Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-09-07; Planning Commission; MinutesPlanning Commission Minutes September 7, 2011 Page 1 Minutes of: PLANNING COMMISSION Time of Meeting: 6:00 p.m. Date of Meeting: September 7, 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 Commissioner Scully led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioners Arnold, Black, Schumacher, Scully, and Siekmann Absent: Commissioner Nygaard STAFF PRESENT Don Neu, Planning Director Jane Mobaldi, Assistant City Attorney Bridget Desmarais, Administrative Secretary Dan Halverson, Assistant Planner Greg Fisher, Assistant Planner Scott Donnell, Senior Planner Clyde Wickham, Associate Engineer Joe Garuba, Municipal Property Manager APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any corrections or revisions to the minutes of the meeting from August 17, 2011. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Schumacher, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission approve the minutes from the Regular Meeting of August 17, 2011 as corrected. VOTE: 6-0-1 AYES: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioner Arnold, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Schumacher, Commissioner Scully and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Nygaard 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 September 7, 2011 Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING Chairperson L'Heureux asked Mr. Neu to introduce the first item. 1. CUP 09-03(A) - NORTH COAST CHURCH - A request for approval of an amendment to Conditional Use Permit CUP 09-03 to expand the total square footage of the existing North Coast Church by 12,768 square feet for a total area of 29,376 square feet within an existing 42,959 square foot office/warehouse building on property located at 2310 Camino Vida Roble in the P-M Zone and in Local Facilities Management Zone 5. Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 1 and stated Assistant Planner Greg Fisher would make the Staff presentation. Chairperson L'Heureux opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 1. Mr. Fisher gave a brief presentation and stated he 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. Jamie Looney, RJ Realty Investors, 1275 Phillips Street, Vista, CA, representing the ownership of the property, stated he would be available to answer any questions. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Siekmann asked if there have been any issues with the church to this point. Mr. Looney stated no and stated there are parking attendants for the church on-site to help with parking. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any further 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 on the item. DISCUSSION Commissioner Siekmann stated she can support the project. Commissioner Arnold stated he too can support the project. Commissioners Black and Scully also stated their support the project. Commissioner Schumacher and Chairperson L'Heureux also stated their support of the project. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Schumacher, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6799 approving CUP 09- 03(A) for a period of 10 years, based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. VOTE: 6-0-1 AYES: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioner Arnold, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Schumacher, Commissioner Scully and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Nygaard ABSTAIN: None Chairperson L'Heureux closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 1 and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item. Planning Commission Minutes September 7,2011 Page 3 2. CUP 11-04 - HOLY CROSS EPISCOPAL CHURCH - Request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow Holy Cross Episcopal Church to operate and hold worship services in an existing 5,208 square foot vacant office/industrial building (building "E") on property located at 2510 Gateway Road within the Bressi Ranch Master Plan in the Planned Industrial (P-M) Zone, in Local Facilities Management Zone 17. Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 2 and stated Assistant Planner Greg Fisher would make the Staff presentation. Chairperson L'Heureux opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 2. Mr. Fisher gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any questions of Staff. Commissioner Black inquired about a monument sign for the front of the building. Mr. Fisher deferred the question to the applicant. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any further questions of Staff. Seeing none, he asked if the applicant wished to make a presentation. Mike Howes, Howes Weiler Associates, 2888 Loker Ave West, Carlsbad, gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions. Mr. Howes stated there has not been any determination regarding the signage for the project yet. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Scully asked how many members the church currently has and the average number in attendance. Mr. Howes stated the church currently has 58 members and the average number in attendance is about 36 members. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if the church is proposing to own or to lease the building. Mr. Howes stated it is currently leased. