Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-01-20; Planning Commission; Minutes(i PLANNING COMMISSION M . 1nutes . Jan. 20, 2021 CALL TO ORDER: 3:00 p.m. City Council Chamber 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 ROLL CALL: Anderson, Lafferty, Luna, Meenes, Merz and Stine Commissioner Geidner absent APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA: None PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING: Chair Meenes directed everyone's attention to the slide on the screen to review the procedures the Commission would be following for that evening's public hearing. City Planner Neu stated the applicant for Agenda Item 4 has requested the item be continued to the next Planning Commission meeting scheduled for Feb. 3, 2021. 4. AMEND 2020-0008 {DEV14024) -HOOVER STREET SUBDIVISION -An appeal of the City Planner's decision denying a request to amend a condition of approval of Tentative Parcel Map MS 14-05, a four-lot subd_ivision project located at 4276 Adams Street. Pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, the City Planner has determined that the project is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The request to amend a project condition to defer construction of the driveway improvements will not have a significant effect on the environment. A Coastal Development Permit was also approved for the project (CDP 14-08) and the project site is not located within the appealable area of the California Coastal Commission . Motion by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Chair Meenes, to continue Agenda Item 4 to the Feb. 3, 2021 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried 6/0/1 (Commissioner Geidner absent). Chair Meenes opened the public hearing for Item 1 1. CUP 2020-006/CDP 2020-0031-FUTURES ACADEMY AT CARLSBAD-Request for a Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit to operate an approximately 2,850-square-foot private school which involves one-to-one or small group instruction for students between sixth and 12th grade. The school proposes to have a maximum of 35 students and 14 staff members onsite at a · time. The private school is located at 705 Palomar Airport Road, Suite 340, an existing office suite within a three-story office building, generally located south of Palomar Airport Road and east of Avenida Encinas. The project is in the lndustria_l (M) zone and Local Facilities Management Zone 3. The project site is not located within the appealable area of the California Coastal Commission. The City Planner has determined that the project site belongs to a class of projects that the State Secretary of Resources has found do not have significant impact on the environment, and it is therefore categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301 -Existing Facilities -of the state California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 19.04.070(A)(l)(b). Planning Commission Minutes Jan .20,2021 Page2 City Planner Neu introduced Agenda Item 1, recommending the Planning Commission act on the item on consent. He stated Associate Planner Bui is available to make the staff presentation if requested (on file in the Planning Division). ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Stine, to approve Agenda Item 1 on consent and adopt Resolution No. 7392 motion carried, 6/0/1 {Commissioner Geidner absent). 2. GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/ SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018) -WEST OAKS -Request for a recommendation of 1) adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum; 2) approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Local Coastal Program Amendment to modify the land use on a 12.53-acre site from Planned Industrial {Pl) land use designation and Planned Industrial (P-M) zoning to Residential (R-30) land use designation and Residential Density-Multiple (RD-M) zoning, and reconfigure the Open Space {OS) land use designation and {OS) zoning boundaries on the site to accommodate required emergency access and preserve on-site habitat and habitat buffer areas; and 3) approval of a Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit, Habitat Management Plan Permit, and Minor Subdivision for the construction of 192 multifamily residential units located southwest of the intersection of Palomar Airport Road and Palomar Oaks Way within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program and Local Facilities Management Zone 5. The project is located within the appeal area of the California Coastal Commission. City Planner Neu introduced Agenda Item 2 and stated Senior Planner Jones would make the staff presentation (on file in the Planning Division). DISCLOSURES: Commissioners Merz, Anderson and Stine disclosed walking the site. Commissioner Lafferty disclosed looking up the site on Google Earth. Chair Meenes disclosed that he walked the site, looked ·over the gate and glanced from 2 or 3 other locations where he could see the site. STAFF QUESTIONS: Commissioner Stine asked for elaboration of the fire safety precautions implemented into )he project. Senior Planner Jones stated that based on the number of dwelling units, only one point cif public access is necessary for the site for residential use. However, for emergen~y access purposes, the fire department is requiring a secondary access. The secondary access will be controlled solely by the fire department. Commissioner Lafferty asked for clarification on page 3 of the brief, stating that table B reports 42 units whereas she calculated 41 units. - Senior Planner Jones responds that he may have made an error when completing the table and confirms that there are 42 units. Commissioner Lafferty asked how this project maximizes housing opportunities throughout the community and whether a density bonus was considered for this project. Planning Commission Minutes Jan. 20, 2021 Page 3 Senior Planner Jones responded that a density bonus project was not considered by the applicant. City Planner Neu responded that a density bonus is not a requirement, rather an option for the applicant to encourage additional affordable housing. He stated that because this site is designated for industrial use, the city perceives any residential development on this property to be a gain. APPLICANT QUESTIONS: Applicant Greg Waite gave a presentation for the Planning Commission. Commissioner Merz asked if the applicant is comfortable with the parking ratio that is provided. Applicant Greg Waite responded that they do feel the parking ratio is adequate. He stated that meeting the city's requirement was the best way to address any concerns with parking. