Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-07-18; Planning Commission; MinutesPlanning Commission Minutes July 18, 2012 Page 1 Minutes of: PLANNING COMMISSION Time of Meeting: 6:00 p.m. Date of Meeting: July 18, 2012 Place of Meeting: COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER Vice Chairperson Siekmann called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Scully led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Vice Chairperson Siekmann, Commissioners Arnold, Black, L’Heureux, Nygaard, and Scully Absent: Chairperson Schumacher STAFF PRESENT Don Neu, City Planner Ron Kemp, Assistant City Attorney Bridget Desmarais, Administrative Secretary Sabrina Michelson, Senior Office Specialist Gary T. Barberio, Community and Economic Development Director Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner Dave de Cordova, Principal Planner Jennifer Jesser, Senior Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Vice Chairperson Siekmann asked if there were any corrections or revisions to the minutes of the meeting from July 3, 2012. Ron Kemp, Assistant City Attorney, commented that Jane Mobaldi, Assistant City Attorney, requested that in her comments on page 11, the word “in” be changed to “on.” MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner L’Heureux, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission approve the minutes from the Regular Meeting of July 3, 2012 as corrected. VOTE: 4-0-3 AYES: Commissioner Arnold, Commissioner Black, Commissioner L’Heureux, and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: Chairperson Schumacher ABSTAIN: Commissioner Nygaard and Commissioner Scully Vice Chairperson Siekmann 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. Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2012 Page 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA None. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING Vice Chairperson Siekmann asked Mr. Neu to introduce the first item. 1. GPA 07-02 – ENVISION CARLSBAD – Planning Commission review of the Envision Carlsbad Draft Preferred Plan. Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 1 and stated Community and Economic Development Director Gary Barberio would make the staff presentation. Vice Chairperson Siekmann opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 1. FOCUS AREA 10 – AVIARA Regarding Focus Area 10, Mr. Barberio stated Staff’s recommendation is to keep the Aviara Resort Site in Focus Area 10 zoned as Travel Recreation Commercial (TR) rather than medium density residential as shown on the Draft Preferred Plan. Vice Chairperson Siekmann asked if there were any questions of Staff. Seeing none, she opened public testimony on Focus Area 10. Jan Kennard, 7251 Spoonbill Lane, Carlsbad, stated that in regards to Lot 10, they have circulated a petition which has over 670 signatures in support of keeping the lot zoned as Travel Recreation Commercial. She urged the Commission to accept Staff’s recommendation to keep the lot zoned as it is shown in the Aviara Master Plan. Jan Fretwell, 7279 Spoonbill Lane, Carlsbad, spoke regarding the rezoning of Lot 10. She stated that if the lot is rezoned to residential as previously recommended, there will be a reduction in recreational space, the local schools will face even more overcrowding, and there will be increase in traffic in an already congested area. She stated there is currently no park within the Aviara Master Plan. Lot 10 provides open space that can be used as park. Ms. Fretwell stated the City should preserve open space, not destroy it. Thomas Krouse, 6637 Curlew Terrace, Carlsbad, concurred with the previous speakers. He thanked staff for the current recommendation for Lot 10. He stated he is concerned about future official planning groups and suggested there should be a specific procedure that no recommendations can be made to change any land which is bound by CC&Rs without notifying the parties involved. Steve Lincoln, 6638 Towhee Lane, Carlsbad, stated the Home Owner’s Association is highly averse to the rezoning and he asked the Commission to follow the recommendation as presented by staff. Vice Chairperson Siekmann asked if there were any other members of the audience who wished to speak on Focus Area 10. Seeing none, she closed the public testimony. Vice Chairperson Siekmann asked if there were any questions of Staff. Vice Chairperson Siekmann asked Mr. Kemp for clarification regarding Mr. Krause comments. Mr. Kemp stated that while there is no legal obligation to do so, the Commission could accept the recommendation to create a new notification requirement. Commissioner Black asked if the property owner could file an application for a change in land use. Mr. Barberio stated yes. Commissioner Nygaard asked