Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-04-06; Planning Commission; MinutesPlanning Commission Minutes April 6,2011 Page 1 Minutes of: PLANNING COMMISSION Time of Meeting: 6:00 p.m. Date of Meeting: April 6, 2011 Place of Meeting: COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER Chairperson L'Heureux called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairperson L'Heureux led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioners Black, Dominguez, Montgomery, Nygaard, and Siekmann Absent: Commissioner Schumacher STAFF PRESENT Don Neu, Planning Director Jane Mobaldi, Assistant City Attorney Bridget Desmarais, Administrative Secretary Sabrina Michelson, Senior Office Specialist Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner Shelley Glennon, Assistant Planner Glen Van Peski, Senior Civil Engineer APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any corrections or revisions to the minutes of the meeting from March 16, 2011. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Dominguez, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission approve the minutes from the Regular Meeting of March 16, 2011. VOTE: 6-0-1 AYES: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Dominguez, Commissioner Montgomery, Commissioner Nygaard, and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Schumacher ABSTAIN: None Chairperson L'Heureux directed everyone's attention to the slide on the screen to review the procedures the Commission would be following during the evening's Public Hearing. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA None. Planning Commission Minutes April 6,2011 Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING Chairperson L'Heureux asked Mr. Neu to introduce the first item. 1. CDP 10-27 - ROZEK RENOVATION - Request for approval of a Coastal Development Permit to construct a 393 sq. ft. addition to an existing 984 sq. ft one-story single-family dwelling unit, which includes a first story covered porch, a second story master bedroom, bathroom and sundeck, as well as an enclosed staircase and roof deck on a .08 acre lot located at 2677 Garfield Street within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program and within Local Facilities Management Zone 1, Chairperson L'Heureux asked the applicant if he wished to continue with only 6 Commissioners present. The applicant stated yes. Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 1 and stated Assistant Planner Shelley Glennon would make the Staff presentation. Chairperson L'Heureux opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 1. Ms. Glennon gave a brief presentation and stated she would be available to answer any questions. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any questions of Staff. Seeing none, he asked if the applicant wished to make a presentation. Sam Wright gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Seeing none, he asked if there were any members of the audience who wished to speak on the item. Seeing none, Chairperson L'Heureux opened and closed public testimony. DISCUSSION Commissioner Nygaard stated she can support the project. Commissioner Siekmann stated she does not have any issues with the project and can support the project. Commissioner Montgomery also stated he can support the project. Commissioner Black stated his support of the project. Commissioner Dominguez stated he cannot support the project as it is proposed. He stated there is too much addition, subtraction and manipulation, and it still ends up with a variance in an area which is already heavily impacted with variances. Chairperson L'Heureux stated he can support the project. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Nygaard, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6770 approving Coastal Development Permit CDP 10-27 based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. VOTE: 5-1 AYES: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Montgomery, Commissioner Nygaard, and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: Commissioner Dominguez ABSENT: Commissioner Schumacher ABSTAIN: None Planning Commission Minutes April 6, 2011 Page 3 Chairperson L'Heureux closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 1 and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item. 2. V 11-01 - LIFE TECHNOLOGIES SIGNAGE - A request for approval of a Variance to the Sign Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.41) to exceed the allowable letter height for four wall signs and four monument signs proposed on three lots developed with three research and development buildings located at 5781 and 5791 Van Allen Way and 5823 Newton Drive, and within Local Facilities Management Zone 5. Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 2 and stated Associate Planner Shannon Werneke would make the Staff presentation. Commissioner Nygaard stated that she had a conflict of interest regarding the project and recused herself from the dais. Commissioner Montgomery also stated he had a conflict of interest regarding the project and recused himself from the dais. Chairperson L'Heureux asked the applicant if he wished to continue with the item with only 4 Commissioners voting on the project. The applicant stated yes. Chairperson L'Heureux opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 2. Ms. Werneke gave a brief presentation and stated she would be available to answer any questions. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any questions of Staff. Commissioner Black referenced Section 21.41.095 of the municipal code which states building addresses should be listed on monument signs. He inquired if that section of the code is applicable to this request. Ms. Werneke stated that it would typically apply; however the applicant does have the building address on each of the buildings. She further stated she would need to work with the Fire Department regarding the requirement. Commissioner Black stated that if it is indeed a requirement he would like to have it added as a condition of approval. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any further questions of Staff. Seeing none, he asked if the applicant wished to make a presentation. Jon Allen, west coast facilities director for Life Technologies, gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Siekmann inquired as to the height of the letter "f" in comparison to the letter "e" in the proposed signage. She stated that it appears to be 3 times larger. Mr. Allen stated that was correct. Commissioner Siekmann asked which building is the corporate headquarters building. Mr. Allen stated it is 5791 Van Allen Way. Commissioner Dominguez stated the requirement for addresses on the sign is for emergency purposes. Mr. Allen stated they would prefer to keep the addresses on the buildings themselves and none of the monument signs have addresses at this time; however, if it is a recommendation of the Commission to add the addresses to the monument, they would be agreeable to it. Commissioner Black asked about letters "SKLZ" on the monument sign located on Newton Avenue. Mr. Allen stated it is a tenant that is located at the back of the building and their lease allows them to have their business name on the monument sign. Commissioner Black asked if that tenant is in agreement with this variance request. Mr. Allen stated yes. Commissioner Dominguez stated the Commission received a letter from the property management firm opposing this request and asked if Mr. Allen had any comments regarding that letter. Mr. Allen stated Planning Commission Minutes April 6, 2011 Page 4 they have met with the Carlsbad Research Center Owners Association, and they have come up with an agreeable plan to submit the entire Master Plan for Life Technologies within 30-45 days and to discuss the signage and landscaping. They have the Owners Association's approval for landscaping and will work with them for the signage requirements. Commissioner Siekmann asked if Mr. Allen had received a letter from Greene Properties and inquired if Mr. Allen had an opportunity to speak with them. Mr. Allen stated he did receive the letter and has spoken with Mr. McCorkle, president of the Owners Association. Mr. McCorkle was present at the meeting with Life Technologies and the Carlsbad Research Center Owners Association. Chaiperson L'Heureux asked if there were any members of the audience who wished to speak on the item. Bill McCorkle, representing the Carlsbad Research Center Owners Association and Greene Properties, stated there are procedures in place for sign variances through the CC&Rs and the specific plan. The opposition that both the Owners Association and Greene Properties have is that the procedures have not been followed and it is not the first time Life Technologies has been in violation of the procedures. While they are not opposed to a sign being put in place, they are opposed to Life Technologies circumventing policies and procedures that are already in place by the City and by the Carlsbad Research Center CC&Rs. Commissioner Siekmann asked what the maximum number of lines are for any monument signs for the properties Mr. McCorkle's company manages. Mr. McCorkle stated that his four properties have only one line on the monument signs. Commissioner Siekmann asked about the number lines on any wall signs. Mr. McCorkle stated there is only one line on one of the buildings. Commissioner Siekmann asked what the largest building Mr. McCorkle's company manages in the Carlsbad Research Center or in the Carlsbad area. Mr. McCorkle stated he owns two buildings on Fermi Court for a combined square footage of 130,000 square feet. Commissioner Siekmann further asked if any of those properties have received a variance for signage. Mr. McCorkle stated they have applied for a second sign at one of their properties. Commissioner Siekmann inquired about the setbacks of the buildings that Mr. McCorkle's company manages. Mr. McCorkle stated the building on Fermi Court has about a 50 foot setback and the building on Priestly has about a 75 to 80 foot setback. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if Mr. Allen wished to respond to any of the issues raised by Mr. McCorkle. Mr. Allen stated the sign on the corner is in fact in violation because the letter "f" is 2 inches too high. Mr. Allen further stated there were 2 other signs also in violation but have since been modified to comply with the CC&Rs, but agreed with the Carlsbad Research Center Owners Association to keep the one currently in violation as is until such time that Life Technologies develops the overall signage plan that has been submitted. Mr. Allen stated that they feel the Carlsbad Research Center CC&R process and the City's process for sign variances run parallel but take separate paths and so they do not feel they are circumventing the process. Commissioner Dominguez asked if the signs will look uniform once everything is complete. Mr. Allen stated yes. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any other members of the audience who wished to speak on the item. Seeing none, he closed public testimony on the item. DISCUSSION Commissioner Siekmann stated she understands the concerns from other businesses regarding the lettering of the signs. She suggested that the size of the letter "f be 54" with the other letters proportionate to that, instead of the size of letters proposed. Commissioner Siekmann stated that the sign ordinance is written so that there are more allowances for signage for larger companies. Planning Commission Minutes April 6,2011 Page 5 Commissioner Black stated that the Specific Plan amendment for the Carlsbad Research Center stated that the Carlsbad Research Center would follow the requirements of Title 21. The signs will be uniform in nature, will follow Title 21, and the request meets the requirements for a variance. He stated he can support the project. Commissioner Dominguez asked staff to clarify the limitations of the wall signs. Ms. Werneke stated the project has been conditioned to limit the number of wall signs to what is currently proposed. Typically the site would be allowed up to 9 wall signs; they will be limited to 4 wall signs as proposed. Commissioner Dominguez feels this could set a precedent and may cause problems in the future; however, there is legitimacy to the request because of the logo. He stated he can support the project. Chairperson L'Heureux stated he can support the project. He stated he is not concerned regarding the lack of the address on the monument sign. Chairperson L'Heureux asked for clarification if the Commission can approve a sign that does not comply with that section of the code. Mr. Neu stated the code does require that the address be placed on the monument sign. If the Commission does not wish to require the address on the monument sign, it would need to be included as part of the variance. Commissioner Black stated that for aesthetics it would look better for the address to not be on the monument sign. However, if a Variance is being requested, then that section of the code needs to be complied with and consequently findings would need to be made to stipulate that the address is not required. Commissioner Siekmann stated she can support the sizing of the wall signs but would like to see the monument sign letter "f" be 54". She does not think the address should be added to the monument sign. Commissioner Dominguez asked for further clarification from Staff regarding the requirement for the address on the monument sign. Mr. Neu stated the current sign ordinance was revised in 2001 and prior to that date, the previous versions of the sign ordinance did not have the requirement for addresses to be on the monument signs. He further stated there are also exemptions in the code as it exists for changing the face of a monument sign. In the case of a new monument sign, Staff would apply the requirement for the address. Mr. Neu stated that if the Commission wanted to not require the address on the monument sign, Staff would need to look at whether or not it is a new monument sign being constructed or an existing sign being re-faced. Ms. Mobaldi added that if the Commission is going to consider a Variance of that type, the Commission needs to relate what they are considering to the findings for a variance Ms. Werneke directed the Commission's attention to a slide on the screen depicting a sign with the address. Commissioner Dominguez stated that it does make it easier to find locations, especially when there are multiple buildings for a business, when there is an address on the monument sign. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if the code envisions an address on each business' monument sign or just on the main monument sign identifying the site. Ms. Werneke stated that the Code does not currently address that issue. Commissioner Siekmann stated she agrees with Commissioner Dominguez with having the address on the monument sign so that it follows the code. Commissioner Black stated he agreed and that the monument sign should follow the Code. Commissioner Siekmann would still like to see the project return to Staff for the size of the lettering on the monument sign. She cannot support the project as it is proposed. Planning Commission Minutes April 6,2011 Page 6 MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Dominguez, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6771 approving Variance V 11-01 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. VOTE: 3-1-3 AYES: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioner Black and Commissioner Dominguez NOES: Commissioner Siekmann ABSENT: Commissioner Schumacher ABSTAIN: Commissioner Montgomery and Commissioner Nygaard Chairperson L'Heureux closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 2. Commissioners Montgomery and Nygaard returned to the dais. Chairperson L'Heureux thanked Staff for their presentations. COMMISSION COMMENTS None. PLANNING DIRECTOR COMMENTS None. CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS Ms. Mobaldi reported on the outcome of the lawsuit regarding the City's Housing Element in which the judge upheld the Mitigated Negative Declaration but stated the City did violate the law to the extent that the City did not have adequate timelines for implementation of some of the action programs which will provide General Plan consistency with the adopted Housing Element. ADJOURNMENT By proper motion, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of April 6, 2011, was adjourned at 6:58 p.m. <^V ' l&U DON NEU Planning Director Bridget Desmarais Minutes Clerk