Motion to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 6, 2007, with the noted correction. Moved by Commissioner Cardosa, seconded by Commissioner Montgomery.

Vote to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 6, 2007, with the noted correction. (Approved)

PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING

1. CDP 07-02 - WALTERS GUEST HOUSE - Request for approval of a Coastal Development Permit to allow for the construction of a 1,461-square-foot detached guest house on a 1.47-acre site previously developed with a single family residence located at 5305 Carlsbad Boulevard within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Local Facilities Management Zone 3.
Resolution No. 6307

Walters Guest House Staff Report

Planning Director Don Neu stated Item 1 would normally be heard in a public hearing context; however, the project appears to be minor and routine in nature with no outstanding issues and Staff recommends approval. He recommended that the public hearing be opened and closed, and that the Commission proceed with a vote as a consent item, including the errata sheet, if any. Staff would be available to respond to questions if the Commission or someone from the public wished to pull the item.

Chairperson Baker asked if any member of the Planning Commission wished to pull Agenda Item 1.

Chairperson Baker asked if any member of the audience wished to address Agenda Item 1; seeing none, she opened and closed public testimony.

Motion to that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6307 approving Coastal Development Permit CDP 07-02 based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. Moved by Commissioner Cardosa, seconded by Commissioner Whitton.

Vote to that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6307 approving Coastal Development Permit CDP 07-02 based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. (Approved)

Chairperson Baker closed the Public Hearing on Item 1 and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item.

2. CUP 190(B) - SUDAN INTERIOR MISSION - Request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to amend the conditions of approval for a faith-based retirement village located at 1400 Flame Tree Lane in Local Facilities Management Zone 20.
Resolution No. 6314

Sudan Interior Mission Staff Report

Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 2 and stated Assistant Planner Dan Halverson would make the Staff presentation.

Mr. Halverson gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions the Commission may have.

Commissioner Boddy asked what the period of time is for the extension. Mr. Halverson stated the proposed extension is for a 20-year period.

Commissioner Whitton stated the current owner is the Sudan Interior Mission and asked who the proposed new owner is. Mr. Halverson stated he was unaware of who the new owners might be.

Commissioner Dominguez asked what the average time span is for a Conditional Use Permit issued to an assisted living facility. Mr. Halverson stated he would defer to Mr. Neu.

Planning Director Don Neu stated the average would probably be 10 to 15 years.

Commissioner Baker asked about the City’s recent Conditional Use Permit updates. Mr. Neu explained the current methods used to determine the length of time permitted when issuing a Conditional Use Permit.

Jack Henthorn, Jack Henthorn & Associates, 5365 Avenida Encinas, Suite A, Carlsbad, gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions.

Chairperson Baker asked if the Applicant wished to give a presentation.

Commissioner Cardosa asked if the new owners intend to use the property in a manner consistent with the existing use. Mr. Henthorn stated he fully anticipates that they will.

Commissioner Cardosa asked if the current residents would be allowed to remain at the facility. Mr. Henthorn stated they would.

Commissioner Montgomery stated the Commission has approved several types of Conditional Use Permits in the past. He asked what the specific use of this site currently is and if it is strictly housing or is a sanctuary present for public worship services. Mr. Henthorn stated the site is currently used for meetings and residential. He added there is not a public worship facility.

Commissioner Whitton asked if the applicant has any information about the new owners and what will their practice be. Mr. Henthorn stated the property has not been officially sold, but there are a couple of faith-based prospects who have agreed to meet the obligations associated with the Conditional Use Permit.

Chairperson Baker asked if there were any members of the audience who wished to address the Commission on Agenda Item 2; seeing none, she opened and closed public testimony.

Commissioner Whitton stated he could not support the project based on the lack of available information regarding the parties to the sale.

Commissioner Dominguez expressed concern for the lengthy time period of the proposed extension and would prefer a 10-year extension.

Commissioner Montgomery stated he concurs with Commissioner Dominguez.

Lengthy discussion ensued among the Commissioners regarding the amount of time that should be allowed for this extension.

Commissioner Montgomery suggested the Commission reach a decision limiting the period of time for the extension to 15 years.

Chairperson Baker asked if the Commission should concern itself with who the occupant is as long as the conditions of the Conditional Use Permit are being met. Deputy City Attorney Ron Kemp stated that no value judgment should be made based on what type of faith-based organization occupies the site.

Commissioner Douglas asked if there were a future violation of the use, would the City have any recourse to remedy the situation. Mr. Neu explained the process of code enforcement and recourse available to the Commission. Discussion ensued regarding the typical uses associated with a Conditional Use Permit.

Commissioner Cardosa withdrew the proposed motion and asked if the applicant would be open to a reduction in the time allowed for the extension. Mr. Henthorn stated he is open to a reduction in time, as long as there was a provision to come before the Commission in the future to obtain a subsequent extension.

Commissioner Whitton stated his objection has nothing to do with whether the applicant is faith-based or not. He added his objection rests on the fact that no information is available about the proposed use and the length of time proposed. Mr. Henthorn stated all parties involved in the discussions regarding the sale of this property fully intend to comply with the conditions as recommended by Staff.

Commissioner Douglas stated her understanding is that the number of residents currently residing at this facility has dwindled and the reason for the sale is to increase the occupancy. Mr. Henthorn confirmed this to be true.

Commissioner Boddy asked if annual reviews are conducted by the City to ensure compliance with Conditional Use Permit conditions. Mr. Neu stated that reviews are conducted and he explained the process that is used.

Commissioner Boddy asked if there are any restrictions to the number of amendments an applicant can seek for a further extension of time of a Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Kemp stated he does not believe there are. Mr. Neu reviewed the standard condition regarding the extension terms that can be granted.

Commissioner Dominguez stated he recalls times in the past where a Conditional Use Permit has come before the Commission after it has expired. Mr. Neu stated those instances have occurred and the current process and practices have been reviewed and if a Conditional Use Permit has gone too far beyond expiration, the applicant is required to apply for a new permit.

Chairperson Baker asked if any member of the audience wished to address Agenda Item 2; seeing none, she opened and closed public testimony.

Motion to that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6314 approving Conditional Use Permit Amendment CUP 190(B), changing the existing condition time-frame from 20 years to 15 years and allowing the extension request per the existing condition, based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. Moved by Commissioner Cardosa, seconded by Commissioner Montgomery.

Vote to that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6314 approving Conditional Use Permit Amendment CUP 190(B), changing the existing condition time-frame from 20 years to 15 years and allowing the extension request per the existing condition, based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. (Approved)

Chairperson Baker closed the Public Hearing on Agenda Item 2 and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item.

3. SDP 06-05/SUP 06-03 - PACIFIC ATHLETIC CLUB - Request for adoption of a Negative Declaration and approval of a Site Development Plan and Special Use Permit to allow the development of a 102,191-square-foot health club on a 15.94-acre site located on the southwest corner of the intersection of El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road in Local Facilities Management Zone 5.
Resolutions No. 6315, 6316, 6317

Pacific Athletic Club Staff Report

Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 3 and stated Associate Planner Jason Goff would make the Staff presentation assisted by Associate Engineer Frank Jimeno.