if the city would notify the surrounding property owners should the land owner submit an application to rezone the site. Mr. Neu stated yes and that there would be a notice Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2012 Page 3 mailed to a certain radius as well as a notice in the newspaper. He further stated that the City’s website does offer a free subscription service so residents can receive the various notices by email. DISCUSSION Commissioner Nygaard commented that staff has done a great job compromising in regards to this Focus Area. She stated she is in favor of going forward with staff’s recommendation. Commissioner Arnold stated he supports staff’s recommendation. Commissioner L’Heureux stated he is happy to leave the site as recommended by Staff. Commissioner Scully stated she was happy to see all the homeowners involved in the process. She is in full support of keeping the site zoned as recommended by Staff. Commissioner Black also stated he was happy to see such a great turn out of residents from Aviara. He agrees with Staff’s recommendation. Vice Chairperson Siekmann suggested that everyone become more involved and urged the residents become subscribers to the various notices on the City’s website. She also supports staff’s recommendation for Focus Area 10. The Commission voted 7-0 to keep Aviara Lot 10 zoned as Travel Recreation Commercial. FOCUS AREA 2 – PLAZA CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR Mr. Barberio discussed Focus Area 2 and explained staff’s recommendation to leave the area west of the mall remain as it is currently designated, Regional Commercial rather than designating it as Mixed Use as shown on the Draft Preferred Plan. The designation still provides the option of mixed use; however it is by right and not mandatory. FOCUS AREA 9 – PONTO Mr. Barberio stated staff’s recommendation is to leave the land use designation as currently proposed, R- 23 rather than R-30 as requested by the owner’s representative. FOCUS AREA 9 – VISITOR-SERVING COMMERCIAL Mr. Barberio discussed the two Visitor-Serving Commercial sites in the Focus Area that are north of Ponto, one is owned by the state; the other is represented by a “solid circle” in the draft plan. Mr. Barberio stated staff’s recommendation is to leave the state owned property designated as open space. He further suggested that policy text be added to the General Plan indicating land uses will be determined through the Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment Project. For the other site, staff is recommending that the “solid circle” not be included on the Draft Plan and that policy text be included in the General Plan regarding the desire for additional visitor-serving commercial uses along the waterfront. The “solid circle” does not apply to any parcel of land and is misleading on a land use map. FOCUS AREA 11 – LA COSTA RESORT Regarding Focus Area 11, Mr. Barberio stated staff is recommending that the lots remain as currently designated, Travel Recreation Commercial rather than medium density residential as requested by the owner. RANCHO CARLSBAD BASIN “BJ PARCEL” For this area, the property owner is requesting the allowed residential density for the site be increased from R-4 (0-4 du/ac) to the new R-30 designation. Mr. Barberio stated that because this request is from the property owner, there has not been any input from the public or any input from the Envision Carlsbad Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2012 Page 4 committee. He stated that if the Commission supports increasing the density on the site, staff recommends designating it at the R-23 density. Commissioner Nygaard asked if staff evaluated any traffic impacts with the increased density on this site. Mr. Barberio stated not at this time. Commissioner L’Heureux asked what would happen if the Commission did nothing at this time. Mr. Barberio stated the site would remain as it is currently designated which is RLM (0-4 du/ac). NEW OFFICE LOCATIONS Mr. Barberio stated that staff recommends specific sites be identified where the Office uses will not impact nearby Planned Industrial uses. He also stated that staff would develop general plan policy text to guide consideration of future requests to designate areas as Office. Staff is recommending that lots in Carlsbad Oaks North and lots southeast/west of Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Parkway be designated as Office. Mr. Barberio concluded his presentation and asked if there were any questions. Vice Chairperson Siekmann asked if there were any questions of Staff. Commissioner Nygaard asked if Staff will be preparing text to explain the Visitor-Serving Commercial “dot” in Focus Area 9. Mr. Barberio stated yes and explained that the “dot” represents the