[00:00:01]
[CALL TO ORDER]
GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE APRIL 19TH, 2023, MEETING OF THE CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION.PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, LED THIS EVENING BY COMMISSIONER HUBINGER.
OKAY. WOULD THE MINUTES CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? OKAY. THANK YOU.
ALL COMMISSIONERS ARE PRESENT.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
THE NEXT ITEM FOR APPROVAL IS THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 5TH, 2023 MEETING.ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 5TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING? OKAY. I'M NOT.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.
OKAY. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER MEENES.
A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.
BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T HERE. THANK YOU.
YEAH, I GOT IT. SO I HAVE TO CHANGE IT BECAUSE I WASN'T HERE.
OH, OKAY. WELL, WE'LL VOTE AGAIN.
OKAY. THE MOTION PASSES 6 TO 0 WITH COMMISSIONER HUBINGER ABSTAINING.
OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM FOR APPROVAL IS THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 19TH, 2023 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE TO THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 19TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING? RIGHT. SEEING NONE, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
OH, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER STINE.
OKAY. DO YOU HAVE A DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.
SO I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
OKAY. BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE THE PROCEDURES FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING, I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE MOVE ITEM NUMBER FOUR TO THE END AND MOVE UP ITEM NUMBERS FIVE AND SIX.
ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO DOING THAT? OKAY. OKAY.
[PUBLIC COMMENT]
OKAY. IF YOU COULD PLEASE PUT THE PROCEDURES ON THE SCREEN, PLEASE DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO THE SCREEN.A REQUEST TO SPEAK FORMS ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL ITEMS. REQUEST TO SPEAK FORMS MUST BE TURNED IN THE MINUTES CLERK PRIOR TO THE ITEMS COMMENCING.
ALL SPEAKERS WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES UNLESS THAT TIME IS REDUCED BY THE CHAIRPERSON.
OKAY, SO THE PROCEDURES ARE FOR EACH ITEM WE HAVE.
WE HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION, PLANNING COMMISSION, QUESTIONS ON THE STAFF PRESENTATION, THE APPLICANT PRESENTATION, PUBLIC TESTIMONY OPENED, AND THEN WE HAVE INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC AND APPLICANT RESPONSE IF NECESSARY.
THEN THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY IS CLOSED.
AN APPEAL MAY BE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK AT CITY HALL WITHIN TEN CALENDAR DAYS OF THE DECISION.
THE COST OF FILING AN APPEAL IS $847 FOR ALL MATTERS.
IF ANYONE WISHES TO QUESTION A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION, THEY MAY CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION AT 1635 FARADAY AVENUE BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 730 AND 530, MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY AND EIGHT THROUGH FIVE ON FRIDAY.
A LIMIT OF THREE MINUTES IS ALLOTTED EACH SPEAKER ITEMS SUBMITTED FOR VIEWING, INCLUDING PRESENTATION OR DIGITAL MATERIALS, WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE TIME LIMIT MAXIMUM FOR THE SPEAKER. THANK YOU.
OKAY. SO FIRST WE HAVE A THE COMMISSION SETS ASIDE THIS TIME FOR UP TO 15 MINUTES TO ACCEPT COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA.
[00:05:02]
THOSE WITHIN THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.MADAM CLERK, HAS ANYONE FILED A REQUEST TO SPEAK TO A SPEAKER SLIP THIS EVENING ON NON AGENDA ITEMS? YES, SIR. LANCE SHELTIE.
OKAY, GOOD. AND SO IF HE COULD PLEASE COME UP AND STATE YOUR NAME AND THEN THE BY LAW, WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO COMMENT ON THESE BECAUSE THEY ARE NON AGENDA ITEMS. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME CLEARLY AND YOUR ADDRESS, MR. THANK YOU. LANCE SCHULTE 7386 ESCALLONIA COURT IN CARLSBAD.
I WANT TO TALK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ABOUT HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO LISTEN TO CITIZENS.
I WAS A CITY PLANNER FOR 25 SOME ODD YEARS, A SENIOR PLANNER, THE ACTUALLY THE PRIME PLANNER FOR THE CITY OF DANA POINT, IN FACT, WHERE I WOULD ADVISE OUR COUNCIL AND AND PLANNING COMMISSION ON PLANNING MATTERS AND WAS AND WAS ALSO A FORMER PLANNER WITH THE CITY OF CARLSBAD HERE FOR MANY YEARS, WAS INVOLVED IN CREATING THE DOUBLE LIBRARY AND VAUGHN CENTER AND THE LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR LA COSTA AND ALL THE VACANT LAND THAT WAS AROUND LA COSTA AT THAT TIME.
FOR EIGHT YEARS I WAS A CITY CEQA ADMINISTRATOR.
BASICALLY THE SAME ROLE THAT ERIC LARDY HAS IN ADVISING OUR PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL ON CEQA MATTERS AND BEING THE FINAL STAFF AUTHORITY ON CEQA MATTERS. TWENTY FIVE YEARS AS A PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR PLANNER.
AND I'VE BEEN ELECTED TO LEADERSHIP POSITIONS FOR THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PLANNERS AND THE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION AS A LEADER OF OUR SAN DIEGO AND IMPERIAL COUNTY SECTION.
A VICE PRESIDENT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AMERICAN EPA, AND A COMMISSIONER FOR THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PLANNERS AND A NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF CERTIFIED PLANNERS.
I HAVE A MASTER'S IN PLANNING AND BUSINESS FROM ACCREDITED SCHOOLS, AND I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I AM JUST ONE OF MANY PEOPLE IN CARLSBAD THAT CARE DEEPLY ABOUT CARLSBAD THAT ARE EXTREMELY EXPERIENCED AND KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT MATTERS AND REALLY CARE ABOUT OUR CITY.
AND WHEN I'VE BEEN IN THE ROLE AND SITTING IN WHERE ERIC SITTING, I'VE ADVISED OUR PLANNING COMMISSIONERS AND OUR CITY COUNCIL TO LISTEN TO CITIZENS BECAUSE WE'RE ON THE GROUND, WE'RE THERE.
WE KNOW AND A LOT OF THE CITIZENS THAT COME TO SPEAK TO YOU HAVE GOT DECADES OF EXPERIENCE IN THESE MATTERS, AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO REALIZE THAT THAT'S A VALUABLE ASSET FOR THE CITY.
IT'S WHAT MAKES CARLSBAD GREAT IS THE CARE THAT CITIZENS HAVE FOR THEIR COMMUNITY AND THE KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE THEY BRING WHEN THEY COME TO SPEAK TO YOU.
YOU ARE THE CITIZENS, COMMON VOICE AND COMMON SENSE.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT ISSUES BEFORE YOU, WHEN YOU LISTEN TO CITIZENS AND WHEN YOU LISTEN TO PAID DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS, YOU HAVE TO BALANCE THOSE AND DETERMINE WHAT MAKES SENSE TO YOU.
WE'RE OBVIOUSLY ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
WE'RE ALWAYS HAPPY TO SEE A GOOD ROOM FULL OF PEOPLE.
SO IF YOU DO WANT TO SPEAK, MAKE SURE YOU GET A SPEAKER SLIP IN AT THE BACK TO THE MINUTES CLERK.
I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE.
[1. CDP 2021-0056/V 2021-0003 (DEV2021-0227) – EDWARDS RESIDENCE]
MR. LARDY, WILL YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE THE ITEM? THANK YOU, CHAIR AND COMMISSION.SO WE DO HAVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION.
JUST BRIEFLY GOING THROUGH A NUMBER OF THE RENDERINGS FOR THIS PROJECT.
THIS IS THE EAST AND THE NORTH ELEVATION.
YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE PROJECT GOES UP TO 30 ACRES IN SOME LOCATIONS, SORRY, 30FT IN SOME LOCATIONS, BUT DOES HAVE A 3 TO 12 PLAIN, WHICH IS THE REQUIREMENTS IN THIS AREA. THIS IS AN R 3 ZONE, BUT IT'S ALSO WITHIN THE BEACH OVERLAY ZONE.
THEN THIS IS THE WEST AND THE SOUTH ELEVATIONS OF THE PROJECT.
THERE WERE A NUMBER OF TOPICS RAISED AT THE APRIL 19TH HEARING.
WE DID PREPARE A MEMO AND DISTRIBUTE IT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
[00:10:02]
AFTER WE DID SOME ADDITIONAL RESEARCH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS PROVIDED IS SOME RESEARCH ON THE HISTORY OF VARIANCES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.AND SO THE PARCEL THAT THE PROPOSED APPLICATION IS IS OUTLINED IN GREEN HERE, BUT THE PARCELS IDENTIFIED IN PURPLE HAVE APPROVED OR COMPLETE VARIANCES RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT.
IT WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY SORRY, THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN MAY OF LAST YEAR.
AND THE ZONING DESIGNATION IS OUR R-3 REQUIREMENT.
THAT REQUIREMENT IN OTHER LOCATIONS HAS A 35 FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT.
THERE WAS QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED.
BUT AGAIN, IT DOES HAVE THAT REDUCED HEIGHT REQUIREMENT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE MUNICIPAL CODE WAS AMENDED AT THAT TIME TO IDENTIFY THE DEFINITION OF ALTERNATIVE DESIGN STREETS AND TO IDENTIFY WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS WERE AND THE STREETS WERE. SO GARFIELD IS AN ALTERNATIVE DESIGN STREET, SO WE DON'T REQUIRE THE SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENTS.
HOWEVER, THERE IS CONDITION 21IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DRAFT RESOLUTION THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE DEVELOPER ENTER INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY FOR FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS ON GARFIELD STREET FOR PAVEMENT BASED SIDEWALKS, CURB AND GUTTERS.
SO THERE WILL BE THAT CONDITION IN THE FUTURE FOR THIS PROJECT.
WITH THAT, THE APPLICANT AND REPRESENTATIVE IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS, BUT OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND THE MINOR VARIANCE FOR THIS PROJECT. THANK YOU, MR. LA. YOU KNOW, AND WE KIND OF COVERED THIS LAST TIME, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONAL EX-PARTE DISCLOSURES FROM LAST TIME.
I WOULD IMAGINE THERE ARE, BUT YES.
THANK YOU. OKAY. SO ARE THERE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF STAFF? SEE COMMISSIONER MEENES.
YES. I WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR GIVING US THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WE NEEDED TO HAVE ON THE ON THE STREET DESIGN, AS WELL AS, OF COURSE, THE THE CORRIDOR OR THE VIEW CORRIDOR.
THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS VERY, VERY HELPFUL IN MAKING A FINAL DECISION.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES. COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.
SO COULD YOU CLARIFY THE TWO PROPERTIES DIRECTLY ADJACENT ACROSS FROM MCGEE PARK? WHAT YEARS WERE THOSE APPROVED? AS VARIED. AND SEE.
I'D HAVE TO PULL UP THE MAP REAL QUICK BECAUSE THOSE ARE IDENTIFIED.
THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH WAS IN THE YEAR 2000, AND THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH WAS IN THE YEAR 2010.
AND YOU'RE SAYING THE ONE BEHIND WAS LAST YEAR? WELL, THIS HIGHLIGHTS A BIG ISSUE TO ME WHERE OBVIOUSLY THERE'S THE COASTAL, THE RUNS RIGHT ON THE COAST.
I SEE AS A POTENTIAL TO HAVING THIS VARIANCE BE.
[00:15:06]
UNDERSTANDABLE BECAUSE OF THE MANAGED RETREATS THAT ARE HAPPENING.BUT THE BECAUSE OF THE COASTAL EROSION AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT BETWEEN OCEAN STREET AND GARFIELD, AND ESPECIALLY ACROSS FROM MAGEE PARK, WHERE I DID WITH X PARTY, DID YOU KNOW, FURTHER DIVE INTO THAT GOOGLE MAP AND REALIZE THAT THE CORNER PROPERTY ON BEACH AND AND GARFIELD IS THE ONE THAT ACTUALLY CONTINUES THE SIDEWALK ACROSS AND ACTUALLY IS THE ONLY PLACE THAT CAN PROVIDE PARKING EXCEPT ALONG THE EDGE OF THE PARK.
SO SO THE IDEA THAT THERE IS NO THERE ARE NO IMPROVEMENTS AND REDUCING THAT FRONT YARD SETBACK COULD INHIBIT SOME TYPE OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
I'M CONCERNED THAT THIS IS MAYBE SHOWING US A BAD PRECEDENT AS OPPOSED TO MAYBE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD CONTINUE THIS PROCESS.
AND SO I'M I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT MAYBE WE DO NEED TO START LOOKING AT OUR PREVIOUS POLICIES BECAUSE THIS POLICY THAT YOUR FOR TALKING ABOUT STREET AND SIDEWALK POLICY COMMITTEE REPORT FROM 2000.
WE'VE CHANGED A LOT IN 25 YEARS OR ALMOST 25 YEARS.
REMODEL OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS WOULD BE EXEMPT FROM IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS.
SO THESE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE DEFERRALS.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT IS TALKING ABOUT THE DEFERRALS.
SO IS THAT A GAP IN OUR POLICY? YOU KNOW, IN THE SENSE OF ARE WE.
ARE WE ALLOWING THESE VARIANCES? BECAUSE WE CAN'T QUITE.
AND THE FACT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET ALL THESE SAFE STREETS AND YET WE'RE DEFERRING SIDEWALKS AND WE'RE ALLOWING THESE VARIANCES TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE WHEN MAYBE THAT'S A POLICY THAT SHOULD BE EVALUATED BECAUSE IT IS MAYBE 25 YEARS OLD.
I DON'T WANT TO CHANGE EVERYTHING.
AND I KNOW THIS PROJECT WON'T CHANGE IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN SUPPORT THIS.
AND SO WE SEE THOSE AS TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES.
I WOULD HOPE THAT THEY WOULD CONSIDER DOING THAT.
I'D BE HAPPY TO SHARE IT WITH THE REST OF THE COMMISSION.
BUT OBVIOUSLY THEY DO TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC AND MOBILITY AND THEY TALK ABOUT THE PUBLIC SPACES AND PLACES AND HOW WE ACCESS AND PROVIDE EQUITABLE ACCESS TO ALL OF THOSE SPACES.
SO SO THOSE ARE OPPORTUNITIES THAT I FEEL ARE INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT WITH NOT JUST ONE PROJECT, BUT OBVIOUSLY THAT MAP THAT YOU CREATED WITH THE PURPLE IS REALLY HIGHLIGHTING SORT OF WHAT I SEE AS A PROBLEMATIC TREND THAT I'M AFRAID TO CONTINUE.
COMMISSIONER STINE? YES. WOULD THE STAFF RETURN TO THE ONE SLIDE WITH THE PURPLE BOXES? IT SHOWS THE AREA. YES, THE VARIANCE MAP.
QUESTION. SOME OF THEM ARE IN LIGHT PURPLE AND SOME DARK PURPLE.
IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO? THE THE DARKER PURPLE, THERE'S ACTUALLY A HATCH ON IT.
SO IT'S A MULTI STORY PROJECT.
SO OKAY. IT'S HARD TO SEE WITHOUT.
[00:20:01]
RIGHT? AND CORRECT.CORRECT. AND IS THAT THAT IS AN APPROVED THREE STORY PROJECT OR TWO.
IT DOES HAVE THAT I'LL CALL IT AN ALCOVE, BUT BY THE TECHNICAL TERM, THAT'S ON THE TOP OF IT.
OKAY. AND WHAT WERE THE HEIGHT OF THIS BE AGAIN, THE HEIGHT OF THIS ONE IS ALSO 30FT.
OKAY. AND LOOKING AT THAT, THE PEAK IS TOWARD THE MIDDLE OF THAT LOT THEN LOOKS LIKE A LITTLE BIT ON THE SOUTH SIDE. MIDDLE SOUTH.
AND SO THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED, BUT NOT BUILT.
I DON'T KNOW ITS CONSTRUCTION STATUS, BUT IT HAS BEEN APPROVED.
OKAY. SO SO THE IDEA IS STAFF SAYING THAT IF THAT IS BUILT CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVAL, THAT WILL HAVE A SIMILAR EFFECT IN TERMS OF POTENTIALLY BLOCKING OCEAN VIEWS FROM MAGEE PARK? YES, BOTH BOTH STRUCTURES HAVE THE SAME HEIGHT WITH A 30FT WITH THE 3 TO 12 PITCH ROOF BUILT INTO THE SITE DESIGN.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, THE VIEW MAY BE OBSTRUCTED WITH THIS ONE, NOT WITH WITH THIS PARTICULAR ONE THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED, NOTWITHSTANDING THE PROJECT IN FRONT OF US. YES.
OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS? ANY OTHER COMMENTS FOR STAFF OR QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, LET'S SEE.
ALL RIGHT. WITH THE APPLICANT, LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION.
OKAY, GOOD. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS CLEARLY FOR THE MEENES CLERK TO THE MICROPHONE.
THE APPLICANTS FOR THE WORDS RESONANCE.
AND I WANT TO THANK ERIC AND HIS STAFF FOR REALLY MOVING THROUGH IN A TIMELY MANNER THE LAST TWO WEEKS TO PROVIDE SOME CLARITY TO SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT HAD COME UP A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO. IF THERE ARE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS IN REGARDS TO THE FOUR ITEMS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP LAST WEEK, WE'D BE HAPPY TO BRING SOME CLARITY TO THAT.
IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS, THEN I'LL LET ERIC PROCEED FORWARD.
AND AND THANK YOU FOR COMING BACK FOR A SECOND MEETING TO APPRECIATE THAT.
SO ARE THERE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? YES, COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.
COULD THIS PROJECT HAVE BEEN DESIGNED SINCE IT'S NEW WITHOUT THESE VARIANCES? WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPACT? YOU WOULD BE NOT ALLOWING A PARTICULAR HOMEOWNER TO BUILD A PROJECT SIMILAR IN NATURE AND VALUE TO THE NEIGHBORS.
SEEMS TO BE PRECLUDING EVER BUILDING SIDEWALKS WHICH ACCESS A PUBLIC PARK.
I FEEL LIKE THAT'S A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION.
WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE IS EVERY HOME ON THAT STREET HAS A 15 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK.
WHAT'S BEING WITH WHAT HAS BEEN ALREADY APPROVED? THERE'S A 20 FOOT SETBACK REQUIRED FOR THE THE DRIVEWAY.
THANK YOU. HI, JOHN STROMINGER.
I LIVE IN VISTA AT 635 VIA COLUMBIA.
THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? OKAY. OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. WE'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
MA'AM. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO HASN'T FILED A SPEAKER SLIP THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON THIS ITEM? OR OR DO WE HAVE ANY DO WE HAVE ANY SLIPS ON THIS ONE? NO, WE DO NOT. ALL RIGHT.
OKAY. SEEING NONE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON THIS ITEM.
DO DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR THE STAFF? COMMISSIONER STINE.
THE APPLICANT HAS TESTIFIED THAT ALL THE HOMES ON THAT STREET HAVE 15 FOOT SETBACKS.
CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT? IS THAT IS THAT TRUE STATEMENT? WE DIDN'T EVALUATE ALL THE HOMES ON THAT STREET, SO WE'D HAVE TO DO A SEPARATE EVALUATION FOR THAT.
[00:25:03]
WE JUST EVALUATED THE VARIANCES THEMSELVES.OKAY. BUT WE HAVE NO REASON TO THINK THAT THAT'S AN INACCURATE STATEMENT.
IN TERMS OF THE 15 FOOT SETBACK FOR THE OTHER HOMES, WE DON'T WE DON'T HAVE ANY REASON TO SUSPECT IT'S INCORRECT, CORRECT? MR. LAFFERTY. I KNOW THAT THE GOOGLE MAP IS NOT ACCURATE, BUT THE ACTUAL HOUSE ON THE CORNER ACTUALLY DOES HAVE A MORE FORWARD SETBACK.
IN THE MAP. IT IS MORE FORWARD THAN THE REST OF THEM.
SO I'M CONCERNED THAT IT DOES START TO ALLOW THINGS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, ENFORCING MAYBE A DIFFICULT PRACTICE TO CONTINUE HONORING.
SO I DO FEEL THAT THAT'S A CONTINUED CONCERN.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR FROM ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. SIR.
I'M SORRY. WHAT NOW? OH, YEAH.
I'M SORRY. OKAY. SO ARE YOU SEEING NONE? WE'LL OPEN COMMISSION DISCUSSION.
SO NOW WE'LL OPEN THE COMMISSION DISCUSSION.
I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE COMMISSIONERS ON THAT.
COMMISSIONER SABELLICO. UH, WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO APOLOGIZE TO THE APPLICANTS FOR THE ORDEAL THAT THEY'VE HAD TO GO THROUGH FOR THIS PROJECT.
IT'S NEVER OUR INTENTION TO MAKE AN APPLICANTS COME TO TWO MEETINGS.
I THINK APPLICANTS EXPECT A DECISION WHEN THEY ARE ON THE AGENDA, SO I DO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
IN THE FUTURE, I HOPE THAT WE CAN DO A BETTER JOB OF ANTICIPATING THE ISSUES THAT ARE LIKELY TO BE RAISED AND DO OUR HOMEWORK ON THOSE ISSUES BEFOREHAND INSTEAD OF RAISING THEM HERE IN THE MEETING.
SO THAT SAID, WE'RE ALL HUMAN UP HERE ON THE DAIS.
OUR STAFF IS HUMAN AND I HOPE THAT THIS ITEM IS A LEARNING EXPERIENCE FOR US GOING FORWARD.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
AND I WANT TO THANK STAFF AND THE APPLICANT FOR GIVING US A LITTLE BIT FURTHER INFORMATION ON THAT.
AS I INDICATED, THE LAST TIME I DID WALK TO MAGEE PARK AND SAW THERE WAS A MODEST OCEAN VIEW CURRENTLY ON ONE CORNER OF THE PROPERTY, THAT BEING THE SOUTHERN CORNER.
AND I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THIS PROJECT POSSIBLY OBSTRUCTING THAT.
BUT IN LIGHT OF WHAT STAFF IS NOW PRESENTING TO US IN TERMS OF WE PROTECT SCENIC CORRIDORS ONLY AND THIS NOT BEING A SCENIC CORRIDOR, I HAVE A DIFFERENT MINDSET.
YEAH, BECAUSE OF OUR PRECEDENT HERE.
AND IT APPEARED TO ME THAT WITH THE APPLICANT LAST TIME THAT HE WAS CAUGHT A LITTLE BIT OFF GUARD AND PERHAPS THAT'S OUR FAULT ON THIS ISSUE AND THAT THE PROJECT WAS REVIEWED WITH STAFF WITHOUT THIS ISSUE.
I'M THE ONE THAT RAISED IT AT THE LAST AT THE 11TH HOUR.
BUT SEEING THAT THERE ARE APPLICANT TESTIFIED THAT ALL THE HOMES HAVE 15 FOOT SETBACKS, WHETHER IT'S COMPLETELY ALL OR MOST STAFF DOES NOT DISAGREE WITH THAT, CAN'T CONFIRM IT BUT CAN DISAGREE WITH THAT.
AND I AM CONCERNED THAT WE THAT THIS WITH THE HISTORY OF VARIANCES HERE, SUBSTANTIAL HISTORY OF ALLOWING SETBACK VARIANCES IN THIS AREA, INCLUDING ALLOWING A PROJECT JUST TO THE WEST OF THERE, THAT IF WE WERE TO DENY THE VARIANCE, WE WOULD BE IMPOSING AN UNFAIR BURDEN ON THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT.
SO EVEN THOUGH I WAS THE ONE THAT HAD SOME QUALMS LAST MEETING ON FURTHER REVIEW AND THANKS TO THE STAFF INPUT, I BELIEVE THAT I CAN SUPPORT THIS APPLICATION.
THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER STINE.
[00:30:03]
STANDARDS IN REGARD TO THE SETBACKS AND WHATEVER.BUT GIVEN THE STAFF'S ANSWERS AND CLARIFICATION IN REGARD TO THE DESIGN STREETS AND AND THOSE IMPROVEMENTS OCCURRING AT A LATER DATE, I'M SATISFIED.
OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO HAVE COMMISSIONER SABELLICO.
OKAY. MOTION HAS BEEN MADE BY COMMISSIONER MEENES AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SABELLICO.
AND I WAS ACTUALLY GONNA MAKE ONE LAST COMMENT BEFORE WE VOTED, AND I'LL JUST SAY THAT I ALSO WANT TO, YOU KNOW, THE FLOW OF THE MEETING THAT CAUGHT ME A LITTLE BIT OFF GUARD TOO, LAST WEEK. BUT I THINK I'D LIKE TO THANK STAFF FOR THEIR EXCELLENT FOLLOW UP WORK AND PUTTING TOGETHER THAT MEMORANDUM TO US.
THAT WAS EXCELLENT FOLLOW UP WORK BY THEM.
SO IT TOOK A LITTLE BIT LONGER THAN WE LIKED.
OKAY. THE MOTION PASSES BY A VOTE OF 6 TO 1.
OKAY. WE WILL NOW CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING.
[2. CDP 2022-0052 (DEV2022-0013) - KANTER RESIDENCE]
MR. LORRY, WILL YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE THIS ITEM? SURE. THIS IS A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THE CANTOR RESIDENCE.AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS ON THIS PROJECT IS ASSOCIATE PLANNER LAUREN IZAGUIRRE.
AND BEFORE WE START THAT FIRST COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY EX PARTE ON THIS ITEM.
YES. I DROVE BY THE SITE AND WALKED THE FRONTAGE OF THE SITE AND VIEWED BOTH THE SIDE VIEWS FROM THE SOUTH AS WELL AS THE NORTH SIDE.
OKAY. COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.
I ALSO DROVE BY THE SITE AND WALKED THROUGH THE AREA.
MY MOM PLAYS BUNCO WITH HER FRIENDS ON A HOUSE AT THAT STREET.
ALTHOUGH I DON'T KNOW IF I'VE DISCLOSED.
MY WIFE IS ALSO A BUNCO PLAYER, BUT PROBABLY NOT.
NO, BUT I WAS ACTUALLY AT THE I ACTUALLY VISITED THE SITE TODAY ALSO.
NOW, DO WE HAVE ARE THERE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF STAFF? OKAY. I HAD ONE.
NOW, IS THIS CONSTRUCTION START ON THIS PROJECT OR WHERE ARE WE AT ON THIS? I CAN CLARIFY THAT.
SO THEY RECEIVED A MINOR COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT LAST YEAR AND THEY STARTED CONSTRUCTION.
THEY GOT THEIR BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED FOR THAT.
AND THEN THEY DECIDED TO DO A PLAN CHANGE CAME IN FOR CONSTRUCTION CHANGE AND INCREASED THE SIZE OF THE ADDITION AND THE DECK, WHICH KICKED THEM INTO A MAJOR COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT. SO THEY PUT THAT ON HOLD AND NOW THEY'RE HERE.
YEAH, BECAUSE I WAS LOOKING AT THE PLANS.
IT LOOKED LIKE THE SECOND EDITION PART OF THAT THAT'S ALREADY BUILT IN, RIGHT? PART OF THE SECOND EDITION.
THE SECOND FLOOR EDITION IS ALREADY BUILT.
OKAY. THANKS. BECAUSE I LOOKED AT THE BUILDING PLANS.
OH, I THINK THEY'VE ALREADY BUILT. OKAY.
THANK YOU FOR THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.
COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY. SO YOU'RE SAYING THEY STARTED CONSTRUCTION ILLEGALLY? NO. SO THEY RECEIVED A MINOR COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ORIGINALLY AND THEN GOT THEIR PERMIT ISSUED THEIR BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED AND DID A CONSTRUCTION CHANGE, WHICH KICKED THEM INTO A MAJOR COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT.
SO DID THEY MODIFY THINGS ONCE THE PERMIT WAS ISSUED? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? OKAY. THAT'S WHAT IT WAS UNCLEAR WHAT YOU WERE SAYING.
BUT THIS ISN'T THE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS.
THIS IS JUST A SCHEMATIC OF WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED, CORRECT?
[00:35:03]
THIS IS A COASTAL JUST A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT PLANS.SO WHAT KICKED IT TO THE MAJOR? THE SQUARE FOOTAGE DIFFERENCE.
SO THE MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE THEY PROPOSE, THE GREATER THE VALUATION.
AND CAN YOU JUST DEFINE THAT THRESHOLD? $60,000? OH, SO IT'S A IT'S A DOLLAR VALUATION AS OPPOSED TO A SQUARE FOOTAGE VALUATION? WELL, WE BASE THE VALUATION ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING.
OUR COASTAL PLAN ACTUALLY HAS A VALUATION IN IT.
BUT IT'S STILL BASED ON SQUARE FOOTAGE.
NO. OR THAT'S HOW WE ESTIMATE THE VALUATION.
SO WE HAVE INTERNAL THRESHOLDS BASED ON OUR BEST ESTIMATES OF CURRENT COSTS, AND THAT'S HOW WE APPLY THE MINOR COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR ADDITIONS SUCH AS THIS ONE.
I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, IS IT 500FT² IS A 1000FT²? WHAT'S THE WHAT'S THE THRESHOLD? SO I GUESS IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.
SO WE HAVE A EVALUATION FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF STRUCTURES.
