254 and 255, and stated that in the CC&R's they were designated as common area for people to use and enjoy. However, he stated this was not possible, because it is a bank that they have no access to. In conclusion, he requested postponement of this item, until such time as the Association Attorney and the Attorney for Ponderosa Homes can resolve the matter. Steve Walsh addressed the Commission again, and expressed concern that some of the homeowners own their banks, and some do not. He also expressed concern over the current condition of thebanks. MINUTES - -.- PLANNING COMMISSION July 8, 1981 Page 8 Commissioner L'Heureux pointed out that when this development was approved, the map showed open space; however, it was not necessarily usable open space. The Commission recognized Sue Yates, 6429 Cayenne Lane, Carlsbad. Ms. Yates stated she has talked with members of the Parks and Recreation Department, and they informed her that this was approved in 1973, and that so much open space did have to be allowed to the City. She also expressed concern that Ponderosa was to build Unit 2 by 1978, and they have not done so. Therefore, the Homeowners Association feels that the City could give them some usable open space. Vice-Chairman Friestedt indicated that the City could not give them usable. open space. In conclusion, Ms. Yates requested that this item be continued, until such time as they could present the matter to the City Council. The Planning Director explained Planning Commission procedure with regard to a zone change for clarification purposes. The Commission again recognized George Putnam, representing Ponderosa Homes. Mr. Putnam explained that the map was approved several years ago, and they did not violate the conditions by not building the tract. He stated that the City of Carlsbad, out of public necessity, established a moratorium on the property, and they were not 'able to finish the slopes on this particular piece of property. He continued to explain that State Legislation was passed which provided that any tract map that was in a moratorium, after same was lifted, has an additional period of time to record the final tract map. ._ Mr. Putnam further explained that they are consistent with the General Plan, and he stated all they are trying to do is meet the conditions of the Tentative Tract Map. One of the conditions, as placed by the City of Carlsbad, to guarantee the use of permanent open space, not necessarily for recreational use, was to rezone the property to open space. In conclusion, Mr. Putnam stated that they are in agreement with the staff report, and indicated that they would be more than happy to plant the banks, grade the property, and put in the irrigation to finish the tract, if they are given the permission to proceed. The Commissibn recognized Charlie Billingsley, 6425 Cayenne Lane, Carlsbad. Mr. Billingsley stated that as it stands now, Ponderosa Homes is responsible for the maintenance of this open space, and if this application is approved, they will start building. Vice-Chairman Friestedt intervened to explain that the approval of the granting of the open space does not authorize the applicant to continue building the final sub- division. He again explained that the applicant has to go before the City Coun+.l in a separate action, and request the final map of that subdivision. Mr. Billingsley pointed out that his concern was that the- Homeowners Association would be responsible for maintenance of the open space, once development continues; and they are ' concecned_lwith the current condition of-same, as it is not what it should be. l :OMI’1ISSIONERS \; -. . NLINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION July 8, 1981 Page 9 Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Vice-Chairmar Friestedt closed the public hearing at 8:58 P.M. The Commission adopted the following Resolution, recommending approval of ZC-238, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein: RESOLUTION NO. 1830, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A ZONE CHANGE FROM P-c (PLANNED commITy) To o-s (OPEN SPACE) ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF CAYENNE LANE AND LA GOLONDRINA STREET. APPLICANT: PONDEROSA HOMES 3. CT 81-24/CP-6(A), ROSE GARDEN. Request for a tentative tract map and amendment to a major condominium permit to split a.23-unit condominium project into two parcels for phasing purposes on a 2.85 acre condominium lot immediately west of Zamora Way between Alicante Road and Almaden Lane in the RD-M zone. With the aid of the overhead projector showing the location of the project, the staff report was presented by Bill Hofman, essentially as contained in the written staff report. Vice-Chairman Friestedt opened the'public hearing at 9:Ol P.M, and extended the invitation to speak. The Commission recognized Bruce H. Wyman, 9373 Hazard Way, Suite 204, San Diego. Mr. Wyman indicated he was the engineer on the project, and expressed the willingness to respond to any questions. