[00:00:03]
[CALL TO ORDER]
PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, LED THIS EVENING BY COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.MS. VIGELAND WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? OKAY. ALL COMMISSIONERS ARE PRESENT.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
THE NEXT ITEM FOR APPROVAL IS THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 21ST, 2023 MEETING.ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 21ST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING? YES. COMMISSIONER MEENES.
YES, I WANTED TO MAKE A CLARIFICATION ON PAGE TWO AND THIRD PARAGRAPH WHEN IT SAYS IN RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONER MEENES QUESTION REGARDING PRIVATE OPEN SPACE, THE INTENT WAS NOT PRIVATE OPEN SPACE.
IT WAS IN REGARD TO THE SETBACK PORTION OF THE FOURTH FLOOR STREET FACING FACADE.
SO SUGGESTION ON THE WORDING I WOULD HAVE WOULD BE IN RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONER MEENES QUESTION REGARDING THE REQUESTED WAIVER FOR THE REQUIREMENT WITHIN THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN TO SET BACK A PORTION OF THE STREET FACING FACADE, SENIOR PLANNER HARKIN EXPLAINED, AND CONTINUE ON.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS TO THE THE MINUTES? OKAY. SEEING NONE, I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE MINUTES OF THE NINTH OF THAT MEETING.
DO YOU HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? I'LL SECOND WITH THE CHANGE THAT COMMISSIONER MEENES SUGGESTED.
OKAY. MOTION HAS BEEN MADE BY COMMISSIONER MEENES AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER STINE.
PLEASE VOTE. IT'S ALREADY VOTED.
I DIDN'T TOUCH ANYTHING. BUT YEAH, MINE IS LOCKED IN ALSO.
YEAH. CAN WE CLEAR THEM AND THEN VOTE AGAIN? OKAY. THE MOTION PASSES.
ALL EXCEPT FOR COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN WHO ABSTAINS.
[PUBLIC COMMENT]
NOW, IF EVERYONE WOULD DIRECT THEIR ATTENTION TO THE SCREEN, I'LL REVIEW THE PROCEDURES OF THE COMMISSION WE'LL BE FOLLOWING FOR TONIGHT'S PUBLIC HEARING.OKAY. I GUESS I'M. OKAY, SO THE PROCEDURE REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM IS REQUIRED FOR ALL ITEMS. REQUEST TO SPEAK FORMS MUST BE TURNED INTO THE MINUTES CLERK PRIOR TO THE ITEM COMMENCING.
ALL SPEAKERS WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES UNLESS THAT TIME IS REDUCED BY THE CHAIRPERSON.
THE APPLICANT CAN MAKE A PRESENTATION, THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY IS OPEN.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION THEN HAS DISCUSSION.
THERE'S A PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE AND THEN THAT PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.
NEXT SLIDE CERTAIN PLANNING COMMISSION DECISIONS ARE FINAL BUT MAY BE APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
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.
MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY AND 8 TO 5 ON FRIDAY.
A TIME LIMIT OF THREE MINUTES IS ALLOTTED FOR EACH SPEAKER.
ITEMS SUBMITTED FOR VIEWING, INCLUDING PRESENTATION.
DIGITAL MATERIALS WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE TIME LIMIT MAXIMUM MAXIMUM FOR SPEAKERS.
[00:05:09]
THE PLANNING COMMISSION.MISS VIGELAND IS ANYONE FILED A REQUEST TO SPEAK A REQUEST TO SPEAKER SLIP THIS EVENING.
YES, I HAVE ONE SPEAKER SLIP FROM LADONNA ANDERSON.
YES. AND WHEN YOU COME TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE SPEAK YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS CLEARLY.
OH, WAIT. MY NAME IS LADONNA ANDERSON.
LEONARD AND I LIVE AT 1265 CYNTHIA LANE WITH MY HUSBAND.
AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO TALK WITH YOU ABOUT TONIGHT IS THE NOISE ABATEMENT FOR THE FREEWAY.
MY BACK YARD BACKS UP TO PIO PICO, WHICH IS OPEN TO THE FREEWAY, AND I REALIZE THAT YOU ARE NOT DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT, BUT I'M HOPING THAT IN SOME WAY THE CITY OF CARLSBAD WOULD WORK TOGETHER WITH SANDAG AND CALTRANS TO HELP OUR NOISE ABATEMENT.