SO SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR RESIDENTIAL OR SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR DECKS AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND THAT CAN BE BASED OFF OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THEY'RE PROPOSING WILL KICK THE VALUATION UP. SEE COMMISSIONER STINE.
YES. QUICKLY, MS. ASGARI. ARE THERE ANY SCENIC CORRIDOR ISSUES CONNECTED WITH THIS PROJECT? NO, THERE ARE NOT.
THEY'RE NOT ANY OF THEM IN THE VICINITY OF THIS PARTICULAR RESIDENCE.
WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION? DON'T BELIEVE.
WE'LL NOW OPEN PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO'S FILED A SPEAKER SLIP ON THIS ITEM? NO, THERE ISN'T. OKAY.
OKAY. SO SEEING NONE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON THIS ITEM.
OKAY. DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NOW WE'LL OPEN COMMISSION DISCUSSION.
ANY COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO DISCUSS THE ITEM.
OKAY. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, MAY I HAVE A MOTION ON THE ITEM? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER MEENES, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER STINE ON ITEM.
THE MOTION CARRIES BY A VOTE OF 7 TO 0.
[3. CDP 2023-0010 - AVENIDA ENCINAS COASTAL RAIL TRAIL AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS]
MR. LAI, WILL YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE THIS ITEM? THANK YOU.SO THIS ITEM IS ANOTHER COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, BUT THIS IS FOR A PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT.
AND SO AVAILABLE TO PRESENT IS ISAAC MORALEZ, ASSOCIATE PLANNER.
WE ALSO THIS IS A CITY INITIATED PROJECT.
WE HAVE BRANDON MILES, REPRESENTATIVE FROM PUBLIC WORKS, AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS I THINK BEFORE.
DO WE HAVE ANY BEFORE WE START, DO WE HAVE ANY EX-PARTE DISCLOSURES ON THIS ONE? COMMISSIONER STINE I WALKED BY THE PROJECT.
I'VE DRIVEN THE SITE MANY TIMES.
OKAY. YEAH. COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.
I'VE ALSO DRIVEN THE SITE SEVERAL TIMES.
OKAY. COMMISSIONER HUBINGER SAME THING.
OKAY. ALSO HAVE DRIVEN THE SITE.
AND COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY? YEAH, I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE.
THE PROJECT BEFORE YOU TODAY IS AN APPLICATION FOR A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE INSTALLATION OF PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS AND THE RECONFIGURATION OF AVENIDA ENCINAS ROAD BETWEEN POINSETTIA LANE AND WINDROSE CIRCLE.
HERE'S THE AGENDA FOR THE PRESENTATION.
I'LL BE WALKING THROUGH THE PROJECT LOCATION, SCOPE, CONSISTENCY AND RECOMMENDED ACTION.
THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED ALONG AVENIDA ENCINAS ROAD BETWEEN POINSETTIA LANE AND WINDROSE CIRCLE.
[00:40:01]
SOME ADJACENT LAND USES INCLUDE THE POINSETTIA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER TO THE NORTHEAST.THE ENTIRE PROJECT IS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
THE ZONING ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT SITE INCLUDES A LOCAL SHOPPING CENTER TO THE NORTHEAST AND RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME PARK TO THE SOUTHWEST. THE PROJECT HAS ONE MAJOR COMPONENT AND OTHER MINOR IMPROVEMENTS.
THE ROADWAY SEGMENT WILL BE RESTRIPED FROM FOR VEHICLE THRU LANES TO TO THRU VEHICLE THRU LANES BETWEEN POINSETTIA LANE AND WINDROSE CIRCLE WHILE MAINTAINING DEDICATED LEFT AND RIGHT TURN LANES AT THE INTERSECTIONS.
THE LANE REDUCTION IS APPROXIMATELY 3500 LINEAR FEET.
AS SHOWN ON THE IMAGE TO THE LEFT.
HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS WILL BE INSTALLED AT VARIOUS INTERSECTIONS.
AN EXAMPLE OF THAT IS SHOWN ON THE RIGHT.
ALL OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS ARE WHAT IS REFERRED TO AS TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES.
TRAFFIC STUDIES SHOW THE LANE RECONFIGURATION FOR THIS SEGMENT WILL STILL OPERATE UNDER ACCEPTABLE LEVELS OF SERVICE UNDER THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN AND MOBILITY ELEMENT.
STAFF COMPLETED A REVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND CONCLUDED THAT THE PROJECT QUALIFIED FOR AN EXISTING FACILITIES EXEMPTION BECAUSE THE PROJECT INCLUDES STREET IMPROVEMENTS OF REASONABLE LENGTH.
WITH THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR AVENIDA ENCINAS COASTAL RAIL AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL.
GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.
ARE THERE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF STAFF? COMMISSIONER MEENES. YES.
THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.
I APPRECIATE THAT. COULD YOU EXPAND A LITTLE BIT FOR ME IN REGARD TO THE LOSS? IT REMAINS AN A CATEGORY BOTH EXISTING CURRENTLY AS WELL AS WITH THE CHANGES.
COULD YOU EXPAND ON THAT A LITTLE BIT FOR US? SURE, NO PROBLEM.
SO LET ME JUST PULL TO THE SECTION OF THAT.
SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE MOBILITY ELEMENT CLAIM IS THAT YOU HAVE TO KEEP A CERTAIN LEVEL OF SERVICE AND THE LEVEL OF SERVICE IS A SO THAT MEANS THAT THE VEHICLES TRAVELED IN THE NORTH AND SOUTHBOUND DIRECTION WILL NOT BE CHANGED WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF OF BICYCLE LANES.
SO MOVING FROM 4 TO 2 LANES WILL NOT BE CHANGING.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? OKAY. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT. OKAY.
OKAY, THEN. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO'S FILED THE SPEAKER SLIP ON THIS ITEM? MADAM CLERK? YES, MR. WICK. OKAY, MR. WICK. OKAY.
I LIVE AT 7425 NEPTUNE DRIVE, AND I GO BY THIS PLACE ALL THE TIME.
AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING, I'M A HOMEOWNER IN SAN PACIFICO, BUT I'M ALSO A ON THE BOARD.
[00:45:02]
AND SO WE WORKED WITH THE CITY WHEN THEY WERE ASKING QUESTIONS.WE PUT IN A LOT OF COMMENTS OF WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE ALONG THERE, BECAUSE EVERYBODY, 456 HOMES, PLUS EVERYBODY IN ROSALINA AND WATERS INN YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY HAS TO GO THROUGH THAT AREA.
AND THIS THIS WAS A LITTLE BIT LONGER PROJECT.
BUT RIGHT NOW WE'RE I'M ONLY ADDRESSING FROM POINSETTIA DOWN TO THE WINDROSE CIRCLE.
AND I THINK THEY DID A GOOD JOB BECAUSE WE WANTED BIKE LANES, YOU KNOW, WE WANTED BIKE LANES.
WE WANTED HANDICAPPED PEOPLE, IF THEY HAVE TO WALK IN A BIKE LANES AND SO THEY PRETTY MUCH DID WHAT WE WANTED, EXCEPT WE HAVE A COUPLE OF CONCERNS THAT I CAN'T SEE ON THE LIMITED SCOPE HERE, WHAT SOME OF OUR CONCERNS WERE, IF THEY WERE GOING TO MAKE IT A LITTLE PRETTIER ALONG THAT AREA BECAUSE IT'S A LOT OF DEAD TREES.
SOME OF THEM ARE CALTRANS, SOME ARE CITY.
WE'D LIKE TO THINK THEY MIGHT SPIFF IT UP A LITTLE BIT FROM THE ESTHETIC VIEWPOINT, ESPECIALLY ALL THE PEOPLE COMING FROM THE BEACH GOING UP TO SPEND MONEY AT RALPH'S AND EAT ALL THE RESTAURANTS.
THE THE OTHER THING THAT WE DO LIKE THE BIKE LANES AND ON BOTH SIDES AND ACCESS FOR HANDICAPPED PEOPLE BECAUSE I USE THIS LITTLE BUGGY TO GET UP THERE.
AND I HOPE THEY PUT THIS THE ONES ON THE EAST SIDE, THE SIDEWALKS, A LITTLE LESS SLOPE IF THEY'RE GOING TO CHANGE ANY OF THAT, BECAUSE I GOT TO GO ON AN ANGLE AND THAT'S HARD ON THIS WHEELIE, SO I LIKE TO KEEP IT.
I GO IN THE BIKE LANE AND I'LL HAVE A LOT MORE ROOM.
THE ONE THING THAT WE DO WANT IS TRAFFIC CALMING.
WE NEED MORE THAN THAT IN OUR OPINION.
PEOPLE LIKE TO STILL GO FAST AND THEY'VE GOT TO HAVE A LOT OF WARNING.
SO WE REALLY LIKE IS A LITTLE MORE SIGNAGE COMING FROM RALPH'S AND ALSO WE IT'S GOING TO BE PART OF OUR OTHER NEXT PART OF THAT PROJECT GOING THE REST OF THE WAY THROUGH SAN PACIFICO PUT IN ONE OF THOSE LIGHTED THAT LIGHT UP CROSSWALKS AT WINDROSE CIRCLE AND YOU PUT IT ALL THE WAY ACROSS.
THE PEOPLE COMING FROM RALPHS WILL SEE THE TAIL END OF IT AND THEY'LL KNOW TO SLOW DOWN.
BESIDES THE SIGNAGE, WE'D LIKE ONE ACROSS WINDROSE CIRCLE THERE.
THAT'S A BIG DEAL FOR US BECAUSE IT'S SCARY.
WE'D LIKE A LITTLE MORE ON THOSE TWO THINGS.
OH, DID YOU HAVE A SPEAKER? I'M SORRY YOU DIDN'T HAVE A SPEAKER SLIP.
THE RULES ARE THE RULES. SORRY ABOUT THAT.
SO. OKAY, SO WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON THAT.
DO WE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR THE STAFF? COMMISSIONER MEENES? YEAH.
COULD STAFF JUST EXPAND A LITTLE BIT ON THE ON THE TRAFFIC CALMING IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE BEING MADE THAT POSSIBLY COULD ANSWER THE QUESTIONS THAT MR. WICK HAS? SURE. I'M GOING TO ASK BRANDON MILES, WHO'S WITH PUBLIC WORKS, TO COME UP AND RESPOND TO THAT.
MY NAME IS BRANDON MILES PUBLIC WORKS.
I'M THE APPLICANT FOR THIS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
I THINK THE ONLY THING I CAN'T SPEAK TO IS THE TYPE OF TREES AND ENHANCEMENTS FOR BEAUTIFICATION IN THE AREA, AND THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING FOR STAFF TO CONSIDER IN THE FUTURE, BUT NOT PART OF THIS PROJECT BECAUSE IT'S PRIMARILY ON THE STREET.
MOST OF THE PEDESTRIAN RAMPS WILL BE UPGRADED TO MEET ADA COMPLIANCE.
THEY WON'T HAVE TO CROSS THE STREET FOR AS LONG A TIME.
THAT'S PART OF MOVING SOME OF THE TRAFFIC DOWN.
SLOWING TRAFFIC IN TERMS OF REMOVING SOME OF THE LANES WILL REDUCE SOME OF THE THE VOLUME.
THE STREET IS ESSENTIALLY OVERBUILT.
IT HAS TOO MANY LANES FOR THE AMOUNT OF VEHICLES THAT ARE ON IT.
AND THE STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT THE TRAFFIC, EVEN THOUGH IN THE FUTURE WHEN IT INCREASES, WE'LL STILL HAVE PLENTY OF CAPACITY AND WORK AT A LOSS, WHICH IS THE BEST SCENARIO FOR THE ROADWAY. LIKE ISAAC MENTIONED, WE WILL BE PROVIDING ENHANCED CROSSWALKS, CONTINENTAL CROSSWALKS.
THEY'LL BE PAINTED CROSSWALKS, SOME THAT DON'T EXIST.
[00:50:07]
FINALLY, WE DID PEDESTRIAN COUNTS FOR VOLUMES TO SEE WHERE THE MAJORITY OF PEDESTRIANS WERE CROSSING AND UTILIZING THIS CORRIDOR.AND SAN CARLOS BY JACK IN THE BOX.
POLLO LOCO WAS THE HIGHEST VOLUME FOR PEDESTRIANS.
SO WE'LL BE PROVIDING A PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL AT THAT LOCATION.
THAT PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL WILL BE GREEN FOR VEHICLES THE ENTIRE TIME UNTIL A PEDESTRIAN COMES UP.
THEN IT WILL TURN RED FOR THE VEHICLES AND THE PEDESTRIANS CAN CROSS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
APPRECIATE THAT. AND ALSO THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE CROSSWALK SIGNALS AND WHATEVER.
I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
COMMISSIONER STINE? YES, MR. MORALES. JUST FOLLOWING UP AGAIN ON COMMISSIONER MEENES POINTS AND THE THE CITIZEN, MR. WICK, HE MENTIONED THE NEED FOR A CROSSWALK AT WINDSOR CIRCLE.
IS THAT PART OF THE PROJECT? AND IF NOT, IS THAT COMING AT SOME PARTICULAR TIME? THERE IS A CROSSWALK THERE.
IT'S JUST NOT A PAINTED CROSSWALK.
BUT IT'S JUST NOT A PAINTED CROSSWALK AS PART OF THIS PROJECT.
ITEM NUMBER THREE ON PAGE 11 TALKS ABOUT MOBILITY, AND IT SAYS THAT THIS PROJECT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON MARCH 14TH, 2023.
SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND JUST WHAT OUR PURPOSE IS TO BE ABLE TO IF THE COUNCIL HAS ALREADY APPROVED IT, WHAT'S OUR PURPOSE IN THIS? WHAT'S OUR ROLE? SURE. SO THIS HAS BEEN A PROJECT THAT'S BEEN IN THE PIPELINE FOR A WHILE WITH RESPECT TO THE DESIGN AND A GRANT APPLICATION FUNDING FOR IT.
WE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COASTAL COMMISSION AND DUE TO THE FACT THAT THIS WAS CHANGING CAPACITY, THE COASTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THAT WE GO AHEAD AND PROCESS A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT PRIOR TO STARTING CONSTRUCTION ON THIS PROCESS.
SO THAT'S WHY THIS ONE IS COMING.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR APPLICANT OR STAFF? OKAY. SEEING NONE.
SEEING NONE WILL NOW OPEN COMMISSION DISCUSSION.
ANY COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER STINE I THINK THIS IS A FINE PROJECT AND IT'S THE INTEREST OF PUBLIC SAFETY, BOTH PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST, AND I CONGRATULATE STAFF FOR DOING THIS.
AS A CYCLIST MYSELF, I HAVE NOTICED THAT IN NORTH COUNTY, NOT JUST CARLSBAD, BUT ENCINITAS, WHERE I OFTEN CYCLE AND SOMETIMES SOLANA BEACH, THERE'S ADDITIONAL GREEN PAINTED STRIPING.
AND THAT'S A REAL BENEFIT IN TERMS OF LETTING MOTORISTS KNOW THAT THIS IS A BIKE LANE AND ALSO KEEPING CYCLISTS WITHIN THOSE LANES. SO I THINK THAT'S A VERY POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT.
I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT IT'S BEING DONE HERE.
SO THIS IS A GOOD PUBLIC SAFETY MEASURE.
SO I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THAT AND I WILL MOVE STAFF APPROVAL.
COMMISSIONER SABELLICO, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT ALSO? YEAH, I WANT TO ECHO A LOT OF THE COMMENTS THAT COMMISSIONER STINE JUST MADE.
CONGRATULATIONS. THIS LOOKS LIKE A GREAT PROJECT AND THANK YOU FOR FURTHERING.
YOU KNOW, LAST YEAR WE DECLARED A STATE OF EMERGENCY FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY IN THIS CITY.
AND I. I REALLY AM GLAD TO SEE THE CITY TAKING IT SERIOUSLY AND LIVING UP TO ITS COMMITMENT.
SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.
COMMISSIONER MEENES. I'LL MAKE A SECOND.
OH, ACTUALLY, I WAS GOING TO MAKE ONE COMMENT, TOO.
I JUST WANTED TO ALSO SAY I VERY MUCH SUPPORT THE PROJECT.
THANK YOU TO MR. MORALES AND MR. MILES FOR DOING A GREAT JOB ANSWERING OUR QUESTIONS.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO MAKE A SPECIAL THANK YOU TO MR. WICK FROM THE PUBLIC FOR COMING, AND I PARTICULARLY ENJOYED YOUR TESTIMONY AND HEARING YOUR PERSPECTIVE.
SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR COMING OUT TONIGHT.
I VERY MUCH SUPPORT THE PROJECT.
[00:55:05]
THE MOTION CARRIES BY A VOTE OF 7 TO 0.OKAY. WE WILL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM.
[5. CDP 2022-0019/V 2022-0002 (DEV 2022-0005) – HOM RESIDENCE: RETAINING WALL VARIANCE]
AND NOW WE'RE ON TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE.YES, WE'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FIVE.
MR. LAI, WILL YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE THIS ITEM? BEFORE I DO THAT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO THE EX PARTE? OH, YES. YES. DOES ANYONE HAVE A EX PARTE ON THIS ITEM? LET'S SEE.
LET'S SEE. COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN I'VE.
I'VE ALSO DRIVEN BY THE PROPERTY.
YES. I'VE DRIVEN BY THE PROPERTY, PARKED AND WALKED THE AREA.
LET'S SEE THEN. I ALSO VISITED THE SITE TODAY.
I WAS ACTUALLY ABLE TO LOOK OVER THE FENCE AND SEE THE RETAINING WALLS.
I THINK SENIOR PLANNER LARDY AND COMMISSIONERS TODAY WE DO HAVE THE HOME RESIDENTS RETAINING WALL VARIANCE REQUEST DOES INCLUDE A CONDITIONAL I'M SORRY, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND A VARIANCE.
THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF TWAIN AND HEMINGWAY.
THE PROJECT SITE IS BORDERED ON THE NORTH, SOUTH AND EAST WITH A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, R-1 RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY AND TO THE WEST THE OPEN SPACE DESIGNATED PROPERTY.
AND THAT PROPERTY IS MANAGED BY THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
IN 2020, THE BACKYARD REMODEL FOR THE HOMES DID BEGIN.
THIS INCLUDED GRADING AND RETAINING WALLS AND A POOL INSTALLATION IN 2021.
DURING A ROUTINE INSPECTION BY THE CITY INSPECTION STAFF, THE THE INSPECTOR NOTICED THAT THE RETAINING WALLS WERE NOT A PART OF HIS PERMIT, NOR WAS THERE A PERMIT ON RECORD FOR THOSE RETAINING WALLS.
AFTER REACHING OUT TO THE OWNER, THE OWNERS WERE INFORMED THAT THE CONTRACTOR WHO HAD PERMITTED HAD PULLED THE PERMIT FOR THE POOL, HAD NOT PULLED THE PERMIT FOR THE RETAINING WALLS. THE CODE CASE THAT WAS THEN INITIATED AND ON FURTHER DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANTS IT WAS AND THEY WERE INFORMED THAT THE RETAINING WALLS WERE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE HILLSIDE REGULATION, HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REGULATION STANDARDS, AND THEREFORE THE OPTION FOR THE APPLICANT WAS TO APPLY FOR A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND A VARIANCE TO TRY TO GET THOSE RETAINING WALLS ALLOWED.
SO I STATED THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT IS PART OF THE PROJECT.
THIS WOULD ALLOW FOR THE GRADING OF THE SLOPE.
THE LIMIT OF SIX FEET FROM THE TOE OF SLOPE OR SIX FEET IS THE STANDARD LIMIT.
THE PROJECT DOES NOT OBSTRUCT VIEWS TO OR FROM THE COASTLINE.
THE PROJECT SITE DOES NOT HAVE ANY AGRICULTURAL VALUE OR CONTAIN ANY SENSITIVE RESOURCES.
IT'S ALSO BEEN FOUND CONSISTENT OR STAFF HAS SEEN THIS CONSISTENT AS COASTAL RESOURCE CONSISTENT WITH THE COASTAL RESOURCE PROTECTION OVERLAY ZONE, IN PART BECAUSE THE SOILS INVESTIGATION DETERMINED THAT THE SLOPE AREA IS STABLE AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS ARE MITIGATED, WHILE THE SLOPE DISTURBANCE WILL NOT DAMAGE OR ALTER MAJOR WILDLIFE HABITAT OR NATIVE VEGETATION AREAS AND THE NO WILDLIFE CORRIDOR CORRIDORS ARE ON SITE AS WELL AS THE SLOPE IS NOT A NORTH FACING SLOPE WHICH ARE USUALLY MORE SUSCEPTIBLE TO SLOPE INSTABILITY ISSUES.
[01:00:03]
DECKS MAY BE CONSTRUCTED UPON A HILLSIDE PERIMETER MANUFACTURED SLOPE PUT UP TO THE REQUIRED BUILDING SETBACK OF THE OTHER UNDERLYING ZONE.IN APPROVING A VARIANCE, YOU HAVE TO MAKE VERY SPECIFIC FINDINGS.
THE FIRST OF WHICH IS THAT BECAUSE OF SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES APPLICABLE TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, INCLUDING SIZE, SHAPE, TOPOGRAPHY, LOCATION AND SURROUNDINGS, THE STRICT EXCUSE ME THE APPLICATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE DEPRIVES SUCH PROPERTY OF THE PRIVILEGES ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY AND UNDER THE IDENTICAL ZONING CLASSIFICATION. FOR THIS FINDING, THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED DOCUMENTATION THAT THE INITIAL GRADING OF THE LOT WAS REQUIRED TO INCLUDE WHAT WE HAVE TERMED A CUTBACK SLOPE. THIS IS WHERE THE MANUFACTURED UPHILL SLOPE TERMINATES AT A DESCENDING NATURAL SLOPE.
THIS THIS IS BY ITSELF A SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE AS MOST UPHILL PERIMETER SLOPES LEAD TO AN ADJACENT HOUSE PAD OR A STREET AND DO NOT SLOPE UP TO SLOPE DOWN. ADDITIONALLY, THIS MANUFACTURED SLOPE RESULTED IN THE SCENARIO WHERE THE MANUFACTURED SLOPE OCCUPIES OVER 40% OF THE PROPERTY AND OVER 80% OF THE REAR YARD AREA.
THIS ALSO RESULTED IN UNUSUAL SHORT DISTANCE, UNUSUALLY SHORT DISTANCE BETWEEN THE HOME AND PREVIOUSLY INSTALLED RETAINING WALL, PROVIDING ONLY 15FT OF REAR YARD DEPTH AND DEPRIVING THE PROPERTY OF AREA NEEDED FOR REAR YARD AMENITIES ADJOINED ENJOYED BY THE MAJORITY OF PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY.
WELL, THE SECOND VARIANCE FINDING THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE IS THAT THE VARIANCE SHALL NOT CONSTITUTE A GRANT OF SPECIAL PRIVILEGE INCONSISTENT WITH THE LIMITATIONS UPON OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY AND ZONE IN WHICH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
THE OTHER FINDINGS THAT NEED TO BE MADE FOR A VARIANCE INCLUDE THAT THE THAT THE VARIANCE DOES NOT AUTHORIZE A USE OR ACTIVITY WHICH IS NOT OTHERWISE AUTHORIZED BY THE ZONE REGULATION IN THAT THE REAR YARD IMPROVEMENTS ARE CONSIDERED ACCESSORY TO THE ALLOWED SINGLE FAMILY USE.
THIS INCLUDES THAT CONSISTENCY WITH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.
AND FINALLY, THAT THE VARIANCE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM IN THAT A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FINDINGS CAN BE MADE AS HIGHLIGHTED EARLIER.
AND SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS FOR COUNCIL TO OR SORRY TO, FOR THE COMMISSION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND VARIANCE AND STAFF IS HERE FOR QUESTIONS.
THANKS. GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ARE THERE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF THE STAFF COMMISSIONER MEENES OR.
CARL, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.
IF THE PROPERTY OWNER HAD OBTAINED A PERMIT INITIALLY PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WALLS ON THE ON THE SLOPE AND A PERMIT WAS WAS BASICALLY GRANTED THROUGH THAT CONSTRUCTION PROCESS, I WOULD ASSUME THAT THE CITY'S INSPECTORS WOULD HAVE BEEN INSPECTING THE SITE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION PHASE UNTIL FINAL.
IN THIS CASE, THE WALLS HAVE ALREADY BEEN COMPLETED BEFORE GETTING A PERMIT.
SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, HAS THE CITY GONE AHEAD THROUGH YOUR PROCESS AFTER THE FACT, BEEN ABLE TO FOR THE INTEGRITY OF HOW THAT CONSTRUCTION WAS OBTAINED AND HOW IT WAS DONE WAS PER CITY REGULATIONS? YES. THANKS FOR THE QUESTION.
FOR THE PROCESS OF THE REVIEW OF THE VARIANCE AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT THROUGH THE COURSE OF THE LAST YEAR, THERE WERE MULTIPLE REQUESTS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER MADE BY OUR ENGINEERING STAFF TO INVESTIGATE THROUGH TESTING OF SOILS AND SOILS ENGINEERS.
I BELIEVE JASON GILBERT HERE IS HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.
BUT WE DID HAVE THEM DO A LOT OF ADDITIONAL TESTING OF THE SOIL AND THE RETAINING WALL SO THAT IF THE VARIANCE WERE APPROVED, WE COULD SAY CONFIDENTLY THAT IT IS SAFE AND BUILT TO A CERTAIN LEVEL OF STANDARDS.
AND WE HAVE BEEN SATISFIED BY THE APPLICANT AND THEIR THEIR WORK TO DO SO.
[01:05:02]
WE ALSO, FROM THE CITY SIDE, TOOK ON THE ASSISTANCE OF A OUTSIDE EVALUATOR FOR GEOLOGICAL STABILITY TO NOT JUST HAVE OUR WORD, BUT AN OUTSIDE WORD AS WELL.THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER STINE.
YES. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION HERE, HAS THE APPLICANT FULLY COOPERATED WITH CITY STAFF WHEN IT WAS AFTER IT WAS PUT ON NOTICE THAT THERE WAS A CODE VIOLATION? MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IS VERY TRUE.
IT'S TRUE. I DECLARE I TOOK OVER THE PROJECT IN THE SUMMER OF LAST YEAR.
IT WAS WITH THE PREVIOUS PLANNER.
I IMMEDIATELY TOOK IT OVER AND MET WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THEIR PLANNER.
I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING BESIDES.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING TO HEAR BECAUSE I SOMETIMES FEEL THAT, YOU KNOW, A PERSON MAY GET CAUGHT AND NOT COOPERATE AND FIGHT THE CITY ON THIS ISSUE. AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS APPLICANT TO THE CONTRARY HAS REALIZED WHEN HE WAS PUT ON NOTICE THAT THERE IS AN ISSUE, HAS FULLY COOPERATED AND HAS EXPERTS THAT HAVE LOOKED INTO THIS AND COME FORWARD WITH THE VARIANCE.
SO THAT'S A VERY POSITIVE SIGN.
THEY HAVE HAD AN UNFINISHED BACKYARD SINCE THAT TIME INTO IN 2021.
ANYONE ELSE? OH, COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.
ARE WE SETTING PRECEDENT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD FOR OTHER DEVELOPERS TO COME IN AND DO THIS? THIS IS MY CONCERN.
SO I THINK THE BEST [INAUDIBLE] TO SAY WHAT SHOWS THAT THIS SITE IS UNIQUE OR ESPECIALLY UNIQUE.
THE MOST CLOSELY COMPARABLE SITE IS ESTIMATED ABOUT 18FT OF SLOPE IN THEIR BACKYARD.
THE OTHER THING THAT IS OF NOTE IS THE DEPTH OF THAT BACK YARD AREA.
SO THAT WAS ALREADY WITH A RETAINING WALL PUT IN WAS 15FT OF DEPTH.
AND THAT'S BEFORE YOU PUT IN A RETAINING WALL.
SO YOU CAN GET ANOTHER 5 TO 10FT WITH THAT RETAINING WALL.
CAN YOU GO BACK TO YOUR MAP THAT SHOWED ALL THE RED IN THE OVERALL SITE MAP? THAT ONE. SO THAT'S MY CONCERN AND I THINK IT'S A CONCERN WE SHOULD ALL HAVE IS WHERE IS OUR PROPERTY, THIS PROPERTY LOCATED IN THAT SCENARIO.
SO THIS IS THE ENTIRE AREA UP HERE.
I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT WHERE THIS UPHILL OR THE CUTBACK SLOPE SCENARIO WHERE IT CUTS BACK FOR THE RIDGELINE MAINLY IS ALONG THIS SECTION AND REALLY KIND OF GOES FROM HERE CURVES TO ABOUT HERE.
SO THIS WAS NONE OF ALL THESE OTHER PROPERTIES ESSENTIALLY DO HAVE GRADING TO THE EDGE.
AND SO THEY JUST LOOK OUT AND SEE A VIEW AND NOT A HILLSIDE.
SO AND SOME OF THESE OTHER PROPERTIES DON'T HAVE A GRADE DIFFERENTIAL OF 15FT, WHICH MEANS THE HILLSIDE ORDINANCE WOULDN'T APPLY TO THEM BECAUSE FOR IT TO APPLY, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A MANUFACTURED SLOPE OF OVER 40% AS WELL AS THE CHANGE IN ELEVATION OF 15FT.