Chairperson Baker opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 3.

Associate Planner Jason Goff gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions the Commission might have.

Chairperson Baker asked about the afternoon back-up at the eastbound turn from southbound El Camino Real to Palomar Airport Road and if that would be considered a signal failure. Mr. Jimeno stated it is not considered a signal failure. Deputy City Engineer Bob Johnson further explained reasons for the back-up and the remedies that are in process at this time.

Commissioner Cardosa asked Staff to discuss the drainage facility at the site. Mr. Jimeno gave an explanation of the drainage onto and off of the site. He pointed out the drainage location on the displayed site map.

Commissioner Whitton asked if a deceleration lane will be provided on southbound El Camino Real at the entrance to the Olympic Village; he added he would like to see a turn lane installed at that location. Commissioner Whitton stated he had requested some statistics regarding the accident history of this location. Mr. Jimeno stated the traffic accident records were reviewed and no accidents at that location were reported. Further discussion ensued among the Commission and Staff regarding the location, including statistical data.

Chairperson Baker stated u-turns are currently not allowed at that intersection; she asked if that would change. Mr. Johnson stated that would not change due to restrictions on Palomar Airport Road.

Commissioner Whitton asked if the development would include any use of solar energy devices. Mr. Windell stated while the project includes passive solar design, it would not include any active energy-producing devices.

Chairperson Baker asked the applicant if he would like to give a presentation.

Bill Hofman, Hofman Planning & Engineering, 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 150, Carlsbad, gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer questions.

Steve Windell, Ginsler, 648 Wildcat Canyon, Berkeley, gave a brief presentation and stated he is available to answer questions.

Sandy Hoffer, Western Athletic Clubs, 1 Lombard Street, San Francisco, gave a brief presentation and stated she is available to answer questions.

Commissioner Boddy asked if the large wooden doors depicted at the entrance are functional or ornamental. Mr. Windell stated they are fully functional.

Commissioner Douglas asked how long the Pacific Athletic Club has been open in Carmel Valley. Ms. Hoffer stated the club opened at that location in the year 2002 and has a membership of 4,200 with 160 to 165 staff members.

Chairperson Baker asked about current plans to remodel the existing Olympic Resort. Ms. Hoffer stated a complete renovation is scheduled to take place.

Commissioner Cardosa asked if Western Athletic Clubs currently manages any hotel facilities. Ms. Hoffer stated they do not.

Commissioner Douglas asked about the renovation efforts and the design style. Ms. Hoffer stated it is likely the appearance will remain as it is now with renovation done to the surfaces. Discussion ensued regarding the entrance to the hotel and design features of the site.

Chairperson Baker asked if there were any members of the audience who wished to address the Commission on Agenda Item 3; seeing none, she opened and closed public testimony.

Commissioner Dominguez stated the original landscape design only provided 15 feet of landscaping. He asked what happened to the scenic overlay zone when this application was originally approved. Mr. Neu stated the El Camino Real Corridor Standards were adopted in February of 1984 and this project may have preceded the adoption of those standards.

Chairperson Baker asked if a deceleration lane were required on El Camino Real, what ramifications would be felt by the overlay zone and current landscaping plans. Mr. Goff stated, in order to be consistent with the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards, 30 feet of landscape set-back would be required and approximately 35 parking spaces would be eliminated. Some discussion ensued regarding the ramifications of adding a deceleration lane and possible alternatives. Mr. Jimeno and Mr. Johnson addressed some questions Chairperson Baker had regarding the history of the intersection in question.

Commissioner Montgomery asked about the entrance to the project and the width of the large wooden doors. He also questioned the courtyard area and the ability for vehicles to turn around within it. Mr. Jimeno stated he would defer to the applicant to answer that question.

Mr. Goff stated as depicted on the plans, the driveway entering the motor-court area, when the doors are completely open, appears to show a width equal to the driveway running along the face of the building. He added he believes that is a fire lane and is 26 feet wide. Commissioner Montgomery asked about the colonnade of palm trees depicted on the plans. He added he wants to ensure they are of appropriate size.

Michael Kato, Topia Landscape Architects, 944 Waples, San Diego, addressed the concerns regarding the landscape design of the site. Discussion ensued between members of the Commission and Mr. Kato.

Commissioner Whitton stated he advocates providing a right-turn-lane on El Camino Real into the Olympic Hotel, but suggested it does not need to be the length previously described. Mr. Jimeno stated a typical right-turn lane is a minimum of 250 feet in length, excluding the transition, which is 120 feet in length. He added it could be shortened, but then it would be below normal City standards.

Commissioner Montgomery stated if the right-turn lane is provided, he prefers not interrupting any of the parking planned for the site. He added he would rather see the landscaping affected instead.

Chairperson Baker asked if it is possible to reduce the requirements, as outlined in the overlay zone, to accommodate the deceleration lane. Mr. Neu stated he believes that there is a provision in the El Camino Real Corridor Standard, which is referred to as "deviations to standards" which is similar to a variance process. He added there are four findings Staff would be required to make dealing with the specific site, the intention of the corridor standards and whether those intentions are still being maintained. Mr. Neu stated if that was the Commission’s intention, Staff would need to receive direction to proceed to make the necessary findings. Chairperson Baker suggested the Commission hold off on that decision for a couple of minutes to see if the support exists to move forward.

Commissioner Montgomery stated that for vision purposes, somewhat of a remodeling of the Olympic is being done, seeing that it was outside of the sight-line of the tower, he stated he is guessing that allows the hotel, at one point in time, to be refurbished. If not, even re-scraped and rebuilt. If that is the case, in theory, if there was a deceleration lane, maybe with the vision we already have the ability to access the site. He added there could possibly be underground parking added and the applicant would have to come back and redo what has already been done.

Chairperson Baker asked if any member of the Commission had anything further to add with regard to the deceleration lane at this point. No response was heard from the dais. Commissioner Whitton suggested a show of hands from the Commissioners.

Chairperson Baker asked the Commission for a show of hands of those willing to either reduce the parking or reduce the overlay zone requirements to accommodate a deceleration lane for access to the property. Commissioners Montgomery and Whitton raised their hands. Commissioner Boddy stated she would be willing to reduce the landscaping in the overlay zone, but could not support a reduction in the parking. Chairperson Baker stated it seems as if reducing the parking is not a favorable idea and asked the Commission for a show of hands in favor of exploring the possibility of reducing the landscaping. Commissioner’s Whitton, Boddy, Montgomery, and Chairperson Baker all raised their hands in support of the latest suggestion to explore the possibility of reducing the landscaping in the overlay zone.