AND IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'LL READ WHAT I'VE WRITTEN.
WE'RE ASKING THAT THE CARLSBAD MEMBERS OF THE SANDAG BOARD RAISE OUR CONCERNS TO ELEVATE THE PRIORITIES FOR CALTRANS AND THE NORTH COAST CORRIDOR PROGRAM TO INSTALL SOUND WALLS ON THE I-5 CORRIDOR.
WE'RE ASKING THE CITY COUNCIL TO AUTHORIZE WAIVERS TO EXTEND TWO EXISTING CARLSBAD BUILDING CODES, RAISING THE WALL HEIGHT FROM 6FT TO 8FT. THIS WOULD ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF SOUND WALLS ON PERSONAL PROPERTY.
I HAVE CALLED AND TALKED WITH SOMEONE AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEY TOLD ME A FENCE CAN ONLY BE SIX FEET AND IF I WANTED TO PUT A WALL OFFSET OFF OF MY PROPERTY LINE, IT COULD ONLY BE SIX FEET ALSO.
UM, WHICH WILL NOT HELP WITH TOTALLY HELP WITH THE SOUND.
I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE DID A DECIBEL LEVEL THIS MORNING AT 9 A.M.
IN MY BACKYARD, AND THE NOISE LEVEL WAS RANGED FROM 79DB TO 85DB.
AND ACCORDING TO MEDICAL RECORDS, ANYTHING ABOVE 70DB FOR A PROLONGED PERIOD OF TIME IS A RISK TO YOUR HEARING AND YOUR EARS.
AND SO I WILL GIVE YOU THAT INFORMATION.
WE HAVE ADULTS AND CHILDREN IN A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS.
WE ALSO HAVE A BOARD AND CARE, WHICH IS SIX ELDERLY PEOPLE LIVING IN THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR TO US.
I'M SORRY. OH, AND SO AS A COMMUNITY, WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE NOISE LEVEL AND THAT WITH THE NEW LANES THAT HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED, THE HOV LANES AND THE FACT THAT THEY'RE TEARING OUT PART OF THE SHRUBBERY. APPARENTLY CALTRANS TELLS ME TO DO PLUMBING OR SOMETHING, BUT THEY'VE TORN OUT PART OF THE.
I'M SORRY, YOUR TIME IS UP, BUT.
YEAH. THANK YOU FOR COMING. AND I JUST WANT.
THE COMMISSION IS PREVENTED BY LAW FROM DISCUSSING OR TAKING ACTION ON THESE ITEMS. SO I'M SO WE CAN'T REALLY DISCUSS IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA.
DO YOU? THANK YOU FOR COMING AND SHARING YOUR THOUGHTS.
SO WE'LL BEGIN TONIGHT'S HEARING.
WE'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE.
BUT BEFORE WE DO THAT, DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY EX PARTE DISCLOSURES ON THIS ITEM? I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA.
I ALSO AM VERY FAMILIAR AND USE THE AREA QUITE OFTEN.
I WALK IT WEEKLY. YEAH, I'VE BEEN BY THE AREA DOZENS OF TIMES.
OKAY. YEAH. AND ACTUALLY I WALKED TODAY.
I WALKED DOWN THE ONE OF THE STAIRS.
WHATEVER THEY CALL THAT. THE ONE WITH THE MULTIPLE LANDING CONCRETE LANDINGS ON IT ALSO.
[1. CDP 2021-0011, HMP 2021-0003, HDP 2021-0002 – BEACH ACCESS REPAIRS]
STRONG, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE INTRODUCE THE ITEM.[00:10:03]
THANK YOU, MIKE STRONG AND GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.THE PROJECT BEFORE YOU TODAY IS AN APPLICATION FOR A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND A HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE REPAIRS AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE BLUFFTOP SIDEWALKS AND BEACH ACCESS STAIRWAYS LOCATED ON THE WESTERN AREA OF CARLSBAD BOULEVARD.
HERE IS AN AGENDA FOR THE PRESENTATION.
I'LL BE WALKING THROUGH THE PROJECT LOCATION, SCOPE, CONSISTENCY AND THE RECOMMENDED ACTION.