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Vice-Chairmar Friestedt closed the public hearing at 9:02 P.M. The Commission adopted the following Resolution, recommending approval of CT 81-24/CP-6(A), to the City Council based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the staff report: RESOLUTION NO. 1829,.RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A REQUEST FOR A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND AMENDMENT TO A MAJOR CONDOMINIUM PERMIT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED IMMEDIATELY WEST OF ZAMORA WAY BETWEEN ALICANTE ROAD AND ALMADEN LANE. APPLICANT: ROSE GARDEN PARTNER- SHIP. ITEM OUT OF ORDER Vice-Chairman Friestedt indicated he had received a request to hear Item No. 4 at the end of the agenda. The Commission concurred. NEW DISCUSSION ITEMS 5. PCD-30, MUSSER. Request for a Planning Commission determination to construct an eight foot fence on the north side of Pine Avenue in the R-1-7500 zone. . With the aid of the overhead projector showing the location of the request, the staff report was presented by Michael Holzmiller, essentially as contained in the written staff report. Mr. Holzmiller indicated that the primary concern of Staff is that approval of this request would set an undesir- able precedent. :OMMISSIONERS y Friestedt Jose L'Heureux Rombotis Schlehuber Farrow Friestedt Jose L'Heureux Rombotis ' Schlehuber Farrow IMINUTES \ - PLANNING COMMISSION July 8, 1981 Page 10 Sheila Musser, 1232 Pine Avenue, Carlsb,ad; addressed the Commission, and indicated that she was also speaking for her husband. She passed around some pictures depicting her residence,. and the need for such a fence, to the Commission. With regard to Staff's finding that the fence would have a detrimental visual impact on the surrounding properties, Mrs. Musser explained that the property to the east of her cannot see where they propose to construct the fence, as her house and garage blocks their view. She stated that the property on the west agreed the proposed fence would be no problem, and indicated concern only if it was to be a solid fence; which is why the applicant decided on the wire fence. She added that the property to the rear of her property has an existing six foot fence. Mrs. Musser continued to explain that other properties in the area have had fences approved that are higher than six feet, for similar reasons. With regard to Staff's finding that there are no unusual circumstances that would justify the construction of an eight foot high fence, Mrs. Musser explained that directly to the rear of her property there are at least four rentals, which they feel is a business due to the traffic generated. Mrs. Musser concluded that a six foot fence, as proposed by Staff, would not block the sight and noise from the freeway. With regard to Staff's feeling that such a fence would set an undesirable precedent, Mrs. Musser stated her opinion that a precedent has already been set, as there are other eight foot fences in the area. Commissioner Farrow inquired if the applicant had received a letter of approval from the neighboring resident to the west of her property. Mrs.'*Musser explained that her neighbor to the west had indicated he could approve of the proposed fence; however, he did not wish to put it in writing in the event that the Mussers' sold their property, and the new owner came in and decided to put in a solid fence, which he would object to. Commission discussion reflected the individual Commissioners' feelings on the need for and the type of fence proposed. The concensus of the Commission was that there were unusual circumstances, and that approval of an eight foot fence could be justified. Vice-Chairman Friestedt inquired if anyone else in the audience wished to speak on the matter. With a negative response, he closed the public testimony. The Commission directed Staff to bring back a Resolution approving PCD-30, which would allow the construction of an eight foot fence. 6. PCD-31, FREEHOF. Request for approval of a Planning Commission Determination to relocate an office building on the east side of Harding Street between Elm Avenue and Oak Avenue in the R-P zone. With the aid of the overhead projector showing the location of the project, the staff report was presented by Bill Hofman;-essentially as contained in the written staff report. : \ OHMISSIONERS Friestedt Jose L'Heureux Rombotis Schlehuber Farrow MINUTES - . . -.- PLANNING COMMISSION July 8, 1981 Page 11 Burt Freehof, 3030 Harding Street, Carlsbad, addressed the Commission. Mr. Freehof indicated he was in agreement with the staff report, and expressed the willingness to respond to any questions. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Vice-Chairma Friestedt closed the public testimony. The Commission adopted the following Resolution, approving PCD-31, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the staff report: RESOLUTION NO. 1828, APPROVING A PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINATION TO RELOCATE AN OFFICE BUILDING FROM ITS EXISTING LOCATION, ONE LOT SOUTH, TO PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON.THE EAST SIDE OF HARDING STREET BETWEEN ELM AVENUE AND OAK AVENUE. APPLICANT: FREEHOF 7. PCD/GPC-11, CITY OF CARLSBAD. General Plan Consistency Determination for land acquisition. Michael Holzmiller explained that this is a request for the Planning Commission to find that the acquisition of the Macario Canyon property for park purposes is in conformance with the General Plan, before it is acquired by the City. The Commission adopted the following Resolution, finding that the proposed land acquisition of the 274-acre Macario Canyon area for park purposes is consistent with the General Plan: RESOLUTION NO. 1831, FINDING THAT THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY FOR PROPOSED PARK PURPOSES IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN. APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD ADDITION TO AGENDA - Pea S&..A&lersen Vice-Chairman Friestedt explained that discussion was held at the City Council meeting of July 7, 1981, and Pea Soup Andersen addressed two concerns with regard to their Specific Development Plan. With the aid of wall exhibits, Michael Holzmiller continued to explain that Pea Soup Andersen is requesting some modifications to some of the required public improvements. Council agreed with those modifications; however, two of them could not be approved unless the Planning Commission found that they were minor changes to the conditions of approval of the Site Development Plan. With the aid of wall exhibits, Richard Allen explained that the developer wishes to delete the median on Paseo De1 Norte along the entire frontage, except for from Palomar Airport Road up to their first main driveway, Avenue of the Flags, where a median is required for left turn pockets. He added that Staff has no objection to this change. The second change, Mr. Allen explained, was that the developer is requesting to stage a sidewalk on the west side, concurrent with the building. He stated Staff has no objection to this change. The Commission found that the changes are minor in nature to the Site Development Plan. :OMflISSIONERS \ Friestedt Jose L'Heureux Rombotis Schlehuber Farrow Friestedt Jose L'Heureux Rombotis Schlehuber Farrow Friestedt Jose L'Heureux Rombotis Schlehuber Farrow :;iw I”;-- I t .* ,. MINUTES ; . I 1 -.. 1. I PLANNING COMMISSION July 8, 1981 Page 12 CONTINUED DISCUSSION ITEMS 4. SDP 81-2, BANDEMER. Request for approval of a conversion of an existing single family residence to a professional office located on the east side of Jefferson Street, between Laguna Drive and Home Avenue in the R-P-Q Zone. Due to a conflict of interest, Commissioner Schlehuber indicated that he would abstain on this item. With the aid of the overhead proj'ector showing the location of the project, Bill Hofman gave a staff report on the matter and indicated that this item was continued from the last meeting because there was a lack of majority vote to approve or deny the project. He stated that the primary reason the project did not receive a majority vote was because concern was expressed that related to the amount of parking proposed for the use. Mr. Hofman continued, that although the applicant does provide the number of parking spaces required for a professional office use as stated in the Code, some of the Commissioners felt that it may not'be enough. Staff did some checking to determine whether the Commission has the discretion to require additional parking over and above the Ordinance requirement, via the Site Development Plan process. It was found that the Commission may require additional standards, if there are special circumstances relating to the project, and if the Commission makes specific findings to justify the increase of standards. Staff believes that it would be very difficult to make any findings which would justify the increase of parking for this project, and feels that there does not seem to be special circumstances which apply only to this property. Mr. Hofman added that if the Commission believes the parking requirements for professional office uses in general are inadequate, Staff would recommend that a Zone Code Amendment be initiated to increase those standards. Discussion reflected the individual Commissioners' feelings on the parking issue. Commissioner Rombotis indicated that he was absent at the meeting of June 24, 1981, when this item was initially heard; however; he has reviewed the minutes, and feels qualified to participate in same. The Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 1821 approving SDP 81-2 based on the findings and subject to the condition contained therein. The Commission directed Staff to look into the Q-overlay, with regard to parking requirements, and come back with some specific guidance that may be incorporated into the Q-overlay zone. \’ - \\a 5 7 \\ 73 *gi;F 'n \ ; i-b / . :OHMISSION~RS \ Friestedt Jose L'Heureux Rombotis Schlehuber Farrow Friestedt Jose L'Heureux Rombotis Schlehuber Farrow NLINUTES . . . PLANNING COMMISSION July 8, 1981 Page 13 ADDITIONAL BUSINESS Commissioner Schlehuber reported that he attended a meeting on Planning in Berkeley. During the meeting it was suggested that Commissioners hold irregular meetings with their Staffs, where it be noticed as a public meeting, to improve Staff relationships. He stated that he felt it was a good idea, and volunteered to provide an agenda to start out with for discussion. The Commission concurred. DIRECTOR'S REPORT James Hagaman, the Planning Director, reported on the City Council meeting, held Tuesday, July 7, 1981. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of the Regular Meeting, held June 24, 1981, were approved as corrected by the Assistant City Attorney; on page 10, first sentence of the last paragraph should read, "The Assistant City Attorney indicated that the purpose of the Q-overlay is to deal with specific projects that have particular problems, and parking is one of the items that can be addressed under the Q-overlay." ADJOURNMENT By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at lo:06 P.M. Respectfully Submitted, JAMES C. HAGAMAN, Secretary to the Planning Commission Ann R. Alleman, Minutes Clerk # \ 4 :OMMISSIONERS Friestedt Jose L'Heureux Rombotis Schlehuber Farrow