Chairperson Baker stated there are four Commissioners willing to explore that option. Mr. Neu clarified that the Commission wished to pursue the option of reducing the landscape in the overlay zone. Commissioner Dominguez asked if Staff could provide the required findings in order to set perimeters for the Commission. Mr. Neu proceeded to read the core areas that would need to be considered in order to take action in that direction and asked the Commission to offer some guidance as to the thinking behind the justification for each. He added with that in mind, Staff could prepare the final documents and the Commission would have two options, either allow staff to prepare to reflect the Commission’s direction and move forward that way or if the Commission would actually like to see them formulated and then return before the Commission for a final review. If the latter is chosen, the Commission would then be continuing the item to a later date where Staff would return with the new documents for the Commission’s review.

Commissioner Dominguez asked if it would be possible to deviate from the standards and reduce the right-turn lane to better accommodate the corner. Deputy City Attorney Ron Kemp stated one of the concerns is that the underlying fee owner here is the County of San Diego and there is some question about the right-of-way and the ability to extend the road at that location. Mr. Jimeno stated the requirement would be similar to what is being required at the eastbound to southbound right-turn lane on Palomar Airport Road. He added approximately 13 additional feet of right-of-way, along El Camino Real, would be required to be dedicated to the City. Mr. Kemp asked if that dedication would have to be acquired from the County. Mr. Jimeno stated the County would have to be consulted regarding their dedication requirements along Palomar Airport Road, but he doesn’t believe the issue has been raised.

Mr. Kemp stated this is one of the concerns to be considered. He added in previous dealings with the County on a Conditional Use Permit that was issued for an expansion at the Coast Waste Management site there was an unwillingness to sign some required documents for that expansion. He stated regarding expanding the road onto County property, even though this is a long-term lease, he stated he does not know what the terms of the lease are and what ability the lessee would have to accommodate a deceleration lane. Mr. Kemp asked if there is someone present from the project who could speak about the terms of the lease; the Commission would like to hear more details.

Mr. Hofman stated the applicant has been in contact with the County and added he is not sure if it will be an issue. He stated it is something that will have to be addressed with regard to Palomar Airport Road anyway. Mr. Hofman added the County has been very accommodating so far; however, the need for a deceleration lane has not been shown, and landscaping gives it a much more appealing entry and provides for the scenic corridor standards. He added two traffic studies, with two revisions have been conducted and can be provided to the Commission.

Commissioner Whitton stated he advocates the deceleration lane and added he believes it is a matter of public safety. He stated the vegetation could be cut down and possibly a wall added, as opposed to eliminating parking.

Commissioner Dominguez stated his desire to speak in favor of the application as it stands. He added apparently the City has conducted substantial studies and have not indicated a problem. He stated this type of action would open a new substantial primary approach to the property, which would most likely de-emphasize the old entrance.

Commissioner Boddy asked what the distance is from the intersection at El Camino Real to the entrance in question. Mr. Jimeno stated he believes it is approximately 450 feet from the curb return to the driveway. Continued discussion was conducted between the Commission and Staff regarding the feasibility of adding the debated deceleration lane, including exploration of widening the driveway in question.

Mr. Johnson reminded the Commission that in the discussion of a right-turn only lane, it is important to factor in that it would not be a deceleration lane if it is ultimately approved by the Planning Commission. It would function as and be considered as a right-turn only lane; there is a difference in lengths and operating speeds. Mr. Johnson went on to explain the more technical details of proposing a turn lane at the site, including the effect to sight distance, the bicycle lane, the possibility of retaining walls, and grade on the site. Mr. Johnson added Staff has reviewed this project from this standpoint and does not believe there is an existing safety issue.

Commissioner Montgomery stated he is in agreement with Mr. Johnson and reminded the group of the difficulties involved with designing from the dais. He added he is inclined to agree with Chairperson Baker on widening the driveway, even to the point of creating a small median, which would allow for an appropriate entrance.

Chairperson Baker asked the Commission if there is support to widen the driveway. Commissioner Cardosa asked what the current width of the driveway is. Bob Wojcik stated the existing driveway is approximately 45 feet in width. He went on to explain some details regarding the configuration of the current driveway and the possibility of adding a right-turn only lane at that location, including the consideration of the handicapped ramp.

Commissioner Boddy asked if, when the traffic studies were done, a prediction was made regarding the number of people would use each driveway. She added she thinks most people would use the entrance located on El Camino Real. Mr. Jimeno stated the traffic study made the assumption of a fifty-fifty split between each entrance.

Commissioner Whitton stated he can support the project, but strongly feels a right-turn lane is necessary in the interest of public safety.

Commissioner Boddy stated she supports the project and feels it satisfies all of the City requirements. She added she is excited to see the project developed in the City, but does share concern about the traffic issue.

Commissioner Douglas stated she can support the project but does have concern about traffic congestion at the driveway. She added she is disappointed that the El Camino Real median left-turn lane will be closed.

Commissioner Dominguez stated he thinks this is an outstanding and detailed application.

Commissioner Montgomery stated he supports the project and loves the detail in the design.

Commissioner Cardosa stated he supports the project and added it is a unique facility.

Chairperson Baker stated she will support the project but shares concern for the right-turn lane.

Motion to approve that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6315 adopting a Negative Declaration and adopt Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 6316 and 6317 approving Site Development Plan (SDP 06-05) and Special Use Permit (SUP 06-03), based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. Moved by Commissioner Cardosa, seconded by Commissioner Dominguez.

Vote to approve that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6315 adopting a Negative Declaration and adopt Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 6316 and 6317 approving Site Development Plan (SDP 06-05) and Special Use Permit (SUP 06-03), based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. (Approved)

RECESS

Chairperson Baker closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 3 and recessed the meeting for a ten-minute break at 7:55 p.m.

MEETING CALLED TO ORDER

Chairperson Baker reconvened the Planning Commission meeting at 8:06 p.m. with all Commissioners present and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item.

4. MP 178(E)/CT 06-24/CUP 06-19/SDP 06-17 - BRESSI RANCH VILLAGE CENTER - Request for a determination that the project is within the scope of the previously certified Bressi Ranch Master Plan Program EIR and that the Program EIR adequately describes the activity for the purposes of CEQA; a request for a recommendation of approval of a Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17); and approval of a Minor Master Plan Amendment (MP 178(E)), Tentative Tract Map (CT 06-24), and Conditional Use Permit (CUP 06-19), for the subdivision of 14.15 acres of land into 8 commercial lots, and the development of 122,800 square feet of commercial retail space within 12 buildings which include a 43,830-square-foot grocery store and 12,000-square-foot specialty food store, generally located south of Gateway Road, west of El Fuerte Street, north of Bressi Ranch Way, and north of Paradise Road, in Planning Area 15 of the Bressi Ranch Master Plan and in Local Facilities Management Zone 17. Resolution Nos. 6310, 6311, 6312, 6313

Bressi Ranch Village Center Staff Report

Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 4 and stated Senior Planner Christer Westman would make the Staff presentation assisted by Associate Engineer Clyde Wickham.

Chairperson Baker opened the Public Hearing on Agenda Item 4.