TO THE EAST OF THE PROJECT SITE ARE SINGLE AND MULTI-FAMILY HOMES.
TO THE NORTH, SOUTH AND WEST IS THE CARLSBAD STATE BEACH.
THE PROJECT HAS A GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATION OF OPEN SPACE.
IN THE OPEN SPACE ZONE, THE SHORELINE RECREATION USE IS PERMITTED.
THE NEXT FEW SLIDES SHOW YOU THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE PROJECT AREA.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE STEEL IS RUSTING AND CRACKING IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS.
IN SOME INSTANCES, SECTIONS OF THE STAIRWAYS HAVE BEEN CLOSED OFF FOR EMERGENCY REPAIRS.
THIS IMAGE WAS TAKEN NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF TAMARACK AVENUE AND CARLSBAD BOULEVARD.
AND THEN LASTLY, THIS IMAGE SHOWS YOU THE EXISTING CONDITION OF THE UPPER SIDEWALK.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE SIDEWALK IS NARROW AND HAS SURFACE MOUNTED RAILINGS.
THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF TWO MAJOR ELEMENTS.
BEACH ACCESS STAIRWAY IMPROVEMENTS AND UPPER SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS.
NO EXPANSION OF THE STAIRWAY IS PROPOSED.
FROM PINE AVENUE TO MAPLE AVENUE.
THE SIDEWALK WILL BE WIDENED VIA AN EXISTING CANTILEVER USING THE EXISTING FOOTINGS AND PILINGS.
NO NEW FOOTINGS WOULD BE INSTALLED.
AND I'M JUST GOING TO HOLD THIS IMAGE FOR A COUPLE MORE SECONDS.
FROM MAPLE AVENUE TO CHERRY AVENUE, THE SIDEWALK WILL BE WIDENED BY REMOVING THE METAL BEAM GUARDRAIL AND EXPANDING THE SIDEWALK ON GRADE. AGAIN, NO NEW FOOTINGS OR PILINGS WILL BE INSTALLED.
THE NEW LENGTH OF THE SIDEWALK WOULD BE 11FT, FOUR INCHES.
THE NEXT TWO SLIDES SHOW RENDERINGS OF THE PROPOSED SIDEWALK WIDENING.
THESE IMAGES ARE NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF CARLSBAD BOULEVARD AND WALNUT AVENUE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S A BEFORE AND AFTER IMAGE.
THESE IMAGES ARE NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF CARLSBAD BOULEVARD AND SYCAMORE AVENUE.
AND ONCE AGAIN, THESE IMAGES SHOW A BEFORE AND AFTER OF THE AREA.
STAFF ANALYZED ALL OF THESE TOPICS FOR CONSISTENCY, INCLUDING THE GENERAL PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AND CEQA AND FOUND IT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THESE DOCUMENTS.
STAFF CONDUCTED AN ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND INCORPORATED MITIGATION MEASURES INTO THE DESIGN OF THE PROJECT TO MITIGATE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS TO A LEVEL OF LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL.
GREAT. THANK YOU, MR. MORALES.
THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF STAFF?
[00:15:07]
I GOT TOO MANY BUTTONS GOING ON.THE GUARDRAILS WILL STAY IN PLACE, RIGHT? NO, THE GUARDRAILS WILL BE REMOVED.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I NOTICED ON THE PICTURE.
THAT THE BEFORE AND AFTER THE THE LAST ONE YOU HAD.
THERE'S THE YOU HAVE GUARD RAILS NOW AND THERE WON'T BE GUARD RAILS.
IS THERE IS THERE ANY REASONING BEHIND THAT OR IS IT JUST A SPACE ISSUE? I BELIEVE THE REASONING IS TO EXPAND THE SIDEWALK.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER STINE.
THANK YOU. WITH REGARD TO THE HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN, I'M LOOKING THROUGH THE STAFF REPORT AS TO ANY HABITAT THAT MIGHT BE AT ISSUE. I SEE A REFERENCE TO BATS.
IS THAT THE HABITAT? AND IF SO, IS THERE SOME TYPE OF ENDANGERED SPECIES THERE THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF? I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER. COULD YOU SAY THAT LAST PART ONE MORE TIME? SURE, PLEASE. THERE'S A REFERENCE TO BATS AS HABITAT.