THAT ARE FURTHER DOWN THIS WAY FROM STAFFS.
OKAY, THANKS. SO FOR THE CUTBACK SLOPES AND AGAIN, FROM THE TOOLS THAT STAFF HAS, IT'S ESTIMATED THAT THE LAST TWO PROPERTIES THAT HAVE THIS CUTBACK SLOPE SCENARIO DON'T EVEN HAVE 15FT OF ELEVATION CHANGE.
[01:10:04]
DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH AND POSSIBLY THE ONE TO THE SOUTH OF THAT AND LIKELY THE TWO TO THE NORTH OF THE STREET AS WELL.AND AGAIN, THOSE DO NOT HAVE THE 25FT OF HILLSIDE.
THOSE ARE MORE ALONG THE LINES OF.
SO IT'S NOT JUST ONE HOUSE THAT REALLY HAS THIS CONDITION, THOUGH, IS WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING.
A HAS A SIMILAR CONDITION TO A MAYBE LESSER DEGREE, YES.
SO AGAIN, THAT THAT STRIKES ME AS A CONCERN BECAUSE HAVING THAT OPPORTUNITY TO, YOU KNOW, DO A LOT OF THIS WORK AND THEN SOMEBODY FIGURING OUT, WAIT A SECOND, THAT'S TOO MUCH WORK IS PROBLEMATIC.
AND I THINK THAT IT SHOULD BE A CONCERN TO OUR OUR NEIGHBORS HERE IN THIS AREA.
SO SO I'M A LITTLE WARY OF THAT, ALTHOUGH I THINK AFTER THE BRIEFING WITH MR. GELLERT AND HAVING THE AMOUNT OF ENGINEERING THAT THIS HAS UNDERGONE, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE DILIGENCE HAS BEEN THERE.
BUT I WONDER IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE PARTICULARLY ADDRESS THIS TYPE OF IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE WE COULD BE DOING TO HELP HOMEOWNERS UNDERSTAND THAT THESE REGULATIONS EXIST IN THEIR PARTICULAR PROPERTIES? YEAH, I'M NOT SURE HOW TO ANSWER THAT.
TYPICALLY, WE DO HAVE PEOPLE COME IN AND ASK WHAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THEY CAN DO IN THE BACKYARD.
BUT AGAIN, IT'S A WELL KNOWN SECTION OF OUR CODE FOR PLANNERS WHO WORK THE COUNTER AND OTHERWISE.
SO WE ARE DEFINITELY WATCHING OUT FOR THAT.
ANYTIME WE SEE SOMEBODY COME TO THE COUNTER OR INQUIRE ABOUT A DEVELOPMENT.
THANK YOU. WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION? OKAY. AND AS YOU'RE COMING OUT THERE, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS CLEARLY INTO THE MICROPHONE FOR THE MINUTES.
CLERK. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. COMMISSIONERS, I'M PAUL LUCAS.
I'M A PLANNER WITH PLANNING SYSTEMS. OUR ADDRESS IS 1530 FARADAY, SUITE 100 AND CARLSBAD.
I'M HERE THIS EVENING REPRESENTING BOB AND BETTY HOM.
THEY'RE THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE AT 2170 TWAIN AVENUE.
THE HOMES ARE HERE REQUESTING THE COASTAL PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR THE THE STEPPED WALLS, AS MR. VAN LEWIN MENTIONED, THAT ARE PRETTY MUCH FULLY INSTALLED ON A SLOPE IN THEIR BACKYARD OF THEIR HOME.
THESE WALLS WERE INSTALLED, ALTHOUGH THEY'RE NOT TOTALLY FINISHED AT THIS POINT, BUT THEY WERE THEY WERE INSTALLED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A GRADING OR A BUILDING PERMIT, AS YOU AS YOU KNOW. AND I THINK MR. VAN LEWIN GAVE A GOOD KIND OF BRIEF BACKGROUND SUMMARY.
BASICALLY, THE HOMES HIRED A REGISTERED CONTRACTOR TO PROCESS THE PERMITS AND AND TO CONSTRUCT THE A SWIMMING, BOTH A SWIMMING POOL AND THE RETAINING WALLS IN THEIR BACKYARD. THEY HAD A VERY SMALL BACKYARD, NOT BIG ENOUGH OR FLAT FOR FOR A POOL.
THEY DID THEIR DUE DILIGENCE TO THE DEGREE THAT THEY ACTUALLY WENT AND COMMUNICATED AND ASKED PEOPLE WHO HAD USED THIS CONTRACTOR BEFORE ON OTHER PROJECTS ALL SEEM TO CHECK OUT. OKAY. THEY HIRED HIM.
BUT UNBEKNOWNST TO THE HOMES, HE HE ACTUALLY WAS ONLY ISSUED THE POOL PERMIT, BUT HE WAS UNABLE TO PULL THE PERMIT FOR THE WALLS DUE TO THEIR CUMULATIVE HEIGHT AND LOCATION ON THE 40 ON THE 40% SLOPE.
BUT THE CONTRACTOR THEN PROCEEDED TO GO FORWARD AND BUILD BOTH THE SWIMMING POOL AND AND THE AND THE WALLS, YOU KNOW, BOTH OBVIOUSLY WITHOUT THE WALLS, WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF OF THE PERMIT.
SO THE HOMS WERE UNAWARE THAT THE CONTRACTOR DIDN'T HAVE THE PERMITS FOR THE WALLS.
AND WHEN THE SWIMMING POOL INSPECTOR CAME, HE NOTICED THE WALLS BEING BUILT.
HE STOPPED THE WORK ON THE WALLS.
[01:15:03]
AT THAT POINT, THE HOMS STOPPED ALL CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS IN THEIR BACKYARD.AND THE CONTRACTOR ULTIMATELY TOOK THE PAYMENTS THAT HAD BEEN PAID BY THE HOMS AND FLED THE STATE.
SO THAT'S ANOTHER WHOLE PROCESS THAT THE HOMS HAVE BEEN THROUGH ON THIS.
BUT THEY'RE OUT HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS ON THIS WITH STILL AN UNUSABLE BACKYARD.
THEY CAN'T LET THEIR GRANDCHILDREN WALK BACK THERE OR ANYTHING.
IT'S GOT REBAR STILL STICKING OUT AND THINGS.
SO THE HOMS ARE NOW REQUESTING AFTER THE FACT ENTITLEMENTS IN ORDER TO AVOID THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE, THE ONE ALTERNATIVE THAT'S AVAILABLE TO THEM IS DEMOLISHING ALL THESE UNFINISHED IMPROVEMENTS AND RETURNING THE REAR YARD TO ITS ORIGINAL STATE.
SO THAT'S WHY THEY'RE HERE TONIGHT.
UH, APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST TONIGHT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE RETAINING WALLS, WHICH WOULD ALLOW THEM TO COMPLETE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SWIMMING POOL AND THE PATIO AND FINISH OFF THEIR REAR YARD.
AS MR. VAN LUNA INDICATED, APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE IN CARLSBAD REQUIRES A FIVE FINDINGS BE MADE.
WE AGREE WITH YOUR STAFF THAT ALL REQUIRED FINDINGS CAN BE MADE IN THIS CASE.
AS WAS MENTIONED, THE HOME LOT BACKS UP TO NATURAL OPEN SPACE, BUT THIS INTERFACE BETWEEN THE HOME'S REAR YARD AND THE OPEN SPACE IS VERY UNUSUAL. IT'S VIRTUALLY THIS DESIGN IS ALMOST UNSEEN IN CARLSBAD.
THE CUT SLOPE ON THE HOMS REAR YARD IS NOT THE KIND OF THE SIDE OF A HILL HOW YOU WOULD NORMALLY CUT AND HAVE A SLOPE, THE SIDE OF A HILL FOR A FOR A BUILDING PAD. IT'S RATHER ON THE TOP OF A RIDGE AND THE RIDGE IS IS AS HIGH AS THE HOUSE.
AND ON THE HOM SIDE ON THE WELL.
SO IT NATURALLY THE SLOPE, THE CUT SLOPE GOES UP AND THEN IT GOES BACK DOWN.
YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY THAT WENT OUT AND SAW IT, YOU COULD SEE IT GOES BACK DOWN TO OPEN SPACE.
SO IT'S A HIGHLY UNUSUAL PROFILE, KIND OF LIKE A PYRAMID, I GUESS YOU WOULD SAY THAT IT'S GOT AN EXCAVATED SLOPE ON THE HOM SIDE AND A NATURAL TOP OF RIDGE WITH SLOPING TERRAIN DOWN ON THE OPEN SPACE SIDE.
SO THE HOMS RETAINING WALL SYSTEM IS INSTALLED, IS INSTALLED NOW IN THE EXCAVATED SIDE OF THE PYRAMID WHICH FACES THE BACK OF THEIR HOUSE. THERE'S NO EFFECT AT ALL ON THE OPEN SPACE SIDE.
AND WE RESEARCHED AND WE COULD NOT FIND ANY OTHER LOT IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, EXCEPT FOR PERHAPS THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBOR TO THE HOMS, TO THE TWO, TO THE I GUESS, TO BE THE SOUTH TO THE SOUTH, IMMEDIATE NEIGHBOR THAT WE COULDN'T FIND ANY OTHER LOT IN THE CITY THAT POSSESSES THIS EXTREME TALL CUT BACK SLOPE SITUATION, WHICH SQUEEZES THE DEPTH OF THE LOT AND CERTAINLY OBSTRUCTS THE VIEW FROM THE LOT.
INDEED, ALMOST ALL OF THE HOMS, NEIGHBORS AND THEIR SPYGLASS HILL SUBDIVISION POSSESS LARGER, USABLE REAR YARD DEPTH AND EXPANSIVE VIEWS, AND MOST OTHER PROPERTIES CAN ACCOMMODATE A PATIO AND A PATIO COVER AND A SWIMMING POOL WITHOUT THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL RETAINING WALL AT THE SLOPES.
SO THUS, WITHOUT THE RETAINING WALLS, THE HOMS ARE BEING DENIED PRIVILEGES ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY, AS ALMOST ALL THE NEIGHBORS HAVE A LARGER AND MORE USABLE AREA IN THEIR REAR YARD.
SO WE AGREE WITH YOUR STAFF THAT THE HOMS PROPERTY IS SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES.
THE SEVERELY CONSTRAINED THE PROPERTY.
WE ALSO AGREE WITH YOUR STAFF OF THE VARIANCE DOESN'T CONSTITUTE A A GRANT OF SPECIAL PRIVILEGES BECAUSE THE HOME'S LOT IS SO UNUSUAL DUE TO ITS LARGE CUT BACK SLOPE THAT STRICT ADHERENCE TO THE SIX FOOT HIGH RETAINING WALL HEIGHT LIMIT WOULD DISALLOW THE HOMS RIGHT TO SWIMMING POOL STANDARD PATIO IMPROVEMENTS IN THEIR REAR YARD CONSISTENT WITH THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
[01:20:09]
WE ALSO AGREE THE VARIANCE DOESN'T CAUSE DOESN'T AUTHORIZE A USE OR ACTIVITY WHICH IS NOT OTHERWISE EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED BY THE ZONING REGULATIONS, BECAUSE THE CONSTRUCTION OF RETAINING WALLS AND REAR YARD PATIOS AND IMPROVEMENTS ARE AUTHORIZED IN THE R-1 ZONE.WE ALSO AGREE THE VARIANCE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE BECAUSE IT CONTINUES TO COMPLY WITH ALL POLICIES OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT. IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE DENSITY OF THE PROPERTY IN ANY WAY.
EXCUSE ME. APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE WILL ALSO ASSURE THAT HILLSIDE CONDITIONS ARE PROPERLY ADDRESSED THROUGH THE STAFF'S REVIEW OF THE INTEGRITY OF THE SLOPE TO ENSURE IT'S STRUCTURALLY SOUND.
WE AGREE THE VARIANCE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PURPOSE OF THE LCP LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND WON'T ADVERSELY AFFECT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PROTECTION OF THE COASTAL RESOURCES. THE HOMS RETAINING WALL WILL NOT IMPACT THE COASTAL SAGE SCRUB RIDGE ON THE FAR SIDE OF THE CUTBACK SLOPE.
IT DOESN'T AFFECT VIEWS OF THE COAST, WON'T DISRUPT ACCESS TO THE COAST, WON'T DIMINISH THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE STORM DRAINS OR RUNOFF TREATMENT ON THE PROPERTY OR IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
DOES THE ENDORSEMENT OF OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AS DEMONSTRATED WITH A LIST OF NEIGHBOR SUPPORTERS SIGNED BY OVER 50 OF THE CLOSEST NEIGHBORS AND PERHAPS BY SOME NEIGHBORS THAT MIGHT BE ATTENDING THIS EVENING? FURTHER, THE HOMS WALLS WON'T IMPACT NEIGHBORS OR THE PUBLIC.
THEY'RE SITUATED ON A CORNER LOT.
THEIR LOT HAS ONLY A SINGLE DIRECT NEIGHBOR, AND THAT NEIGHBOR IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
THAT'S THE ONE I WAS I WAS TALKING ABOUT WHO HAS A RELATIVELY SIMILAR BUT NOT AS EXTREME SITUATION.
THEY DON'T HAVE NEIGHBORS ON THE WEST OR NORTH OR EAST SIDES.
SO WE'VE REVIEWED THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
WE'VE REVIEWED THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
AND I'VE GOT BOB AND BETTY HOM HERE WITH ME THIS EVENING.
THIS HAS BEEN QUITE A PROCESS ON THIS WHEN THEY STARTED.
PARDON ME, SIR. YOUR TIME IS UP.
HE'S FILLED OUT A SPEAKER CARD AND HE'LL COME UP ON A SPEAKER CARD.
ARE THERE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. WE'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
ARE THERE ANY SPEAKER SLIPS ON THIS ITEM? YES, CHAIR, THERE ARE FIVE.
THE FIRST CALL UP RAY PATCHETT.
OKAY. SO, MR. PATCHETT HERE. BEEN COMMISSIONED. MY NAME IS RAY PATCHETT.
I AT. SORRY, MR. PATCHETT. LET ME START THE TIMER.
I DIDN'T CHANGE ANYTHING BETWEEN THEN AND NOW, BUT TECHNOLOGY, WE LOVE IT, DON'T WE? ANYWAY, I'M HERE TO.
MY WIFE, DENISE, WHO IS ALSO HERE AND I ARE HERE TO SUPPORT THE HOMS IN THE VARIOUS APPLICATION REQUESTS THEY HAVE AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AS WELL. WE LIVED AT THAT LOCATION SINCE 2004, SO WE'VE SEEN PEOPLE COME AND GO ALL DIRECTIONS.
AND PRIOR TO THE HOM'S ARRIVING, WHEN WE WALK OUT OUR FRONT DOOR, WHAT WE WOULD SEE AT THAT LOCATION PRIOR TO THE HOMS WAS A BUNCH OF WEEDS THAT WERE OFTEN JUST DRY WEEDS IN THE SUMMER.
AND SO THE IMPROVEMENTS, EVEN UNFINISHED THAT THE HOMS HAVE PUT IN ARE SUPERIOR TO WHAT WAS THERE.
[01:25:05]
OKAY. OKAY.GOOD EVENING, CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS.
I'M SPEAKING FOR MYSELF AND MY WIFE AND IT LOOKS LIKE I ONLY HAVE A FEW MINUTES HERE, BUT WE HAVE MANY SUPPORTERS HERE AND I WANT TO ONLY TAKE ABOUT FIVE SECONDS. IF YOU GUYS CAN STAND UP AND SAY, YOU KNOW, THAT ARE HERE TO SUPPORT US, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR FOR FOR BEING HERE.
ALL RIGHT. BUT THESE ARE NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS THAT ARE HERE TO SUPPORT US.
BUT LET ME START OFF VERY QUICKLY THE BACKGROUND.
ALL RIGHT. BETTY AND I, WE MOVED UP HERE FROM ORANGE COUNTY.
ALL RIGHT. 2019, WHEN WE WHEN WE ARRIVED HERE AND WE LIVED AT THAT RESIDENCE FOR OVER 30 YEARS.
OKAY? SO WE ARE VERY FAMILY ORIENTED.
ALL RIGHT. WE WANT TO BE BE WITH THE GRANDKIDS.
AND THERE HAVE BEEN MANY TIMES WE DRIVE BACK AND FORTH AND WE JUST GET HOME TOO LATE.
ALL RIGHT. AND WE WANT TO BE PART OF THEIR LIVES, SO WE WANT TO BE CLOSE BY.
THAT'S A MAJOR REASON WHY WE MOVED DOWN.
ALL RIGHT. TO BE WITH THEM, WE HIRED A CONTRACTOR TO WORK ON OUR ON OUR BACK YARD LANDSCAPING.
ALL RIGHT. WE WE DID OUR DUE DILIGENCE.
WE WE CHECKED THAT THEY WERE LICENSED.
WE WENT TO AT LEAST THREE DIFFERENT PLACES TO SEE WHAT KIND OF WORK THEY DID.
ALL RIGHT? THEY HAD ALL THE CREDENTIALS, EVERYTHING.
THEY LEFT US, RIGHT? THEY MISAPPROPRIATED THE FUNDS.
AND WE'RE JUST YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT GOING TO WORK.
AND ONE OF THE MAJOR STIPULATIONS, IF I SAID IT ONCE, IT MUST HAVE SAID IT 100 TIMES.
YOU GUYS GOT TO TAKE CARE OF THE PERMITS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WE DON'T WANT THIS TO HAPPEN.
ALL RIGHT. AND THEY SAID FINE.
ALL RIGHT. AND MY WIFE AND I, WE'RE NOT THE TYPE OF PEOPLE LIKE TO CIRCUMVENT THE SYSTEM.
WE LOVE THE NEIGHBORS, GREAT PEOPLE.
ALL RIGHT, BE PART OF THE COMMUNITY.
AND WE DON'T LIKE I SAID, WE'RE NOT THE TYPE OF PEOPLE GO AROUND TRYING TO SHORTCUT STUFF.
AND AND THAT'S NOT OUR INTENT.
AND BUT THEY PUT US IN A POSITION WHERE AND WE GO FORWARD FROM HERE.
ALL RIGHT? AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TONIGHT.
AND I GUESS I ALSO WANT TO SAY IS THAT, HEY, WHY DID WE DO ALL THIS? WELL, IT'S BECAUSE, ONCE AGAIN, IT'S FOR THE GRANDKIDS.
ALL RIGHT. BETTY AND I ENVISIONED THE THING PAVED OFF AND DONE.
WE'VE BEEN THERE NOW STOP WORK FOR OVER TWO AND A HALF YEARS AND WE'RE NOT THERE.
ALL RIGHT? WE LOVE OUR NEIGHBORS.
WE'RE THE TYPE OF PEOPLE, AS YOU CAN TELL, WE LOVE OUR NEIGHBORS.
WE WANT OUR FRIENDS BY. SO ANYWAY, MY TIME IS OUT.
ACTUALLY, YOU DON'T. A QUESTION.
OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKER SLIPS THE NEXT TWO SPEAKERS? DANIEL TORO, PLEASE.
CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS AND FELLOW RESIDENTS.
I LIVE AT 3228 [INAUDIBLE] VALLARTA HERE IN CARLSBAD.
I'M A SON IN LAW TO THE APPLICANT'S BOB AND BETTY HOM.
I THINK THE FACT THAT THE SON IN LAW IS SPEAKING SPEAKS VOLUMES ABOUT MY SUPPORT.
SO AS WELL AS THE PROUD RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, I'M ALSO THE ASSOCIATE VICE PRESIDENT OF CAMPUS MASTER PLANNING AND STRATEGIC OPERATIONS AT POINT LOMA NAZARENE UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO.
SO I'M OFTEN IN FRONT OF THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO DOING EXACTLY THESE EXERCISES.
SO AS A CONTRIBUTING MEMBER OF THIS COMMUNITY WHO IS IN GOOD STANDING.
I CAN ALSO TESTIFY TO THE UNFORTUNATE IMPACT THAT THESE CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE LED TO THIS POINT.
[01:30:04]
PERSONALLY, WE'VE DEALT WITH TWO AND A HALF YEARS OF INJUSTICE, AND WE'RE CALLING UPON THE CITY TO HELP US RESOLVE THAT. I BELIEVE THAT THE HOMS HAVE UNDERGONE SUBSTANTIAL PERSONAL DIFFICULTY.OUR FAMILY IS BEEN HARMED OVER THE PAST TWO AND A HALF YEARS.
AND THERE HAS BEEN FINANCIAL HARDSHIP RELATED TO THE DELAYED COMPLETION OF THIS BACKYARD.
WE'RE HERE TO SHOW SOLIDARITY.
WE'RE HERE TO REQUEST THAT YOU, AS THE COMMISSIONERS, UNDERSTAND OUR SITUATION AND ALSO SHOW US THE VIRTUES OF THIS COMMUNITY THAT WE, LIKE MANY OTHERS CONTRIBUTE TO AND SUPPORT.
WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE GOOD WORK OF THE STAFF.
THEY HAVE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND VETTING THE WORK THAT'S TAKEN PLACE.
GREAT MEASURES, GREAT LENGTHS TO VET AND RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL HERE TONIGHT.
SO AGAIN, WE JUST COME TO YOU NOT JUST HONORING THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE.
ALSO ASKING AS AS NEIGHBORS, TOO, THAT YOU WOULD UNDERSTAND AND CONSIDER OUR SITUATION.
IVAN MENDELSOHN, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.
I'M SORRY. SORRY TO CUT YOU OFF.
TRY TO BE REALLY QUICK. HERE I AM, THE NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH.
SO I LIVE RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THE HOM'S AND JUST WANT TO CONTINUE AND ECHO WHAT'S BEEN SAID HERE.
IT'S DEFINITELY AN UNFORTUNATE SITUATION.
SO IT'S REALLY UNFORTUNATE THAT ALL OF THIS HAS COME.
AND I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO QUALMS ABOUT THE BUILDING.
IT LOOKS VERY STRUCTURE LOOKS EXCELLENT.
I'VE BEEN HERE QUITE A FEW YEARS BEFORE THEY WERE THERE.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A NICE SIZED JACUZZI THAT'S ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF OUR YARDS.
WE HAVE A SIDE YARD SO WE DON'T HAVE TO GO AS FAR BACK UP INTO THERE.
AND IT KIND OF PEAKS RIGHT UP ON THE NORTH END.
SO THEY ARE AT THE HIGHEST PART OF THE HILL.
SO THEY ARE IN A SOMEWHAT UNIQUE SITUATION.
JUST TWO DOORS DOWN, IT'S COMPLETELY FLAT.
THEY LITERALLY HAVE AN OCEAN VIEW AS THEY WALK OUT THEIR DOOR.
SO THE HOM'S ARE IN A VERY UNIQUE SITUATION.
BUT HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
[APPLAUSE] OKAY WASS THAT IT FOR THE SPEAKER SLIPS? YEAH. OKAY, GOOD. OKAY. SO WE WILL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON THIS ITEM.
OKAY. DO THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR THE STAFF? COMMISSIONER MEENES. YEAH I SYMPATHIZE WITH MR HOM IN REGARD TO THE EXPERIENCE THAT HE'S HAD.
AND OF COURSE, I DON'T HAVE TO EVEN ASK THAT QUESTION BECAUSE YOU HAVE OBVIOUSLY SUPPORT FROM ALL YOUR NEIGHBORS IN REGARD TO WHAT YOU WANT TO FINALLY ACCOMPLISH. SO.
I APPRECIATE THAT. COMMISSIONER STINE.
JUST BRIEFLY, STAFF HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION TO THIS APPLICATION? NO, WE HAVE NOT. THANK YOU.
MR. AND MRS. HOM'S MY SYMPATHY.
I CAN IMAGINE HOW TERRIBLE THIS MUST BE FOR YOU.
BUT ON THE ONE SIDE, LOOK AT THE SUPPORT YOU HAVE OF YOUR NEIGHBORS.
[01:35:08]
HOPEFULLY BEFORE LABOR DAY.SO I PERSONALLY WANT TO COMMEND YOU FOR THE WAY YOU'VE HANDLED IT, YOU AND YOUR FAMILY.
AND AND IT'S REALLY NICE TO HAVE ALL YOUR NEIGHBORS HERE AND SUPPORT.
I MEAN, I JUST THAT MAKES ME FEEL REALLY, REALLY GREAT.
SO. WE'LL OPEN UP FOR COMMISSION DISCUSSION.
SEEING WOULD ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO DISCUSS THIS.
I WANT TO ECHO WHAT SOME OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE SAID.
I'M TOUCHED BY THE APPLICANT, BY THE PROFESSIONAL PRESENTATION, BY THE NEIGHBORS.
FOLKS YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT SOMETIMES WE FIND IN VARIANCE SITUATIONS SOMEBODY WHO WAS JUST TRYING TO FLOUT THE RULES, JUST TRYING TO GET AWAY WITH SOMETHING AND GOT CAUGHT. OKAY.
I HAVE A TOTALLY DIFFERENT VIEW WHEN THOSE COME IN THAT THAT'S A DIFFERENT SITUATION.
YOU WERE AT THE OTHER END OF THE CONTINUUM.
YOU TRIED TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
YOU'VE GOT YOUR NEIGHBORS SUPPORT AND I COMMEND YOU FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING.
STOPPING WHEN YOU FOUND OUT THAT YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE PERMIT TO KEEP THE WORK ON THE SLOPE, YOU DIDN'T TRY TO, YOU KNOW, SLIDE ON BY. SO YOU'VE SHOWN GOOD FAITH YOU WERE VICTIMIZED BY A CONTRACTOR.
BUT SOMETIMES RULES NEED EXCEPTIONS.
AND I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE CASES NOT ONLY BY THE GOOD FAITH THAT YOU'VE SHOWN THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT, NO OPPOSITION, BUT THE FACT THAT THIS IS A SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES, I DON'T THINK THAT YOU'RE GOING TO FIND A LOT LIKE THIS ANYWHERE, MAYBE CLOSE TO IT, ANYWHERE.
AND THAT TREMENDOUSLY STEEP SLOPE.
IN FACT, THERE WAS A MENTION THAT THAT IT WAS LIKE A PYRAMID EFFECT.
AND I THINK THAT WAS YOUR REPRESENTATIVE WHO MENTIONED THAT.
BUT I THINK THAT'S ALL SPOT ON.
THIS IS AN APPLICANT MR. HOM. YOU'RE GOING TO BE CONGRATULATED FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING, GETTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT, NO OPPOSITION.
SO I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC TO THIS, EVEN THOUGH MANY TIMES I'M VERY RELUCTANT TO GIVE VARIANCES.
YOU'RE IN A TIGHT SITUATION AND I THINK YOU DESERVE A BREAK HERE.
SO I FULLY SUPPORT THE VARIANCE.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY AND THANK YOU FOR THE COMMUNITY SUPPORT.
IT'S ALWAYS VERY, VERY HEARTWARMING TO SEE HOW CARLSBAD SHOWS UP FOR PEOPLE.
THE ONLY ADVICE MR. HOM THAT I WOULD HAVE THE NEXT TIME YOU DO THIS TYPE OF WORK, WHICH I'M SURE YOU'RE GOING TO BE JADED FOR A LONG TIME.
OKAY. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? OR YES, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
OKAY. MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER MEENES AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STINE.
SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION OR COMMENTS.
PLEASE VOTE. [APPLAUSE] THE MOTION PASSES 7 TO 0.
AND CONGRATULATIONS TO MR. AND MRS. HOM. WE WISH YOU THE BEST IN YOUR PROJECT, AND THANK YOU FOR COMING OUT TONIGHT.
[01:40:02]
VERY GOOD PRESENTATION.JUST AS YEAH, AS PEOPLE ARE CLEARING OUT, WE HAVE ONE.
WE KNOW WE'VE HAVE A GOOD TURNOUT TONIGHT HERE.
FOR THE LAST ITEM, WE HAVE ONE MORE ITEM THAT SHOULD NOT TAKE TOO LONG.
SO GIVE THEM JUST A MOMENT TO CLEAR OUT.
SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX.
[6. CDP 2021-0044/HDP 2022-0008/SUP 2021-0002/SUP 2022-0002 (PUB 2020-0009) - EL CAMINO REAL ROAD WIDENING]
AND I THINK COMMISSIONER SABELLICO.THANK YOU. I AM GOING TO RECUSE MYSELF ON THIS ITEM BECAUSE I LIVE IN THE COMMUNITY AT THE, WELL ON EL CAMINO AND COLLEGE, WHERE COLLEGE COMES TO A DEAD END, AT LEAST CURRENTLY DOES.
SO I WILL BE RECUSING MYSELF AND I WILL COME BACK FOR ITEM NUMBER 4.
SO MR. LARDY, WOULD YOU PLEASE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX? YES. IF WE COULD HAVE THE REST OF THE EX PARTE AND THEN WE'LL START THE PRESENTATION.
OH YEAH. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY EX PARTE ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.
YEAH, I ACTUALLY I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE, BUT I ALSO LOOKED UP IN THE HISTORIC REGISTRY, THE TWO MARONE ADOBES. THERE ARE ACTUALLY TWO OF THEM.