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any members of the audience who wished to speak on the item. Seeing none, he opened and closed public testimony on the item. DISCUSSION Commissioner Siekmann stated her support of the project. Commissioner Arnold also stated his support of the project. Commissioner Black stated his support of the project. Commissioner Scully also stated her support of the project. Commissioner Schumacher concurred with his fellow Commissioners. Chairperson L'Heureux also stated his support of the project. Planning Commission Minutes September 7, 2011 Page 4 MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Schumacher, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6800 approving CUP 11- 04 for a period of 10 years, based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. VOTE: 6-0-1 AYES: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioner Arnold, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Schumacher, Commissioner Scully and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Nygaard ABSTAIN: None Chairperson L'Heureux closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 2 and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item. 3. V 11-04 - SANTARCANGELO ADDITION - A request for approval of a Variance from the Parking Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.44) to allow the applicant to add 600 square feet of floor area to one unit of an attached duplex that does not have the required two- car garage on a lot located at 843 Camellia Place, and within Local Facilities Management Zone 1. Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 3 and stated Assistant Planner Dan Halverson would make the Staff presentation. Chairperson L'Heureux opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 3. Mr. Halverson gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any questions of Staff. Commissioner Arnold asked how many people are living in the units. Mr. Halverson stated there are families living in each unit. Commissioner Schumacher commented that the Staff Report mentioned that the addition needed to be easily removable. Mr. Halverson stated that it is not mentioned in the Staff Report; however it is discussed in the existing Non-Conforming Ordinance but it not a requirement of this project. Commissioner Siekmann asked for clarification regarding the variance request sent to the Coastal Commission and how it affects this project. Mr. Halverson stated the new Non-conforming Uses and Structures chapter is on file with the Coastal Commission and it would allow, with certain findings and permits, for applicants to make additions without applying for a variance. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any further questions of Staff. Seeing none, he asked if the applicant wished to make a presentation. Mike Santarcangelo, 843 Camellia, 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 on the item. Commissioner Scully asked if the neighbors are in agreement with the plans. Mr. Santarcangelo stated that everyone is in agreement with the proposed plans. Planning Commission Minutes September 7, 2011 Page 5 Chairperson L'Heureux asked what sort of precedence this will set for other properties in the area of this project considering the slowness of the Coastal Commission. Mr. Halverson stated this is a unique situation. There are other units that might meet the criteria for a variance but those property owners would need to apply for a variance until the new standards are adopted and approved by the Coastal Commission. DISCUSSION Commissioner Siekmann thanked Staff for their work on the project and stated her support of the project. Commissioner Arnold stated he can support the project. Commissioner Black stated he can support the project. Commissioner Scully also stated she can support the project. Commissioner Schumacher stated his concurrence with his fellow Commissioners. Chairperson L'Heureux stated he can support the project and commended Staff for working with the applicant to find a solution with this project. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Schumacher, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6801 approving Variance V 11-04 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. VOTE: 6-0-1 AYES: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioner Arnold, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Schumacher, Commissioner Scully and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Nygaard ABSTAIN: None Chairperson L'Heureux closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 3 and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item. 4. GPA 11-06/ZCA 11-05/LCPA 11-06/PDP 00-02(E)/SP 144(N) - CHANGES TO POWER PLANT STANDARDS - Request for recommendations of approval to adopt (1) a General Plan Amendment to modify the description of the Public Utilities (U) land use designation and clarify "generation of electrical energy" may be a primary function of the U designation if it is located outside the Coastal Zone but only if it is conducted by a government entity or by a company authorized or approved for such use by the California Public Utilities Commission; (2) a Zone Code Amendment to the Public Utility (P-U) Zone to clarify (a) generation of electrical energy must be by a government entity or by a company authorized or approved for such use by the California Public Utilities Commission, is permitted as a primary use outside the Coastal Zone only, and is permitted as an accessory use in or outside the Coastal Zone only if it is limited to a generating capacity of fewer than 50 megawatts; (b) generation of 50 megawatts or more is prohibited in the Coastal Zone; and (c) transmission of electrical energy is a permitted use if conducted by a government entity or by a company authorized or approved for such use by the California Public Utilities Commission; (3) a Local Coastal Program Amendment to the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan to eliminate a requirement for a report that would address whether preservation of land east of Interstate 5 is needed for power plant expansion; (4) an amendment to the Encina Power Station Precise Development Plan as necessary to be consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance amendments proposed and to make housekeeping changes; and (5) an amendment to the Encina Specific Plan as necessary to achieve consistency with the proposed amendments, delete standards regarding future power plants, and make housekeeping changes. Planning Commission Minutes September 7, 2011 Page 6 Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 4 and stated Senior Planner Scott Donnell would make the Staff presentation. Commissioner Siekmann recused herself from the dais due to being an intervenor with the Carlsbad Energy Commission opposing the building of the Carlsbad Energy Center project. Chairperson L'Heureux opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 4. Mr. Donnell gave a detailed presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any questions of Staff. Commissioner Arnold disclosed that he has written many articles opposing the power plant as well as done work with the Power of Vision group; however he does not have any financial interest in the power plant or any property affected by the power plant. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if there were any other members of the audience who wished to speak on the item. Arnie Roe, 3210 Piragua Street, commented he is a member of the Power of Vision Committee and stated his support of the project before the Commission. Julie Baker, 4213 Sunnyhill Drive, Carlsbad, with Power of Vision, strongly encouraged the Commission to support this project. Kelley Irish, El Arbol Drive, Carlsbad, stated her support of the project. Chairperson L'Heureux acknowledged receipt of a letter from Luce Forward. Brian Fish, 600 West Broadway, from Luce Forward and representing NRG and Cabrillo Power, stated his objection to the project. Commissioner Black asked what the alternatives are if the Commission voted in favor of the amendments. Mr. Fish stated the CEC has discretion on the siting not the City. Chairperson L'Heureux closed public testimony. Jane Mobaldi, Assistant City Attorney responded to the letter and public comments from Luce Forward. Ms. Mobaldi stated that it is in fact true that the City does not have jurisdiction over the power plant siting. As it has been pointed out, the CEC has the ultimate decision with regards to siting of power plants that are more than 50 megawatts; however, the City retains its local land use jurisdiction authority, and the city has the right to specify General Plan designations and zoning. The CEC does take those land use regulations into consideration when making their decision as to whether or not a power plant is properly sited. Ms. Mobaldi commented that in the letter presented by Luce Forward the government code cited provides that when a city contemplates that it is going to be changing some regulations with regards to uses, it has the ability to adopt an interim ordinance to keep everything in the status quo while reviewing potential new regulations. That can be done for up to a two year period at which point the new regulations need to be adopted which is exactly what the City is doing in this case. The City contemplated making revisions with regard to the uses that are currently on the site and in the coastal zone. The City took the two years to study what they wanted to do and they are now back before the Planning Commission to make recommendations on legislative changes which will change the zoning and the General Plan designations. This is exactly the type of follow-up action that the state law contemplated. Ms. Mobaldi further commented that in regards to the point about not complying with CEQA, the City is relying on certain exemptions because the City is not actually changing any land uses, not changing General Plan designations or zoning for any properties. The City is merely drilling down on those regulations and getting more detailed about what uses will be allowed. The City is not absolutely prohibiting all electrical generation. Electrical generation will still be allowed inside and outside the coastal zone; there will just be more restrictions in both of those locations particularly in the coastal zone. In regards to other potential future contemplated uses on these sites, the City has not reached that point Planning Commission Minutes September 7, 2011 Page 7 yet. The City Council has decided to include that as part of the General Plan Update, or Envision Carlsbad, process which is an on-going effort. It is really premature at this point to try and develop any kind of project specific description that would be meaningful in terms of doing a CEQA analysis. That is not piecemealing. With respect to the comment that the amendments are unconstitutionally vague, Ms. Mobaldi stated that the City has the police power to adopt land use regulations and to adopt zoning measures, and there is no constitutional right to build a power plant. The City can prohibit certain types of uses as long as there is reasonable basis for doing so and there is substantial evidence that ties that basis to the public health, safety and welfare. When the City decides to adopt ordinances such as these, they have the power to determine what is in the best interest of the community and what will best promote the health and safety of the community. Ms. Mobaldi stated she does not quite understand the comments stating the City is being discriminatory towards privately owned power companies because the letter remarks that ultimately all power generators will be regulated by the PUC in order to get approval to be on the grid. In any event, Ms. Mobaldi stated the City's interest is in making sure that power operators in the City are adequately regulated, and the City feels it can ensure that by saying that if it is a governmental entity or authorized by the PUC, the company will be adequately regulated to protect the health and safety of the community. The comment regarding whether or not the coastal zone is the most logical place for a power plant, Ms. Mobaldi stated it is not a legal issue and it is a matter of opinion. Ms. Mobaldi stated that the comments about the unconstitutional taking are off base. A regulatory taking has two fundamental components: first there needs to be an economic impact to the property owner from the regulatory action and when there is a challenge alleging a taking, the courts will look at the extent with which it interferes with the investment backed expectations of the property owner. There is ordinarily quite a hurdle on the part of the property owner to show that a regulatory taking has actually been so severe as to give him no viable, economic use of the property and therefore it will leave him with an uncompensated taking of his property by the