Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-08-12; Planning Commission; MinutesIMINUTES MEETING OF: PLANNINGCOMMIssIoN DATE OF MEETING: August 12, 1981 TIME OFMFETIJ!JG: 7:00 P.M. PLACE OF MEETING: Council Chmnbers CALL 'ICI ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairman Marcus at 7:00 P.M. ROLL cAI;L: Present - Chairman Marcus, Ccmxnissioners Runbotis, Jose, Schlehuber, and Friestedt. Curmissioner Farrow arrived at 7:45 P.M., during item No. 5. Absent - Ccanmissioner L'Heureux. Ex-Officio Members James Hagaman, Planning Director, and Dan Hentschke, Assistant City Attorney, were also present. 0 Staff members present were: Michael Holzmiller, Principal Planner Bill Hofman; Associate Planner Richard Allen, Principal Civil Engineer PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Chairman Marcus. PLANNINGcoMMISSICNPF#CEIXJRES: Chairman Marcus explained Planning Ccmmission procedures in its capacity as an advisory Commission to the City Council, and identified those matters delegated to the Planning Conmission for a final decision. Chairman Marcus further explained the procedure observed by the Cammission during public hearing items. ._ ITEM OUT OF ORDER: 2. Z-242, FRANDSEN. Request for a preannexational Zone Change frcm the County's E-l-A to Carl&ad's C-2-Q for property located on the west side of El Camino Real, 1400 feet north of Alga Road. Michael Holzmiller indicated that Staff has received a request to continue this item, as all of the property that should be included within the zone change was not placed on the application. The Carnnission contined X-242, Frandsen, for re- noticing. CONTINUEDPUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. zc-239, KELLY. Request for a preannexational Zone Change from County C and R-4 to the P-M-Q Zone for property located on the south side of Palomar Airport Road. With the aid of a transparency showing the location of the project, the staff report was presented by Michael Holzmiller, essentially as contained in the written staff report. ;OtMSSION ERS \ Marcus Ranbotis Jose Schlehuber Friestedt -- . -- . w-y :; : / ..:‘...:. < _..re -1 ; ‘?.. . .’ 4brrirBj \/ AU b2 .._. .:r-::,,. P August 12, 1981 Page 2 Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 7:08 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. The C~ission reccgnitied Jean Jensen, P. 0. Box 1307, Carl&ad; Planning Consultant for the applicant. Ms. Jensen indicated that the applicant wished to go with Alternative No. 4. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcus closed the public hearing at 7:08 P.M. *_ In response to Conmission query regarding the joint agreement for the driveway, and the layout of same, '. Michael Holzmiller explained that the applicant has been mrking with the Engineering Department to work out the best location. for the driveway. As proposed 'now, ,itwould be right along the property line separating the two parcels. 0 :',, The Ccmr$ssion approved:the Negative Declaration issued by ~ the,Planning' Director, and adopted the following Resolution, recanmending approval of ZC-239, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the .-. staff report: - :'? '. .I RESOLUTION NO. 1837, REcoMMENDING,APPF0VAL OF A : .: PREANNMATIONALZONECHANGEFROMCOUNTYOFSANDIEGO . ', j C AND R'4.m CITY OF CARLSBADP-M-Q ON PI0PEm .', > GENERALLY LOCAT~ONTHESOUVISIDEOFPALOMAR AIRPORT mADAPPW3XIMATELYmMILE EASTOF. INTERSTATE 5 IMMEDIATELYWESTOFTHEPCWER TRANSMISSION LINES. :APPLICANT: RqBEFT B.. KELLY. * 3. CT 81-21/.X-167, C&T.NGA R\NEm. Request for I 8 approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map and Condcminium Permit to develop 70 units on the .. ' -. northwest comer of Alicante Road and Altisma Way, south .of Caringa Way in the RD-M Zone.. With the aid of a transparency showing the location of the project, Bill Hofman gave the staff report, essentially as contained in the written. staff report. .!. 'Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at ?:ll P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. The