ONE OF THEM IS ON HAYMAR AND THE OTHER ONE IS THE OLDEST MARONE ADOBE, WHICH IS AT 2770 SUNNY CREEK ROAD, BUILT IN 1843. AND IT WAS PART OF THE ORIGINAL 19 PRE APPROVED BUILDINGS THAT WERE INDIVIDUALLY APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER EX PARTE? COMMISSIONER STINE. YES, I JUST WANT TO SAY, AND PROBABLY THIS IS SHARED BY MOST OF THE COMMISSIONERS, I'VE LITERALLY DRIVEN BY THERE HUNDREDS OF TIMES.
BUT I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA.
YES. I DRIVE THE STREET ALMOST EVERY DAY.
YES. SAME THING. NOT EVERY DAY, BUT I'VE BEEN THROUGH THAT MAYBE 50 TO 100 TIMES.
AND I'VE DRIVEN THE SITE AS WELL DROVE IT AGAIN TODAY.
THERE WAS ANOTHER PROJECT ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO FROM ON EL CAMINO REAL.
THANK YOU, CITY PLANNER LARDY AND HELLO AGAIN, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THE PROJECT BEFORE YOU TODAY IS AN APPLICATION FOR A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, A HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, A FLOODPLAIN, SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND AN EL CAMINO REAL CORRIDOR, SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND A WAIVER OF GENERAL PLAN OPEN SPACE POLICY 4.P.6 TO ALLOW FOR THE WIDENING OF THE NORTHBOUND SEGMENT OF EL CAMINO REAL AND CONSTRUCT ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN JACKSPAR DRIVE AND COLLEGE BOULEVARD.
HERE'S THE AGENDA FOR THE PRESENTATION.
I'LL BE WALKING THROUGH THE PROJECT LOCATION, SCOPE, CONSISTENCY AND THE RECOMMENDED ACTION.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PROJECT IS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY ALONG NORTHBOUND EL CAMINO REAL BETWEEN JACKSPAR DRIVE AND SUNNY CREEK ROAD. WITH ADDITIONAL ROTARY STRIPING STARTING AT COLLEGE BOULEVARD TO THE EAST OF THE PROJECT SITE IS A PORTION OF RANCHO CARLSBAD GOLF COURSE AND A PORTION OF UNDEVELOPED LAND.
TO THE WEST OF THE SITE ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
THE PROJECT IS IN THE COASTAL ZONE AND IS WITHIN THE APPEALABLE AREA OF THE COASTAL COMMISSION.
EL CAMINO REAL IS PREDOMINANTLY A SIX LANE ROADWAY THROUGH MUCH OF THE LENGTH IN THE CITY.
[01:45:03]
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PICTURE ON THE LEFT IS APPROXIMATELY 100FT NORTH OF COLLEGE BOULEVARD AND SHOWS WHEN EL CAMINO REAL GOES FROM THREE LANES TO TWO.HERE IS ANOTHER IMAGE TO ORIENTATE THE COMMISSION.
THE IMAGE TO THE LEFT IS TAKEN AT THE START OF SUNNY CREEK ROAD.
LASTLY, THE IMAGE TO THE LEFT IS TAKEN A FEW HUNDRED FEET NORTH OF THE PREVIOUS SLIDE.
THIS IS ADJACENT TO THE RANCHO CARLSBAD GOLF COURSE.
THIS PARTICULAR SEGMENT HAS LONG BEEN IDENTIFIED FOR EXPANSION.
THE MAJORITY OF THE PROJECT SITE HAS A GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION OF PUBLIC.
HOWEVER, THERE IS 844FT² CURRENTLY DESIGNATED AS OPEN SPACE.
AND 1500FT² OF PROPERTY ACQUISITION CURRENTLY DESIGNATED AS R4.
THE PROJECT WILL ENHANCE VEHICULAR MOBILITY BY ADDING A THIRD NORTHBOUND LANE THROUGH A COMBINATION OF ROADWAY WIDENING AND PAVEMENT RESTRIPING. THE PROJECT WILL ALSO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OF SIDEWALK AND CLASS TWO BICYCLE LANES.
GRADING FOR THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDES 5700 CUBIC YARDS OF CUT AND 2250 CUBIC YARDS OF FILL.
AND I'LL JUST LET THIS SLIDE HERE FOR ONE SECOND.
STAFF ANALYZED ALL OF THESE TOPICS FOR CONSISTENCY AND FOUND THE PROJECT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THESE DOCUMENTS, WITH THE ONE EXCEPTION BEING THE OPEN SPACE ELEMENT. THERE IS A SECTION OUTSIDE OF THE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY OF 844 SQUARE FEET CURRENTLY DESIGNATED AS OPEN SPACE.
GENERAL PLAN POLICY 4.P.6 ADDRESSES SITUATIONS LIKE THESE AND SETS CRITERIA FOR PROPOSED ADJUSTMENTS TO THE OPEN SPACE BOUNDARIES.
THE ONLY REQUIREMENT TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A WAIVER IS THAT THERE ARE NO SENSITIVE HABITAT.
THE PROJECT CONDUCTED A BIOLOGICAL SURVEY AND FOUND NO SENSITIVE HABITAT WITHIN THE 844FT².
THEREFORE, THE PROJECT IS ELIGIBLE FOR A WAIVER.
STAFF COMPLETED A REVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND CONCLUDED THAT THE PROJECT QUALIFIED FOR AN EXEMPTION FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION OR CONVERSION OF SMALL STRUCTURES, WHICH INCLUDES STREET IMPROVEMENTS.
WITH THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPT A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THE EL CAMINO REAL ROAD IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN JACKSPAR DRIVE AND SUNNY CREEK ROAD.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
YEAH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
ARE THERE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF STAFF? COMMISSIONER HUBINGER? OH, I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T CLEAR UP ON THAT ONE.
YES, IZZAK, MAYBE YOU CAN CLARIFY FOR ME.
IN MANY CASES, IF THERE'S UNDEVELOPED LAND ADJACENT TO A CORRIDOR LIKE EL CAMINO, THE RESPONSIBILITY OF EXPANDING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IS OFTEN THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPER IF A PROPERTY IS DEVELOPED THAT'S VACANT.
AND IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THERE IS VACANT LAND ADJACENT TO THIS PORTION OF THE STREET.
AND SO IF YOU COULD EXPAND FOR ME JUST A LITTLE BIT AS TO WHY THE CITY IS NOT WAITING UNTIL A DEVELOPER COMES IN AND ACTUALLY DEVELOPS THAT PROPERTY AND THEREFORE THE RESPONSIBILITY POSSIBLY FOR IMPROVEMENT COSTS WOULD BE BORN BY THE DEVELOPER VERSUS THE CITY.
COULD YOU EXPAND ON THAT A LITTLE BIT AS TO WHY THE CITY IS TAKING ON THIS AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME? YEAH. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER MEENES.
I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO DEFER THAT QUESTION TO THE APPLICANT, BRANDON MILES.
[01:50:04]
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES, THE MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIRES THAT THE APPLICANT FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENT PAY FOR AND PROVIDE THOSE FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS.THE LOS CAPACITY WAS SUFFERING AND DIRECTED STAFF TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE IMPROVEMENTS AHEAD OF THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE RESIDENTS. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
YES, MR. MILES. HAS THE STAFF RECEIVED OR MAYBE THIS IS FOR MR. MIRELES. ANY QUESTIONS, CONCERNS OR OBJECTIONS TO THIS PROJECT? WE JUST RECEIVED ONE CALL.
A QUESTION JUST VERIFYING THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT AND NO OPPOSITION FOR IT.
GOOD. I DIDN'T THINK SO, BUT I WANTED TO CLARIFY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OH, I'M SORRY.
THANK YOU. YEAH, BECAUSE WE RECENTLY ADOPTED A HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM, AND THIS IS THE SUNNY CREEK 2770 IS ON THE ORIGINAL PROPERTIES REMAINING ON THAT PRE 1990 LIST BEFORE THE HISTORIC INVENTORY WAS TAKEN AWAY.
WHAT PROTECTIONS ARE THIS PROJECT GOING TO PUT IN PLACE TO BE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS ADOBE STAYS PROTECTED? BECAUSE IT IS AN OLDER STRUCTURE AND IT'S PART OF OUR RECENTLY REAPPROVED LIST? I CAN ANSWER THAT FIRST, COMMISSIONER.
WE ALSO REVIEWED AN EIR FROM A PROJECT IN THE SAME VICINITY AND IT CONCLUDED THAT THERE WERE NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS TO ANY SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES. BUT I AM ALSO GOING TO HAND IT OVER TO JASON TO ANSWER ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR THAT.
SO THAT STRUCTURE IS ABOUT 700FT OR SO AWAY FROM THE CONSTRUCTION AREA.
THERE WON'T. THERE ISN'T A NEED FOR ANY PROTECTION AS THAT CONSTRUCTION IS VERY IT'S TYPICAL AN LIGHT I WOULD CALL IT LIGHT WORK. IT'S JUST A GROUND PREPARATION.
THERE AREN'T ANY PILES OR ANYTHING BEING DRIVEN OR ANY HIGH VIBRATION, SO THERE WILL BE LITTLE TO NO, PROBABLY NO VIBRATIONS FELT AT THE SITE OF THE ADOBE.
OKAY. I GUESS THAT JUST SORT OF HOW DOES THAT GET INSURED? I MEAN, HOW DO WE MEASURE THAT? IS IT SOMETHING YOU GUYS MEASURE ON A REGULAR BASIS WHEN YOU DO THESE CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS? OR I MEAN, HOW DO, SINCE THIS IS AN OLD BUILDING BUT RELATIVELY NEW IN THE WAY THAT WE'VE THOUGHT ABOUT HISTORIC BUILDINGS.
WE HAVEN'T REALLY HAD TO THINK ABOUT THEM IN THE SAME WAY NOW.
THOSE ARE THE TYPE OF PROJECTS WE WOULD MONITOR.
THIS ADOBE HAS PROBABLY SUFFERED THOUSANDS OF EARTHQUAKES.
SO THIS ROAD IS NOTHING COMPARED TO THOSE.
AND WHAT'S A TYPICAL DISTANCE THAT YOU WOULD SAY THE VIBRATIONS OCCUR JUST SO THAT I UNDERSTAND IT? LIKE, WHAT'S YOUR THRESHOLD, I GUESS.
SEE STANDING ON CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.
I COULD PROBABLY FEEL A SCRAPER MAYBE 20FT AWAY, MAYBE 15FT AWAY.
MORE THAN THAT, YOU JUST REALLY DON'T FEEL THEM.
BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE DRIVING, I MEAN, YOU SEE HERE, YOU KNOW, YOU FEEL THAT BIG TRUCK GOING BY, YOU KNOW, ON EL CAMINO WHEN IT'S GOING 50, WHATEVER, MILES AN HOUR, THE SPEED LIMIT, LET'S HOPE.
YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S WHY I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DISTANCE WOULD BE.
IT WOULDN'T BE ANY DIFFERENT THAN THAT.
SO THE NORMAL TRAFFIC ON EL CAMINO REAL, THIS WOULDN'T BE MUCH DIFFERENT THAN THAT.
[01:55:05]
OKAY. AND ARE THERE LIKE MEASUREMENTS OF THAT? I MEAN, WHAT'S THE STANDARD I GUESS? THERE IS NO STANDARD. I HAVEN'T HAD A NEED TO MEASURE THAT BECAUSE IT REALLY HASN'T BEEN AN ISSUE WITH THIS TYPE OF GRADING.LIKE I SAID, WHEN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS DO PENETRATE THE GROUND WITH VIBRATIONS OR WITH PILE DRIVING, THAT'S WHEN WE WARRANT CONCERN BECAUSE THAT'S AN EXTRA AMOUNT OF VIBRATION GOING IN THE GROUND.
AND USUALLY IT'S CLOSER PROXIMITIES THAT WE'RE MONITORING.
THIS IS NOT IN THAT REALM AT ALL.
IT'S FAR AWAY AND THERE'S VERY LITTLE VIBRATION.
OKAY. I APPRECIATE YOUR CLARIFICATION ON THAT AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OR ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. WE'LL NOW OPEN PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
ARE THERE ANY SPEAKER SLIPS ON THIS ITEM? NO CHAIR. THERE'S NO.
THANK YOU. SEEING NONE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON THIS ITEM.
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR THE STAFF? OKAY. OKAY.
SEEING NOW WILL OPEN COMMISSION DISCUSSION WOULD ANY COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM? OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
MAY I HAVE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? I'LL MOTION.
MOVE TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION.
OKAY. OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HUBINGER.
OKAY. THE MOTION PASSES 6 TO 0 WITH COMMISSIONER SABELLICO ABSTAINING.
LET'S JUST GO FIVE MINUTES AND THEN WE'LL GO.
YEAH, YEAH, FIVE MINUTES, AND THEN WE'LL BE BACK FOR THE LAST ITEM.
OKAY. WE'LL CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER, PLEASE.
WE'RE CALLING THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER.
BEFORE WE GO TO THE NEXT ITEM, I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM THIS NEXT ITEM ON ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY. I'M A PRINCIPAL AT LIEN ASSOCIATES IN CARLSBAD COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE FIRM.
SO GOING WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY TO RECUSE MYSELF.
SO I'LL BE HANDING THE CHAIR OF THIS PROJECT OVER TO VICE CHAIR SABELLICO.
WELL, GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.
THIS IS THE LAST AGENDA ITEM OF TONIGHT'S MEETING.
[4. SDP2022-0003, CDP2022-0023, and PCD2023-0001 (DEV2022-0048) - FPC RESIDENTIAL]
AND OUR POLICY IS REQUIRE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM TO FILL OUT A SPEAKER SLIP PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE ITEM.I'M GOING TO SAY JUST A COUPLE THINGS BEFORE INTRODUCING THE ITEM.
SO NOW IS THE TIME TO FILL ONE OF THOSE OUT IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE SO ALREADY.
AS SUCH AS TONIGHT'S HEARING PRECEDES.
PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT COMMISSIONERS ALREADY HAVE EXTENSIVE BACKGROUND ON THIS AGENDA ITEM, SO IF EVERYONE WILL PLEASE DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO THE SCREEN. I WILL REVIEW THE PROCEDURES FOR THE COMMISSION THAT THAT THE COMMISSION WILL BE FOLLOWING FOR THIS ITEM.
THEY ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE PROCEDURES THAT WERE OUTLINED IN PREVIOUS ITEMS BECAUSE THIS IS AN APPEAL, AN APPEAL UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT EXEMPTION THAT WAS GRANTED BY THE CITY PLANNER.
SO, MR. LARDY, WOULD YOU PLEASE BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE PROCEDURES? SURE. SO THE PROCEDURES WILL START THE SAME WAY WITH A PUBLIC HEARING, OPENING STAFF PRESENTATION AND COMMISSION OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED BY AN APPLICANT PRESENTATION WITH A COMMISSION OPPORTUNITY FOR ANSWER QUESTIONS.
[02:00:01]
THERE WILL BE A PRESENTATION BY THE APPELLANT.WE WILL THEN PRESENT A STAFF RESPONSE TO THE APPEAL, AND THEN THE COMMISSION WILL HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR APPELLANT, AND THEN WE WILL OPEN PUBLIC TESTIMONY, MOVE THROUGH THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY, AND THEN CONCLUDE WITH PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION, VOTE AND CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR.
FIRST, HAVE ANY COMMISSIONERS HAD ANY EX PARTE CONVERSATIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER MEENES. YES.
I DROVE THE SITE BOTH ON PONTO.
ACTUALLY, COMMISSIONER HUBINGER, I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE.
I'VE WALKED IT NOT RECENTLY, BUT I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE.
I TOO AM FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE.
COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY. DO YOU HAVE ANY EX PARTE? DROVE BY THE SITE.
COMMISSIONER STINE? YES, I AM VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE.
I HAVE BEEN TO THE AREA MANY TIMES AND OVER THE WEEKEND I WALKED THE PERIMETER OF THE SITE AND ALSO THE SURROUNDING AREA. SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE RIGHT NOW.
THANK YOU. I ALSO VISITED THE SITES TODAY EARLIER IN MY CAR, AND I WALKED AROUND A LITTLE BIT.
I LOOKED AT THE STORAGE FACILITY.
ADDITIONALLY, I AM FAMILIAR WITH SOMEONE WHO I BELIEVE WILL BE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANTS.
I SERVED ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF AN ORGANIZATION THAT SHE NOW SERVES ON, AND WE DID NOT SERVE ON THE BOARD AT THE SAME TIME, AND I SEE NO REASON WHY IT WOULD PREVENT ME FROM BEING FAIR AND IMPARTIAL.
SO I WANT TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY BEFORE STAFF'S PRESENTATION TO ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF LETTERS AND ERRATA SHEETS THAT WERE SENT TO THE COMMISSION AND PRINTED OUT FOR OUR CONVENIENCE HERE, JUST FOR THE RECORD.
AGAIN, THAT IS NOT THE PROPERTY THAT IS BEING DISCUSSED TODAY.
IT IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROPERTY BEING DISCUSSED TODAY AND THE OWNERSHIP HAS SINCE CHANGED IN THOSE TWO YEARS, BUT I BELIEVE IT IS CURRENTLY OWNED BY THE SAME APPLICANT THAT IS PRESENTING TODAY.
SO THAT'S JUST FOR EVERYONE'S AWARENESS.
OUR SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, MR. KEMP, ALSO REQUESTED THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE SOME BRIEF BACKGROUND ON THIS ITEM, SO I'LL TURN IT OVER TO HIM.
ACTUALLY, IT'S REALLY NOT NECESSARILY ON THIS ITEM.
IT'S REALLY WHAT THE ROLE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS IN GENERAL.
SO IT'S JUST A BRIEF REMINDER TO TELL YOU THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ROLE IS TO ASSURE THAT ALL THE LAND USE DECISIONS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE POLICIES, PLANS, AND ORDINANCES ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, THE STATE AND FEDERAL LAW.
AND THEN ALSO TO REMIND YOU, AS I DO FROM TIME TO TIME, ABOUT THE HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT, WHICH WAS PASSED BY THE STATE A FEW YEARS AGO, IN ORDER TO ENCOURAGE US AN LOCAL JURISDICTIONS ON HOUSING.
AND THE STATE IS TELLING US THAT CITIES SHALL NOT DISAPPROVE A PROJECT OR IMPOSE A CONDITION REQUIRING LOWER DENSITY UNLESS THE CITY FINDS BASED ON A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE THAT THE PROJECT WOULD HAVE A SPECIFIC ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY OR AND THERE IS NO FEASIBLE METHOD TO SATISFACTORILY MITIGATE OR AVOID SUCH ADVERSE IMPACT.
SO JUST A COUPLE THINGS TO KEEP IN MIND AS WE GO FORWARD.
THANK YOU. MR. LARDY, WOULD YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE THE ITEM? RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THE FPC RESIDENTIAL PROJECT.
HERE TO GIVE THE PRESENTATION IS SENIOR PLANNER JASON GOFF.
[02:05:04]
THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.GOOD EVENING. THE SUBJECT OF TONIGHT'S DISCUSSION IS THE CONSOLIDATION OF THREE LEGAL PARCELS CONSISTING OF 4.64 ACRES LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE CITY AT THE INTERSECTION OF PONTO DRIVE AND PONTO ROAD AND THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CONSOLIDATED SITE WITH 86 RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT UNITS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE ZONING FOR THE SITE.
ALL EXISTING STRUCTURES ARE PROPOSED TO BE DEMOLISHED TO PREPARE THE SITE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT.
THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THE SITE CONSISTS OF R-15 RESIDENTIAL ON ONE PARCEL, AND A COMBINATION R-5 RESIDENTIAL VISITOR COMMERCIAL ON TWO OTHERS.
ZONING FOR THE SITE IS RESIDENTIAL DENSITY MULTIPLE ON ONE PARCEL AND A COMBINATION RESIDENTIAL DENSITY MULTIPLE / COMMERCIAL TOURIST ON THE TWO OTHERS. ALL THREE ZONES HAVE A QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE REQUIRING THE PROCESSING OF A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
UNDER THE COMBINATION R-15 / VISITOR COMMERCIAL LAND USE DESIGNATIONS A PROPERTY OWNER MAY CHOOSE TO IMPLEMENT EITHER THE R-15 LAND USE DESIGNATION OR THE VISITOR COMMERCIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE R-15 LAND USE DESIGNATION IS BEING PROPOSED SIMILAR TO THAT OF THE CAPE RAY HOTEL TO THE NORTH, WHICH CHOSE TO DEVELOP ENTIRELY UNDER THE VISITOR COMMERCIAL LAND USE.
BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS NOT WITHIN THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION'S APPEAL JURISDICTION.
HERE'S THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN.
THE DEVELOPER IS SEEKING A DENSITY BONUS UNDER STATE LAW, WHICH ALLOWS THE DEVELOPER TO INCREASE THE DENSITY OF THE PROPERTY BY 27.5% IN RETURN FOR MAKING AT LEAST 15% OF THE PROPOSED DWELLING UNITS AFFORDABLE TO LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS.
WITH A 27.5% DENSITY BONUS THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS ALLOWED ON THE SITE IS 90 UNITS, WITH 11 OF THOSE REQUIRED TO BE RESTRICTED AS AFFORDABLE.
THE DEVELOPER IS PROPOSING 86 UNITS AND TO MAKE 13 OF THEM AFFORDABLE, CONSISTENT WITH CARLSBAD INCLUSIONARY ORDINANCE REQUIRING 15% OF THE TOTAL UNITS, INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS UNITS, BE MADE AFFORDABLE.
AND THREE A QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE IS APPLIED TO TWO OF THE THREE EXISTING PARCELS.
AS PART OF THE DENSITY BONUS THE PROJECT IS REQUESTING INCENTIVES, CONCESSIONS AND WAIVERS AS ALLOWED TO STATE AS ALLOWED PURSUANT TO THE STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW. PURSUANT TO CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE, SECTION 21.86060 OF THE DENSITY BONUS ORDINANCE, A PROJECT CAN REQUEST INCENTIVES AND CONCESSIONS AS DEFINED IN STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW BASED ON THE PERCENTAGE OF AFFORDABLE UNITS.
THE ONE INCENTIVE OR CONCESSION REQUESTS ALLOW FOR A COMBINATION FENCE AND RETAINING WALL HEIGHT ALONG THE COMMON PROPERTY LINE WITH THE RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY UP TO 12FT, WHERE CITY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ALLOW FOR UP TO SIX.
THE THREE WAIVERS INCLUDE A REDUCTION.
ONE A REDUCTION IN FRONT YARD SETBACK ALONG PONTO DRIVE AND FUTURE PRIVATE BEACH WAY.
TWO, A REDUCTION IN SIDE YARD SETBACK ALONG PONTO ROAD.
[02:10:07]
PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65915P5.AS IT RELATES TO THE LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN, ZONE 22 OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS.
THE PROJECT IS PROVIDING SLIGHTLY MORE THAN 15% OF THE 4.64 ACRE PROJECT SITE AS OPEN SPACE.
AS SHOWN ON THIS SLIDE, THE PROJECT IS PROVIDING 31,450FT² OF OPEN SPACE TO MEET THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT, WHERE IT IS ONLY REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 30,317FT².
THIS OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT SHOULD NOT BE CONFUSED WITH PUBLIC PARK REQUIREMENTS AS IT RELATES, THERE HAS BEEN DIFFERENT INFORMATION SHARED ABOUT PUBLIC PARKS OR ABOUT PARK NEEDS AND WHETHER THE CITY HAS MET THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF PARK SPACE OUTLINED IN THE CITY'S GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE CITY.
CITY STAFF PROVIDED DETAILED INFORMATION AT TWO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS, ONE HELD ON JANUARY 26TH, 2021, AND ANOTHER HELD ON JULY 13TH, 2021, ABOUT PARK REQUIREMENTS, CITY LAND ACQUISITION LIMITATIONS AND PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS.
FURTHERMORE, THE CITY HAS MET THE CURRENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE STANDARD FOR PARK SPACE IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT AND THE VACANT SITES IN THE PONTO AREA ARE ZONED FOR RESIDENTIAL / COMMERCIAL TOURISM DEVELOPMENT AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE LEGAL RIGHT TO DEVELOP THOSE VACANT SITES PER THE APPROVED 2015 GENERAL PLAN AND LOCAL COASTAL PLAN WHICH GUIDE HOW LAND CAN BE USED AND DEVELOPED IN THE CITY.
AS IT RELATES TO NUMEROUS CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED FROM CARLSBAD RESIDENTS REGARDING A REQUEST FOR PARK DEDICATION OVER PARK IN LIEU FEES, WE WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION EXHIBIT TWO CONDITION EIGHT REQUIRES THAT THIS PROJECT COMPLY WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES WHICH ARE REQUIRED AS PART OF THE ZONE 22 LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT PLAN.
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 22 MITIGATION MEASURE SPECIFICALLY REQUIRES THAT ALL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL PAY PARK IN LIEU FEES UNLESS EXEMPTED BY PRIOR AGREEMENT AND PUBLIC FACILITY FEES FOR PARK DISTRICT 3.
AS SUCH, THROUGH CONDITION NUMBER 8, THE PROJECT DEVELOPER WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PAY PARK IN LIEU FEES BASED ON THE MOST CURRENT FEE SCHEDULE IN THE AMOUNT OF $413,144 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT.
ON JANUARY 5TH, 2023, THE CITY PLANNER THROUGH THE PROCESS OUTLINED IN CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 19.04.060 COMPLETED A REVIEW OF THE PROJECT AND POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, ALSO REFERRED TO AS CEQA.
THROUGH THIS PROCESS, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT QUALIFIED FOR AN EXEMPTION PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15 332 INFILL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS SEQUA CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 AS A CLASS 32 EXEMPTION FOR PROJECTS UNDER FIVE ACRES LOCATED WITHIN URBANIZED AREAS AND CONSISTENT WITH GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE SITE.
A NOTICE WAS POSTED ON JANUARY 5TH, 2023, FOR A PERIOD OF TEN DAYS, AND ON JANUARY 17TH, 2023, A TIMELY APPEAL WAS FILED BY CARLSBAD RESIDENT LANCE SCHULTE.
THE APPEAL STATES THAT THE EXEMPTION DOES NOT MEET THE CRITERIA FOR A CLASS 32 EXEMPTION.
THE APPEAL RAISED ISSUES ALLEGING THAT THE PROJECT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM, THAT THE AREA IS NOT WITHIN AN URBANIZED AREA AND MAKES REFERENCE TO OTHER ITEMS UNDER CEQA.
THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE APPEAL AND STAFF'S RESPONSE TO EACH OF THESE ITEMS WAS OUTLINED IN THE APPEALS ANALYSIS SECTION INCLUDED AS EXHIBIT 13 OF THE PROJECT STAFF REPORT. STAFF HAS FOUND THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH ALL APPLICABLE POLICIES OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM PROVISIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE AND THE LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE.
IN CONCLUSION, TWO RESOLUTIONS OF APPROVAL HAVE BEEN PREPARED FOR THIS AGENDA ITEM.
THE FIRST PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION IDENTIFIED AS EXHIBIT ONE OF THE STAFF REPORT DENIES AN APPEAL OF THE CITY PLANNERS DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332.
THE SECOND PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION IDENTIFIED AS EXHIBIT TWO OF THE STAFF REPORT, APPROVES THE DETAILS OF THE LAND USE DEVELOPMENT REQUEST AND APPROVES THE PROJECT BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS PROVIDED THEREIN.
[02:15:04]
COMPLIANCE CAN BE MET BY DETERMINING A PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM CEQA OR PREPARING AN ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.IF THE FIRST PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION IDENTIFIED AS EXHIBIT ONE OF THE STAFF REPORT IS APPROVED, THEN THE APPROPRIATE CEQA CLEARANCES AND RELATED CONTENT NECESSARY TO BEGIN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS ON THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT LAND USE PLAN HAVE BEEN PREPARED.
THE PROJECT IS CONDITIONED TO ENSURE THE PROPOSED PROJECT'S COMPATIBILITY WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND THAT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY ARE MAINTAINED. THE PROJECT WOULD ALSO BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE BUILDING STANDARDS, CODES AND ENGINEERING STANDARDS THROUGH THE STANDARD BUILDING PERMIT AND CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLAN CHECK PROCESS.
HOWEVER, IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FINDS THAT THE APPEAL RAISES A SUBSTANTIAL ISSUE AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES NOT APPROVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION ASSOCIATED WITH EXHIBIT ONE, THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD NEED TO DIRECT STAFF TO CONDUCT FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BEFORE POTENTIALLY APPROVING THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT LAND USE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS.
5J1. AS THE ATTORNEY, AS OUR CITY ATTORNEY ALLUDED TO, WHICH STATES WHEN A PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT COMPLIES WITH APPLICABLE OBJECTIVE GENERAL PLAN.
I'M SORRY. PROJECT COMPLIES WITH THE APPLICABLE OBJECTIVE GENERAL PLAN ZONING AND SUBDIVISION STANDARDS AND CRITERIA THAT WERE IN EFFECT AT THE TIME THE APPLICATION WAS DEEMED COMPLETE.
CITIES SHALL NOT DISAPPROVE THE PROJECT OR IMPOSE A CONDITION REQUIRING A LOWER DENSITY UNLESS THE CITY FINDS BASED ON A PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE THAT THE PROJECT WOULD HAVE A SPECIFIC ADVERSE IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY.