Senior Planner Christer Westman gave a brief presentation including an overview of some recommended amendments and an errata sheet. He stated he would be available to answer any questions the Commission might have.

Commissioner Dominguez asked how the decisions to remove certain elements that were included in the original Master Plan document were made. Mr. Westman stated those decisions were based on discussion with the applicant and review of the preliminary site plan. He added those discussions included the considered intent of the site plan, the functionality, and benefits that might be felt by the community. Some discussion ensued regarding the original Master Plan versus the current amended site plan.

Chairperson Baker asked the applicant if he would like to give a presentation.

Jeff Williams, LNR Property Corporation, 4275 Executive Square, San Diego, gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions and introduced various members of his development team who would also answer any questions presented.

Commissioner Whitton asked about ingress and egress points associated with the proposed site of Trader Joe’s. Mr. Williams stated a representative from Trader Joe’s would best be suited to speak about the layout of the store.

Greg Paquet, Regional Vice President, Trader Joe's, 800 South Shamrock, Monrovia, stated Trader Joes is not involved in the design and development of the site plan for the Bressi Ranch Village Center. He added Trader Joes designed the interior of the store and worked with the site plan design as it was presented.

Commissioner Whitton asked about the possibility of an ingress and egress point located on Finnila Place. He added the warehouse area is located on the south side of the store and suggested that location have windows in order to accommodate the street scene. Mr. Paquet stated that the setup of the store has been reviewed, considering the location of the entrance, and it would be necessary to completely shift the design in order to make that type of change. He added he is open to any suggestions and will review the design further.

Commissioner Dominguez stated the Commission has been led to believe that Trader Joe's is committed to the particular layout presented. He asked if all of the needs of Trader Joe's could be met, would they be willing to conduct another review. Mr. Paquet stated, given the amount of time his team has devoted to the design of the floor plan and considering further delays associated with another review, the design presented is the one he would like to see implemented. Further discussion ensued regarding the possible reconfiguration of the floor plan and ramifications that might be felt. He distributed a copy of the proposed Trader Joe's internal layout including a possible change to the design that may be feasible.

Commissioner Montgomery stated his understanding of the difficulties involved with rotating the interior layout of the store. He suggested a second access point at the corner of the store, but understands there are other difficulties with that option. Commissioner Montgomery stated his belief that the project needs another access point. He added if the building itself was enlarged toward the parking lot to some degree, another type of use could be added at that corner location to energize the circle in place of another ingress, egress point. Mr. Williams stated the building is currently proposed to be located directly on the right-of-way. He added it would be difficult to create an opportunity there without obstructing the public right-of-way. Mr. Williams stated detailed discussions have been held with the Mulberry Community regarding Trader Joe’s loading dock and the current design honors the concerns that were revealed as a result of those discussions.

Further discussion ensued regarding the current layout and all of the possible configurations that have been explored.

Commissioner Whitton stated he would prefer to see an exit added at the corner to activate the community. He added he is glad to see the windows on the side. Mr. Williams stated this building has beautiful elevations on three sides and has great architectural design.

Commissioner Dominguez stated he has a concern that the east side of the green, once the road was eliminated, created an invisible barrier. He added he would like to see the addition of a footpath parallel to the green to direct flow into the promenade area. He stated he would accept a path of decomposed granite outlined by landscaping. Commissioner Dominguez stated other than that, this is a tremendous application.

Chairperson Baker stated her agreement with Commissioner Dominguez. She added she sees the Commission unanimously nodding their heads in agreement with the idea of a sidewalk or path being added on the east side of the green. Mr. Williams stated there is a sidewalk located on the property fronting the park. Further discussion ensued regarding the feasibility of a trail linking the various areas within the Village Center.

Chairperson Baker asked if there were any further questions for the applicant; seeing none, she stated there are 17 requests to speak from members of the audience and opened public testimony.

Kelly Morrison Pop, Boys and Girls Club, 3115 Roosevelt Street, Carlsbad, spoke about her relationship to the community and added she is aware of the issues related to the path and is open to discussion about alternatives. Ms. Pop stated that she is in favor of the project as submitted.

Commissioner Douglas disclosed that she sits on the Board of Directors for the Boys and Girls Club and that she is a resident of Rancho Carrillo and added she is familiar with the homeowners association, who has submitted a letter in support of the project. She added that she is not a signee and did not participate in those discussions.

Bryan Clark, 2641 Hancock Circle, Carlsbad, stated he has concerns about the changes to the site and is not in favor of the proposed design.

Marla Hollender, 6310 Huntington Drive, Carlsbad, spoke briefly about her concerns related to the deviations in the project from what was presented when she moved there. She added she believes they will have a negative effect on the community. She stated she is not in favor of the project as submitted.

Barbara Mercado, 2650 Hancock Circle, Carlsbad, stated she concurs with the previous speakers regarding the need for a roadway. She questioned if the windows portrayed in the drawings on the southern side of Trader Joes, are real windows or a facade. Ms. Mercado stated she does not support a 24-hour retail store at this location and is not in favor of the project as submitted.

Commissioner Boddy asked if Ms. Mercado is opposed to any type of drive-through facility at this location. Ms. Mercado confirmed that she is.

Tara Clark, 2641 Hancock Circle, Carlsbad, stated she would yield her time to her neighbor, Peter Katz, because they share the same views on this issue.

Jeff Sobczyk, Project Management Advisors, 462 Stevens Avenue, Solana Beach, stated he is representing the owner of an 18-acre parcel located just north of the site. He added the Bressi Ranch Village Center will be a great amenity and is in support of it for many reasons.

Peter Katz, 6310 Huntington Drive, Carlsbad, reviewed his credentials and gave an extensive slide presentation utilizing time donated to him from several of his neighbors. He outlined his objections to the current application and urged the Commission to consider re-evaluating the site design.

Kimberly Pottin, 6327 Huntington Drive, Carlsbad, stated she is in agreement with Mr. Katz and added she has concerns about safety with the proposed design.

Jon Nalbandian, 2680 Bressi Ranch Way, Carlsbad, stated he is in agreement with Mr. Katz. He has been a resident of the community since phase two and he was not aware of any previous homeowners association meetings where LNR discussed the proposed changes to the site design.

Stewart Keith, 6165 Greenwich Drive, San Diego; Michael Merrill, 4051 Alameda Drive, San Diego; and Joseph Mascari, 1717 Ketner Blvd., San Diego, all submitted a request to speak, but in the interest of time, waived the opportunity when it was presented.

Mike Strong, 6211 Liberty Place, Carlsbad, stated he is president of the Mulberry homeowners association for the affordable housing site. He stated his interest and concern is mainly with the loading bay at Trader Joe's and the change in the hours of operation. Mr. Strong stated the earlier hour is considered a night-time use by City standards.

Michael Kern, 2684 Bressi Ranch Way, Carlsbad, stated he is in agreement with Mr. Katz. He added he is concerned with the major changes to the park that is maintained by the homeowners association dues he pays. Mr. Kern stated he feels like there is an unwillingness to compromise.