concept of adding more commercial services along the coast where appropriate sites are identified. This concept can be expressed in policy text rather than on a land use map. Commissioner Nygaard asked about the Rancho Carlsbad Basin BJ proposal. Mr. Barberio stated the property owners have the right to file their own request for a General Plan Amendment. Vice Chairperson Siekmann opened public testimony. Craig Beam, 2815 Townsgate Road, Westlake Village, representing LoneStar Properties in the Ponto area, stated their request is to consider high density slightly above R-23 but not R-30. He asked that the Commission consider a 10% increase from what is allowed in the R-23 zone. Mr. Beam commented that it is important to focus on what can be done and to allow more flexibility. Todd Galarneau, representing the Corky McMillin Companies, 2750 Womble Road, San Diego, stated his support of the Draft Preferred Plan as it relates to the Quarry Creek site. De’Ann Weimer, 6606 Fiona Place, representing Friends of Aviara, stated the current design of the Quarry Creek site goes beyond its topographic limit. Ms. Weimer asked that the panhandle be preserved. Fred Sandquist, 6408 Crossbill Court, Carlsbad, member of EC3, commented on Quarry Creek and Focus Area 3. He stated there was a unanimous consensus on the EC3 to recommend preserving the panhandle. He commented that he is an open space advocate and encouraged the Commission to take another look at Focus Area 3. Cynthia Eppeldauer, representing Archstone, 3 MacArthur Place, Santa Ana, commented on Focus Area 7. She stated that Archstone would like an opportunity to go through the planning process to allow multi- family housing on the Bressi Ranch site. She asked the Commission to maintain flexibility in allocating units from the Excess Dwelling Unit Back. Ms. Eppeldauer invited the Commission and any members of the public to attend a workshop regarding the site. The workshop will be held Saturday July 28, 2012 from 10:00-1:00 at Christian City Church on Gateway Road in Carlsbad. Kathryn McHenry, 3210 Via de Canto, Carlsbad, stated she is appalled the City is even considering over 600 homes in the Buena Vista Ecological Preserve. She asked the Commission to reconsider their decision and to support the recommendation of EC3 to move development off the panhandle. Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2012 Page 5 Barbara Hamilton, 2335 Pio Pico Drive, member of EC3, stated there has been a consistent call for connectivity with nature and the community has consistently voiced their desire to preserve the panhandle throughout the entire process. She commented that the Quarry Creek site is a very historical site for the region, and the Planning Commission should support the recommendation of EC3. Dolores Welty, 2076 Sheridan Place, Leucadia, stated that she is incorporating by reference all testimony concerning Focus Area 3 and Quarry Creek. She commented that it is important to keep the open space in the City of Carlsbad. Ms. Welty stated she is concerned with what goes on with Batiquitos Lagoon. She further commented that she wants to be noticed with any development for Focus Areas 9 and 3. Ms. Welty stated she would like the state to retain control of the land they own along the coast. Bob Ladwig, Ladwig Design Group, 2234 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, spoke in regards to the Basin BJ Parcel. He stated he would like to continue to request the R-30 zoning designation for that parcel. Bill Arnold, 3432 Don Ortega Drive, Carlsbad, representing the Rancho Carlsbad Owners Association, stated the HOA would like to sell the Basin BJ Parcel and supports the requested R-30 designation. Commissioner Scully asked if the Rancho Carlsbad Owner’s Association is in support of the R-30 designation. Mr. Arnold stated they are supportive of either designation, R-30 or R-23. Margie Caruso, 6624 Brookite Court, stated that in regards to Focus Area 7, the residents of Bressi Ranch are strongly opposed to the multi-family proposal from Archstone. Sherry Alvarado, 3327 Tyler Street, Carlsbad, spoke in support of the overpass at Chestnut Avenue. She would like to see the City pursue resolving the partially built structure at Roosevelt and Tyler Street. She further commented that the City should consider the Barrio as part of the Village as she feels the term “barrio” has a negative connotation. Douglas Palmeri, 3748 Arapaho Place, Carlsbad, stated that in regards to Basin BJ, he is against the proposal for high density homes on that site. Apartments would increase traffic. He stated he would like to keep the site designated for single family homes. Jennifer Liu, Arapaho Place, stated that traffic is too much already and she is against any high density housing