OR THERE IS NO FEASIBLE METHOD TO SATISFACTORILY MITIGATE OR AVOID SUCH ADVERSE IMPACT.
A SPECIFIC ADVERSE IMPACT MEANS A SIGNIFICANT, QUANTIFIABLE, DIRECT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACT BASED ON OBJECTIVE IDENTIFIED, WRITTEN PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY STANDARDS, POLICIES OR CONDITIONS AS THEY EXISTED ON THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION WAS DEEMED COMPLETE AND THERE IS NO FEASIBLE METHOD TO SATISFACTORILY MITIGATE OR AVOID THE ADVERSE IMPACT OTHER THAN THE DISAPPROVAL OF THE PROJECT OR THE APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT UPON THE CONDITION THAT IT BE DEVELOPED AT A LOWER DENSITY.
AS SUCH STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPT THE RESOLUTION IDENTIFIED AS EXHIBIT ONE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT, DENYING THE SUBJECT APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE CITY PLANNERS DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT PER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 AND ALSO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION IDENTIFIED AS EXHIBIT TWO OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT APPROVING THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? COMMISSIONER STINE. YES.
JUST I WANT TO MAKE SURE I HEARD THIS MR. GOFF, WITH REGARD TO THE PARK IN LIEU FEES, DID YOU SAY THAT THIS PROJECT IS CONDITIONED TO PAY $413,000 IN SOME ODD? DID I HEAR THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. THAT'S FOR ALL OF THE 83 UNITS.
THAT'S WHAT THE MATH WORKS OUT TO, RIGHT? YES. THANK YOU.
ARE WE FIRST TO CONSIDER THE DENIAL AND THEN CONSIDER THE PROJECT, OR IS THERE AN ORDER WHICH WE NEED TO EVALUATE THIS? WELL, MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE YOU CONSIDER THE THE APPEAL OF THE THE CITY PLANNERS DETERMINATION, BECAUSE IF YOU UPHOLD THE DETERMINATION OF THE CITY PLANNER, THEN YOU GO ON TO CONSIDER THE PROJECT.
[02:20:07]
CONSIDER THE REST.WHAT HAS BEEN DONE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S THERE AND TO UNDERSTAND HOW THAT IMPACTS ANY TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT? WELL, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY.
IT WAS I WOULD DESCRIBE IT MORE OF LIKE A LANDSCAPE YARD OR A SO ON.
BUT THE FORMER PROJECT SITE HAD BEEN REMEDIATED BEFORE THE PROPERTY OWNER HAD TAKEN OWNERSHIP OF IT.
SO AND DO YOU HAVE DOCUMENTATION OF THAT REMEDIATION? I DO NOT. SO THAT WOULD BE A CONCERN TO ME.
GOOD. AND I THINK THAT'S A COMMUNITY CONCERN.
WAS THERE A BIOLOGICAL REPORT? THERE'S BEEN A BIOLOGICAL REPORT.
THERE WAS NO HAZARDS RELATED TO THIS SITE WHATSOEVER INCLUDED AS PART OF THAT DOCUMENT.
AND I ALSO UNDERSTAND THERE WAS GENERAL PLAN EIR, IS THAT CORRECT? AS PART OF THAT? WELL, THE GENERAL PLAN EIR IN 2015 DID STUDY THE CITY COMPREHENSIVELY.
WE'RE NOT RELYING ON THAT FOR THIS EXEMPTION.
THIS EXEMPTION COULD HAVE OCCURRED REGARDLESS OF THAT EIR.
BUT THAT EIR DID STUDY THE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AS THEY ARE IN PLACE TODAY.
I'LL JUST ADD THAT AS PART OF OUR EVALUATION OF THE CEQA EXEMPTION, WE DID DO REVIEW TO SEE IF THERE WAS ANY OPEN CASES BASED ON THE AVAILABLE DATABASES FOR THIS SITE AND THERE WERE NOT ANY OPEN HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SITE CASES.
THANK YOU. SO OUR CITY ACTUALLY HAS BEEN TO THAT SITE AND THEY'VE DONE AN ANALYSIS.
NOTHING WAS IDENTIFIED ON THE SITE.
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF.
OKAY. WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION? ALL RIGHT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND YOU WILL HAVE TEN MINUTES.
THANK YOU. I'M DAVID GATZKE WITH THE H.G.
FENTON COMPANY 7577 MISSION VALLEY ROAD IN SAN DIEGO.
CHAIR SABELLICO, COMMISSIONERS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT AND FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF OUR PROJECT.
I ALSO WANT TO START BY COMMENDING ALL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD STAFF.
SENIOR PLANNER GOFF, PLANNER LARDY, JASON [INAUDIBLE], CITY ENGINEER AND OTHERS.
WE HAVE A VERY PROFESSIONAL STAFF.
BUT I'M HERE WITH OUR ENTIRE TEAM, OUR ARCHITECT, KT [INAUDIBLE] ALLEN SCALES CIVIL PLSA LANDSCAPE.
MARK MOODY WITH GMP LEGAL AND LAND USE TEAM.
HEATHER RILEY WITH ALLEN MATKINS, OUR BIOLOGIST GREG MASON WITH ALDEN ENVIRONMENTAL.
SEAN KILKENNY FROM DUDEK, WHO HELPED US WITH THE THOROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ON THIS PROPERTY, AND JOHN BOORMAN WITH LLG, OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER, ALONG WITH RILEY WEBB, WHO'S OUR PROJECT MANAGER, AND JOHN LERAY, WHO'S HELPED US WITH COMMUNITY OUTREACH.
HG FENTON COMPANY IS A FAMILY OWNED SAN DIEGO BASED COMPANY THAT HAS BEEN AROUND FOR 117 YEARS.
I HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF WORKING FOR A COMPANY THAT CAN TAKE THE LONG VIEW AND DO THE RIGHT THING.
AND WE DO A VARIETY OF PLACES FOR SAN DIEGO RESIDENTS TO LIVE AND WORK.
[02:25:02]
RACEWAY DEVELOPMENTS.REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH, I WILL ASSURE YOU THAT BEFORE ACQUIRING THE PROPERTY, WE HAD A FULL PHASE ONE REPORT DONE ON ALL OF THE ACQUISITION SITES, INCLUDING THE FORMER STORAGE YARD, AND FOLLOWED UP ON ANY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER PHASE TWO STUDIES.
SO WE ARE CONFIDENT AND HAVE MADE SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT IN THIS PROPERTY BASED ON THE SUITABILITY OF THE PROPERTY AND PLAN TO OWN IT FOR THE LONG TERM AND CERTAINLY TAKE THOSE CONSIDERATIONS SERIOUSLY.
YOU ALL MENTIONED QUITE A BIT OF FAMILIARITY WITH THE LOCATION.
I JUST WANT TO USE THIS SLIDE TO POINT OUT WHAT WE NOTICED.
THIS IS A SITE THAT IS WELL LOCATED WITH BOTH OFFICIAL AND UNOFFICIAL WALKING TRAILS, CLOSE PROXIMITY TO NEARBY SHOPPING, CLOSE PROXIMITY TO TRANSIT, AND REALLY A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO TO RECREATE AND ENJOY WHAT CARLSBAD HAS TO OFFER WITH THE NATURAL BEACHES.
SHORT E-BIKE, E-BIKE RIDE OR BICYCLE RIDE UP CARLSBAD BOULEVARD TO THE DOWNTOWN.
AND WE SAW AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO CONVERT LOW VALUE USES TO A VIBRANT COMMUNITY.
I KEEP PRESSING THE WRONG BUTTON.
AND SO WE SAW AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO REALLY FILL A GAP IN WHAT'S AVAILABLE TO CARLSBAD RESIDENTS.
THERE'S A GROWING DEMAND IN MARKET FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE RENTERS BY CHOICE, WHO WANT THE OPPORTUNITY FROM THE EXISTING RENTAL MARKET OF THREE AND FOUR BEDROOM TOWNHOMES, WHO WANT THE MAINTENANCE FREE HOME MAINTENANCE, FREE LIFESTYLE, PRIVATE YARD SPACE ATTACHED GARAGES IN A GREAT LOCATION AND A RENTAL OPPORTUNITY THAT MAY NOT OTHERWISE BE FINANCIALLY AVAILABLE AT CARLSBAD HAS GOT A LARGE AND GROWING COMMUNITY OF ENTREPRENEURS, PROFESSIONALS, SCIENTISTS AND SO FORTH, AND WE SAW THIS AS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO MEET THAT MARKET DEMAND.
MOST OF THE HOMES HAVE NO ONE LIVING ABOVE OR BELOW AND AS STAFF MENTIONED, IS COMPLEMENTED BY 30% OPEN SPACE FOR BOTH PASSIVE AND ACTIVE RECREATIONAL USES. THE SITE DESIGN.
IN YELLOW ARE THREE STOREY HOMES WITH ROOFTOP DECKS THAT HAVE FRONT PORCHES AND FRONT STOOPS TO ENHANCE THE STREETSCAPE ALONG PONTO ROAD AND PONTO DRIVE AND THEN ROOF DECKS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE VIEWS AND PROVIDE PRIVATE OPEN SPACE.
THE INTERIOR OF THE SITE ARE LANE HOMES THAT HAVE PRIVATE BACKYARDS.
THAT WAS MEANT TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE DENSITY ACROSS THE STREET.
AND AGAIN, OVER 90% OF THESE ARE THREE AND FOUR BEDROOM HOMES THAT REALLY MEET AN EMERGING NEED AS PEOPLE HAVE MORE WORK FROM HOME DEMANDS AS HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION CHANGES WITH MORE MULTIGENERATIONAL HOUSEHOLDS OR DIFFERENT NEEDS AND SOMETHING THAT ISN'T READILY AVAILABLE IN THE IN THE RENTAL MARKET AND PARTICULARLY ISN'T AVAILABLE IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE PROUD OF IS THAT THE 13 DEED RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE HOMES THAT WILL BE BUILT ON SITE WILL BE INDISTINGUISHABLE AND MATCH EXACTLY THE SIZE OF THE REST OF THE PROJECT AND CREATE AN OPPORTUNITY THAT ISN'T AVAILABLE TO PEOPLE AT THAT INCOME LEVEL.
IN CARLSBAD, WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE AT THAT INCOME LEVEL THAT SERVE COFFEE OR WORK AT A GROCERY STORE, OR MAYBE A YOUNG TEACHER OR SOMEONE STARTING OUT IN THEIR CAREER.
I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT, AND THERE'S EXTENSIVE INFORMATION IN THE STAFF REPORT ABOUT THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS THAT WE DID IN ADDITION TO TWO COMMUNITY OUTREACH MEETINGS, ONE ON SITE, ONE ONLINE.
AND THEN ALSO HAD COFFEE WITH A NUMBER OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO EXPRESSED INTEREST AND WANTED TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THE PROJECT, AS WELL AS KNOCKED ON ALL OF THE DOORS OF THE PEOPLE IMMEDIATELY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROJECT.
[02:30:02]
THE NEIGHBORS WERE GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE QUALITY OF DEVELOPMENT AND HAD VERY POSITIVE FEEDBACK ABOUT WHAT WE WERE OFFERING.AND I THINK WE ALWAYS SEE OPPOSITION TO CHANGE IN COMMUNITIES LIKE THIS, BUT I THINK WE'RE GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS PROJECT AS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO MATCH THE EXISTING PLANS AND ZONING, BUT ALSO OFFER SOMETHING NEW.
I DO WANT TO ADDRESS THE BRIEFLY.
I THINK EXEMPTION IS A POTENTIALLY MISLEADING TERM.
YOU MIGHT BELIEVE THAT IT MEANS NO ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS WAS DONE OR COMPLETED, BUT YOU'LL SEE IN CONJUNCTION WITH STAFF'S THOROUGH REVIEW AND COMMENTS, WE PROVIDED A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, A CLIMATE IMPACT STUDY THAT ADDRESSED AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS AND NOISE STUDY, A VIBRATION STUDY FROM THE ADJACENT RAILROAD TRACKS, A BIOLOGICAL IMPACT STUDY, A CULTURAL RESOURCES AND HISTORIC RESOURCES STUDY, AN ARCHEOLOGY STUDY AND A FULL GEOTECHNICAL REPORT.
AND ONLY AFTER ALL OF THOSE TECHNICAL ANALYZES WERE DONE ON THE PROPERTY AND WE WERE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH SEQUA THROUGH A THOROUGH REVIEW, COULD THE CITY PLANNER MAKE THE DETERMINATION THAT AN EXEMPTION WAS THE APPROPRIATE PATH FOR THIS PROJECT? FOR THIS PROJECT? AND AGAIN, WE HAVE OUR CONSULTANTS WHO PREPARED A NUMBER OF THOSE TECHNICAL REPORTS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS TONIGHT.
SO IN CONCLUSION, I'M VERY PROUD TO BRING A PROJECT THAT WAS DESIGNED TO MEET COMPATIBLE COMMUNITY NEEDS AND IS INTENTIONALLY INTENDED TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE SPECIAL BEACH PROXIMATE SITE THAT WE HAVE IT LOCATED ON.
AND THAT'S LED TO STAFF'S CONCLUSION TONIGHT.
SO OUR PROJECT TEAM AND I LOOK FORWARD TO ADDRESSING YOUR SPECIFIC QUESTIONS AND REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL TONIGHT TO UPHOLD THE CITY PLANNERS DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT HAS FULLY COMPLIED WITH THE STATE'S STRICT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND TO APPROVE THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER STINE? YES, SIR. AND IT WAS.
IT WAS A GATSBY, SIR? GATSKI. GATSKI? GATSKI. YES. MY MOUTH'S A LITTLE DRY.
YOU CAN CALL ME WHATEVER YOU LIKE.
LAST NAMES ARE IMPORTANT TO PEOPLE.
CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE AMENITIES THIS PROJECT OFFERS, WHETHER IT'S OPEN SPACE? I THINK THERE'S A PICKLEBALL COURT.
TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT, SIR.
ABSOLUTELY. SO GO BACK TO HERE.
YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THE SITE HAS KIND OF A T SHAPE IN TERMS OF HOW THE OPEN SPACE IS ARRANGED, WHICH IS DESIGNED TO CREATE OPEN SPACE BETWEEN THE HOMES AND RESIDENCES AND TO CREATE STRONG PROJECT ENTRANCES.
AND SO IN THAT CENTER SPINE THAT RUNS.
THERE WE GO. ON THE SITE IS INTENDED TO BE AN ACTIVE MEETING AREA.
THERE ARE BARBECUES, THERE ARE SOME HAMMOCKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND THEN TO THE RIGHT OF THE SCREEN IS A PICKLEBALL COURT AND DOG PARK AREA, BECAUSE THAT ALWAYS TENDS TO BE A POPULAR AMENITY AND PARTICULARLY WITH THE PRIVATE YARDS.
AND SO ALL OF THIS WAS MEANT TO BE DISTRIBUTED THROUGHOUT THE SITE TO CREATE SOME SEPARATION BETWEEN THE HOMES AND TO CREATE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY IN A GOOD PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE AS OUR RESIDENTS LEFT THEIR HOMES TO GO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF WHAT'S ON SITE.
ALL RIGHT. AND KIND OF EXPANDING ON THAT, WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT YOU'RE ATTEMPTING TO PROVIDE THE RESIDENTS WITH SOME TYPE OF PARK LIKE AMENITIES THERE WITH THE OPEN SPACE AND PLACES TO PLAY? YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.
HOW IS THAT LIKE A PARK IN YOUR MIND? YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.
AND SO PART OF THE DESIGN OF THE COMMUNITY IS PRIVATE, USABLE, OPEN SPACE.
AND SO PRIVATE YARDS, WHICH TYPICALLY AREN'T AVAILABLE TO THE SIZE WE'VE OFFERED HERE IN A RENTAL COMMUNITY, BUT ALSO COMMON IN SHARED OPEN SPACES, PLACES FOR YOU TO MEET YOUR NEIGHBORS AND RECREATE.
PICKLEBALL HAS BEEN PARTICULARLY POPULAR, A DOG AND PET EXERCISE AND RELIEF AREA AND AS WELL AS MEETING AND MEETING SPACES, BARBECUES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
[02:35:05]
TO GARDEN, COOK OUTDOORS, WHATEVER THEY LIKE TO DO.THANK YOU. THAT'S ENCOURAGING TO KNOW, SIR.
NOTWITHSTANDING THAT WE'VE RECEIVED A GREAT DEAL OF NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS THAT WOULD LIKE THIS COMMISSION TO ORDER A THAT THERE BE A PARK DEDICATION.
OKAY. COULD YOU RESPOND TO THAT CONCERN, PLEASE? YEAH, IT'S SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN AWARE OF FROM OUR INITIAL RESEARCH AND ACQUISITION OF THE SITE THROUGH THE PLANNING AND HAVE HAD EXTENSIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY AND WITH THE CITY ABOUT THAT.
THAT I KNOW IS AN ISSUE THAT HAS A HISTORY IN CARLSBAD.
I THINK STAFF'S REPORT MENTIONED MULTIPLE TIMES THAT THIS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED WITH THE CITY COUNCIL AND PERHAPS WITH THE LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL.
CITY LEADERSHIP HAS MADE THE DECISION THAT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO TO SERVE RESIDENTS WITHIN THIS FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE IN THIS PART OF THE CITY IS TO COLLECT A FEE TO SUPPORT PARKS LOCATED ELSEWHERE.
AND SO THAT'S AGAIN, CONSISTENCY WITH THE PLAN IS OUR COMMITMENT TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AND TO CITY STAFF, AND THAT IS THE DIRECTION THAT WE WERE GIVEN TO PAY THE FEE TO SUPPORT PARK FACILITIES ELSEWHERE.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANTS? OH, COMMISSIONER.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
MR. GOFF TALKED ABOUT 15% OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT.
CORRECT. AND IN YOUR PRESENTATION YOU SAID THERE WERE 30% OPEN SPACE OR PARK SPACE BEING PROVIDED.
MY QUESTION IS, SO ACCORDING TO MY CALCULATIONS, THAT'S ABOUT 32% OR 64,000FT² OF OPEN SPACE ON THIS SITE.
AND THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, WHY ARE THE FRONT YARD SETBACKS AND THE WIRE SETBACKS REQUESTING BEING REDUCED WITH WITH SO MUCH OPEN SPACE? SO THE SETBACK REDUCTIONS ARE ALONG THE STREET FRONTAGE BECAUSE WE WANTED TO CREATE A STRONG STREET SCENE FROM THE HOMES TO THE ADJACENT STREET.
THERE'S NO VEHICLE PARKING IN THE FRONT WAY WHERE YOU MAY HAVE A DRIVEWAY.
AND SO HAVING ENOUGH WIDTH TO CREATE SEPARATION FROM THE PUBLIC WALK TO THE FRONT OF THE HOME, BUT ALSO HAVING THE HOME BE EYES ON THE STREET AND THE STREET PRESENCE WAS PART OF OUR DESIGN FEATURE.
AND EVEN THOUGH EVEN THOUGH IT IS A FOUR AND A HALF ACRE SITE TO BUILD THIS PRODUCT, THERE ARE NATURAL SITE CONSTRAINTS THAT WE HAVE TO GET VEHICLE CIRCULATION THROUGH.
WE WANT TO CREATE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS.
AND SO WE SAW IT'S A 20% REDUCTION FROM TEN FEET ALLOWED TO EIGHT FEET FROM FIVE FEET ALLOWED TO FOUR FEET ON THE SETBACKS AS THE BEST WAY TO MAXIMIZE KIND OF THE BALANCE OF INTERESTS OF THE SITE OF BUILDING THE HOMES THAT WE THOUGHT RESIDENTS WOULD WANT TO HAVE THE INTERIOR OPEN SPACE, THE EXTERIOR, OPEN SPACE AND CREATE A GREAT STREET SCENE.
AND I NOTICED THERE'S QUITE A SIGNIFICANT GAS LINE THAT'S RUNNING THROUGH THE CENTER OF THE SITE.
SO I UNDERSTAND THAT LIMITS THAT WAS ANOTHER CONSTRAINT.
WE WERE DEALING WITH ORGANIZATION TO THAT.
BUT I'M STILL CONFUSED AS TO WHY WITH 64,000FT² OF OPEN SPACE, THE SETBACKS, WHICH ARE, WHAT, 3000 603,400 BEING REQUESTED, NOT ABLE TO BE MET.
SO SO IT SEEMS LIKE A BIG QUESTION.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE ON YOUR TEAM COULD SORT OF TALK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, WHY THAT DECISION WAS MADE THAT WAY? BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE AMENITIES.
I UNDERSTAND THE STREET FRONT, I UNDERSTAND THE GAS LINE.
SO AGAIN, PART OF IT WAS TO CREATE PRIVATE, USABLE, OPEN SPACE IN THE REAR YARDS.
AND SO WE FOUND THAT TO BE THE BEST COMPROMISE.
[02:40:01]
IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION ON THE FIRST PAGE, EXHIBIT SIX TALKS ABOUT THE 4.64 ACRES TIMES 15 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRES EQUALS 70 UNITS.THE 70 UNITS IS MULTIPLIED BY THE DENSITY BONUS, WHICH ENDS UP BEING ABOUT 20 UNITS, AND THAT'S THE 15% OF LOW INCOME UNITS.
WHY IS IT WHY AREN'T WHY ARE ONLY 13 LOW INCOME UNITS BEING PROVIDED AND NOT 2,015% OF THE 86 IS ROUNDS UP TO 13.
SO IT'S 15% OF THE UNITS PROVIDED ARE AFFORDABLE.
BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS EVEN WITH THE 70 AND THE DENSITY BONUS, WE COULD HAVE HAD 20, 15% OF THE UNITS ARE BEING PROVIDED AS AFFORDABLE.
SO. YES, BUT WE'RE NOT GETTING 20.
SO THAT'S KIND OF MY QUESTION AND WHY I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE MATH ON THAT.
COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY, IF I COULD JUST CLARIFY THE MATH ON THIS ONE, BECAUSE I PULLED THAT ONE UP.
SO THE THE 15% IS FIRST LOOKED AT, HAVING THE 70 UNITS THAT'S ALLOWED BY THE BASE ZONE.
THEN THEY ARE GETTING 20% DENSITY BONUS ON TOP OF THAT.
SO THAT 20 RIGHT THERE IS WHAT THEY ARE GETTING IN PART OF DENSITY BONUS.
SO THEN AS PART OF OUR INCLUSIONARY HOUSING, WE DO AN ADDITIONAL CALCULATION.
SO WE WOULDN'T DO IT BASED ON THE MAXIMUM.
BUT WE COULDN'T HAVE REQUESTED THE 15% BASED ON THE MAXIMUM.
AND THAT'S CODIFIED IN OUR THAT'S CODIFIED IN OUR INCLUSIONARY HOUSING ORDINANCE.
ANYTHING TO ADD, MR. KEMP? NO. I GUESS THE ONLY OTHER THING I WANTED TO BRING UP, WHICH IS SOMETHING YOU ADDRESSED EARLIER, IS THAT THE SETBACKS THAT YOU'RE QUESTIONING ARE A WAIVER UNDER DENSITY BONUS LAW, WHICH IS SOMETHING WE'RE REQUIRED TO GIVE IN RETURN FOR THE DENSITY BONUS.
WE UNDERSTAND YOU'RE ENTITLED TO THIS BONUS, BUT WE ALSO NEED HELP WITH OUR TEACHERS AND POLICE AND EVEN OUR PLANNERS WHO ARE STRUGGLING TO TRY AND LIVE HERE. SO THE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING WE CAN ACTUALLY INCORPORATE INTO THESE PROJECTS, OBVIOUSLY THAT'S A CONCERN THAT OUR COMMUNITY SHARES.
SO APPRECIATE YOUR PRESENTATION.
ARE THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANTS? OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION.
SO ON THE EASTERN EDGE OF THE PROJECT, THAT IS WHAT GOES UP AGAINST THE THE RAIL.
IS THERE GOING TO BE A FENCE IN BETWEEN THE THE RESIDENCES AND THE RAIL? YES, ABSOLUTELY. SO THAT'S AND THE WALL THERE INCENTIVE REQUEST IS RELATED TO THAT.
AND SO THAT WALL PROVIDES SAFETY AS WELL AS SOUND AND VIBRATION PROTECTION.
THE TOP THREE FEET OF THAT, THOUGH, TO MITIGATE THE HEIGHT AND THE IMPACT OF THAT HEIGHT IS PROPOSED TO BE GLASS, WHICH PROVIDES PROTECTION FROM THE INTERMITTENT SOUND FROM THE ADJACENT RAIL, BUT ALSO PROVIDES VISIBILITY BOTH INTO THE SITE AND OUT FROM THE RESIDENTS ACROSS.
THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MEENES.
I THINK IT'S MORE OF AN EDIFICATION AND CLARITY ON MY BEHALF.
THEY WERE TALKING FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WERE TALKING ABOUT THE SETBACKS ON ON SOME OF THE DESIGNS OF WHERE THE PLACEMENT I THINK YOU, THE DEVELOPER HAVE DONE HAS DONE A GREAT JOB IN DESIGNING THE LAYOUT OF THE PROJECT.
I WOULD ASSUME THAT PART OF THAT SETBACK REQUIREMENT IN ORDER TO GET THE 86 UNITS AND DESIGNING IT TO WHERE YOU HAVE AS MUCH OPEN SPACE WITHIN THE UNITS.
THE SETBACK IS IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THE 86 UNITS.
ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. AT 18.5 UNITS TO THE ACRE, THESE SITES REQUIRE DESIGN DOWN TO THE INCH.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
I ASSUME THAT. THE LAST CALL FOR QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANTS.
[02:45:07]
OKAY. SEEING NONE.NOW, I BELIEVE WE ARE GOING TO GO TO A PRESENTATION BY THE APPELLANTS MR. SCHULTE. AND MR. SCHULTE, THE GREEN BUTTON WILL ADVANCE YOUR SLIDES.
WHY DID I SPEND $800 TO TALK TO YOU? BECAUSE I LOVE CARLSBAD.
I'VE BEEN HERE FOR 36 YEARS, AND I'M CARING ABOUT THE FUTURE OF OUR FUTURE CITIZENS AND OUR CITY.
I'LL MAKE IT SIMPLE FOR YOU, BECAUSE I'VE DONE THIS MANY TIMES BEFORE WITH CITY COUNCILS.
YOU NEED TO BE INDIVIDUALLY AND COLLECTIVELY 100% SURE AND RESPONSIBLE.
THAT THERE IS NO THAT YOU KNOW, AND THAT YOU CAN CAN CONFIRM THAT THERE IS NO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT AND THEREFORE IT CAN BE EXEMPT OR WHAT I'VE ADVISED COUNCILS AND PLANNING COMMISSIONS IS TO TAKE THE LOGICAL LEGAL AND SAFE APPROACH AND REQUIRE CEQA ANALYSIS SO THAT YOU KNOW BEFOREHAND WHAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ARE.
YOU NEED TO KNOW BEFORE YOU MAKE A DECISION ON THIS PROJECT.
I'M NOT ARGUING FOR OR AGAINST THE PROJECT.
AND DO THAT BEFORE YOU VOTE ON A PROJECT.
AND A LOT OF THESE DEAL WITH RECREATION.
PARK BUT THAT'S WHERE OUR PARK IS AND THAT'S WHERE OUR PARK MONEY IS GOING.
THIS PROJECT SHOULD BE REQUIRED AS YOU ARE FULLY AND LEGALLY ALLOWED UNDER UNDER MUNICIPAL CODE 20.44 TO REQUIRE THE THE DEVELOPER TO PROVIDE ITS PARK LAND DEDICATION OF ABOUT 7.7 ACRES IN LAND AT PONTO.
THEY CAN AFFORD TO GIVE 0.7 ACRES FREE OF FREE LAND TO THE CITY FOR A MUCH NEEDED PARK HERE.
YOU NEED TO TAKE OWNERSHIP OF WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO REQUIRE THEM TO DO THAT OR NOT.
I THINK THE FACTS SUPPORTING THE APPEAL THAT WE'VE SENT TO YOU ARE PRETTY CLEAR.
THE LAND USE ISSUES AND THE PARK ISSUES THAT WE DEALT WITH ARE GOING TO BE DEFERRED TO THE CITY'S LCP BECAUSE I RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE COASTAL COMMISSION JUST YESTERDAY THAT TALKS ABOUT THAT.
BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS THAT YOU NEED TO BE EITHER 100% SURE THAT YOU'VE GOT ALL THE INFORMATION AND YOU'RE 100% SURE THERE'S NO IMPACTS OR YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.
ARE THERE IMPACTS? SHOULD THEY SHOULD THEY BE DISCLOSED AND DISCUSSED? AND SHOULD CITIZENS KNOW ABOUT THEM BEFORE YOU VOTE? I THINK WE'VE ITEMIZED THOSE FAIRLY WELL.
HERE'S WHAT THE COASTAL COMMISSION SAID.
STAFF SAID COASTAL COMMISSION IS 100% SUPPORTIVE OF THIS.
LOOK AT THE BOLDFACE LANGUAGE.
THE COASTAL COMMISSION IS SAYING THERE IS SIGNIFICANT PARK AND VISITOR SERVING ISSUES IN THIS AREA AND HAVE TOLD THE CITY HAS DENIED THE CITY'S APPLICATION TO CHANGE SOME OF THESE LAND USES IN 2010 AND IN 2017 SAID IN MULTIPLE TIMES THAT THE LAND USES IN PONTO COULD CHANGE BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF COASTAL RECREATION, I.E.