Conmission recognized.Har Delawie, of H&ner Delawie Associates, Architects and Planners; Architect on the project. He stated that the project would be an asset-to the La Costa area, and urged approval of same. The CQnmission recognized Marvin Bowles, 2340 Caringa Way, . Carl&ad. Mr. Bowles stated his concern was with the view, and feels the project will be detrimental to same if the elevation is not controlled. The Ccmmrission recognized+StanReid, 2357 Caringa Way, Carl&ad. Mr. Reid expressed con=,m with the traffic on Alga Road, and indicated that it is frequently utilized as a "race track." He also inquired if the City has any plans of widening Alga Road, to slow down the traffic.' '. Mr,.Reid continued, indicating he was also concerned with access if the project was approved, and the elevation of same. _ . . . .- . . ._ . . ” . _. -,. e.3.-:.;... . , : -.,. XlflMISSIONEKS -cc Marcus : Rcmbotis. Jose . Schlehuber. Fries tedt -- August 12, 198 1 Page 3 Richard Allen explained that Alga Road will bewidened to a divided four lane road, and will be done by the Daon Corporation. However, it is not a condition of any developnt that it be widened, and he indicated that he is unclear as to the timing of same. The Planning Director added that the eastern end of Alga Road is currently being imroved to Melrose Avenue, as well as the connection of .Melrose on down to Rancho-Santa Fe Road. Therefore, there will be a complete loop in the near future. - Since no one, else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcus closed the public hearing at 7:17 P.M. The Ccaranission approved the Conditional Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and adopted the following Resolution, recmanending approval of Gs,81- 21/CP-167, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the staff report: . RESOLUTION NO. 1847, -1NGAPPIQVAL OF A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISIaJ MAP AND CONDOMINIUM PERMIT ON PROPERtYGENERALLY LCCATH)ONTHENORI'HWESTCOPNER OFALICANTE ROAD,ALTISMAWAY,AND SOUTHOFCARINGA PAY. APPLICANT: CARINGAINVES'IMENTS. 4. CUP-204; ST. PATRICK'S CHURCH. Request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to remove an existing single family house and construct a new sanctuary for the existing St. Patrick's Church on property located on the northwest corner of Adams Street and Tamarack Avenue in the R-l Zone. With the aid of transparencies showing the location of the project, and the proposed and reccmnended heights for the spire, the staff report was presented by Bill Hofman, essentially as contained in the written staff report. Mr. Hofman brought up two issues for Planning Cmxnission consideration. First, the height of the proposed spire, and second, the location of parking stalls. With regard to the space, Mr. Hofman indicated the 60' height was excessive in staff's opinion and instead recamnended 45' which is more in keeping with the scale of the structure. Secondly, staff acknowledged that parking may be a problem given the location of most parking stalls 350' away fram the sanctuary. Staff indicated that the problem would be acceptable because the peak use time of the church would not conflict with peak use times on Tamarack and Adams. Cmissioner Schlehuber indicated that he is a me&r of St. Patrick's Church; however, is not a me&r of the Trustees. He discussed the matter with the City Attorney, who indicated that there would be no conflict of interest. Commissioner Jose inquired if any consideration was given in reference to the possible relocation of the building, to utilize spaces and the area on the west side of the structure for more convenient parking. He pointed out that the Church holds Bingo on Friday nights, which creates a large gathering, and expressed concern with the traffic flow on Adams Street and Tamarack Avenue. Bill Hofman responded that Staff did not consider the - Bingo night;.however, in terms of relocating parking;--it was considered and Staff came to the conclusion with the architect that it would require a significant redesign to obtain nore parking closer to the sanctuary. Marcus Rcs-botis Jose Schlehuber Friestedt c - ..I .