on the BJ Parcel. Sondra Cima, 2909 Candil Place, stated she would like to keep the Quarry Creek site as open space. She stated the city should consider the Open Space Committee recommendation before making a decision on Quarry Creek. Penny Johnson, 1360 Hillview Court, Carlsbad, agrees with the previous speakers in regards to Quarry Creek. She stated the area will suffer greatly as a result of any development. Ms. Johnson stated that when the Aviara residents were rallying, the Commission supported them, so why not support the residents regarding Quarry Creek. Terie Chalfant, Escondido, spoke in regards to the Barrio. She stated that the term “barrio” means “neighborhood” and emphasizes that the area is a community established by hard working family people. She stated she is not a fan of high density but will work with what the City decides. Ofie Escobedo, owner of Lola’s Deli in the Barrio, stated she is in support of the Barrio and she would hate to see any of the cultural and historical areas disappear. Ms. Escobedo thanked the work done by the EC3 committee. Maryann Viney, 2796 James Drive, Carlsbad, spoke in support preserving the Quarry Creek panhandle. Kasey Cinciarelli, Lyons Court, Carlsbad, stated there are flaws in the Envision process. She stated that all of the changes are being made without public noticing and there is no voice for the environment, no botantist on city staff. The EC3 committee was hand-selected. The Envision process is being used to stuff more development everywhere. The City could choose to refuse housing element mandates. Bressi Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2012 Page 6 Ranch and Aviara residents got their wish but the Commission is not giving the Open Space advocates their wish. Shelley Hayes Carron, resident of the Marron Adobe, stated her concurrence with the previous speakers regarding what the citizens want. She urged the Commission to listen to the recommendations from the community including the recommendations regarding Quarry Creek. Diane Nygaard, representing Preserve Calavera, spoke on Quarry Creek. She stated that 24 years ago the site was 100% open space. She stated she was at the meeting to represent the vision of the community now and for future generations. She would like the Commission to preserve the panhandle, or at least say that is the vision. Eric Woods, 3752 Arapaho Place, Carlsbad, stated he is concerned with the Basin BJ Parcel. He is concerned with the number of units that could be proposed on that site. Mr. Woods stated that any proposal on that site should go through the process. John Chavez, 2405 Granada Way, Carlsbad, spoke in regards to the Barrio. He stated the area is already high density with at least 1 or 2 families per unit and no parking. He asked the Commission to reconsider increasing the density as it will not help property values. Vice Chairperson Siekmann asked if there were any other members of the audience who wished to speak on the item. Seeing none, she closed public testimony. RECESS Vice Chairperson Siekmann called for 10 minute recess at 8:34 p.m. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Vice Chairperson Siekmann called the meeting to order at 8:45 p.m. with all Commissioners present. FOCUS AREA 2 – PLAZA CAMINO REAL Commissioner Nygaard stated she supports staff’s recommendation. Commissioner Arnold stated he also supports the recommendation as presented. Commissioner L’Heureux stated he is bothered that the term “mandatory” was never used when speaking of mixed use. He can support the recommendation. Commissioner Scully stated that as long as the option of mixed use is there, she can support the recommendation. Commissioner Black agreed with his fellow Commissioners to support the recommendation. Vice Chairperson Siekmann also agreed with her fellow Commissioners. Commissioner L’Heureux asked if Ponto would be the only area with the Mixed Use designation if mixed use was removed from Focus Area 2. Mr. Barberio stated yes. By a show of hands, all the Commissioners supported staff’s recommendation. FOCUS AREA 9 – PONTO Commissioner Nygaard stated her support of staff’s recommendation. Commissioner Arnold stated his support of staff’s recommendation. Commissioner L’Heureux can support staff’s recommendation. Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2012 Page 7 Commissioner Scully can also support staff’s recommendation. Commissioner Black can support the recommendation from Staff. Vice Chairperson Siekmann stated she can support Staff’s recommendation. The Commission voted 6-0 to support staff’s recommendation. FOCUS AREA 9 – VISITOR-SERVING COMMERCIAL As long as the policy text is included in the appropriate documents, Commissioner Nygaard can support Staff’s recommendation. Commissioner Arnold agreed with Commissioner Nygaard and stated he can support Staff’s recommendation. Commissioner L’Heureux stated he can support the recommendation to remove the “dot” but would rather designate the Manzano site as Visitor-Serving Commercial. Commissioner Scully stated she can support Staff’s recommendations. Commissioner Black stated he can also support Staff’s recommendations. Vice Chairperson Siekmann stated her support of the recommendations. With a vote of 6-0, the Planning Commission can support removing the dot from the Preferred Plan. The Commission voted 5-1 (L’Heureux) in regards to the designation for the Manzano property. FOCUS AREA 11 – LA COSTA RESORT The Planning Commission can support staff’s recommendation. RANCHO CARLSBAD BASIN BJ PARCEL Commissioner Nygaard stated any change to the designation of the property needs to go through the process. She stated the site should remain as it is currently. Commissioner Arnold stated he agrees with Commissioner Nygaard. Commissioner L’Heureux agreed that it should be left as it currently is. Commissioner Scully stated the site should remain as is and any requests should go through the proper channels. Commissioner Black stated he would like to keep the site designated as RLM. Vice Chairperson Siekmann agreed with her fellow Commissioners. The Commission voted 6-0 to leave the site designated as it currently is. NEW OFFICE LOCATIONS Commissioner Nygaard stated the site on Palomar Airport Road makes sense; however, she feels the site on Faraday is problematic. Commissioner Arnold agreed with Commissioner Nygaard. Commissioner L’Heureux agrees with designating the Palomar Airport Road site as Office. Regarding the Carlsbad Oaks North site, he can see it designated for office, however, it is the medical option that Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2012 Page 8 causes a problem. Commissioner L’Heureux asked if there are sufficient tools to check compatibility with adjacent uses. Mr. Neu and Mr. Barberio described the existing regulations that ensure compatibility with adjacent uses. Commissioner L’Heureux asked if there will be enough Planned Industrial sites 20 years from now. Mr. Barberio stated that much of the land designated as Planned Industrial is developed with Office uses. Mr. Bhatia stated that for a myriad of reasons that issue should not be a big concern. Commissioner L’Heureux stated he can support office at the Carlsbad Oaks North site. Commissioner Scully can support both recommendations from Staff. Commissioner Black can support Staff’s recommendations. Vice Chairperson Siekmann asked about sensitive uses next to medical uses. Mr. Barberio described existing regulations related to the location of sensitive uses in proximity to uses which use hazardous materials. Regarding the Palomar Airport Road site, the Commission voted 6-0 to support Staff’s recommendation. The Commission voted 4-2 (Arnold and Nygaard) to support Staff’s recommendation for the Carlsbad Oaks North site. QUARRY CREEK Vice Chairperson Siekmann asked the Commission if they wanted to reconsider their previous recommendation to allow the Quarry Creek Master Plan process determine the land uses for Quarry Creek. Vice Chairperson Siekmann asked about the recent decision by Oceanside regarding the Rancho Del Oro interchange at Highway 78. Mr. Neu stated that he had previously forwarded to the Commission the letters city Staff sent to the City of Oceanside providing comments on their circulation element. Mr. Barberio stated that no new information has been presented that would require the Commission to reconsider their previous recommendation on Quarry Creek. Commissioner Black asked about the previous recommendation. Mr. Neu stated the previous recommendation by the Commission is that more detailed information about the property would be provided through the Master Plan Environmental Impact Report in order to make decisions regarding appropriate land uses. Commissioner Nygaard stated she is in favor of the process. She feels the Commission cannot evaluate the site based on what they feel they would like for the site. There will be more detailed information presented to the Commission in the Environmental Impact Report for the Quarry Creek Master Plan Commissioner Arnold realizes the Council set forth a minimum number of units for the site through the Housing Element. He would like to look at it as a big picture process. He stated that for the record, in looking at that land mass, he feels this is a very important ecological barrier, and as planners it is incumbent on the Commission to see what the site will look like in the future. Commissioner Arnold feels the density is too much and the City needs to explore ways to preserve the panhandle. He recommends that