PUBLIC PARKS IN THIS AREA AND THAT THAT THOSE ISSUES ARE GOING TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE SAME DEVELOPERS PLANNING AREA F SITE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY.
SO THERE IS A REASONABLE POSSIBILITY OF BOTH CUMULATIVE AND SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS.
[02:50:03]
THE PONTO SITE IS CONTIGUOUS WITH PONTO SITE 18, WHICH OVERLAPS IT AND THE DEVELOPER'S PLANNING AREA F SITE DIRECTLY ADJACENT.ALL THOSE 17 ACRES ARE ALL CONTIGUOUS.
IN FACT, THERE'S A CONCURRENT PROCESSING OF PONTO SITE 18, WHICH OVERLAPS RIGHT ON TOP OF THIS PROJECT THAT IS HAVING TO GO THROUGH COASTAL SEQUENCE ANALYSIS AND IT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW.
THERE ARE UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES, A TEN INCH HIGH PRESSURE GAS LINE THAT RECENTLY HAD A LEAK.
THOSE GAS LINES, WHEN THEY LEAK AND THEY AND THEY GO, THEY EXPLODE.
IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE ONES THAT WERE EXPLODING UP IN SAN FRANCISCO, THIS RUNS RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THAT PROJECT, RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE OF HIGH DENSITY HOUSING THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY ANALYSIS THAT SHOWS THAT'S GOING TO BE SAFE IN THE FUTURE.
WE NEED THAT STUDY DONE ALONG WITH OTHER THINGS.
SEQUA PROHIBITS YOU FROM WHAT'S CALLED MITIGATING INTO AN EXEMPTION.
THEY'VE ALREADY VIOLATED THE GUIDELINES ALREADY AND THEY'VE TOLD YOU THEY HAVE BECAUSE THEY'VE PRE MITIGATED THEIR PROJECT TRYING TO PRE MITIGATE THEIR PROJECT WITH STUDIES THAT YOU HAVE NOT SEEN, THAT CITIZENS HAVE NOT SEEN AND CITIZENS HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO EVALUATE.
THERE ARE ALSO SEGMENTING AND PIECEMEALING THE PROJECT.
THE 4.6 ACRE SEGMENT IS A SEGMENT OF THE OVERALL SIX ACRE PONTO SITE 18 SEGMENT, WHICH IS ALSO A SEGMENT OF THE 17 ACRE SITE THAT THEY ALREADY OWN.
AND THESE FUTURE PHASES, THEY'RE GOING TO BE DEVELOPED.
THEY DIDN'T BUY THAT LAND NOT TO DEVELOP IT.
AT PONTO SECO ALSO REQUIRES THAT THESE REASONABLY FORESEEABLE PROJECTS ARE ARE DISCLOSED.
THE DEVELOPER AND THE CITY ARE PIECEMEALING.
THEY'RE TAKING THIS 4.6 ACRE PROJECT THAT IS THAT IS BASICALLY WITHIN THE SIX ACRE PROJECT THAT THEY'RE ALREADY EVALUATING. THERE'S TWO PROJECTS ON THE SAME LAND THAT ARE GOING AND CONCURRENTLY BEING EVALUATED AND THAT THEY REDUCE THE SITE OF THIS PROJECT TO BE JUST UNDER THE FIVE ACRES.
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THAT PROJECT AND CREATE AND MAKE IT SMALLER.
WE'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT SMALLER SO IT CAN TRY TO QUALIFY.
THAT'S GAMING THE SYSTEM, THAT'S PIECEMEALING AND THAT'S ILLEGAL.
THEY ALSO SAY THAT THIS IS IN FACT, OH, IT'S URBAN INFILL.
THE SITE IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO ALL THOSE GREEN AND YELLOW ENDANGERED SPECIES, GNATCATCHERS THAT ARE FEDERALLY PROTECTED UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.
PART OF IT IS SHOWN AS THAT BLACK LINE AND.
THE. THIS AREA IS REQUIRED TO DO A FIVE YEAR ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT RESTORATION PROJECT BECAUSE WHEN THE GAS LINE WAS REPLACED, BECAUSE IT WAS LEAKING, THEY THEY TORE OUT ALL SORTS OF ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT AND THEY HAVE TO SPEND FIVE YEARS TO REESTABLISH IT. THIS IS NOT INFILL.
THIS IS THIS IS PRETTY, PRETTY NATURAL.
THE OTHER ISSUES THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH, TOO, ARE VMT.
THEY'RE USING ASSUMED VMT REDUCTIONS OF SAYING IF WE JUST MAKE THINGS DENSER, PEOPLE WON'T DRIVE.
THE CITY SAYS WE HAVE TO DRIVE SIX MILES TO GET TO OUR PARK.
THAT PARK WAS SUPPOSED TO BE OUR PARK THAT SERVES OUR NEED AND OUR DEFICIT.
HOW CAN THIS BE REDUCING VMT? YOU'RE JUST MAKING IT WORSE.
REQUIRE THE DEVELOPER TO PROVIDE THE PARKLAND OR THE PARKLAND DEDICATION.
[02:55:04]
THIS IS WHAT THE PARKLAND SITUATION LOOKS LIKE.THAT IS HOW WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE PROVIDED OUR PARKS.
THIS PROJECT CAN HELP SOLVE THAT PROBLEM BY DEDICATING THE LAND.
ANYWAYS, YOU NEED TO BE 100% SURE THAT EVERY SINGLE.
THANKS. SORRY, I GOT A LITTLE EMOTIONAL THERE.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPELLANTS? PLEASE ASK ME QUESTIONS.
OKAY. ACTUALLY, I BELIEVE AT THIS TIME IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR STAFF TO RESPOND TO ANY ANY ISSUES RAISED BY THE APPELLANTS. I WILL ASK THEM TO RESPOND TO A COUPLE ITEMS. BUT IF FIRST, THEY WANT TO RESPOND TO ANY ITEMS THAT THEY THEMSELVES FEEL NECESSARY.
SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GO THROUGH THAT PRESENTATION NOW AND THEN IF THERE'S QUESTIONS, YOU CAN CALL MR. SCHULTE BACK UP. UNDERSTOOD.
THANK YOU. SO MR. GOFF ALREADY WENT OVER A LITTLE BIT OF THIS, BUT JUST TO SAY THROUGH THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 19, THE CITY PLANNER IS DEAD GRANTED AUTHORITY TO DETERMINE WHETHER A PROJECT IS EXEMPT. IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN SOME OTHER JURISDICTIONS.
THAT DOCUMENT WAS APPEALED BY MR. SCHULTE. SO THAT'S WHY THIS ITEM IS ON THE AGENDA FOR MOST OF YOUR ITEMS. THAT DOCUMENT IS NOT APPEALED, AND THAT'S WHY WE INFORM YOU THAT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S ON YOUR AGENDA.
A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROCESS FOR THE APPEAL.
THE APPEAL IS DE NOVO, MEANING THAT THE MATTER IS HEARD AND NEW, BUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHOULD ONLY CONSIDER EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO THE CITY PLANNER PRIOR TO THAT DETERMINATION. THE BURDEN ON PROOF IS ON THE APPELLANT TO ESTABLISH SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
THE NEXT IS THAT IT'S BARRED FROM USING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE APPEAL.
THE FIRST ITEM ALLEGING THAT THERE IS AN INCONSISTENCY IN THE GENERAL PLAN AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM, AS MR. GOFF ALLUDED TO, THE PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED RESIDENTIAL 15 AND VISITOR COMMERCIAL.
COASTAL COMMISSION STAFF HAVE IN WRITING NOW AGREED WITH THIS INTERPRETATION.
I'M GOING TO RUN THROUGH EACH OF THE ITEMS ON NUMBER TWO INDIVIDUALLY.
THE FIRST IS THAT THE ALLEGING THAT THE PROJECT IS BARRED FROM CEQA GUIDELINES 15300.2.
THIS SETS A SET OF EXCEPTIONS TO AN EXEMPTION.
DIFFERENT SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OR CRITERIA.
THE NEXT COMPONENT IS STATING THAT THE PROJECT DID NOT MEET THE COMMON SENSE EXEMPTION.
WE UTILIZE THE SEPARATE CLASS 32 INFILL EXEMPTION.
THAT'S A DIFFERENT SECTION OF LAW.
THE NEXT ONE IS ALLEGING THAT WE DID NOT ADDRESS THE COMPLETE PROPERTY OWNERSHIP OR THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND THE CUMULATIVE IMPACT OF SUCCESSIVE PROJECTS IN THE SAME PLACE OVER TIME. THE PROXIMITY OF LAND OWNERSHIP IS NOT BY ITSELF A CONSIDERATION UNDER SEQUA.
[03:00:03]
THE PROJECT INCLUDES THE WHOLE OF THE ACTION UNDER SEQUA THAT IS SUBMITTED TO US.THE PROPERTY OWNER, AS THEY ACQUIRED PROPERTY IN THIS AREA, SUBMITTED THIS PROJECT ALSO STATE THAT THERE IS A HOUSING ELEMENT PROCESS THAT IS SEPARATELY STUDYING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THAT THAT INCLUDES A LARGER AREA THAT IS GOING THROUGH ITS SEPARATE PROCESS.
AND DEPENDING ON WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS PROJECT, THOSE PROPERTIES, MAY BE REMOVED FROM THAT HOUSING ELEMENT, BECAUSE THAT IS A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT STUDYING A DIFFERENT HIGHER INTENSITY AT THE DIRECTION FOR THE HOUSING ELEMENT REZONING PROGRAM.
THERE ARE NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE APPELLANT HAS THE BURDEN TO SHOW SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE WHY THIS IS DISTINGUISHED FROM OTHER INFILL PROJECTS.
THE NEXT COMPONENT IS RELATED TO THE CLASS 32 INFILL PROJECTS.
CLASS 32 INFILL PROJECTS HAVE A NUMBER OF CRITERIA SUCH AS SIZE AND LOCATION.
ONE OF THOSE CRITERIA IS THAT THE PROPERTY IS SUBSTANTIALLY SURROUNDED BY URBAN USES.
THIS IS A DIAGRAM THAT SHOWS THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE LINEAR FEET OF LAND THAT'S SURROUNDING IT WITH OTHER COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS TO THE WEST AND NORTH, AS WELL AS THE RAILROAD TRACKS.
75% IS OFTEN USED AS THE THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING CONSISTENCY WITH THIS.
AND THIS PROPERTY HAS 84% SURROUNDING IT FOR URBAN USES.
SO THE CITY'S VMT GUIDELINES OUTLINED SEVERAL STRATEGIES THAT CAN APPLY TO REDUCE A PROJECT'S VMT.
THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION INCLUDES TWO COMPONENTS THAT ARE BASED ON STANDARD TRAFFIC RATES WOULD REDUCE VMT, AND THAT IS THE INCREASE IN RESIDENTIAL DENSITY, WHICH WAS INCLUDED AS PART OF THE APPLICATION FOR THE DENSITY BONUS, AS WELL AS THE AFFORDABLE AND BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING, WHICH WAS A REQUIREMENT OF BOTH OUR INCLUSIONARY HOUSING ORDINANCE AS WELL AS THAT DENSITY BONUS.
AND SO THOSE COMPONENTS REDUCE THE VMT BY 22% BELOW OUR THRESHOLD, WHICH MAKE IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO MAKE THE FINDINGS REQUIRED FOR THE EXEMPTION. THERE IS A VMT STUDY THAT WAS POSTED ALONGSIDE THE EXEMPTION AND MADE AVAILABLE WHEN THAT EXEMPTION WAS MADE AVAILABLE.
SO THAT CONCLUDES WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT THIS AGAIN IS JUST THE SAME SLIDE WITH THE RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR THE RESOLUTION DENYING THE APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE CITY PLANNERS DETERMINATION.
AND THEN AFTER THAT, CONSIDERING THE PROJECT SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT.
AND I WANT TO DO THIS IN AN ORDERLY FASHION.
SO I'D LIKE TO INVITE THE APPELLANTS UP AND WILL ASK QUESTIONS OF THE APPELLANTS FIRST.
SO ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. SCHULTE? COMMISSIONER STINE? SIR. MR. SCHULTE, YOU MADE A NUMBER OF ACCUSATIONS HERE, AND I'M NOT SURE YOU GOT YOUR FACTS RIGHT ON A LOT OF THESE THINGS, BUT I WANTED TO EXPLORE THEM ANYHOW.
YOU SAY THERE'S A HIGH PRESSURE GAS LINE.
ARE YOU SAYING THERE'S A HIGH PRESSURE GAS LINE ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT? NOT LAND NEXT DOOR, BUT ON THIS PROJECT? OKAY. YEAH.
IT RUNS RIGHT DOWN THE CENTER OF THE SITE.
SO AGAIN, NOT ON THE ADJACENT, BUT JUST HERE.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? CAN YOU PULL UP THE MAP? I'LL POINT IT OUT TO YOU.
OKAY. IS THIS A POINTER, TOO? ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER STINE, WE CAN CONFIRM THAT THE TEN INCH GAS LINE RUNS THROUGH THE SPINE OF THE PROJECT.
IT DOES. UNDERGROUND LINE RIGHT DOWN THE CENTER.
YOU ARGUED THAT THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY VIOLATED SEQUA BY CONDUCTING STUDIES.
YOU CONSIDER THAT A VIOLATION FOR THEM TO DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE BEFORE THEY APPLIED FOR THE EXEMPTION? I DON'T.
[03:05:01]
CALIFORNIA STATE LAW DOES AND CALIFORNIA STATE CASE LAW DOES.WHAT IT SAYS IS THAT IF YOU HAVE A REQUIREMENT TO PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE AND PRESENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND YOU CIRCUMVENT THAT PROCESS BY DOING THESE STUDIES BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, OUTSIDE OF THE PUBLIC REVIEW PROCESS OF CEQA, YOU ARE TRYING TO THEN DESIGN THE PROJECT OR MITIGATE THE PROJECT. SO THAT IT DOESN'T COMPLY, DOESN'T HAVE TO COMPLY WITH SEQUA YOU'RE BASICALLY USING THESE STUDIES AND MANIPULATING THE PROJECT SO THAT YOU AVOID GOING THROUGH THE SEQUA ANALYSIS.
THE CEQA ANALYSIS IS DESIGNED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU AS A PLANNING COMMISSION, YOU AS A CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITIZENS OF CARLSBAD KNOW WHAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ARE.
YOU SUBMIT THE RESULTS OF THOSE STUDIES TO THE PUBLIC TO REVIEW AND SAY, DOES THIS MAKE SENSE? WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS? YOU DON'T KNOW.
WELL, HELL, SEQUA IS SUPPOSED TO MAKE THAT A PUBLIC PROCESS SO EVERYONE CAN SEE IT.
AND THAT'S STATE LAW AND THAT'S CASE LAW.
WELL, I'M GOING TO ASK FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OPINION ON THAT.
MR. KEMP, CAN YOU GIVE US AN OPINION ON THAT, PLEASE? I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S IN THE STUDIES THAT THEY LOOKED AT.
I THINK MR. SCHULTE IS PROBABLY MAKING SOME ASSUMPTIONS.
THE APPLICANT CAN PROBABLY SPEAK TO WHAT IT WAS THAT THEY STUDIED.
SO I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU FIND THAT WITHOUT ACTUALLY DOING SOME PRELIMINARY STUDIES.
SO THEY DO NEED TO LOOK AT THOSE THINGS TO SEE IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A SIGNIFICANT EVENT.
THAT'S PART OF 15, THREE, THREE, TWO.
OKAY. ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY CASE LAW THAT WOULD SUGGEST THAT DOING THE STUDY ITSELF IS A VIOLATION OF STATE LAW? NO, THANK YOU.
MR. SCHULTE, YOU INDICATED THAT, PEOPLE IF THIS PROJECT IS APPROVED, THAT PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO DRIVE SIX MILES TO GET TO A PARK. THE PARK YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK, CORRECT? CORRECT. THE CITY ISN'T THERE A PONTO PARK TWO AND A HALF MILES BY YOUR OWN SIDE, TWO AND A HALF MILES FROM THIS PROJECT SITE? THE PONTO PARK, OR WHAT'S CALLED POINSETTIA PARK, IS ACTUALLY WHAT IT'S CALLED, THAT PARK ACREAGE, WITHOUT VETERANS PARK THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT IS PARK DEFICIENT.
THE CITY, THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT IS PARK DEFICIENT.
AND THE SOLUTION TO PROVIDE FOR THAT PARK DEFICIENCY, I.E.
THERE'S MORE PEOPLE THAN THERE IS PARK ACREAGE IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT.
THE CITY SOLUTION TO THAT DEFICIT IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT WAS THAT OUR PARK, THE PARK LAND THAT WE NEED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT IS INSTEAD GOING TO BE PROVIDED IN THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT THAT IS SIX MILES AWAY.
THAT IS WHAT THE CITY HAS SAID.
WELL, VETERANS PARK IS SIX MILES AWAY.
SIR, THAT GOES BEYOND THE SCOPE OF MY QUESTION.
MY QUESTION IS, ISN'T POINSETTIA PARK PROPERLY 2.5 MILES FROM THE SITE OF THIS PROJECT? IT IS. AND YOU HAVE TO CROSS A FREEWAY.
NOTHING FURTHER. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. SCHULTE AT THIS TIME? OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION.
SO AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF YOUR APPEAL, YOU STATED THAT YOU MADE A BLANKET STATEMENT SAYING THAT WE HAVE TO KNOW THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF A PROJECT BEFORE WE VOTE, WHICH I THINK IMPLIES THAT WE DON'T KNOW THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS UNLESS WE DO AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT.
SO. ARE YOU SAYING THAT CEQA EXEMPTIONS ARE NEVER JUSTIFIED?
[03:10:03]
NO. I'VE APPROVED A LOT OF CEQA EXEMPTIONS.WHEN IT'S CLEAR AND OBVIOUS THAT THERE'S NO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND IT COMPLIES WITH LAW.
I THINK THE ISSUE IS, IS THERE'S ENOUGH QUESTIONS RELATED TO THIS PROJECT.
A HIGH PRESSURE GAS LINE, ENDANGERED SPECIES, HABITAT, PARK ISSUES, LAND USE ISSUES, TRAFFIC ISSUES.
FOR INSTANCE, LET'S JUST LOOK AT THE TRAFFIC ISSUE.
THEY HAD USED VMT REDUCTION ESTIMATES TO REDUCE THE TRAFFIC IMPACT BY 22%.
WELL, PARKS AND SCHOOLS ARE OVER TWO MILES AWAY ACROSS THE FREEWAY.
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DRIVE TO GET TO THEM THERE.
THERE IS SOME COMMERCIAL THERE, BUT IT'S NOT A BIG JOB CENTER.
THE REASON THAT THERE'S HIGH VMT AT PONTO IS BECAUSE THERE'S, YOU HAVE TO DRIVE.
I'VE LIVED THERE FOR OVER 20 YEARS.
I HAVE TO DRIVE TO GO ANYWHERE OTHER THAN TO WALK TO RALPH'S OR RIDE MY BIKE TO RALPH'S.
AND THE FACT IS THAT THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE, THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT LIVE THERE, HAVE HIGH VMT BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO DRIVE AND THEY HAVE TO DRIVE LONG DISTANCES.
TO SAY THAT THE SOLUTION, THE SOLUTION TO VMT IS SIMPLY ADDING MORE PEOPLE TO THE EXISTING EQUATION TO ADDING MORE PEOPLE THAT NEED TO DRIVE TO PUTTING IN LARGE UNITS THAT.
90% OF THESE UNITS ARE 3 OR 4 BEDROOM.
THAT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF HIGH OCCUPANCY.
THEY'RE GOING TO BE OCCUPIED BY TWO TYPES OF INDIVIDUALS.
A LOT OF ADULTS LIVING TOGETHER THAT HAVE MULTIPLE CARS THAT NEED TO DRIVE AND GET TO WORK OR THEY'RE GOING TO BE OCCUPIED BY LARGE FAMILIES. AND THEIR KIDS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GO TO SCHOOL.
THEIR KIDS ARE NOT GOING TO WALK ACROSS I-5 FOR THREE MILES TO GO TO THE PARK AND TO WALK TO SCHOOL.
THAT'S THE REASON THERE'S HIGH VMT IN PONTO.
SIMPLY SAYING WE'RE GOING TO ADD MORE TRAFFIC, MORE PEOPLE DRIVING BY.
HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM IS A RIDICULOUS ARGUMENT, SIMPLY.
AND THEN WHAT'S REALLY TRAGIC? THIS IS THE THING THAT'S REALLY TRAGIC IS YOU USE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING EXCUSE.
FOR PEOPLE THAT DON'T HAVE MAYBE THE ECONOMIC MEANS OF ALL OF US AND THAT THEIR COST OF TRANSPORTATION IS REALLY IMPORTANT AND IT'S EXPENSIVE.
YOU'RE PUTTING THOSE PEOPLE INTO AN ENVIRONMENT THAT IS FORCING THEM TO DRIVE.
BECAUSE THIS IS A HIGH VMT AREA.
SO NOT ONLY I MEAN, IT'S ALMOST PATHETICALLY SAD THAT WE'RE SAYING WE SHOULD PUT PEOPLE THAT CAN LEAST AFFORD TO DRIVE IN AN AREA THAT WHERE THEY HAVE TO DRIVE MR. SCHULTE CAN CAN WE, YOU KNOW, NARROW YOUR RESPONSE TO MY QUESTION? SURE. SO I JUST ASKED IT.
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT CEQA EXEMPTIONS ARE INHERENTLY NOT JUSTIFIED? SO YOU COULD HAVE SAID NO.
WELL, I WANT TO EXPLAIN WHY AND WHY THIS IS DIFFERENT THAN JUST ANY EXEMPTION.
DOES DO THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF'S RESPONSE TO THE APPEAL? COMMISSIONER STINE? YES, I BELIEVE ONE OF THE POINTS HE MENTIONED AND IF I MISQUOTED YOU OR MISINTERPRETED MR. SCHULTE, YOU LET ME KNOW.
BUT DIDN'T YOU SAY THAT THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO HAVE A PARK DEDICATION AS PART OF THIS PROJECT? I THOUGHT YOU USED THE WORD REQUIRED.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? IF YOU READ CARLSBAD, MY ANSWER IS, ARE YOU? IS YOUR ARGUMENT THAT AS THE COMMISSION, WE HAVE TO IMPOSE A PARK DEDICATION ON THIS APPLICANT? IS THAT YOUR ARGUMENT, SIR? YES. OKAY.
CITY ATTORNEY, WOULD YOU RESPOND TO THAT, PLEASE? YES. THIS IS NOT A SUBDIVISION.
THE POWER TO REQUIRE A PARK DEDICATION.
THE SECTION HE'S TALKING ABOUT, 2044 IS IN THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT SECTION OF OUR CODE.
AND THIS IS A CONSOLIDATION OF THREE LOTS.
IT'S WHAT'S KNOWN AS A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT.
[03:15:08]
SO 2044 DOESN'T APPLY.THERE'S NOT A SUBDIVIDED HERE.
SO WHAT WE HAVE IS A FALLBACK IS THE ZONE 22 PLAN, WHICH REQUIRES THE DEVELOPER TO PAY PARK AND LIEU FEES SO WE DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO REQUIRE A DEDICATION OF PARK LAND FOR THIS SITE.
MAY I MAY I READ SOMETHING FROM THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE THAT IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT? SO I THINK THE RESPONSE I ASKED FOR A RESPONSE.
THAT WAS YOUR POSITION. I ASKED FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY'S RESPONSE.
I THINK THAT MATTERS RESOLVED.
SORRY, BUT YOU'RE OUT OF ORDER.
I'M GOING TO ALLOW THE COMMISSIONERS TO CONTINUE ASKING THEIR QUESTIONS.
OKAY. SIR, YOU SAID THIS IS A PIECEMEAL.
WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS PIECEMEAL.
ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY PROJECTS RIGHT NOW IN THE PIPELINE, IN THE SURROUNDING OR ADJOINING AREA THAT YOU SAY THIS IS ONLY A PART OF? YOU SAID PIECEMEAL, SIR.
THAT WAS ONE OF YOUR ARGUMENTS.
WHAT OTHER PROJECT IS THERE? WHY DO YOU SAY IT'S PIECEMEAL? STAFF HAS INDICATED THAT THERE IS A CONCURRENT PROJECT CALLED THE PONTO SITE 18 PROJECT THAT'S CURRENTLY BEING PROCESSED THAT OVERLAYS AND EXPANDS UPON THE BOUNDARIES OF THIS PROJECT.
SO HERE'S AN INSTANCE WHERE YOU'VE TAKEN A SIX ACRE PROJECT.
AND SAID WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT SMALLER THAN FIVE ACRES SO IT CAN QUALIFY AS A POTENTIAL EXEMPTION WHILE AT THE SAME TIME YOU'RE ANALYZING A SIX ACRE PROJECT.
YOU CUT IT INTO TWO DIFFERENT PROJECTS A 4.6 ACRE PROJECT AND A SMALLER PROJECT TO GET AWAY FROM THE CEQA ANALYSIS BECAUSE THE ENTIRE SIX ACRE PROJECT, WHICH IS THE PONTO SITE 18, REQUIRES CEQA ANALYSIS.
I'D LIKE STAFF TO COMMENT ON THAT.
STAFF IS THERE ANOTHER PROJECT THAT PENDING THAT OVERLAYS THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT? THERE ARE NO PRIVATE DISCRETIONARY APPLICATIONS THAT ARE PENDING OR OVERLAY THIS PROJECT.
WHEN THE HOUSING ELEMENT REZONE PROJECT CITY COUNCIL DIRECTED REMOVAL OF ONE OF THE POTENTIAL SITES SITE 13 AND REMOVAL OF THE PONTO PLANNING AREA SITE, THEY DIRECTED STAFF TO EVALUATE OTHER PARCELS IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT FOR POTENTIAL INCLUSION AND REZONE.
AND THE SCOPING FOR THAT REZONE GENERAL PLAN.
AND SO WE RECEIVED A TIMELY APPLICATION UNDER THOSE REQUIREMENTS AND HAVE PROCESSED THAT.
AND THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY.
WE'RE STILL WORKING ON THE EIR FOR THAT OTHER PROJECT.
BUT AS IF THIS PROJECT MOVES FORWARD, WE WOULD LIKELY REMOVE THESE THREE PARCELS FROM THAT ANALYSIS BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T MAKE SENSE TO REZONE THEM WHILE THERE'S AN APPROVED PROJECT ON IT.
THANK YOU. SO HAVE WE ADDRESSED THE ISSUE OF WHETHER THIS WAS SIX ACRES TO BEGIN WITH OR WHETHER IT WAS ACTUALLY THE 4.86 THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TONIGHT? THESE THREE PARCELS HAVE NOT HAD ANY BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT OR ANYTHING RELATED TO IT.
THEY WERE PART OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION, WHICH IS THE THE 4.6 ACRES.
ARE THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? UM. OH.
COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY. YEAH, JUST A STAFF.
THIS ALL SEEMS TO BE ALL RESIDENTIAL.
CORRECT. BUT THE ZONING IS VISITOR COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL.
CAN YOU CLARIFY WHAT THE VISITOR COMMERCIAL ZONE ENTAILS AND WHY? MAYBE THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS VISITOR.
THIS IS WHAT WE CALL A SPLIT DESIGNATION ZONE.
AND THERE ARE SEVERAL OF THESE THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
IT WAS ORIGINALLY A BROADER SPLIT ZONE, AND THE CAPE RAY HOTEL HAD THE SAME DESIGNATION.
THEY DID CHOOSE TO DO THE VISITOR COMMERCIAL.
SO THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF GOING THE OTHER WAY.
[03:20:02]
THIS PROPERTY, TWO OF THE THREE PROPERTIES HAVE THAT AND THEY ARE PROPOSING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH RESIDENTIAL.THERE IS NO COMMERCIAL INVOLVED WITH THIS.
I MEAN, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT OBVIOUSLY IS IS A CONCERN ABOUT THESE, YOU KNOW, IN A SENSE ISOLATED LOCATIONS IS PEOPLE DO NEED TO DRIVE TO THEIR GROCERY STORE, THEIR SCHOOL, THEIR PARK, WHEREVER, WHATEVER IT IS.
SO THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERN IS IF THERE'S NO COMMERCIAL RELATED TO THIS, DOES IT BECOME AS OBVIOUSLY THE CORRESPONDENCE HAS, YOU KNOW, ENUMERATED, YOU KNOW, A AN ISLAND WHERE THESE NUMBERS ARE FICTION, YOU KNOW, OR FICTIONAL, YOU KNOW, AND ESPECIALLY NOW THAT WE'VE JUST APPROVED THIS ROAD REDUCTION ON THE ADJACENT STREET THAT WILL ACTUALLY GO TO THE GROCERY STORE.
HOW ARE WE REALLY IMPACTED BY THIS PROJECT? WELL, I'LL START.
AND THEN, IF MR. GELDARD HAS ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD, HE'S WELCOME TO.
SO THIS IS WE LOOK AT THE PROJECT FROM A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT FACETS.
ONE OF THE ITEMS IS TO STUDY THE VMT UNDER SEQUA.