Sean Current, 2684 Bressi Ranch Way, Carlsbad, and Cathy Finn, 2674 Leighton Circle, Carlsbad, both submitted requests to speak in opposition of the project, but donated their time to Mr. Peter Katz.

Chairperson Baker asked if there were any other members of the public who wished to address the Commission regarding Agenda Item 4; seeing none, she closed Public Testimony.

Chairperson Baker reminded the Commission that it is customary to end Planning Commission meetings at 10:00 p.m. and to continue beyond that time would require a motion. She asked the Commission if they wanted to move forward with the item at the evening’s hearing or continue it until the future hearing of July 18.

Commissioner Douglas stated she is not clear how the Commission could finish at the present hearing with so much left to discuss at such a late hour.

Commissioner Montgomery stated it may not be possible to dispose of the item at the evening’s hearing, but in fairness would like to see the applicant afforded the opportunity to respond to comments and hear feedback from the Commissioners.

Commissioner Whitton stated he would be willing to devote another hour to the evening’s hearing and added the ultimate discussion may have to be delayed.

Chairperson Baker stated the hearing could proceed for one more hour in order to offer an opportunity to hear a rebuttal from the applicant and Staff opinions; after that time the Commission could revisit the idea of continuing the item to a future hearing.

Associate Engineer Clyde Wickham stated Staff has reviewed the project multiple times in terms of traffic and deliveries. He added Staff appreciates the walkable community aspect of the project and it has been conditioned to have a traffic signal installed at Finnila Place and Gateway Road if found to be warranted. Mr. Wickham went on to explain the possible routes that delivery trucks might take, adding that traffic studies have been conducted and reviewed extensively. He stated the missing roadways mentioned are not in the Mello Roos District nor included in an Assessment District covering several arterial roadways.

Commissioner Boddy asked about traffic flow within the proposed Stater Brothers parking lot. Mr. Wickham stated that during the process, the team reviewed the idea of angled parking at that location. He added that design leaves a large, triangular, dead-zone of unused space.

Mr. Westman addressed safety issues regarding the proposed changes to the site plan. He explained the process of Staff review and reasoning for the conclusions that were made. Mr. Westman stated none of the retail stores are proposed to be in operation 24 hours a day. He added the delivery hours are restricted to 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and the drive-through pharmacy window is limited to the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.

Commissioner Dominguez stated the standard hours of operation for the City are from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and asked if there is an extension to those hours for this project. Mr. Westman stated the noise ordinance speaks of construction noise which is limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to dusk and he added there is not any other guideline that exists, which would restrict particular uses to prescribed hours. He added there was another commercial project where deliveries were limited to the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.

Commissioner Boddy asked if the hour between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. is considered night-time use under any City policy. Mr. Westman stated not that he is aware of and went on to explain the process of noise analysis and findings that were made at this particular site.

Commissioner Whitton asked if the area where the proposed footpath would be located could have a horseshoe configuration with one-way in and one-way out. Mr. Westman stated there were still two points to cover, one regarding the applicant’s meetings with the homeowner’s association. He added the noticing was conducted through the homeowner’s association as a flyer inserted with their newsletter. He stated his belief that there was an additional direct mailing for the first meeting that was conducted; the applicant can confirm that detail. Secondly, Mr. Westman addressed the issue of the park being primarily used by the Boys and Girls Club. He added that he does not know how to answer such a question. He stated the hope would be that some dialogue would occur between the Boys and Girls Club and the Bressi Ranch Homeowners Association regarding how much the Boys and Girls Club can and should be using that park.

Commissioner Whitton stated the proposed design depicts 35 compact parking spaces and he added he feels those could be changed to regular size spaces.

Mr. Hofman addressed comments that were made by the audience members. He complimented Mr. Katz on his presentation and stated he had worked with him in the past. Mr. Hofman stated he was the author of the original master plan for Bressi Ranch and added the plans that have been referenced were conceptual. He pointed out that the original sketches were only designed as a depiction of what would be possible. He stated his belief that the project can move forward at this evening's hearing.

Mr. Williams stated LNR paid the homeowners association for two separate mailings to 623 homes, announcing the public meetings that were being scheduled regarding this development. The mailings were handled by the homeowners association and he added there were no separate mailings or private meetings held. Mr. Williams stated there were approximately 80 participants at the first meeting and 40 at the second. He added he recognizes some of the faces present at this evening’s hearing from those meetings. Mr. Williams went on to explain the reasoning behind some of the design decisions that were made including the traffic routing and retail deliveries.

Commissioner Montgomery stated several points were brought up by the neighbors of this development. He added he likes the design layout for the most part and asked about the building at the entrance into the site from Gateway Road at Finnila Place. Commissioner Montgomery brought forward the issue of the omitted street and suggested a widened parkway for pedestrians and bicyclists in its place. Mr. Williams addressed Commissioner Montgomery’s concerns stating that the main street requires an anchor to visually invite customers into the center. He outlined several design concepts and reviewed the slides with the group.

Commissioner Dominguez quoted a previous statement from the applicant that Trader Joe's requires a demographic base of 25,000 to draw from. He added with that kind of required exposure the alternative entry farther up on Gateway would have been more conducive and then the proper alterations could have been made at the corner of Village Square. He asked if that had ever been considered. Mr. Williams stated that the configuration he suggested had been considered, but from a planning perspective it would create issues with drawing people into the center. He went on to explain the issues involved with that type of change adding that all configurations they could come up with were investigated.

Commissioner Whitton stated his belief that the developer is aware of the Commission’s concerns. He added he thinks the same issues are being repeatedly discussed and feels that some time is needed to reconsider the application.

Chairperson Baker stated that she believes that the applicant has tried every configuration possible. She wondered if anything more could be done before the matter appears before the Commission again. Commissioner Whitton stated he likes the project but his major concerns are Trader Joe’s and the traffic flow at the site. Chairperson Baker stated there is a dilemma here in the sense that there are certain operational considerations that a grocery store must take into consideration which another type of retail outlet does not face.

Commissioner Douglas stated she has a problem with the configuration of Trader Joe's. She added she has an issue with the blind windows located on the south side. Ms. Douglas stated she is in favor of the inclusion of a walking pathway.

Commissioner Whitton stated he does not wish to dictate the interior design of Trader Joe's, but he added he believes the common concern is the windows located on the side of the building facing a major street and an entry there as well to allow patrons to be discharged onto a major street.

Commissioner Dominguez stated he would prefer to see the integrity of the community preserved and added he cannot support the project the way the application stands.

Commissioner Montgomery added that he had stated his issues and would like to see a secondary exit from Trader Joe's on the Circle, but if it absolutely cannot be because of operational issues, he stated he is okay with that. He added he would like more concrete information on why the building that was previously located at the entrance had to be moved. Commissioner Montgomery stated he would like to see not just a sidewalk, but a 15-foot paseo added to the design in place of the street that was removed. He added he can support the remaining elements of the site design.