the Quarry Creek Master Plan project is a mistake and the City should proceed with caution. Commissioner L’Heureux stated that because of the complexity of the Quarry Creek project, the Commission owes it to future generations to have as much information as possible. He understands the community wanting to preserve as much open space as possible and he feels the concept is trying to preserve as much as possible. Commissioner L’Heureux would like as much preserved as possible even if it means clustering the units on the site. He feels the Master Plan process needs to take its course. Commissioner Scully would like to see the discussion reopened, specifically regarding the panhandle. She feels the Commission needs to heed the suggestions of the EC3 with this property just as the Commission did for all the other focus areas. Commissioner Black feels he does not have enough information to reopen the discussion. Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2012 Page 9 Vice Chairperson Siekmann stated she would like to see an EIR for this site. She feels both sides deserve to have an EIR adequately evaluate the site. While she supports open space, Vice Chairperson Siekmann would like to wait until the Master Plan development proposal is presented to the Commission. Commissioner Arnold stated an EIR will only articulate a plan, not a vision. Commissioner Scully asked how much flexibility the Commission will have once an EIR is prepared. Mr. Neu stated the applications that will eventually be before the Commission will be discretionary so there will be a great deal of discretion although the Commission will be asked to evaluate the project in terms of CEQA impacts or lack of impacts so there will be some level of constraints. The Commission will also be reviewing the project in the context of the City’s ordinances, such as the Habitat Management Plan. The developer’s plan currently proposes 56% of the site as open space. The other alternatives in the EIR evaluate additional open space and transferring density to other areas of the site. The Commission will not be locked into accepting one alternative over another. Mr. Barberio stated the Commission’s current recommendation is to not a make a change to the existing General Plan in the Quarry Creek area. Commissioner Scully asked what the panhandle designation is currently. Mr. Barberio stated OS and RLM. Commissioner L’Heureux commented that if the Commission keeps the designations as they are today for the site that will become the base and if the applicant wants anything more than that, the burden will be on the applicant to convince the Commission that something more intense than what is already provided for in the General Plan is warranted. Mr. Barberio stated that will be in the context of the actions the city has already taken for the area. There is a housing element program for the site, the site has been designated a smart growth site. However, that does not commit anything on the site until the final decision is made with the Master Plan. Commissioner Nygaard asked if it prevents the Commission from moving some units closer together to preserve more open space. Mr. Barberio stated there are examples of previously approved Master Plans, such as Robertson Ranch, where the Master Plan that came before the hearing was not the Master Plan which ended being approved. It is not uncommon that once all the information is provided, it is analyzed, and all the options are weighed, the Commission’s recommendation to the City Council is not what the Master Plan is. The Planning Commission voted 4-2 (Scully and Arnold) to keep the current recommendation for the Quarry Creek site. FOCUS AREA 7 – PALOMAR CORRIDOR and BARRIO Commissioner Arnold stated that regarding the Barrio, the Commission should recommend to City Council that the Commission celebrates the area and the heritage. He suggested that funds be allocated to the museum. Commissioner Arnold also stated that the Commission should be very careful with the density for the Barrio. Commissioner L’Heureux does not want to reopen the discussion regarding Focus Area 7. For the Barrio area, he stated he suggested that the Barrio and the Village be merged into one. Commissioner Scully does not want to reopen either area for discussion. Commissioner Black and Vice Chairperson Siekmann stated their agreement with Commissioner Scully. Commissioner L’Heureux stated one of the challenges for the Barrio area will be infill and how the city deals with it. The Commission voted 6-0 to not reopen Focus Area 7 – Palomar Corridor for discussion. The Commission voted 5-1 (Arnold) to not reopen the discussion regarding the Barrio area. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to accept the Draft Preferred Plan as revised.