‘.‘. rrr1ry u A&AU August 12, 1981 Page 4 missioner E'riestedt inquired if the existing parking requirements would correspond if this was a cunmercial development or a omnunity center. . . Bill Hofman explained that by the Ordinance, churches are required to have one parking space for every six seats within the sanctuary; therefore, it is difficult to compare cormercial, as it is based n-ore on square footage of the floor area of a commercial center. The project is mnditioned to provide seven additional parking spaces, on site; therefore, it would tiet the parking standards. Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 7:25 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. The Cmmission reco&.zed John Landry, Architect on the project. Mr. Landry addressed the issue of the spire, and indicated that they feel that 60 feet would be in o proportion to the architecture, and requested the &mission consider same. He added that the purpose of the spire is to project a symbol to the -unity that this is a religious,facility. With regard to the parking, Mr. Landry explained that they have developed a scheme, subsequent to this report, that would allow five additional parking spaces immediately adjacent to the building. Therefore, they feel they have responded to that issue. He added that they are proposing to obtain the other two spaces within 150 feet of the sanctuary. On Item No. 18, with regard to the potential widening of Tamarack Avenue, Mr. Landry indicated that sirice they are currently in the process of designing Tamarack itself, and are unsure as to what the setback will be, the applicant will agree to give the City what setback they would require to widen Tamarack Avenue. In conclusiou, Mr. Landry indicated that they are in agreement with all other conditions of the CUP. In response to Cmission query regarding the rendition that relates to parking, Mr. Landry indicated that they are in agreement with same. Bill Hofman explained that the intent of the condition was to locate parking as close as possible to the sanctuary without causing a major redesign. In reference to Condition No. 18, &missioner Jose inquired if Staff and the applicant would accept a future street agreement. Mr. Landry indicated he would assume they would; however, he questioned whether they were talking about 16 or 18 feet with regard to the widening of Tamarack Avenue. Richard Allen stated that.there is currently a contract out with a design consultant to design Tamarack Avenue, and since it is not a standard street, Staff does not know precisely what the alignment is at this point. He stated that they have included in Condition No. 18 that the applicant either install the street, cr'sign a future improvement agreement, and contribute to the improvements, concurrent with the entire widening of Tamarack Avenue. With regard to the right-of-way, there is already an existing offer of dedication of 16 feet, which will be the maximum they.will need. , ‘\ \ * - :i \ \ ? l . XWlMISSIONERS MINUTES Auqust 12, 1981 Paqe 5 \ 9 COMMISSIONERS Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcus closed the public hearing at 7:34 P.M. Chairman Marcus inquired as to the heiqhts of the Pea Soup Andersen's windmill, and the spire of the Mormon Church. Bill Hofman indicated that the windmill is 82 feet, not includinq the blades; and the Mormon Church is 58 feet 10 inches. He also pointed out that Staff is not owed to the 60 foot heiqht, but instead to the proportion of the spire to the church structure. The two structures are not to scale and will be visually inmnpatible to each other. The Commission approved the Negative Declaration issued by the Planninq Director, and adopted the following Resolution, approvinq CUP-204, based on the findinqs and subject to the conditions oontained therein; with the amendment of Condition No. 12 to sixty (60) feet: RFSOLUTION NO. 1845, APPRGVING A CONDITICNAL USE PERMIT'I0CON~UCTANEWSANCI'UARYFORTHE ST. PATRICK'S CHIJRCHONPROPEKIYGENERALLY LOCRTEDON THENOJUWWESTCORNEROFADAMS,STREETlWDTAMAlWK AVENUE IN THE R-l ZbJE. APPLICANI': ST. PATRICK'S CHURCH. 