IS THAT THE MITIGATION WE'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE? BATS IN THE AREA? THAT'S CORRECT. SO MITIGATION MEASURE BIO TWO HAS SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE, ESSENTIALLY MAKING SURE THAT IF THERE IS BATS IN THE AREA, THAT THERE'S PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETINGS AND THERE'S THE BIOLOGISTS ON SITE DURING THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION.
IS THERE SOME EVIDENCE THAT THERE'S THAT SPECIES OF BAT THAT'S ENDANGERED THAT NEEDS SPECIAL PROTECTION? I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS AN ENDANGERED SPECIES, BUT THERE IS IF I CAN PULL UP, IF YOU GIVE ME ONE SECOND, I CAN PULL UP THE SPECIFIC BAT SPECIES.
OKAY, ONE SECOND. JUST CURIOUS ON THAT.
I DIDN'T KNOW THAT MAYBE CERTAIN SPECIES OF BATS ARE WARRANTED SPECIAL PROTECTION? I'M NOT SURE.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE THE IT KIND OF SUMMARIZES THE BAT SPECIES.
IT SAYS IF A SPECIAL BAT STATUS, BAT SPECIES OR A ROOST OF ANY BAT SPECIES IS PRESENT, THEN THESE CERTAIN BIO MITIGATION MEASURES WOULD BE IN EFFECT.
STAFF. HAVE YOU OR ANY STAFF GIVEN CONSIDERATION TO HAVING ANY OR SOME OF THE STAIRWELLS BE RAMPED? UH, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. WE DO HAVE A STAFF MEMBER HERE TODAY, LAUREN FARRELL, WITH THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.
SHE'S THE APPLICANT, AND SHE WILL BE ABLE TO ANSWER SOME OF THOSE ADA QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS.
SO THIS PROJECT OBJECTIVES ARE TO REALLY JUST BE A REPAIR PROJECT AND REPLACE IN KIND.
SO THAT'S WHY THE FOOTPRINT IS REMAINING THE SAME.
THERE'S ALSO KNOW SENSITIVITY WITH THE COASTAL BLUFF THAT THESE PROJECTS ARE LOCATED ON.
WHEN MIGHT RAMPS EVER BE AVAILABLE? I DON'T KNOW.
THAT CIP PROJECT IS NOT CURRENTLY FUNDING.
I WILL HAVE MY ENGINEERING MANAGER, MR. HOSSEIN AJIDEH, TO HELP WITH THAT.
GOOD EVENING, CHAIR COMMISSIONERS.
I'M A TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING MANAGER LIKE MS.
[00:20:03]
MISTER FARRELL SAID THAT CIP PROJECT IS CURRENTLY INACTIVE AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS CITY COUNCIL DECIDED TO BASICALLY DEFUND PART OF THE PROJECT.AND ONCE THIS PROJECT IS COMPLETED, WE MOST DEFINITELY GO BACK TO COUNCIL AND SEEK DIRECTION.
THAT PROJECT PROPOSES TWO RAMPS, ONE FROM NEAR ACTUALLY PINE FROM OCEAN DISTRICT PARKING PARKING LOT TO THE BEACH, AND THE OTHER ONE IS NEAR TAMARACK.
SO OBVIOUSLY THOSE TWO PROJECTS WILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND IT WILL BE MORE CHALLENGING TO GET COASTAL COMMISSION PERMITS.
NOW, WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE RENOVATION? IS IT THE STEEL OBVIOUSLY IS RUSTING.
THERE'S SOME DETERIORATION THERE.
IS THE CONCRETE ALSO AFFECTED? SIGNIFICANTLY DAMAGED, YES.
AND HOW WIDE IS IS ARE ANY OF THESE STAIRWELLS? I BELIEVE THERE ARE MAYBE AROUND 6 TO 8FT.
I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER WITH ME.
WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING THAT UP, CAN I ASK A QUESTION OR TWO? MR.. THERE WAS A FEASIBILITY STUDY DONE IN 2020, RIGHT? YES, THERE WAS A FEASIBILITY STUDY, AND I BELIEVE IN 2017.
AND STAFF CAME TO COUNCIL IN 2020 WITH SOME OPTIONS.
AND I THINK BECAUSE OF THE HABITAT AND POTENTIALLY SOME GEOLOGIC ISSUES, THEY DETERMINED THAT THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO TURN ANY OF THESE EXISTING STAIRWAYS INTO ADA ACCESS.