government for a public use. All of the cases require a finding that the case is ripe to be determined by the court, which means the applicant has to show that the City has actually applied those regulations to the applicant's proposed development and in many cases it requires multiple proposed developments with rejections and denials by the government prior to a finding that there has been a taking. Ms. Mobaldi stated that none of that has been done in this case. Finally, Ms. Mobaldi stated that with respect to the comment that the purpose of the Precise Development Plan and Specific Plan is not to create forward looking standards, the Precise Development Plan is part of the Specific Plan which is part of the zoning for the property. When dealing with land use regulations those documents need to be consistent and need to reflect the current status of the land use regulations, and that is why each of those documents is being amended to reflect the land use refinements. Chairperson L'Heureux stated in GPA 11-06 it refers to a "community service requirement." He asked if the power generated would stay locally or if it would end up some other place. Mr. Donnell stated generally speaking if a power plant or power generator has a contract with SDG&E, that power generation and electricity produced tends to stays within the county therefore benefitting Carlsbad and other parts of the county. With the Carlsbad Energy Center project proposal, for example, there is no contract that that project has signed with SDG&E to sell power to SDG&E so the power it produces may go beyond San Diego County and serve some other jurisdiction in the state. In that example, it would not meet the definition or the primary functions described in the Public Utility designation. Chairperson L.Heureux asked how these proposed actions will impact the desalination plant. Mr. Donnell stated the desalination plant is a use considered consistent with the Public Utility designation, whether zoning or General Plan. That project is fully approved and entitled and already has the necessary lease arrangements or guarantees to the access the existing power station's infrastructure that the desalination plant relies on such as the water intake and outfall. Mr. Donnell does not believe this project which is directed at the generation of power would affect the desalination plant. Chairperson L'Heureux asked about the CEC's involvement in projects outside the coastal zone. Mr. Donnell stated that to clarify, if such a facility were proposed in the City of Carlsbad outside of the coastal zone, and if it were a facility of 50 megawatts or larger, it would probably need a substantial piece of property larger than the 5 acres or so that all the public utility properties are now designated outside the coastal zone. Because of that, since power generation is only permitted in the Public Utility zone chances are an application for such a power plant would need to file with the City amendments to its zoning ordinance and General Plan to designate additional land. That remains in the City's jurisdiction to decide whether redesignating land from one use to another is appropriate. That is not something the CEC would override. Chairperson L'Heureux asked that if property was redesignated, the CEC would still be Planning Commission Minutes September 7, 2011 Page 8 involved. Mr. Donnell stated that would be correct because in the example provided, the plant would be over 50 megawatts but the CEC would look to the City standards to see if it was a permitted use according to city requirements. Chairperson L'Heureux asked if the CEC's concern at that point would be whether or not it is a permitted use at the location. Joe Garuba, Municipal Property Manager, stated the energy commission, in its evaluation of a power plant project, looks at a series of criteria based on location. The CEC functions very similarly to the Planning Commission or the City Council in evaluating the appropriateness of a particular site. DISCUSSION Commissioner Arnold stated that city leaders sometimes have to go out there and do what is best for the communities. He stated his support of the project. Commissioner Black stated he believes in fairness as well as respecting the rights of the citizens of Carlsbad. The Commission is here to represent the community as a whole. He stated he can support the project. Commissioner Scully stated she agrees with her fellow Commissioners. The citizens groups have spoken with their petitions and continued involvement in this situation. Commissioner Schumacher stated his appreciation for the speakers on the item tonight. Tonight's action reflects not only the Council's preference but the community's preference as well. He stated he can support the item. Chairperson L'Heureux thanked Staff for their hard work on the project. He can support the project. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Schumacher, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6803, 6804, 6805, 6806, and 6807 recommending approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA 11-06), Zone Code Amendment (ZCA 11-05), Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 11-06), Precise Development Plan Amendment POP 00-02(E) and Specific Plan Amendment SP 144(N) subject to the findings contained therein. VOTE: 5-0-2 AYES: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioner Arnold, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Schumacher and Commissioner Scully NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Nygaard and Siekmann ABSTAIN: None Chairperson L'Heureux closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 4 and thanked Staff for their presentations. Commissioner Siekmann returned to the dais. COMMISSION COMMENTS None. PLANNING DIRECTOR COMMENTS None. Planning Commission Minutes September 7, 2011 Page 9 CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS None. ADJOURNMENT By proper motion, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of September 7, 2011, was adjourned at 7:48 p.m. DON NEU Planning Director Bridget Desmarais Minutes Clerk