IT IS NOW VMT THAT WE STUDY, WHEREAS SEVERAL YEARS AGO IT WAS LEVEL OF SERVICE IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT THAT GOVERNANCE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH AND CAPCOA, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL OFFICE ASSOCIATION, SET FORWARD GUIDELINES OF TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT THEY SEE AND THE STUDIES HAVE SHOWN HAVE REDUCED VMT. IT'S NOT A SPECIFIC LIST OF THINGS THAT ARE NEEDED IN THAT, BUT WHAT THEIR STUDIES HAVE SHOWN IS THAT HIGHER DENSITY AND LOW INCOME, ESPECIALLY IN AREAS SUCH AS CARLSBAD, THAT HAVE MAJOR JOB CENTERS, DOES TEND TO REDUCE VMT.
AND SO IT WAS BASED ON THAT AND THE TRAFFIC STUDIES THAT WERE EVALUATED AS PART OF THAT, THAT THE CEQA DETERMINATION THAT THERE WAS NOT SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC IMPACTS WAS DETERMINED. WE WILL CONTINUE EVALUATE THE AVENIDA ENCINA'S CHANGES AND THAT ONE COULD BE POTENTIALLY CHANGED BACK IN THE FUTURE IF THERE'S A PROBLEM. BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD, THAT'S A SEPARATE EVALUATION.
ANYTHING TO ADD? I JUST WANTED TO ASK MR. KEMP ON THIS POINT.
SO THE THE APPEAL WAS THE APPLICATION WAS THE IN REGARDING BMT WAS THAT THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION DIDN'T MATCH THE METHODOLOGY, NOT THE THE APPEAL DIDN'T DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THE.
THE METHODOLOGY BEING VALID OR NOT.
IT ONLY SAID THAT IT DIDN'T MATCH IT, AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT BRINGING IN SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE BRINGING INTO THIS ARGUMENT, WHICH IS A FAIR POINT. SO WE'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.
I MEAN, THE APPEAL SPEAKS FOR ITSELF.
YOU ARE CONFINED TO THE MERITS, YOU KNOW, TO WHAT WAS RAISED IN APPEAL.
AND HE IS NOT ALLOWED TO BRING IN NEW INFORMATION TO THIS HEARING.
AND THEN THERE IS ONE OTHER THING THAT I WANTED TO ADDRESS, BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN THROWN OUT AS WELL, WHICH IS THERE IS AN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE HERE IN THAT THERE'S A TEN INCH PIPELINE RUNNING THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF THE PROJECT.
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF MAKING THAT STATEMENT IS THEY'RE POINTING TO 15 300.2, WHICH IS THE EXEMPTION EXCEPTIONS TO THE EXEMPTION.
SO WHEN YOU START LOOKING AT THE EXEMPTION ITSELF, WHICH IS THE INFILL EXEMPTION, THOSE ARE EXEMPTIONS THAT ARE ADOPTED BY THE NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY OF CALIFORNIA THAT DESIGNATE CLASSES OF PROJECT THAT THE SECRETARY OF NATURAL RESOURCES HAVE FOUND DO NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. SO BY THEIR DEFINITION, IF YOU MEET THOSE FOUR CATEGORIES THAT ARE OUTLINED, THIS DOES NOT HAVE SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
NOW, THAT CAN BE DEFEATED BY SAYING THAT THERE'S UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES, COURTS HAVE NOT REALLY DEFINED WHAT UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES MEANS, BUT THEY PUT THE BURDEN ON AN OPPONENT OF A PROJECT TO PROVE BY A HIGHER LEVEL OF OF EVIDENCE, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THERE IS AN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE.
[03:25:07]
THAT IT'S REASONABLY POSSIBLE THAT THE UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE ITSELF HAS AN A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.SO THE IDENTIFIED UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE HAS TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
AND IF YOU WANT CLARIFICATION ON THAT, ASK.
SO. GAS LINES ARE EVERYWHERE BURIED IN OUR CITY.
YEAH. WHAT IS THE STANDARD SIZE GAS LINE? AND IS THIS UNIQUE? WHEN A STANDARD SIZED GAS LINE.
YEAH, IT JUST DEPENDS ON THE NEED OF THE OF THE OF THE COMMUNITY.
THEY SIZE THE GAS LINE BASED ON WHAT IS WHAT IS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE THE SERVICE.
I COULD SAY ON THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE WE DID CONSULT WITH OR GO TALK TO THE GAS COMPANY.
SOCAL GAS. SOCAL GAS AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
AND THERE THEY DIDN'T HAVE THOSE CONCERNS.
YEAH. AND THE ONLY THING THAT IS A CONCERN IS NORMALLY THEY'RE IN A ROADWAY, CORRECT? CORRECT. I MEAN, THIS IS NOT IN A ROADWAY.
THIS IS IN SORT OF A SPORADIC.
ADJACENT TO PROPERTIES THAT ARE QUITE CLOSE BECAUSE THE EASEMENT IS, WHAT, 20FT? 30FT? WHAT IS THE EASEMENT? IT'S TEN.
OKAY. SEEING NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF.
WE WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY PORTION OF THIS HEARING.
WELL, IS THAT RIGHT? OKAY. WILL THE MINUTES CLERK PLEASE CALL THE FIRST SPEAKERS? UM, I'LL CALL YOU IN GROUPS OF THREE IF YOU CAN LINE UP.
THE FIRST SPEAKER CAN GO TO THE PODIUM.
KATHLEEN STEINBERGER, FOLLOWED BY BRETT SCHWARZENBACH, FOLLOWED BY ERIC BROVOLD.
WILL THE MINUTES CLERK PLEASE TELL THE PUBLIC HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK? THERE WERE 30 CARDS RECEIVED, 13 WILL SPEAK. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. YOU MAY BEGIN. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. HELLO, COMMISSIONERS, I'M CARLSBAD CITY STAFF. MY NAME IS KATHLEEN STEINBERGER.
I LIVE AT 3479 CORVALLIS STREET, CARLSBAD RESIDENT SINCE 1999.
I'M HERE BECAUSE AND MY FAMILY'S HERE IN CARLSBAD, BECAUSE OF THE OCEAN AND THE BEACH.
IT'S FURTHER UNFORTUNATE THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS CHOSEN TO PURCHASE IN LIEU FEES INSTEAD OF PROVIDING PUBLIC PARK SPACE PUBLIC PARK SPACE FOR THE CITIZENS AND VISITORS OF CARLSBAD.
THE CALIFORNIA COAST BELONGS TO ALL OF THE PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA.
I KNOW WE LIKE TO USE THAT WORD VISION IN CARLSBAD TO PROVIDE A PUBLIC PARK AT THIS LOCATION WOULD GREATLY ENHANCE THE PUBLIC'S ENJOYMENT AND ACCESS TO THE COAST.
THE STATED GOALS OF THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL ACT.
NOT ONLY WILL THE PEOPLE OF CARLSBAD NOT BE GIVEN PARK SPACE AT THIS LOCATION TO ENJOY OUR COAST.
THE DEVELOPER STATED IN PUBLIC OUTREACH ATTACHED IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT THEY WILL BE DISCOURAGING PUBLIC PARKING FOR SPACE FOR NON RESIDENTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ALONG PONTO DRIVE, THEREBY REDUCING COASTAL ACCESS TO THE BEACH IN CARLSBAD.
REMOVAL REDUCTION OF PARKING FOR SURFERS AND OTHER VISITORS TO PONTO CARLSBAD STATE BEACH IS A VIOLATION OF THE PUBLIC TRUST DOCTRINE, WHICH EMPHASIZES PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE COAST ESTABLISHED BY THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL ACT OF 1976.
PLEASE CONSIDER THE CURRENT AND FUTURE RESIDENTS OF CARLSBAD PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE COAST AND.
AND PLEASE EVALUATE HOW YOUR DECISION WILL IMPACT THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN OUR BEAUTIFUL BEACH TOWN.
[03:30:04]
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS BRETT JOHNSON, PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
AND I'M HERE TONIGHT ON BEHALF OF OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS, ENCOURAGING YOU TO SUPPORT, SUPPORT THE PROJECT AND SUPPORT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT TONIGHT.
AS YOU KNOW, THIS SITE IS CURRENTLY VERY UNDERUTILIZED AND IT'S DOING NOTHING TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC OR COMMUNITY VITALITY IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM AS IT IS, VERSUS THIS BEAUTIFUL PROJECT THAT WOULD BRING 86 HOMES.
AND I WANT TO ADD A WORKFORCE HOUSING TYPE OF PRODUCT THAT THEY'RE BRINGING TO THE TABLE.
ONLY ABOUT 20,000 OF THOSE LIVE HERE.
AND SO WE NEED MORE OF THIS TYPE OF PRODUCT HERE IN THE COMMUNITY IN ORDER TO CREATE THAT OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR WORKFORCE TO ACTUALLY LIVE IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT THEY WORK IN.
THEY'VE BROUGHT IN 30% OF OPEN SPACE, AS YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD.
WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE YOU TODAY TO THE PROJECT MEETS ALL THE ZONING GUIDELINES YOU'VE HEARD YOU KNOW WITH THE WITH THE OUR STAFF HAS TALKED ABOUT THE DENSITY BONUS HELPS BRING ADDED PRODUCT TO IT TO THE TABLE MORE DOORS WHICH ARE SO NEEDED.
THAT'S WHAT WE HEAR ABOUT ALL THE TIME.
HOUSING IS THE ULTIMATE SUPPLY AND DEMAND ECONOMY AND SUPPLY IS SHORT.
WE NEED MORE SUPPLY IN CARLSBAD TO MAKE IT MORE AFFORDABLE.
WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE YOU TODAY TO VOTE FOR THIS PROJECT AND MOVE FORWARD.
I'M THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE SAN DIEGO NORTH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL.
OUR OFFICES ARE IN SAN MARCOS ON EAST MISSION DRIVE.
I JUST WANT TO HAVE YOU THINK ABOUT TWO NUMBERS.
AND REALLY, ANY TIME YOU THINK ABOUT HOUSING, TWO NUMBERS OVER THE LAST DECADE, FROM 2012 TO 2022, THE CITY OF CARLSBAD ADDED ALMOST TEN, ACTUALLY A LITTLE OVER 10,000 NET NEW JOBS.
SO THAT'S NOT ME MAKING IT UP.
STAFF SENDS UP TO SACRAMENTO ADDED JUST OVER 3100 HOMES OR IN OTHER WORDS, 3.24 JOBS, NET NEW JOBS CHASING EACH NEW HOUSE THAT YOU ADDED IN CARLSBAD.
AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A JOBS HOUSING BALANCE PROBLEM IN NORTH COUNTY.
THAT'S WHY WE HAVE AND HERE'S THAT SECOND NUMBER BRETT MADE REFERENCE TO 20%.
WELL, THE CENSUS WAS EVEN WORSE.
ONLY 14% OF THE JOBS IN CARLSBAD ARE HELD BY PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN YOUR TOWN BECAUSE THE CITY'S BEEN UNABLE OR UNWILLING.
OR WE GO THROUGH PROCESSES LIKE THESE THAT LAST TILL 9:00 AT NIGHT WHILE EXPENSIVE CONSULTANTS GET PAID BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T ADDED ENOUGH HOUSING IN THIS REGION. WE'VE PUT THE BURDEN ON CITIES LIKE VISTA, SAN MARCOS, OCEANSIDE, ESCONDIDO OR UNINCORPORATED AREAS OR SOUTHERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, WHERE THOSE WORKERS THAT ARE AT CARLSBAD COMPANIES CREATING PROPERTY TAX, HOTEL TAX THAT KEEP THE AMENITIES IN THIS TOWN GOING HAVE TO LIVE EVERY NIGHT BECAUSE THEY DON'T GET BEAMED UP BY THE STARSHIP ENTERPRISE.
THEY GET ON THE ROAD AND THEY DRIVE.
THAT'S WHAT A HOME IS, WHERE A WORKER GOES TO SLEEP AT NIGHT.
IF YOU DO ANYTHING TONIGHT, ASK THE DEVELOPER TO PUT ANOTHER 80 OR 90 UNITS ON THAT PROJECT.
BUT I KNOW THEY WON'T AND I KNOW WHY THEY WON'T TO MAINTAIN TO STAY CONFORMANCE WITH YOUR ZONING.
BUT THAT'S WHAT WE NEED IN THIS REGION.
MORE HOUSING TO MEET THE DEMANDS THAT HAVE BEEN CREATED BY A ROBUST ECONOMY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND GOOD LUCK TONIGHT.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS ANDREW BECHT, FOLLOWED BY STACY GREEN, FOLLOWED BY JASON SANTOS.
GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.
[03:35:01]
I. I RESIDE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.AND I FEEL FORTUNATE TO HAVE PURCHASED PROPERTY IN 2017.
I GREW UP IN THE NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY OF LEUCADIA.
I'M AN OUTDOOR ENTHUSIAST THAT ENJOYS TAKING MY FAMILY TO PONO BEACH, ENJOYING THE SCENIC BATIQUITOS LAGOON, AND WATCHING MY FIVE YEAR OLD PLAY IN NUMEROUS SPORTS AT POINSETTIA PARK.
I LOVE NORTH COUNTY AND EVERYTHING IT HAS TO OFFER, BUT THERE IS A MAJOR HOUSING SHORTAGE.
THESE TOWNHOMES CREATE DENSITY WHILE MAINTAINING A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
PLEASE SUPPORT THE PROJECT TODAY.
MY NAME IS STACY GREEN AND I LIVE AT 809 MOLA VISTA WAY IN SOLANA BEACH.
I'M A NORTH COUNTY RESIDENT FOR OVER FOUR DECADES.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT TODAY, ESPECIALLY WITH THE EVER CLIMBING INTEREST RATES PEOPLE CAN'T AFFORD, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A HOUSEHOLD INCOME OF OVER $200,000 OR MORE TO AFFORD TO LIVE IN COASTAL NORTH COUNTY.
THAT BEING SAID, MY DAUGHTER, HER FIRST APARTMENT WAS 350FT² FOR $980.
TODAY, THAT APARTMENT RENTS $1,800.
IT'S A VERY SUCCESSFUL DEVELOPER WHO'S SO HIGHLY RESPECTED.
SO I IMPLORE YOU TO DENY THIS APPEAL.
AND I THINK THAT YOU ALL TODAY AS COUNCIL PEOPLE BEING ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE, HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE HOUSING MUCH NEEDED, NOT JUST IN CARLSBAD BUT THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY.
GOOD EVENING, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO TALK TONIGHT.
MY NAME IS JASON SANTOS AND I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF THE FPC RESIDENTIAL AND TOWNHOME PROJECT.
PLEASE SUPPORT THIS PROJECT TODAY.
THANK YOU. THE NEXT THREE SPEAKERS ARE MICHAEL MCSWEENEY.
GOOD EVENING, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.
I'M THE CAREER TECHNICAL EDUCATION COORDINATOR FOR THE CALIFORNIA HOMEBUILDING FOUNDATION.
I'VE SPENT 95% OF MY ADULT WORKING LIFE IN THE RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ARENA.
[03:40:07]
THE CALIFORNIA HOMEBUILDING FOUNDATION HAS A FOUR YEAR CURRICULUM FOR ANY HIGH SCHOOL, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE? THE TEACHERS THINK OF A HIGH SCHOOL SHOP CLASS THAT TEACHES YOU HOW TO BUILD A HOUSE.IT'S TO EXPOSE STUDENTS TO CAREERS IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY.
I SUPPORT THIS PROJECT, AND I HOPE YOU DENY THE APPEAL.
I'M ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE IN SAN DIEGO THAT SOMETIMES COMES TO CARLSBAD FOR A STAY VACATION.
AND WHERE DO I GO? THE CAPE RAY. I'VE PROBABLY BEEN THERE SIX TIMES.
AND WHEN I LOOKED OUT THE WINDOW, IT WAS LIKE, I'M IN LAKESIDE.
AND THEN I THOUGHT TO MYSELF, WELL, I KNOW THE RESIDENTS UP HERE.
HOW COME NOBODY'S CALLED CODE COMPLIANCE? BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY A CRUMMY LOOKING PLACE.
SO WHEN I SAW THAT THE VISUALS FOR THIS PROJECT, I'M LIKE, WOW, THAT LOOKS JUST LIKE THE HOTEL.
AND WHY IS THAT? WELL, I COULD REGURGITATE EVERYTHING, BUT EVERYBODY'S ALREADY SAID.
BUT I WANT TO TOUCH ON THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT.
IF DEBBIE FOUNTAIN USED TO BE YOUR HOUSING PERSON HERE, I WOULD ASK HER IF SHE WAS HERE.
HOW MANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPERS BUILT THREE AND FOUR BEDROOM UNITS.
I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER HEARD OF ANY OF THAT SIZE.
I LOOK AT THIS AS A WIN, WIN WIN.
HOW IS IT A WIN WIN WIN? NUMBER ONE, THE CITY LOSES AN EYESORE.
NUMBER TWO, IT GAINS AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WHICH YOU NEED TO MEET YOUR ARENA NUMBERS.
SO I'M HOPING YOU'LL DENY THE APPEAL AND YOU'LL VOTE TO APPROVE THE PROJECT.
LET'S SEE IF I CAN STAND UP ANOTHER FEW MINUTES HERE.
CHAIRMAN, IF YOU WISH, YOU CAN SIT DOWN AND MAKE YOUR COMMENT IF YOU WISH.
OH, NO, I NEED TO STAND UP AND THEN I'M GOING TO RUN TO THE BATHROOM AFTER THIS IS OVER A LONG TIME.
SO MY NAME IS CHAZ WICK AGAIN.
I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU GO THROUGH.
LUCKILY FOR ME, I HAD A THE PEOPLE.
FIRST THEY COME, THEY TELL YOU WHAT THEY WANT.
THEY COME TO CITY STAFF AND IT GOES UP TO THE CITY MANAGER WHO DOES WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL SAYS.
SO WE GOT USED TO DOING THINGS THAT WOULD GIVE US A GREEN BELT ALL AROUND THE CITY IN REDLANDS CALLED THE CROWN JEWEL EMERALD NECKLACE.
HERE WE'VE HAD THIS PROPERTY THAT WHEN I MOVED IN, I DIDN'T REALIZE I'D BEEN COMING HERE FOR A LONG TIME TO CARLSBAD THERE WAS NO PARK NEAR MY HOUSE AND I REALIZED THERE'S 456 HOMES.
SO I AM HERE TONIGHT REPRESENTING THE HOA SAN PACIFICO, 456 HOMES THAT WE WERE INVITED TO COME AND LOOK AT THE PROJECT OF FENTON.
WE WENT I WENT PERSONALLY TO TWO DIFFERENT MEETINGS AND I SAT DOWN WITH THERE'S THREE PEOPLE HERE.
THE FIRST MEETING DOWN AT OUR POOL COMPLEX.
AND THEN I HAD ANOTHER MEETING AND THE PEOPLE WERE VERY NICE.
THEY'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING WITH IT.
BUT THE MAIN THING THAT I NEEDED TO KNOW IS I DIDN'T GET A PARK WHEN I PAID IN LIEU, IN LIEU FEES FOR HERE I HAVE TO GO SIX MILES OR SO JUST TO GET ACROSS THE FREEWAY, ESPECIALLY FOR ME.
I CAN'T GO TO VETERANS PARK IS THAT I BELIEVE THERE'S A POSSIBILITY THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS THE RIGHT TO PICK ONE OF TWO OPTIONS.
AND IF CITY ATTORNEY SAYS I'M WRONG, THAT'S OKAY.
I'M NOT A LAWYER, SO I WON'T ARGUE WITH THEM.
I'VE NEVER PRESENTED TO YOU BEFORE, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT IF THERE IS A POSSIBILITY, I WOULD LIKE THE FENTON GROUP TO DONATE POINT SEVEN ACRES TO A PARK, NOT FEES, BECAUSE THE FEES MAY BE USED FOR ANOTHER PARK SOMEWHERE, JUST LIKE THEY DID VETERANS PARK.
[03:45:04]
WE HAVE TO GO THERE OR THERE'S TOO MANY PEOPLE OVER AT THE OTHER ONE HERE.SO I WOULD ASK YOU THAT PLEASE CONSIDER AT LEAST DOING THAT FOR THE CITIZENS.
AND THE OTHER THING IS, I JUST WANTED TO CLEAR UP SOMETHING THAT WE DID TALK TO FINN.
SO THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T ASK THEM TO COME TO OUR FACILITY.
I'M HERE. OKAY. MY NAME IS WILLIAM ROUSH.
I LIVE AT 7075 WHITEWATER STREET, AND I LIVE AT HANOVER COMMUNITY.
WE LIVE RIGHT NEXT TO THIS DEVELOPMENT.
I DON'T CARE IF THEY DEVELOP IT OR NOT.
BUT LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING.
THIS DEVELOPER, HE DIDN'T TALK TO ANYBODY IN OUR COMMUNITY.
WHAT ABOUT THE CITY STAFF? WHY DIDN'T YOU COME TO US? WHY HAVEN'T YOU SHARED WITH US ALL OF THESE STUDIES THAT HAVE BEEN DONE? I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, WITHOUT MITIGATION, IT'S GOING TO AFFECT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF MY COMMUNITY.
NO ONE'S TALKED TO US ABOUT TRAFFIC.
WHAT ABOUT YOUR DEVELOPMENT? WHAT ABOUT THE TRUCKS? SO THEY CAN WRECK IT UP? NOBODY'S COME TO TALK TO US ABOUT IT.
WHAT ABOUT THE NOISE? I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THAT AT LEAST THE CITY WOULD HAVE HAD ENOUGH GUMPTION TO COME AND TALK TO THE COMMUNITY THAT LIVES RIGHT BY IT.
EXPLAIN TO US AND HELP US MITIGATE ANY THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO HAPPEN.
WE HAVE KIDS RIDING ON BIKES AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TRUCKS DRIVING RIGHT DOWN IT.
WE HAVE PEOPLE FROM SOLANA BEACH.
SOMEWHERE IN EAST COUNTY COMING AND TELLING US WE LIVE RIGHT HERE.
I DON'T CARE IF YOU BUILD A HOME THERE, BUT MAKE IT SAFE.
IT HAD MANURE, PILES OF MANURE.
HOW CAN THAT BE? SO THE CITY IS TRYING TO MAYBE RAMROD THIS DOWN.
OUR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE NEXT TO IT, BRING US INTO IT, MAKE US PART OF THE COMMUNITY.
IF YOU WANT TO PROVE IT, MAKE US PART OF THIS.
WE WANT NEW HOUSING, BUT WE WANT TO DO IT SO IT HAS LESS IMPACT ON ALL OF US SO WE ALL CAN LIVE A NICE, SAFE, CLEAN LIFE WITH OUR KIDS WITHOUT JUST BEING RAMROD DOWN OUR THROAT.
THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKERS ARE DALE ORTIZ, FOLLOWED BY HALEY RICHARDSON, FOLLOWED BY HEATHER RILEY.
IS THAT THE LAST OF THE SPEAKERS? THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING.
I RESIGNED AT 7135 ZEPHYR PLACE IN CARLSBAD AND HAVE BEEN THERE SINCE 2002 AND PAID TAXES ON THAT PROPERTY.
AND I'VE WATCHED THIS COMMUNITY DEVELOP INTO AN AREA WHERE WE HAVE 40% MORE DENSITY IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT THAN ANY OTHER QUADRANT IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD.
USE PLAN WERE TO HAVE A PARK IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT.
WE HAVE CHILDREN IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AT VISTA MAR SAN PACIFICO, WHO HAVE A RELEGATED TO PLAYING IN THE STREET. THEY SHOULD HAVE A PARK TO PLAY IN.
GIVING THEM THE OPTION OF GOING TO VETERANS PARK IS OF NO CONSEQUENCE TO THEM AND IT WOULD CAUSE THEM EVEN FURTHER DANGER TO THEIR SAFETY.
WE NEED A PARK IN THE SOUTH QUADRANT FOR OUR CHILDREN'S SAFETY.
WHICH WOULD ALSO BE INCREASED THEIR SAFETY WOULD BE FURTHER THREATENED BY THE INCREASED TRAFFIC PRODUCED BY 66 ADDITIONAL UNITS FROM PEOPLE WHO WOULD BE COMPELLED TO DRIVE TO WORK.
[03:50:08]
THAT'S NONSENSICAL.I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE RESIDENTS WHO ARE ALREADY PRESENT IN SOUTHWEST QUADRANT CARLSBAD AND THE SAFETY OF THEIR YOUNG PEOPLE.
WE SHOULD HAVE BEFORE THIS PROJECT GETS ANY FURTHER, IT SHOULD HAVE A CEQA REVIEW.
AND WHAT ABOUT THIS HAZARD WITH THE GAS LINE COMING THROUGH THE PROPERTY? I WOULDN'T WANT TO HAVE THAT ON MY CONSCIENCE IF WE HAVE.
AN EXPLOSION OF THAT GAS LINE.
THE PUBLIC SAFETY DEMANDS THAT SEQUA REVIEW BE COMPLIED WITH.
THIS IS NOT A TIME FOR AN EXEMPTION.
IT'S A TIME FOR COMPLIANCE, FOR THE SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY.
THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS HOLLY RICHARDSON AND I AM A RESIDENT OF CARLSBAD.
I'VE LIVED HERE FOR 17 YEARS RAISING MY FAMILY HERE.
I'VE GOT TWO BOYS AND HAVE ENCOURAGED MY SIBLINGS TO MOVE TO THE REGION.
SO WE ARE A GROWING COMPANY IN CARLSBAD AND CANDIDLY, I DON'T THINK I WOULD HAVE TAKEN THE JOB IF I DIDN'T THINK THAT I COULD FIND HOUSING. THANKFULLY, IT WAS A LONG TIME AGO AND BECAUSE WE ARE A GROWING COMPANY, WE ARE FACED WITH A LOT OF THE CHALLENGES THAT YOU'VE HEARD TONIGHT.
I DO WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT AND THANK YOU, BECAUSE AS A RESIDENT OF THE COMMUNITY, I ABSOLUTELY LOVE IT HERE AND I LOVE WHAT YOU'VE DONE TO ATTRACT THE COMPANIES THAT BRING THE JOBS.
I THINK THAT'S IMPERATIVE FOR OUR FUTURE GROWTH AND COMMUNITIES THAT DON'T GROW STAGNATE.
AND RIGHT NOW. WE DON'T WE HAVEN'T KEPT PACE WITH THAT.
I ALSO WANT TO JUST TAKE A VERY QUICK MOMENT AND AND I DON'T WANT TO HARP ON IT BECAUSE I KNOW MOST OF YOU ARE VERY, VERY WELL INFORMED. SO I WON'T I WON'T SAY A LOT, BUT IT'S DISCOURAGING AS A RESIDENT OF THE COMMUNITY THAT WE HAVE SUCH BASELESS CLAIMS THAT ARE PUSHING AGAINST HOUSING FROM PEOPLE THAT REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND THE THE IMPLICATIONS OF SEQUA.
SO JUST AS A MOMENT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THERE ARE RESIDENTS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY THAT UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE DEALING WITH AND THAT TRUST YOU AND YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF SEQUA COMPLIANCE. THIS IS THIS IS A STELLAR PROJECT.
IT'S CANDIDLY ABOUT AS CLOSE AS YOU CAN COME TO A POSTER CHILD FOR THE KINDS OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WE NEED WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY, SO MUCH SO THAT THE STATE IS INCENTIVIZING THESE KINDS OF PROJECTS.
SO PLEASE SUPPORT NEW COMMUNITIES, NEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WITHIN OUR WITHIN OUR CITY.
PLEASE SUPPORT THESE KINDS OF PROJECTS, THIS ONE AND AND OTHERS THAT HOPEFULLY WILL COME IN FRONT OF YOU SO THAT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE BEING ATTRACTED HERE FOR JOBS CAN LIVE HERE AND PROSPER HERE AND CONTRIBUTE BACK TO THEIR COMMUNITIES.
THANK YOU. I'M A LITTLE OUT OF ORDER HERE. I'M DOLORES WELTY FROM 276 SHERIDAN ROAD IN LEUCADIA.
AND I LOOK AT CARLSBAD EVERY DAY.
AND BELIEVE ME, YOU ALL USE MY ROAD, TOO, WHICH IS LA COSTA BOULEVARD.
AND I'LL TELL YOU, YOU'RE PACKING THEM IN DOWN THERE.
THIS IS THE OLD DALE SCHRIBER PROPERTY I THINK THAT YOU'RE DEVELOPING AT THIS POINT.
I THINK HE WANTED A GARDEN, A HOTEL THERE.
HE THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE PERFECT THERE.
AND INSTEAD, HE'S GOING TO GET ALL THESE HOUSES.
WELL, HE'S GONE AND I WILL BE TOO SOON.
BUT HE'S GETTING ALL THESE HOUSES AND NO PLACE FOR KIDS, NO GREEN SPACE FOR HIM.
[03:55:01]
BIT OF A TRAMWAY DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT ENOUGH.WE DON'T HAVE VERY MANY PARKS IN LEUCADIA.
WE GOT THAT SET ASIDE WHEN I WAS YOUNG, AND THEN WE'RE WORKING HARD TO GET SOME MORE PLACES.
BUT WE'VE FOUND LITTLE, LITTLE TINY PARKS, LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS TO BE JUST REALLY NECESSARY.