5 . CT 81-22/CP-168, MOIR DEVCXL Request for a 21 unit Tentative Tract Map and Condominium Permit on property located on the east side of Carl&ad Boulevard between Tamarack Avenue and Sequoia Avenue in the mM Zone. With the aid of a transparency showing the location of the project, the staff report was presented by Michael Holzmiller, essentially as contained in the written staff report. Chairman Marcus opened the public hearinq at 7:41 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. The Comnission recognized Howard Anderson, 2198 Carmel Valley Road, De1 Mar; Architect on the project. Mr. Anderson gave a brief review of the design of the project, and indicated that the applicant is in aqreement with the renditions remxmended by Staff. In c?onclusion, Mr. Anderson expressed the willingness to respond to any questions. missioner Farrow arrived at 7:45 P.M. The Conmission recoqnized Joyce James, 3931 Garfield Carl&ad. Mrs. James expressed concern with the existing density in the area, and indicated that approval of this project would only add to the problems of parkinq and traffic conqestion. Mrs. James further indicated that she was aware of the 42 parkinq spaces to be provided in the underqround parkinq, and expressed concern that only eiqht visitor parking spaces will be provided for guests on site. Chairman Marcus pointed out #at the project does meet the Condominium requirements. Marcus Ro&otis Jose Schlehuber Friestedt MINUTES August 12, 1981 Paue 6 COMMISSIONERS p In conclusion, Mrs. James stated that there was a project with lower density proposed for this lot in the past, and there were ooncems about the high density at that time. The Conmission remized Doreen Ryan, 152 Sequoia Avenue, Carl&ad. Ms. Ryan indicated that her concerns were with the density of the proposed project, the height of the entrance of the underground parkinq garaqe, location of the landscapinq, improvements on Sequoia Avenue, the heiqht of the buildinq, and the loss of view. Richard Allen explained that the haul route is taken care of at the time the gradinq permit is issued by the City Enqineer, and also thev try to keep heavy trucks off of liqht duty streets like Sequoia Avenue. He added that Sequoia Avenue will be widened alonq the frontaqe of this project before any occupancy is permitted. The Commission reoxjnized &My Schmidt, 172 Sequoia Avenue, Carl&ad. She indicated that her concerns were the liqhtinq facilities in the children's play area, as far as the heiqht and intensity of same; and the parkinq. Chairman Marcus explained that the parkinq is covered by the Condominium Ordinance, and the'liqhtinq is taken care of by condition. Michael Holzmiller stated that in the Resolution of approval, there is no specific condition on lightinq, and the question should be addressed by the applicant. The Cmission reqnized Mary Melideo, 159 Hemlock, Carl&ad. She requested a clarification on the reference to public transportation, and how it will alleviate the traffic. Michael Holzmiller explained that it is one of the items looked at when reviewinq density, and if it is located on a bus route, and is anveniently accessible to a bus route, it is one of the locational items used in justifyinq hiqher density. This is located adjacent to a bus stop, makinq it convenient for the people from the project to utilize same. Ms. Melideo added that she also has ooncems with the parkina and the density of the proposed project. The Conmission reaxnized Helen McConnauqhay, 143 .Sequoia Avenue, Carl&ad. Ms. McConnauqhay shawed the Conmission some pictures of the current parkina situation on Sequoia Avenue, and stated her opinion that if this project is approved, the parking on Sequoia will have to be eliminated. She pointed out that since there is no parkinq on Carl&ad Roulevard, everyone parks on Sequoia. The Comission reaxmized Jeanette Lowe, (aka Ike), 3955 Garfield, Carlsbad. Ms. Lowe stated that the traffic and parkinq situation on Sequoia Avenue is so mnqested, they even have problems getting parkinq in their own driveway. In conclusion, Ms. Lowe stated that she strongly opposes this project. The Conmission recoqnized Tim Harris, 144 Sequoia #2, Carl&ad. Mr. Harris expressed concern that their view will be totally blocked from the beach if this project is FF-J=d. - .y-;.y,. . .