Commissioner Cardosa stated he has similar concerns to his fellow Commissioners. He added the Trader Joe's facility is beautiful, but he does not like the less-than-user-friendly factor along the side. He stated a parkway of some sort is necessary to provide adequate circulation, but vehicle access is not necessary.

RECESS

Chairperson Baker recessed the meeting for a five-minute break at 10:42 p.m.

MEETING CALLED TO ORDER

Chairperson Baker reconvened the Planning Commission meeting at 10:52 p.m. with all Commissioners present.

Mr. Hofman stated it seems that there are only two significant issues left to resolve. One is with the access points and window treatment at the Trader Joe’s site and the other is the sidewalk or paseo along the Boys and Girls club. He stated the intention to provide display windows on the south elevation and to work with the materials to give the appearance of a store front. Mr. Hofman asked if an entry door to Trader Joe's can be added along Finnila Place as close to the corner as possible, would the Commission be in agreement to that. Mr. Hofman asked if the project could be conditioned to provide these things between this hearing and the future City Council hearing so that it could move forward.

Commissioner Whitton stated the proposal does not sit well with him and he added he feels like the Commission is passing off its responsibility.

Commissioner Dominguez stated he would like to hear more details on the proposed pathway. He added his understanding of the operational compromises involved with adding a corner doorway to the Trader Joe's site. He stated the position of the Trader Joe's building shrouds the effectiveness of the Finnila Place center point. He added he would, at the least, like to hear the proposal for the path along the front of the Boys and Girls Club. Mr. Hofman stated he has heard several varying ideas for the path or paseo and would need further direction from the Commission regarding the preferred design of the pathway. He reminded the Commission that the application for the Boys and Girls Club itself will contain an opportunity for the Commission to direct the design of the path.

Commissioner Douglas stated a walkway that would accommodate pedestrians would satisfy her. She added it is not necessary to accommodate cyclists. She stated that the circle is the highpoint of the shopping center and providing a door from Trader Joe's onto that area would be good. She added it might be possible to design a crescent frontage that could accommodate some type of kiosk. Commissioner Douglas stated she agrees with the elimination of blind windows and instead prefers a display window with benches and planters.

Commissioner Boddy stated the proposal from the applicant seems workable as it is and added she would be comfortable conditioning the project, but would defer to Staff to direct the design of the pathway.

Commissioner Montgomery stated the proposed plan is great, but he added he would like to see a presentation of the proposed changes that have been spoken of at this hearing. He stated he is in agreement regarding the pathway, but would rather not see the Boys and Girls Club impacted by it. Commissioner Montgomery added he would rather see a portion of the park dedicated to the area in order to create the pathway.

Commissioner Cardosa stated he agrees with Commissioner Montgomery regarding the walkway and would include a trellis element in order to fit the theme of the other entry. He added there are obstacles associated with the Trader Joe’s site and it probably needs to be relocated and would like to see revised site plans.

Chairperson Baker stated she is in agreement regarding the pathway. She added there has been concern over security issues raised as a result of the removal of the road and stated those might be minimized if the path were wide enough to accommodate a security golf cart access. Chairperson Baker stated it appears there is unanimous agreement from the Commission regarding the path and added it seems that Trader Joe’s is the main issue. She stated her understanding of having two major attractions at either end of the center and is fine with providing an access point facing Finnila Place. Chairperson Baker stated she could approve this project with some changes and added it will have to move forward to City Council for approval as well.

Commissioner Whitton stated he has a problem with the path and would like to see the design and possible options. He added he is not prepared to vote on the project.

Commissioner Douglas asked if the Commission could condition the project at this hearing and then have an opportunity to review the changes before the City Council hearing. Chairperson Baker advised the Commission that would not be possible; any review would have to be held at a public hearing.

Commissioner Boddy asked if a special meeting could be held prior to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission hearing of July 18. Mr. Williams stated he believes the project can be conditioned at the evening's hearing. The group conferred back and forth about scheduling issues.

Mr. Neu stated there are a couple of options available: one would be that the Commission could provide Staff with direction as to what is to be accomplished and then delegate the authority to Staff to implement those directions, or the application could move forward to City Council where they could review the record to ensure it meets the intentions set forth at this hearing. He added regarding a special meeting, it would be difficult to pick a certain future date at this hearing. There are many issues to consider, including the availability of this facility, Commissioner’s schedules, holiday schedules, and Staff availability. He stated if no future date is set at this hearing, a public notice would be necessary, which would require a minimum of a two-week lead time.

Commissioner Douglas suggested a special meeting be held on July 5 to review changes to the proposal. Mr. Hofman stated it typically takes about 1 1/2 months to reach City Council and added if the project could receive approval with conditions at this hearing, they could work with Staff over the next month and return for a review by the Planning Commission prior to City Council review. He added this would ensure that the application could move forward to City Council at the next available time and also afford the Commission an opportunity to see the design changes. Chairperson Baker stated the problem is, at that point the Commission would have no authority to require further modifications. Mr. Neu concurred with Chairperson Baker.

Lengthy discussion ensued among the Commissioners and Staff regarding the details of scheduling a special meeting and it was ultimately decided that it would not be practical to schedule a future hearing at this hearing.

Chairperson Baker outlined the options available: (1) the project could be continued to a future hearing on July 3 or July 18, (2) the Commission could vote on the project at this hearing and if the applicant is unsatisfied with the outcome he could appeal the decision, and (3) the Commission could vote on the project at this hearing and add conditions requiring changes to the design.

Chairperson Baker stated she is in favor of voting on the project at this hearing. Discussion ensued among the Commissioners regarding the options presented.

The Commission displayed informal agreement on continuing the item to a future special meeting of July 3. Mr. Neu stated he is not comfortable with that decision and added there have been many instances where meetings have been held or rescheduled and the public shows up and we’ve had to cancel because of room availability or unknown circumstances. He stated it has not been a very good situation.

Continued discussion ensued regarding the details and difficulties of scheduling a special meeting. The notion of continuing the meeting to the regularly scheduled meeting of July 18 was considered.

Commissioner Montgomery stated he is willing to vote on the item including specific conditions. He added he would like to see the Trader Joe's site conditioned to contain a corner entrance. He stated he favors adding more interest to the Finnila Drive entrance to the center.

Commissioner Dominguez stated he concurs with Commissioner Montgomery and added he would like to see a recessed crescent or square alcove at the corner entrance to the Trader Joe's building. He stated he is willing to concede on the dummy window issue, but would like to see them used for displaying products. Commissioner Dominguez stated the proposed pathway should be a minimum of 10 feet wide.

Commissioner Douglas stated she is in agreement with her fellow Commissioners, but does not feel the walkway needs to be 10-foot wide. She added she would like to see some benches and planters added near the display windows to make the area user-friendly and visually pleasing.

Commissioner Montgomery stated the Trader Joe’s site is set on the diagonal and it could possibly be clipped at the corner to create the alcove area that has been mentioned.