YOU SHOULD LOOK ALONG VULCAN FOR THAT LITTLE SKATE RAMP THAT THEY MADE THE DEVELOPER PUT IN.
CONSTANTLY. AND THERE'S ANOTHER ONE UP OFF VULCAN.
NO, PARDON ME, UP OFF PIRAEUS FOR ALL THOSE NEW HOUSES THERE.
PEOPLE COME FROM POWAY TO USE THAT.
IT'S SO WELL, IT HAS SO MANY THINGS.
THEY TOLD ME IT HAS A ZIP LINE AND IT'S TINY.
THIS GUY COULD PUT IN JUST A LITTLE BIT YOU.
I'M TALKING TO MEN MAINLY HERE.
AND BY GOD, I'LL TELL YOU, IF YOU CAN WALK TO A PARK AND SIT THERE WITH A FEW OF YOUR NEIGHBORS AND WATCH THOSE KIDS PLAY TOGETHER, THAT'S A DAY TO COUNT. I LOVED IT.
AND YOU DON'T GIVE YOUR PEOPLE A PARK LIKE THAT.
CARLSBAD. I THOUGHT HIGHLY OF YOU.
UH, GOOD EVENING, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS.
I'M AN ATTORNEY AT ALLEN MATKINS, AND I'M LAND USE COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT.
BUT A FEW WERE MENTIONED TONIGHT, AND I WANT TO COVER THOSE.
THE CLASS 32 INFILL EXEMPTION IS ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE HERE.
THERE ARE NO UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES IF GAS PIPELINES WERE AN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE.
MY GUESS IS, AND I'M NOT A MATHEMATICIAN, 90% OF CARLSBAD COULD BE IN TROUBLE.
SO IT'S NOT AN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE.
IT'S PLANNED FOR FIRE WAS ACCOMMODATED, THE GAS COMPANY WAS ACCOMMODATED.
I WANT TO REITERATE MR. GATSBY'S EARLIER COMMENT THAT AN EXEMPTION IS A BIT OF A MISNOMER.
WE'RE NOT EXEMPTING OURSELVES OUT OF SEQUA JUST BECAUSE WE FEEL LIKE IT.
WE DID ALL OF THE APPROPRIATE REVIEW.
THOSE TECH STUDIES, I THINK, AS COMMISSIONER STINE SAID, WERE DUE DILIGENCE.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO.
ALL THOSE TECH STUDIES SHOWED NO SIGNIFICANT, NO POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS.
WE DID THE ANALYSIS AND CLEARED THE SITE 100%.
AND I BELIEVE ALL THE TECH STUDIES WERE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.
I CAN'T SAY FOR SURE BECAUSE I COULDN'T PULL IT UP ON THE WEBSITE NOW.
BUT I DO BELIEVE ALL OF THAT INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE.
AND I ADAMANTLY DISAGREE WITH THE APPELLANT'S COMMENT THAT THE TECH STUDIES WERE INACCURATELY DONE OR SOMEHOW THE TECH STUDIES PULL US OUT OF SEQUA THAT'S ABSOLUTELY LUDICROUS. AS YOUR ATTORNEY ADVISED YOU, THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF YOUR DAMNED IF YOU DO AND YOU'RE DAMNED IF YOU DON'T.
COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY QUESTION EARLIER.
THE PHASE ONE SHOWED NO CEQA CONCERNS.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT OWNERSHIP OF A PROPERTY ADJACENT IS IRRELEVANT.
THAT IS NOT A CUMULATIVE IMPACT.
THERE ARE NO ENDANGERED SPECIES ON SITE.
[04:00:02]
BUT SINCE YOU WERE DOING AN ACTION ALSO TO APPROVE THE PROJECT, HE GETS HIS THREE MINUTES TO TALK ABOUT YOUR APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT.ASIDE FROM SEQUA AND HE'S ASSURED ME HE WILL NOT ADDRESS SEQUA.
I SPECIALIZED IN TOD PLANNING IN PLANNING AREAS TO ACTUALLY DENSIFY THEM FAR HIGHER THAN THIS.
AND MAKE THE THE LAND USE TRANSITION TO HIGH DENSITY AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
UNITS THAT ARE COMBINED IN SMALL OR YOU'RE CRAMMING A LOT OF PEOPLE IN HIGH DENSITY.
REQUIRES LARGE PARK OPEN SPACES TO MITIGATE THAT.
OTHERWISE YOU CREATE SLUMS. AND WE'VE SEEN EXAMPLES OF SLUMS BEING CREATED IN LOS ANGELES THAT HAVE NOT DONE THAT.
AND BASICALLY, WE'RE SLEEPWALKING INTO THE SAME HOLE THAT LOS ANGELES CREATED BY NOT PROVIDING PARKLAND NEXT TO DENSE DEVELOPMENTS. IT'S A RECIPE FOR DISASTER.
YOUR CITIZENS ARE TELLING YOU THAT, AND IT'S COMMON SENSE.
IF WE JUST DENSIFIED YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND ADDED NO AMENITIES.
THEN IS YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD GETTING BETTER? IS THAT MAKING IT BETTER? IS IT REALLY? I WANT TO READ TO YOU.
THE PARK DEDICATION ORDINANCE BECAUSE YOU ARE ALLOWED TO REQUIRE A PARK HERE.
21.44.050 STANDARDS FOR FEES IN LIEU OF PARK DEDICATION.
SECTION B IF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION CONTAINS 50 PARCELS OR LESS, ONLY THE PAYMENT OF FEES SHALL BE REQUIRED.
EXCEPT. THAT WHEN A CONDOMINIUM PROJECT.
STOCK COOPERATIVE OR COMMUNITY APARTMENT PROJECT EXCEEDS 50 DWELLING UNITS.
DEDICATION OF LAND MAY BE REQUIRED NOTWITHSTANDING, NOTWITHSTANDING THAT THE NUMBER OF PARCELS MAY BE LESS THAN 50, YOU ARE FULLY ALLOWED UNDER CARLSBAD THAT SECTION OF CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE 20.44.050 TO REQUIRE THIS DEVELOPER TO PAY HIS REQUIRED PARK LAND DEDICATION IN LAND. THEY HAVE THE LAND TO DO IT.
BEFORE I GET ASKED, I WILL POINT OUT ONE OF THE KEY WORDS YOU HEARD MR. SCHULTE SAY, WHICH WAS SUBDIVISION OF LAND.
AND THIS SIMPLY IS NOT A SUBDIVISION OF LAND.
SO 2044 DOESN'T APPLY BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A SUBDIVISION OF LAND.
THE POWER TO GET PARK DEDICATIONS ALL OF 2044 EMANATES FROM THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND THE GOVERNMENT CODE. SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, AND OUR CODE DEFINES A SUBDIVISION.
AS. THE DIVISION OF LAND FOR THE PURPOSES OF SALE, LEASE OR FINANCING A SUBDIVIDER IS A PERSON FIRM CORPORATION WHO PROPOSES TO DIVIDE OR CAUSES TO BE DIVIDED REAL PROPERTY INTO A SUBDIVISION FOR HIMSELF OR OTHERS.
USUALLY IT'S CREATING PARCELS THAT WERE NOT THERE BEFORE.
NOW IT'S THREE, YOU HAD TWO, NOW IT'S TEN.
WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS THREE BEING REDUCED TO ONE, AND THAT ISN'T A SUBDIVISION OF LAND.
IT'S A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, WHICH IS SPECIFICALLY EXEMPTED FROM THE LOT FROM THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT UNDER 66412 D SO IT'S OUR OPINION THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AT 2044 DOES NOT APPLY.
[04:05:08]
THANK YOU, COUNSELOR.I WILL NOW CLOSE PUBLIC TESTIMONY AND OPEN COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION.
COUNSELOR, WOULD YOU PROVIDE FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THIS STAGE OF THIS EVENING? THE PARAMETERS IN WHICH WE HAVE, I GUESS YOU COULD SAY, AUTHORITY AND OR RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE A DECISION IN REGARD TO THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT TONIGHT TO JUST KIND OF REFRESH FOR EVERYONE BECAUSE WE'VE GONE THREE HOURS.
THANK YOU. YOU MEAN YOU WANT ME TO GO BACK TO WHAT I SAID AT THE VERY BEGINNING? I'M SURE THAT YOU ARE CAPABLE.
YEAH, IT'S RIGHT HERE CONDENSING FOR US TO BE ABLE TO DO SO.
SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ROLE IS TO ASSURE THAT ALL LAND USE DECISIONS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE POLICIES, PLANS AND ORDINANCES ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND ALSO STATE AND FEDERAL LAW.
SO IT'S NOT YOUR JOB TO COME UP WITH NEW RULES, NEW PLANS, NEW POLICIES.
YOU'RE NOT A LEGISLATIVE BODY IN THAT REGARD.
SO YOU HAVE TO JUDGE THIS PROJECT BASED ON THE EXISTING RULES.
SO YOUR PURVIEW IS LAND USE AND PLANNING.
YOUR PURVIEW IS NOT PARKS AND REC.
THERE'S A COMMISSION FOR THAT.
AND THE CITY COUNCIL ALSO HAS OBVIOUSLY THE ABILITY TO SET THE POLICIES FOR PARKS.
COMMISSIONER STINE, WOULD THIS BE THE TIME TO ADDRESS JUST THE ISSUE OR BOTH ISSUES? I BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THE SECRET RESOLUTION FIRST.
AM I RIGHT, MR. CHAIR? YOU CAN ADDRESS ANYTHING PERTAINING TO ANYTHING IN THE ITEM.
OKAY. I AM GOING TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES BECAUSE I THINK THAT IS A PIVOTAL ISSUE.
BEFORE WE GET TO THE MERITS OF THE PROJECT, WE HAVE TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE.
WE HAVE A SEPARATE RESOLUTION AND IF THE EXEMPTION IS FAULTY, I THINK THAT NECESSARILY IMPLIES THAT THE PROJECT GOES BACK FOR FURTHER REVIEW.
SO I THINK THAT'S A THRESHOLD ISSUE THAT WE HAVE TO WRESTLE WITH BEFORE WE GET TO THE MERITS OF THE PROJECT AND THE PARK DEDICATION ISSUE. AS OUR SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY HAS INDICATED TWICE NOW, AND I THINK HE IS ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON, GIVEN US VERY GOOD GUIDANCE HERE.
AND IN FACT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE AGENDA, WE ARE A QUASI JUDICIAL BODY.
WE LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE WE MAKE FINDINGS ON BASED UPON OUR LAWS, OUR POLICIES, OUR ORDINANCES, STATE AND LAW. WE DON'T HAVE A BLANK SLATE JUST TO DRAW ON AND SAY, WE'D LIKE TO DO THIS.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE ROLE IS.
SO OUR FIRST ISSUE HERE IS THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION.
IF WE DEFINE THAT THAT WAS FAULTY, WE GOT TO STOP THERE.
NO USE TO GO INTO THE SECOND ONE.
SO I'M GOING TO RESERVE MY COMMENTS ON THE SECOND ON THE MERITS OF THE PROJECT UNTIL LATER.
IT'S BEEN POINTED OUT TO US A NUMBER OF TIMES.
THIS IS AN APPEAL HERE BY MR. SCHULTE. MR. SCHULTE HAS THE BURDEN LEGAL TERMS HE MUST GO FORWARD AND PERSUADE US THAT STAFF MADE AN ERROR.
SO THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE TO ME IS WHETHER MR. SCHULZ HAS MET HIS BURDEN.
WHAT STAFF HAS DETERMINED IS THERE IS AN INFILL EXEMPTION AND STAFF HAS FURTHER DETERMINED THAT THE CLAIMS OF EXCEPTIONS TO THE EXEMPTION OKAY, ARE NOT SUBSTANTIATED AND THEY'VE GONE THROUGH EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM.
I'VE GONE THROUGH THEM MYSELF.
I'VE SPENT HOURS LOOKING THROUGH THIS ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGE AND THE STAFF RESPONSES.
SO I DON'T TAKE THIS LIGHTLY AT ALL.
SO MY, MY, MY SENSE ON THIS, MY STRONG FEELING ON THIS IS STAFF IS 100% CORRECT.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT MR. SCHULTE HAS MET HIS BURDEN TO SHOW THAT THE EXEMPTION IS NOT BASED UPON SOLID EVIDENCE.
[04:10:07]
WHY DO I SAY THAT? STAFF HAS BEEN VERY SPECIFIC IN THE EXEMPTION THAT IS LOOKED TO.AS I RECALL, THEY LAID OUT THE REASONS FOR THAT.
I WILL TELL YOU, INITIALLY I HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THIS PROJECT IS NOT SURROUNDED ENTIRELY BY URBAN USES TO THE SOUTH.
SO I WAS CONCERNED THAT IS THIS TRULY AN INFILL PROJECT WITH URBAN SURROUNDING IT.
BUT I'VE BEEN PERSUADED AND LOOKED AT THE STANDARDS THAT IT DOESN'T.
I THINK IT'S A 75% AND YOU'VE GOT THAT.
THEY'VE DONE THE MEASUREMENTS.
SO IN TERMS OF THE EXEMPTION TO BEGIN WITH, THE EVIDENCE IS THERE STAFF IS RIGHT.
NOW, THE SECOND TIER WAS THE VARIOUS EXCEPTIONS THAT MR. SCHULZ HAS ALLUDED TO IN HIS PAPERS AND AND STAFF HAS GONE ITEM BY ITEM ABOUT THAT.
IS THERE ANY COMMON SENSE REASON WHY THIS SHOULD EXEMPTION SHOULD NOT APPLY? NO, THERE ISN'T.
IS THERE ANY UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES? WELL, YOU'VE HEARD THAT THERE MAY BE A GAS LINE THERE, BUT WHAT'S SO UNUSUAL ABOUT THAT? THERE ARE GAS LINES IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY.
AND YOU HEARD STAFF TALK ABOUT WE'VE CHECKED INTO THAT.
IT'S NOT IRRESPONSIBLE TO APPROVE A HOUSING PROJECT WHERE THERE'S A GAS LINE UNDERNEATH IT.
SO THERE'S NO UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES HERE.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS, THAT'S BEEN DOWNPLAYED AS WELL.
WHAT CUMULATIVE IMPACTS? WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS PROJECT AS IT'S PRESENTED.
AS STAFF HAS POINTED OUT, IT'S NOT PART OF A SERIES OF PROJECTS.
THIS IDEA, IT'S PIECEMEAL AND CUT UP FOR THIS PARTICULAR.
I DON'T THINK IT'S SUBSTANTIATED.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S EVIDENCE OF THAT.
SO, I MEAN, I COULD GO ITEM BY ITEM ABOUT THE ARGUMENTS, INCLUDING SOME MADE BY MR. SCHULTE TONIGHT THAT HAVE BEEN PROVEN TO BE ABSOLUTELY WRONG.
YOU KNOW, IS THERE A REQUIREMENT FOR A PARK DEDICATION HERE? THERE IS NOT.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT THIS WOULD BE AN END RUN AROUND BECAUSE THEY HAPPEN TO DO STUDIES? IS THERE ANY LAW THAT SAYS THAT'S AN END RUN? NO, THERE'S NOT.
SO MUCH OF WHAT MR. SCHULTE HAS SAID HAS BEEN VERY PERSUASIVELY REFUTED.
SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT EVERYTHING AND I'VE SPENT, AS I SAY, HOURS LOOKING AT GIVING A LOT OF THOUGHT, LOOKED AT, EVEN LOOKED AT THE CODE SECTIONS THAT MR. SCHULTE TALKS ABOUT FOR PARKS AND TALK TO THE CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT THIS.
I JUST DON'T THINK THE BURDEN'S BEEN MET HERE AT ALL, NOT EVEN CLOSE.
SO WOULD I'M GOING TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY AND WOULD THE CLERK PLEASE READ THOSE NAMES? YES. THE FOLLOWING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE THEIR SUPPORT OF AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR NOTED.
FOR THE RECORD, THEY DID NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT THE FIRST NAME IS MARY SCHAPIRO, ARISSA KRAMER, CHRIS ROSINK, CONSTANCE GUFFIN, GEOFF O'CONNOR, ANGIE ORTIZ, WHITNEY HODGES, TONY MCMAHON, SHANNON GAUNT, RUBEN CABALLOS.
WILLIAM MORRISON, EMILY COLWELL, TODD DOLFO, ANGIE ORTIZ.
PLEASE LET THE MINUTES REFLECT THAT.
ALL RIGHT. PUBLIC TESTIMONY IS CLOSED AGAIN.
WE'RE BACK INTO COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION.
OKAY. WELL, SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION FROM COMMISSIONERS, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
YEAH, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GOING TO DO.
[04:15:02]
EXHIBIT ONE, DENYING THE SUBJECT APPEAL OF LANCE SCHULTE, UPHOLDING THE CITY PLANNERS DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT PER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332. SECOND.OKAY. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER MEENES AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER STINE ON ESSENTIALLY THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE SEQUA APPEAL, NOT THE REST OF THE ITEM NUMBER FOUR, PLEASE VOTE.
WE ARE STILL IN DISCUSSION BECAUSE WE HAVE MORE RESOLUTIONS TO CONSIDER.
EXCUSE ME. SO THE RESULTS ARE SIX ZERO ON THAT VOTE, CORRECT? OH, YES. APOLOGIZE AFTER.
THIS IS MY FIRST TIME CHAIRING A MEETING.
THIS IS ALSO OUR FIRST TIME HEARING A CEQA APPEAL IN A VERY LONG TIME.
IT'S BEEN A LONG EVENING. THE RESULTS ARE SIX ZERO IN FAVOR OF DENYING THE CEQA APPEAL BY MR. SCHULTE. SO BACK TO DISCUSSION.
SEEING NONE. I WILL SPEAK IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE REST OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
SUPPORT. AS WITH ALL EVERY FIBER OF MY BEING THERE, BEING A PARK AT PONTO, I WAS APPOINTED BY THE COUNCIL MEMBER FOR DISTRICT FOUR AND THERE IS A SERIOUS PARK DEFICIT IN.
THERE JUST IS I MEAN, THERE'S IT'S UNDISPUTABLE.
AND I KNOW THAT THE COUNCIL LONG AGO LONG BEFORE I WAS BORN ACTUALLY THEY.
DECIDED THAT VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK, WHICH IS A GREAT PARK, ONE THAT WE VOTED FOR.
WOULD THE ACREAGE OF IT WOULD BE ALLOCATED TO ALL FOUR QUADRANTS.
THAT IS NOT A DECISION THAT I SUPPORT.
IT IS NOT A DECISION THAT ANY OF US VOTED FOR.
BUT AND IT'S NOT A DECISION THAT I WILL ACCEPT CREDIT OR BLAME FOR.
THIS WAS ALREADY APPROVED AND WE CANNOT GO BACK IN TIME AND REVERSE THOSE DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL, WHICH WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO RESCIND OR REJECT OR IGNORE.
WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY WHAT THE POLICIES ARE AT THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION.
SO I WISH I COULD REQUIRE THE DEVELOPER TO DEDICATE LAND AND NOT JUST DEDICATE MONEY FOR SOME FUTURE PARK SOMEWHERE ELSE. I REALLY WISH THAT I COULD, BUT AS COUNCILOR KEMP HAS DETAILED, WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO DO THAT.
I HAVE TRIED MIGHTILY HARD TO UNDERSTAND IT AND I CANNOT.
AND WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE DEDICATION OF LAND.
THIS PROJECT DEVELOPER OWNS THE LAND AND THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO DEVELOP IT AND THEY HAVE SATISFIED ALL OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. THEY HAVE SATISFIED ALL ALL REQUIREMENTS UNDER SEQUA FOR THE CLASS 32 EXEMPTION, THE EXEMPTION IS ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE, WHICH IS WHY WE JUST VOTED TO DENY THE APPEAL OF IT.
SO I THINK THAT REALLY THIS PROJECT HAS TO MOVE FORWARD AND IT IS A BEAUTIFUL PROJECT.
I THINK THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT IS A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT TO THE LAND.
PONTO AS A REGION WILL NEVER, EVER BE A SLUM.
IT IS ONE OF THE MOST BEAUTIFUL LOCATIONS IN THE WORLD.
IT IS A LOCATION THAT MAKES ME INCREDIBLY PROUD TO BE A RESIDENT OF CARLSBAD.
AND IT WILL NEVER NOT BE THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT IS NOT RUINING OR LESSENING THE EXPERIENCE OF PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN PONTO.
I THINK IF ANYTHING, IT IS A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT BECAUSE WHAT IS THERE CURRENTLY IS BARREN.
ONE ONE PERSON WHO MADE PUBLIC COMMENT SAID IT LOOKED LIKE JUST SOME RANDOM PIECE OF LAND THAT YOU WOULD SEE IN RAMONA OR LAKESIDE AND NOTHING AGAINST THOSE COMMUNITIES.
BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU EXPECT TO SEE IN COASTAL NORTH COUNTY, IN COASTAL CARLSBAD.
[04:20:08]
COMMISSIONER MEENES.WELL STATED, AND I'M NOT GOING TO REITERATE GIVEN THE TIME OF THE EVENING THAT IT HAPPENS TO BE, BUT I WILL COMMEND THE APPLICANT IN REGARD TO THE PROJECT THAT YOU DID SUBMIT.
I THINK ONE, AS YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE HOUSING ISSUES THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND OF COURSE WE HAVE RINA NUMBERS THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH WITHIN SAN DIEGO COUNTY AND CARLSBAD IS EQUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT.
I THINK THAT THE PROJECT AND HOW YOU DESIGN THE PROJECT TO INCORPORATE THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING, THE DESIGN OF THE PROJECT, THE UNIQUENESS OF THE NUMBER OF THE SIZE OF THE OF EACH AND EVERY APARTMENT, HOW YOU HAPPEN TO PUT TOGETHER THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGNS TO BE COMPATIBLE TO ONE, THE BEACH ENVIRONMENT.
SO I'M TOTALLY 100% SUPPORT THE PROJECT.
I AGREE WITH ALL HIS COMMENTS ON THAT.
WITH REGARD TO THE THE NUMBERS OF VERY NUMBERS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE SENT EMAILS AND SOME OF THEM WHO HAVE APPEARED HERE ASKING US TO INSIST THAT THE APPLICANT DEDICATE PARKLAND, THAT'S JUST NOT WITHIN OUR LANE TO DO. FOLKS.
IT'S VERY CLEAR FROM OUR CITY ATTORNEY, I AGREE WITH HIM.
WE LISTEN TO HIM. HIS ADVICE THAT IS OUTSIDE OUR LANE, IT'S A SUBDIVISION.
THIS IS A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT.
EXCUSE ME, IS IT A SUBDIVISION? IT'S NOT A SUBDIVISION.
OKAY. AND BECAUSE IT'S NOT A SUBDIVISION, THE CODE SECTIONS THAT MR. SCHULTE ARGUED HE USED FOR THE ARGUMENT THAT WE COULD NOT INSIST THAT THE DEVELOPER DEDICATE PARKLAND ARE WAY OFF TARGET. HE'S NOT RIGHT, MR. KEMP IS. HE'S WRONG AND MR. KEMP IS RIGHT. WE HAVE TO LISTEN TO THAT.
THE I THINK THE APPLICANT HERE IS BEING SENSITIVE TO THE NEEDS FOR PARKLAND.
MY GOSH, THEY'RE HAVING TO PAY PARK FEES IN A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF $413,000.
DOES IT BY A BIG TEN ACRE PARK? NO, PROBABLY DOESN'T.
BUT THAT'S A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF MONEY.
YES, KIDS CAN PLAY THERE, PEOPLE CAN SOCIALIZE THERE.
IT'S A PARK LIKE SETTING WITHIN THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT THAT'S TO BE COMMENDED.
SO THEY'RE SENSITIVE TO THAT ISSUE.
THEY'RE PAYING SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT INTO FOR IN LIEU FEES WE CANNOT INSIST UPON.
SO THEY ARE SENSITIVE TO THOSE ISSUES.
AND THEN FINALLY, I JUST WANT TO MAKE A POINT ON THE SPEAKERS THAT WE HAD.
AND THEY'RE ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON.
WE HAVE PRICED OURSELVES OUT OF HAVING HOMES FOR SO MANY OF OUR CITIZENS, AND THIS IS A PROJECT THAT WILL HELP TO ADDRESS THAT SOMEWHAT.
SOMEWHAT. THEY'RE PARTICULARLY IN NEED IN OUR AREA FOR LOW INCOME HOUSING AND FOR APARTMENT TYPE HOUSING FOR PEOPLE GETTING STARTED IN LIFE, YOUNG PROFESSIONALS AND OTHER PEOPLE.
THIS WOULD BE AN IDEAL PROJECT FOR THEM.
IN FACT, EVEN WE EVEN GOT A LETTER FROM THE THE CAPE RAY HOTEL SUPPORTING THIS PROJECT.
WHAT DO THEY SAY? WE NEED HOUSING FOR PEOPLE THAT WORK AT THE HOTEL, FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE CLERKS, PEOPLE WHO ARE MAIDS, PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPORT STAFF, THERE'S NO PLACE FOR THEM TO GO. THEY HAVE TO GO MILES AND MILES AWAY TO SOME OF OUR INTERIOR CITIES.
SO THIS WOULD HELP TO ADDRESS THAT NEED.
SO MANY OF OUR SPEAKERS SPOKE UP AND ADDRESSED THAT.
THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT AND THIS WILL HELP TO ADDRESS THAT NEED.
SO I'M WHOLEHEARTEDLY IN SUPPORT OF THAT PROJECT FOR THOSE REASONS AND THE REASONS THAT COMMISSIONER MEENES AND COMMISSIONER AND CHAIRPERSON OF SABELLICO INDICATED.
[04:25:04]
COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.THANK YOU. THIS HAS BEEN A VERY DIFFICULT TASK FOR ME.
MY INITIAL INCLINATION WAS I WANT TO DO EVERYTHING IN MY POWER TO GET A PARK IN THE PONTO AREA BECAUSE I AGREE WITH THE SPEAKERS THAT THEY TALKED ABOUT THE SAFETY, ET CETERA.
BUT AND I WANT YOU TO JUST REALIZE WHAT EACH OF US, EACH OF OUR COMMISSIONERS HAVE DONE.
THERE'S 500 PAGES OF DOCUMENTS HERE, WHICH WE'VE ALL WORKED ON VERY HARD.
NOW, SOME OF YOU MAY DISAGREE, BUT THAT WAS MY CONCLUSION.
AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE I'D LOVE TO SEE ONE.
BUT, YOU KNOW, STAFF HAS DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB.
I'M THINKING THAT THIS WILL SERVE A PURPOSE.
AND I'M VERY SORRY FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO SPOKE IN FAVOR OF THE PARK.
LIKE I SAID, I INITIALLY AGREED WITH YOU, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE POWER TO DO THAT.
OKAY. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
MOTION TO APPROVE THE SECOND RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THIS PROJECT.
A MOTION TO APPROVE THE SECOND RESOLUTION BY COMMISSIONER STINE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MEENES.
THE PROJECT PASSES THE RESOLUTION EXCUSE ME? PASSES 6 TO 0 WITH COMMISSIONER MERZ RECUSED.
AND THAT CONCLUDES ITEM NUMBER FOUR.
I BELIEVE CHAIRPERSON MERZ DID LEAVE.
SO I WILL STILL BE PRESIDING OVER THE REMAINDER OF THE MEETING.
WE ARE NOW IN COMMISSIONER REPORTS.
[PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER REPORTS]
NONE. THANK YOU.NONE. I'M GOING TO HAND OFF THE BATON TO COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.
AREN'T MEETINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPOSED TO END IN FOUR HOURS? THERE IS LAW THAT WE END IN THE PAST PRE-COVID WHEN MEETINGS STARTED AT SIX.
WE HAD A RULE THAT WE WOULD END AT TEN AND SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION TO GO PAST 10:00.
IF YOU TOOK THE LAW AND APPLIED IT TO THIS, SOMEBODY THEORETICALLY COULD HAVE MADE A MOTION.
I CAN'T FIND ANYTHING THAT SAYS WE ACTUALLY ENDED A TIME CERTAIN.
I LOOKED IT MIGHT BE ON A PIECE OF PAPER OUTSIDE, BUT IT'S NOT IN OUR AGENDA.
SO I GUESS IT COULD HAVE BEEN NICE.
MAYBE IT WOULD HAVE MADE PEOPLE OKAY.
SO AND THEN CONFIRMED BY MR. STRONG. THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION WILL BE MONDAY THE EIGHTH.
OKAY. COMMISSIONER STINE? VERY BRIEFLY, IN LIGHT OF THE LATENESS OF THE HOUR, THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT CITIZEN'S COMMITTEE HAS COMPLETED ITS WORK AND THERE WILL BE A REPORT CONSISTENT WITH OUR DETERMINATIONS ON PERFORMANCE STANDARDS GOING TO CITY COUNCIL.
BUT THE COMMITTEE IS NOW COMPLETED ITS JOB.
ALL THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE STILL IN THE ROOM WHO SPOKE.
I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE THE WILLINGNESS AND THE DEDICATION OF CITY RESIDENTS TO COME AND STAY MORE THAN FOUR HOURS TO TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION OF A PROJECT.
SO THANK YOU ALL. AND WE ARE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.