-_ . . August 12, 1981 Page 7 The Curmission recognized Ellie Harris, 144 Sequoia #4, Carl&ad. Ms. Harris stated her mnCern was with the parking situation. .. The Carranission recognized Mr. J. C. Herd, 151 Sequoia ' Avenue, Carl&ad. Mr. Herd explained that several years ago.when another condominium project was proposed at this location, they recanmerded closing Sequoia Avenue a& Carl&ad Boulevard, making it into a cul+de-sac; and-he inquired if such an idea was before the Cunmission at this time. .' Michael Bolzmiller indicated that idea was not being considered by the Planning Department or the CaTmission. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcus closed the publichearing at,.!:03 P;M. B ,.' with regard-to the parking, Curmissioner-Schlehuber stated his-feeling.'that this project would not create any ~ additional problems that do not“already exist. . :-. Conmissioner Ranbbtis pointed out'for clarification : .'; purposes that Sequoia'Avenue will,be:widened, which wiil : " eliminate a little bit of the cx>ngestion. .. He added that .; the project doesmeet the intent of the Ordinance, in that '* the eight guest parking spaces are.a reasonable ., * _. .. ; requirement. .' _ Cmissioner Ron&&is also pointed out that the problem is . the'attraction to the beach, and has been accentuated by the elimination of the parking on Carl&ad Boulevard, which has forced the traffic up the side streets... He 6' stated that the City Council is looking-into the matter-of the parking in the beach area. -. . . Michael Holzmiller reiterated that the project does meet the Ordinance requirements, and pointed out that the Ordinance does allow the Conmission to consider giving '. credit for on street visitor-parking spa&s; however, on- this particular project, because of the location, the ,applicant provided.them all on site. .- With the aid of a wall exhibit, Mr. Holzmiller explained where the visitor parking is to be located on the project. Staff found that. there is a walkway that leads - out to Sequoia'Avenue, and suggested that the Ccamnission might wish to consider eliminating that walkway, or putting a gate for residents only across same. If this walkway was cut off, it would force visitors to park, and walk all the way around the project to get to the units. Mr. Anderson, the Architect, addressed the Cammission, and explained that with regard to the top lighting, they were not proposing to light the area; and a condition that would limit same would not be objectionable. . With regard to the gate, it would not be a problem fran ' the applicant's standpoint; however, he pointed out that it is a required exit. As long as'they can meet the Building Department requirements, a locked gate could be. utilized. . . ..^_ .- . . _ _ . - . _/ .’ --.*‘.,‘.q..‘. - , I a.*. _. \ ‘i, . \ \ \ % 0’ A : XVlMISSIONERS ’ * ---S. --.,.* ..- ” 12 -. T, -y.Tp\,:-.y . . ..-a ,:“. . . ” .AvAJL+y u A PUI L7 *- - ~.:~..‘;...~‘~‘.:. . ,-‘z;.-..~ . -_ c-L.- - . ._I. . ,. ^ - August 12, 1981 Page 8 .The Cormnission approved the Negative'Declaration issued by the Planning Director, and adopted the following Resolution, recchlanending approval of CT 81-22/CP-168 to the City Council based>on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein; and directed Staff to check with the Building Department in attempt to incorporate language into the Resolution that access to the project be a locked key fram the exterior; and with the addition of a condition, in the event there is any lighting, that- it be shielded from reflecting on surrounding properties: . RESOL&ON