Commissioner Whitton stated he is not in agreement at all and added he feels it is the responsibility of the Commission to review the proposed changes.

Chairperson Baker stated she feels that everyone is fundamentally in agreement and a valid suggestion is on the table.

Commissioner Boddy stated she thinks it is the Commission’s responsibility to set policy, but not necessarily to micro-manage every detail of the project.

Chairperson Baker indicated her agreement with Commissioner Boddy’s statement and asked if anyone is prepared to make a motion. Commissioner Montgomery indicated that he is willing to do so, including several amendments.

Motion to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall re-design the Major "C" building to provide a second point of access at the corner of Finnila Place and Town Garden Lane opposite the traffic circle, which may include new lease space and to further setback the building face from the corner." Moved by Commissioner Montgomery, seconded by Commissioner Dominguez.

Vote to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall re-design the Major "C" building to provide a second point of access at the corner of Finnila Place and Town Garden Lane opposite the traffic circle, which may include new lease space and to further setback the building face from the corner." (Approved)

Motion to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall include in the site plan a minimum 10-foot wide pathway, not to adversely affect the future Boys and Girls Club, that may be located within the boundaries of the Village Square, along the eastern boundary of the Village Square that is inviting with architectural features and may include benches, trellises, and other park features." Moved by Commissioner Montgomery, seconded by Commissioner Dominguez.

Vote to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall include in the site plan a minimum 10-foot wide pathway, not to adversely affect the future Boys and Girls Club, that may be located within the boundaries of the Village Square, along the eastern boundary of the Village Square that is inviting with architectural features and may include benches, trellises, and other park features." (Approved)

Motion to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall reconsider relocation of the bank building (Pad "A") to be adjacent to the west side of Finnila Place and/or consider the addition of more substantial structures along the western side of Finnila Place frontage including enhanced trellises and pergolas." Moved by Commissioner Montgomery, seconded by Commissioner Dominguez.

Vote to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall reconsider relocation of the bank building (Pad "A") to be adjacent to the west side of Finnila Place and/or consider the addition of more substantial structures along the western side of Finnila Place frontage including enhanced trellises and pergolas." (Approved)

Motion to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall revise the southern elevations of the Major "C" building to include display windows and the display of product and to include street furniture, landscape, and decorative lighting on the south street frontage. Street furniture, landscape, and decorative lighting shall also be provided on the east street frontage." Moved by Commissioner Montgomery, seconded by Commissioner Boddy.

Vote to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall revise the southern elevations of the Major "C" building to include display windows and the display of product and to include street furniture, landscape, and decorative lighting on the south street frontage. Street furniture, landscape, and decorative lighting shall also be provided on the east street frontage." (Approved)

Motion to that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17), and adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6310, 6311, and 6312 approving Minor Master Plan Amendment (MP 178E), Tentative Tract Map (CT 06-24), Conditional Use Permit (CUP 06-19), including the errata sheet and amendments, and based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. Moved by Commissioner Montgomery, seconded by Commissioner Boddy.

Vote to that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17), and adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6310, 6311, and 6312 approving Minor Master Plan Amendment (MP 178E), Tentative Tract Map (CT 06-24), Conditional Use Permit (CUP 06-19), including the errata sheet and amendments, and based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. (Approved)

Chairperson Baker thanked the members of the public for their input and closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 4.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS

None.

CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS

None.

ADJOURNMENT

By proper motion, the regular meeting of the Planning Commission of June 20, 2007, was adjourned at 11:45 p.m.

Jun 20, 2007 Planning Commission Meeting

Full agenda
Share this video

PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING

1. CDP 07-02 - WALTERS GUEST HOUSE - Request for approval of a Coastal Development Permit to allow for the construction of a 1,461-square-foot detached guest house on a 1.47-acre site previously developed with a single family residence located at 5305 Carlsbad Boulevard within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Local Facilities Management Zone 3.
Resolution No. 6307

Walters Guest House Staff Report

Chairperson Baker asked if any member of the Planning Commission wished to pull Agenda Item 1.

Chairperson Baker asked if any member of the audience wished to address Agenda Item 1; seeing none, she opened and closed public testimony.

Chairperson Baker closed the Public Hearing on Item 1 and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item.

2. CUP 190(B) - SUDAN INTERIOR MISSION - Request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to amend the conditions of approval for a faith-based retirement village located at 1400 Flame Tree Lane in Local Facilities Management Zone 20.
Resolution No. 6314

Sudan Interior Mission Staff Report

Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 2 and stated Assistant Planner Dan Halverson would make the Staff presentation.

Mr. Halverson gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions the Commission may have.

Commissioner Boddy asked what the period of time is for the extension. Mr. Halverson stated the proposed extension is for a 20-year period.

Commissioner Whitton stated the current owner is the Sudan Interior Mission and asked who the proposed new owner is. Mr. Halverson stated he was unaware of who the new owners might be.

Commissioner Dominguez asked what the average time span is for a Conditional Use Permit issued to an assisted living facility. Mr. Halverson stated he would defer to Mr. Neu.

Planning Director Don Neu stated the average would probably be 10 to 15 years.

Jack Henthorn, Jack Henthorn & Associates, 5365 Avenida Encinas, Suite A, Carlsbad, gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions.

Chairperson Baker asked if the Applicant wished to give a presentation.

Chairperson Baker asked if there were any members of the audience who wished to address the Commission on Agenda Item 2; seeing none, she opened and closed public testimony.

Commissioner Whitton stated he could not support the project based on the lack of available information regarding the parties to the sale.

Commissioner Dominguez expressed concern for the lengthy time period of the proposed extension and would prefer a 10-year extension.

Commissioner Montgomery stated he concurs with Commissioner Dominguez.

Lengthy discussion ensued among the Commissioners regarding the amount of time that should be allowed for this extension.

Commissioner Montgomery suggested the Commission reach a decision limiting the period of time for the extension to 15 years.

Chairperson Baker asked if any member of the audience wished to address Agenda Item 2; seeing none, she opened and closed public testimony.

Chairperson Baker closed the Public Hearing on Agenda Item 2 and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item.

3. SDP 06-05/SUP 06-03 - PACIFIC ATHLETIC CLUB - Request for adoption of a Negative Declaration and approval of a Site Development Plan and Special Use Permit to allow the development of a 102,191-square-foot health club on a 15.94-acre site located on the southwest corner of the intersection of El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road in Local Facilities Management Zone 5.
Resolutions No. 6315, 6316, 6317

Pacific Athletic Club Staff Report

Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 3 and stated Associate Planner Jason Goff would make the Staff presentation assisted by Associate Engineer Frank Jimeno.

Chairperson Baker opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 3.

Associate Planner Jason Goff gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions the Commission might have.

Chairperson Baker stated u-turns are currently not allowed at that intersection; she asked if that would change. Mr. Johnson stated that would not change due to restrictions on Palomar Airport Road.