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Chair Meenes asked if any members of the public submitted comments to be read as part of the meeting. Residents Sherry Hoffman, Kurt Ho/son, Ninia Hammond, Mark Moody, and Adam Guteridge commented in support of the project noting that housing shortages make it difficult for employers to attract top candidates, and those already working within the city to find nearby housing. Also, the project offers affordable housing opportunities that are not currently available and is easily accessible to public transportation. Catherine Ferguson, VP of NCYIMBY, submitted comments in support of the housing opportunities, green allocation, traffic improvements, and accessibility to public transport. Chair Meenes closed public testimony at 4:10 p.m . COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Commissioners Anderson and Stine stated support for the project based on location, accessibility, community outreach, design, and ,use of zoning change. Commissioner Lafferty stated concern over power line noise, fenced open space, low lot coverage, low density and separation of affordable housing. Commissioner Merz stated support for efforts to attract residents who are already employed within the city and to attract workers for businesses in the area. Chair Meenes stated support for the project as it will help RHNA numbers and compliments landscaping plans. ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Stine, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to adopt Resolution No. 7395, Resolution No. 7396, and Resolution No. 7397. Motion carried, 6/0/1 (Commissioner Gelder absent). Planning Commission Minutes Jan.20,2021 Page4 3. CDP2020-0004 (DEV 2019-0124) -MUHE ADDITION -Request for. approval of a Coastal Development Permit to allow for the construction of 4,004 square feet of additions to an existing single-family residence located at 2373 Jefferson Street within the Mello II Segment of the city's Local Coastal Program and Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The project site is within the appealable area of the California Coastal Commission. The City Planner has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that the State Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment, and it is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to Section 15301, new construction to an existing single-family residence, of the state CEQA Guidelines. C City Planner Neu introduced Agenda Item 3 and stated Associate Planner Dan would make the staff presentation (on file in the Planning Division). DISCLOSURES: Commissioners Anderson and Merz disclosed visiting the site. Commissioners Lafferty, Stine and Chair Meenes disclosed driving by the site. STAFF QUESTIONS: Commissioners Merz and Anderson stated concern over the low number of parking spaces when considering the number of rooms that are being proposed in the house. ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Luna, seconded by Commissioner Lafferty, to adopt Resolution No. 7400. Motion carried, 6/0/1 (Commissioner Geidner absent). 5. CT 2019-0004/PUD 2019-0004/CDP 2019-0012 (DEV2018-0087) -330 CHINQUAPIN AVENUE -Request for approval of a Tentative Tract Map, Planned Development Permit and Coastal Development Permit to allow the demolition of a single-family home and the development of a seven-unit, residential air-space condominium project on a 0.44-acre site located at 330 Chinquapin Avenue, within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program and within Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The project site is located within the appealable area of the California Coastal Commission. The City Planner has determined that this project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15332 "In-Fill Development Projects" of the State CEQA Guidelines and will not have any adverse significant impact on the environment. City Planner Neu introduced Agenda Item 5 and stated Associate Planner Garcia would make the staff presentation (on file in the Planning Division). DISCLOSURES: Commissioners Stine, Merz and Chair Meenes disclosed driving by the site. Commissioner Lafferty disclosed that she is familiar with the site. Commissioner Anderson disclosed she drove by the site and looked it up on Google Earth . Planning Commission Minutes Jan. 20, 2021 Page 5 APPLICANT PRESENTATION: Cameron Crockett, applicant, gave a presentation to the Planning Commission. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Resident Jens Peter Timm expressed concern regarding the parking allotment for the additional units being proposed, overcrowding and access to emergency vehicles on the street. He stated that one unit per structure should be a standard in neighborhoods south of Tamarack. COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Commissioners Lafferty, Luna, Anderson,·Stine and Chair Meenes commented in support of the project's creative design. ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Luna, seconded by Commissioner Lafferty, to adopt Resolution No. 7402. Motion carried, 6/0/1 (Commissioner Geidner absent). 6. GPA 2019-0003 (PUB 2019-0009)-HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE 2021-2029-An informational presentation on the update to the General Plan Housing Element, a state-mandated process currently underway that will provide Carlsbad a housing strategy for the upcoming 2021-2029 housing cycle. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065, receiving this report does not constitute a "project" within the meaning of CEQA in that it has no potential to cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and therefore, does not require environmental review. City Planner Neu introduced Agenda Item 6 and stated Senior Planner Donnell would make the staff presentation (on file in the Planning Division). ACTION: The Planning Commission received the presentation. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS/COMMENTS: Commissioner Lafferty commented that discussion from the last historic preservation meeting held on Jan. 11, 2021, included death of owners of both the Culver House and Marron Adobe. She stated that there is uncertainty in what wHI happen regarding the sale of both propertie's. She added that the next meeting is scheduled in March 2021. CITY PLANNER REPORTS: City Planner Neu stated that the City Council is scheduled to discuss the Ponto Planning Area F property on Tuesday, Jan. 26, 2021. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS: None Planning Commission Minutes Jan. 20, 2021 Page 6 ADJOURNMENT: Chair Meenes adjourned the duly noticed meeting at 7:07 p.m. Corina Flores -Minutes Clerk