NO. 1846, REO3mI% APPFQVAL OF A 21 UNIT-TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND CONDOMINIUM PERMIT ON PR3PERI'Y GENERALLY UXXTED'ON THE EAST SIDE OF C%RLSBADBCULEVA??DBETWEENTAMARACEAVENUEAND SEQUOIA -AVENUE. APPLICANT:. MXR DEVCO. _ : 6. CT 81-27/CP-171, SWEATI'E. Request for approvalgf a Tentative Subdivision Map and.Condominium Permit to develop 17 units on the west side of Tyler Street between Chestnut Avenue and.Walnut Avenue in the .RD-M Zone. L.. With the aid of's transparency showing the location of the ,.:'; project, the staff report was presented by Michael : ',:, Holzmiller, essentially as contained in the written staff _ . : ,' report. - I.., ‘. ', : ,., _, Cunrnissioner Jose expressed concern that in this 'an3 other ..' projects, we seem to be'going above the medium density - level; and he pointed out that additional parking could be I 'provided with the elimination'of units.* . In response to a request for clarification of Condition 41 No. 17 of the Resolution, Richard-Allen-explained that _ this project, orice it paves most of the'area, will *' concentrate and increase the flow of water onto the railroad property. Staff was requesting an agreement so that the City is held harmless if same ever caused a '. problem for the railroad. With regard to Condition No. 26, Conmissioner Roxbotis .inquired if this was not in the Building Code. Michael Holzmiller explained that same is a.Fire Department requirement, which may just be included to make sure the applicant is aware of it. Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 8:19 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. . The Commission recognized Howard Sweatte;'P. 0. Box 11321, San Diego; Designer of the project. Mr. Sweatte briefly reviewed the design of the project, and the amenities that will be offered. He added that they are in agreement with the Staff recamnendations. . missioner -is referred, to noise attenuation, and inquired if the applicant has considered same on the uni.ts that connect up to the railroad tracks. , , . Mr. Sweatte responded that they have provided landscaping, but have not done an acoustical analysis on the project. He added that they are taking all the sound proofing provisions into consideration. -- . . . , ii XWlMISSIONERS \ Marcus Rombotis . Jose Schlehuber Friestedt Farrow - I “--._ - .._ c -#-v-d.;-’ ._’ . . -ry>,.;:J‘..:cy~:“. . . .K’ SVAAAv %# A. - U .;: .-,, -... . . . ?. rr-..-..-m-,r.. - . . '7: -. . - . . . . : . * August 12, 1981 Page 9 .Ccamnissioner Friestedt inquired if the project; being adjacent to the railroad right-of-way, would constitute a noise impact zone. Michael Holzmiller stated he believed it would; however, it,would be required by the Building Code. The Ccsmission recognized Ralph H. Davis, 3395 Tyler Street, Carlsbad. Mr. Davis inquired if Tyler Street was a street or an alley. .Staff indicated that it was:a'- street. -. , Mr. Davis added that several years, ago when the underpass was put in. at Chestnut avenue, there was' an agreement with .. the State to make Chestnut a through street; and he stated his opinion,that this was an important step as far as this project is concern&. .’ In conclusion, Mr. Davis referred to-other beach CorroTlunities -north of Carisbad, and 'stated his feelingohat '. projects such as this. restrict the use of the beach to the ~ -public; and .he requested the wission consider same.' The Cammission recognized Connie Trejo. Ms. Trejo stated : -. her opinion that '?yler:.Street is not adequate to handle .,. :Y the traffic that is projected forthis project.. I" Since no-one else wished to speak on the matter,;Chairman , ..' Marcus closed the public.hearing at 8:25 P.M. ._ . . .: _. -.I Ccarmission discussion included the width of Tyler Street. - Richard Allen indicated that due to the review of the' . area, and the number of buildings that are built on .encroachments with no setback, it does not sew feasible to get any more right-of-way. , I . In reference to the Noise,Abatement Program, Cmissioner. Jose inquired if any consideration was given to constructing a block wall around the project. Michael Holzmiller explained that the applicant is providing a six foot masonry wall around the entire.project, and same is indicated on the plan. >.' .The Ccnrmission approved"the Negative Declaration issued'by the Planning Director and adopted the following Resolution, reccaTmending approval of CT 81-27lCP-171, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained there,in: RESOLUTIONNO. 