Steve Windell, Ginsler, 648 Wildcat Canyon, Berkeley, gave a brief presentation and stated he is available to answer questions.

Sandy Hoffer, Western Athletic Clubs, 1 Lombard Street, San Francisco, gave a brief presentation and stated she is available to answer questions.

Commissioner Boddy asked if the large wooden doors depicted at the entrance are functional or ornamental. Mr. Windell stated they are fully functional.

Chairperson Baker asked about current plans to remodel the existing Olympic Resort. Ms. Hoffer stated a complete renovation is scheduled to take place.

Commissioner Cardosa asked if Western Athletic Clubs currently manages any hotel facilities. Ms. Hoffer stated they do not.

Chairperson Baker asked if there were any members of the audience who wished to address the Commission on Agenda Item 3; seeing none, she opened and closed public testimony.

Michael Kato, Topia Landscape Architects, 944 Waples, San Diego, addressed the concerns regarding the landscape design of the site. Discussion ensued between members of the Commission and Mr. Kato.

Commissioner Montgomery stated if the right-turn lane is provided, he prefers not interrupting any of the parking planned for the site. He added he would rather see the landscaping affected instead.

RECESS

Chairperson Baker closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 3 and recessed the meeting for a ten-minute break at 7:55 p.m.

MEETING CALLED TO ORDER

Chairperson Baker reconvened the Planning Commission meeting at 8:06 p.m. with all Commissioners present and asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item.

4. MP 178(E)/CT 06-24/CUP 06-19/SDP 06-17 - BRESSI RANCH VILLAGE CENTER - Request for a determination that the project is within the scope of the previously certified Bressi Ranch Master Plan Program EIR and that the Program EIR adequately describes the activity for the purposes of CEQA; a request for a recommendation of approval of a Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17); and approval of a Minor Master Plan Amendment (MP 178(E)), Tentative Tract Map (CT 06-24), and Conditional Use Permit (CUP 06-19), for the subdivision of 14.15 acres of land into 8 commercial lots, and the development of 122,800 square feet of commercial retail space within 12 buildings which include a 43,830-square-foot grocery store and 12,000-square-foot specialty food store, generally located south of Gateway Road, west of El Fuerte Street, north of Bressi Ranch Way, and north of Paradise Road, in Planning Area 15 of the Bressi Ranch Master Plan and in Local Facilities Management Zone 17. Resolution Nos. 6310, 6311, 6312, 6313

Bressi Ranch Village Center Staff Report

Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 4 and stated Senior Planner Christer Westman would make the Staff presentation assisted by Associate Engineer Clyde Wickham.

Chairperson Baker opened the Public Hearing on Agenda Item 4.

Chairperson Baker asked the applicant if he would like to give a presentation.

Chairperson Baker asked if there were any further questions for the applicant; seeing none, she stated there are 17 requests to speak from members of the audience and opened public testimony.

Bryan Clark, 2641 Hancock Circle, Carlsbad, stated he has concerns about the changes to the site and is not in favor of the proposed design.

Commissioner Boddy asked if Ms. Mercado is opposed to any type of drive-through facility at this location. Ms. Mercado confirmed that she is.

Tara Clark, 2641 Hancock Circle, Carlsbad, stated she would yield her time to her neighbor, Peter Katz, because they share the same views on this issue.

Kimberly Pottin, 6327 Huntington Drive, Carlsbad, stated she is in agreement with Mr. Katz and added she has concerns about safety with the proposed design.

Sean Current, 2684 Bressi Ranch Way, Carlsbad, and Cathy Finn, 2674 Leighton Circle, Carlsbad, both submitted requests to speak in opposition of the project, but donated their time to Mr. Peter Katz.

Chairperson Baker asked if there were any other members of the public who wished to address the Commission regarding Agenda Item 4; seeing none, she closed Public Testimony.

Commissioner Whitton stated the proposed design depicts 35 compact parking spaces and he added he feels those could be changed to regular size spaces.

Commissioner Dominguez stated he would prefer to see the integrity of the community preserved and added he cannot support the project the way the application stands.

RECESS

Chairperson Baker recessed the meeting for a five-minute break at 10:42 p.m.

MEETING CALLED TO ORDER

Chairperson Baker reconvened the Planning Commission meeting at 10:52 p.m. with all Commissioners present.

Commissioner Whitton stated the proposal does not sit well with him and he added he feels like the Commission is passing off its responsibility.

Commissioner Whitton stated he has a problem with the path and would like to see the design and possible options. He added he is not prepared to vote on the project.

Commissioner Montgomery stated the Trader Joe’s site is set on the diagonal and it could possibly be clipped at the corner to create the alcove area that has been mentioned.

Commissioner Whitton stated he is not in agreement at all and added he feels it is the responsibility of the Commission to review the proposed changes.

Chairperson Baker stated she feels that everyone is fundamentally in agreement and a valid suggestion is on the table.

Motion to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall include in the site plan a minimum 10-foot wide pathway, not to adversely affect the future Boys and Girls Club, that may be located within the boundaries of the Village Square, along the eastern boundary of the Village Square that is inviting with architectural features and may include benches, trellises, and other park features." Moved by Commissioner Montgomery, seconded by Commissioner Dominguez.

Vote to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall include in the site plan a minimum 10-foot wide pathway, not to adversely affect the future Boys and Girls Club, that may be located within the boundaries of the Village Square, along the eastern boundary of the Village Square that is inviting with architectural features and may include benches, trellises, and other park features." (Approved)

Motion to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall reconsider relocation of the bank building (Pad "A") to be adjacent to the west side of Finnila Place and/or consider the addition of more substantial structures along the western side of Finnila Place frontage including enhanced trellises and pergolas." Moved by Commissioner Montgomery, seconded by Commissioner Dominguez.

Vote to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall reconsider relocation of the bank building (Pad "A") to be adjacent to the west side of Finnila Place and/or consider the addition of more substantial structures along the western side of Finnila Place frontage including enhanced trellises and pergolas." (Approved)

Motion to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall revise the southern elevations of the Major "C" building to include display windows and the display of product and to include street furniture, landscape, and decorative lighting on the south street frontage. Street furniture, landscape, and decorative lighting shall also be provided on the east street frontage." Moved by Commissioner Montgomery, seconded by Commissioner Boddy.

Vote to that the Planning Commission amend Planning Commission Resolution No. 6313 recommending approval of Site Development Plan (SDP 06-17) by adding an additional condition of approval to read, "Subject to the approval of the Planning Director, the applicant shall revise the southern elevations of the Major "C" building to include display windows and the display of product and to include street furniture, landscape, and decorative lighting on the south street frontage. Street furniture, landscape, and decorative lighting shall also be provided on the east street frontage." (Approved)

Chairperson Baker thanked the members of the public for their input and closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 4.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS

None.

CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS

None.

ADJOURNMENT

By proper motion, the regular meeting of the Planning Commission of June 20, 2007, was adjourned at 11:45 p.m.

Jun 20, 2007 Planning Commission Meeting

Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download Selected Item