1844,~MMENDINGAPPRXAL OFA, TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP AND CONDOMINIUM PERMIT Irb . DEVELOP 17 UNITSONP~PEF?IYGENERALLY LOCATED ON THF,WESTSIDEOFTYLERSTREETBETWEENCHESTNUT AVENUE ANDWALNUTAmE.IN THE RD-M ZONE. APPLICANT: SSJEATTE 7. CT 81-25/P-169, TIBERIO/PEACOCK. Request for a 14 unit Tentative Tract*Map and Condominium Permit to convert a 17 unit apartment project, presently under construction, to condominiums on the southeast corner of Pine Avenue and Lincoln Street-in the R-3 Zone. . . . With the aid ofaa transparency showing the location of the project, the staff report was presented by Bill Hofman, essentially as contained in the written staff report. _- . . .._ . _ . ._ . . -. . Marc&s. ' . Rcmbotis Jose Schlehuber Friestedt Farrow ---. -._- :. ‘“: Id ,12-:-d ..‘1’..,! 1% 0 ,A.* & ry qJ * JCI b;;t .:!.::*,. ..i F,. . . . . .-. .’ ,:. ‘_ ; - . : . - -- . .-. . . , August 12, 1981 Page 10 WUIISSIONERS ’ Chairman Marcus opened the public hearing at 8:31 P.M., and extended the invitation to speak. . . The Cammission recognized JamesPeacock, 6325 Bayshore Walk, Long Beach. Mr. Peacock indicated that he was in . agreement with the staff report, and expressed the willingness to respond to any questions. I - Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman Marcus closed-the public hearing at 8:32 P.M. The Commission approved the Notice of Prior Environmental .' Complianw issued by the Planning Director and adopted the following Resolution, remnding approval of CT 8.l- . 25/P-169, to.the City Council based on the findings. and subject to the conditions contained in the staff report: RESOLDTIONNO. 1849, REmI&APPROvAL OF A?4 UNIT CONDOMINIUM~NVERSIONONPF0PER.CY UXATED ON 'JHESOUTHEASTCXXNEROF PINE Am AND LINCOLN STREET. APPLICANT: TIBERI&PEACOCK . . . 8. .- CT 80-22(AJ/CP~IOl(A), LATIniDE 33 Request for an .,. ,. ?‘ amendment to a previously approved-Tentative Tract . ..' Map and Condominium Permit by the addition of one . : unit (eight.total) on property located on the east . . ./ side of*Lincoln Street between Pine Avenue and * '. ._ 1 '> Walnut Avenue in the R-3 Zone. . . . _ With the aid of a transparency showing the location of the'project, Bill Hofman gave the staff report., essentially as contained in the written 'staff.report. 6' Chairman Marcus opened the public-hearing at 8:34 P.M.,, _ and extended the invitation to speak. .*, . . The Commission recognized Jack Groswith, 818 Dewitt Avenue, Encinitas. Mr. Dewitt indicated that the . . applicant is in agreement with the staff report. Since no one else wished to speak on the matter, Chairman ,Marcus closed.the public hearing at 8:34 P.M, The Connnission approved the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning .Director and adopted the following Resolution, reccmmending approval of CT 80-22(A)/?& - 101(A) to the City Council based on the findings'ard subject to the conditions contained in the staff report.: . RESOLUTION NO. 1848, RECOMMEND INGAPPROVALOFAN AMENDMENT 'IO A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND CONDOMINIUM PEI@lIT BY THE ADDITION OF ONE UNIT, EIGHT 'IWIAL, ON PmPERFY GENERALLY LOCATED ON 'IHE EAST SIDE OF LINCOLNSTREETBETWEENPINEA~EANDWALNUT AVENUE. APPLICANT: LATITUDE 33 . RECESS: . Chairman Marcus called a recess at'8:36 P.M., and the Comnission reconvened at 8:44 P.M., with six members present. . . . . ..- _- . . . . .A ,: Marcus Rombotis Jose Schlehuber .' I Friestedt Farrow , Marcus Rcmbotis J-e .Schlehuber F&es t.e$t Farrow -, 3, .L _ . 5.. ‘f . ‘... :‘i . ..ypQ ‘- dVA&ALy u-a 1cd u -, - - -I . . . . -.L) . ;. . . . .-.- ” -.;: ; - ; . .- . . : - ‘f I . ’ . August 12, 1981 Page 11 . DISCUSSION ITEMS: 9. MS-547,'L & L DEVEUXCMENT. Request for a Minor Subdivision creatinq two lots, one of which will be a panhandle lot, on-the west side of Park Drive in ' the R-l-15,000 Zone. . Michael Holzmiller gave the staff report, with the:&d of a transparency showing the location of the project. In response to mission query, Richard Allen indicated that the conditions of approval >nclude 'the improvement of Park Drive. . The Conmission recognized Mike Img, 10009 Sparrow, . Fountain Valley. Ms. Long indicated that they are in agreement with the staff report. : * The Cm&ssion adopted the follotiing Resolution, . .' remmending approval of MS-547,.based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein: RESOLUTION NO.' 1843, REmMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE ..: ,. !, CREATIONOFAPANHANDLEL#I'Z+S PARTOF'AMINOR -. SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF PARE DRIVE . : IN THE R-1-15,000 ZONE. APPLICANT:- L & L ', ./ ;. : DEVELOPMENT. .( :- - 10. k-538, KELLET. Request.for approval of a Minor Subdivision creating..3 lots, one of which. would be a panhandle lot on the northwest corner of.Highland Drive and Buena Vista Avenue in the R-l Zone;. I t Bill Hofman gave the staff report, with-the aid of a : - transparency showing the location of the project. Chairman Marcus inquired if the appli'cant,was present to address the &mission, and received a negative response. The Camission adoptedthe .following Resolution, .recmmerding approval of MS-538, based on the findings ' and subject to the conditions contained therein: RESOLDTION~NO. 1850, RF, COMMIWDINGAPPWALOFTHE CREATIONOFAPANHANDLE IOTAS-PARTOFAMINOR SUBDMSION IOCATED ON THE NORTHNEST CORNER OF HIGHLAND DRIVE AND BUENA VISTA AVENUE IN THE R-l, _ zoNF4. APPLICANT: KELLET ADOPTIONOF RESOLDTIONS: 11. RESOLUTION NO. 1827, MUSSER. The &mission adopted the following Resolution: RESOLUTION NO. 1827, APPv.A REQUEST FOR AN EIGHT FOOT HIGH FENCE CN PmPEFQY *GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PINE AVENUE BETWEEN PI0 PICO DRIVE AND HIGHLAND AVENUE. APPLICANT: MUSSER _ . - -- . . .I.. . - . WlMISSIONERS ' Marcus - Rcmbotis. Jose . Schlehuber- Friestedt Farrow - Marcus Rczm6otis ) . Jose Schlehuber Friestedt Farrow Marcus Ranbot Jose is Schlehuber' Friestedt Farrow 1. -“-:“‘:’ ._’ -‘~r”:‘~ . . . . . . y”” . .’ hArr,&AV u au aa hi3 ..yc.. 1.‘). ;,‘; .., c:;;..:._ _ . -_ - August 12, 1981 Page 12 12. RESOLUTION NO. 1825, RUSSELL. Michael Holmiller indicated that the applicant has talked with the Fire ;u?a Building Departments, and has discussed the possibility of alternative methods in complying with conditions 24, 25, and 27 on page 5 of the Resolution. - - Therefore, Staff is suggesting the insertion of the . mrding "or alternative approved by the Fire or Building Department," in Conditions No. 24, 25., and 2*7. He added that sti meets with'the approval of the applicant. The Commission adopted the following Resolution, with the amendment to Conditions No. 24, 25, and 27 as suggested by Staff: : RESOLUTION NO. 1825, RFkDWNDiiJG APPROVAL FOR.*= NINE UNIT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND CONDOMINIUM PERMIT ,- .+: ,.,r.c &PmPEW GISJERALLY LOCATl@ ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HOMF, STREET BETWEENJEFFERSON STREET AND HOPE AVENUE. APPLICANT: RUSSELL: L. "' APPROVAL-OF MINDTES: . ‘. ', '2 Minutes of the Regular Meeting, held July 22, 198i, were .c approved as suhnitted. : . . 4 I : . .mw: ., . . By prcper motion the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 P.M. to a special meeting to be held August 13,, 1981 .at 3:30 P.M. Respectfully Stiitted,;. JAMES'C. HAGAMAN Secretary to the Planning Carnnission Ann R. &man, Minutes Clerk . . . . . .._ .- . - . \ ‘i . \ \ % l ‘ 3 : XWlMISSIONERS ’ --- Marcus Fhrbotis Jose Schlehuber Friestedt Farrow .- Marcus Rcanbotis Jose Schlehuber Friestedt Farrow , l ‘.--. --.. -. ,.-