SO I BELIEVE THEY CHOSE A RAMP TO BE PUT IN PINE AND AND POTENTIALLY TAMARACK.
SO THE FEASIBILITY STUDY IDENTIFIED THOSE TWO LOCATIONS.
AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE FEASIBILITY STUDY, OR AT LEAST SOME PRELIMINARY DESIGN, IS STILL FUNDED, IF NOT, NOT THE OVERALL PROJECT, RIGHT? THAT'S IN THE CIP BUDGET FOR 24-25.
YES. THE PROJECT IS STILL PARTIALLY FUNDED, BUT THE FUND IS NOT ENOUGH TO REALLY FURTHER THE DESIGN.
THIS IS SOMETHING I KNOW STAFF HAS WORKED ON AND IDENTIFIED LOCATION AND THEY JUST NEED TO START TO DO SOME OF THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING AND THEN COUNCIL WOULD NEED TO COME UP WITH THE FUNDING FOR THAT.
THAT'S RIGHT. ANYTHING I SAY, THEY'RE WRONG.
NO, ACTUALLY, I WAS COMPLETELY CORRECT.
THE ONLY THING I ADD IS THAT THE LOCATION NEAR TAMARACK THAT HAS OTHER COMPLEXITY BECAUSE THE RESTROOM HAS IN THE PROCESS TO BE IDENTIFIED AS A HISTORIC SITE.
SO OBVIOUSLY THAT WOULD ADD TO THE COMPLEXITY FOR THAT LOCATION.
SO. SO IF I UNDERSTAND THIS AND THANK YOU, MR. KEMP, I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU TO CHIME IN ON THAT.
SO IF I UNDERSTAND THIS, THERE'S NO TIMELINE FOR HAVING DISABLED OR ELDERLY HAVE RAMP ACCESS.
CORRECT. HE'S AN ATTORNEY, SO BE CAREFUL.
I'M JUST A CONCERNED CITIZEN WHO LISTENS TO MY NEIGHBORS.
HE'LL ASK YOU A LEADING QUESTION.
I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THERE'S NO TIMELINE AT THE MOMENT.
THERE IS IN THE BUDGET FOR 24-25 TO START TO DO PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING ANALYSIS.
[00:25:03]
AS FAR AS ACTUALLY FUNDING IT, I THINK THE ESTIMATE IN 2020 WAS $2.8 MILLION PER RAMP.SO I THINK THEY'LL NEED TO FIGURE OUT A FUNDING SOURCE FOR THAT.
AND I COULDN'T TELL YOU A TIME LINE FOR THAT FOR COUNSEL.
AND I DON'T THINK MR. AJIDEH PROBABLY COULD EITHER.
YES. IN REGARD TO THE GUARD RAIL.
TO MY RECOLLECTION, IN READING THROUGH THE STAFF REPORT AS TO THE REMOVAL OF THAT GUARD RAIL, BECAUSE THE SPEED LIMIT ON CARLSBAD BOULEVARD HAS BEEN REDUCED, IT IS NO LONGER REQUIRED TO HAVE THAT GUARD RAIL.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.
COMMISSIONER SABELLICO. UH, THANK YOU.
MY QUESTION WAS ACTUALLY, COMMISSIONER HUBINGER IS NOT COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.
UH, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO REQUIRE THE GUARDRAILS BE THAT WE KEEP GUARDRAILS ON THE STREET BECAUSE WE DO HAVE A STATE OF EMERGENCY? I'M. I'M LED TO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES GIVEN THAT STATE OF EMERGENCY, AND WE CAN, YOU KNOW, DENY OR MODIFY THE PROJECT IF WE FIND AN ADVERSE IMPACT TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY.
YOU'RE QUOTING A STANDARD FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT.
I WOULD SAY THAT I WOULD WANT TO HEAR EXPERT TESTIMONY FROM OUR ENGINEERS ABOUT THE NECESSITY FOR THE GUARDRAILS BEFORE YOU WOULD REQUEST THEM.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'VE ADDRESSED THAT OTHER THAN TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY'VE BEEN REMOVED, BUT I'M SURE THEY'VE DONE SAFETY STUDIES AND THEY CAN ADDRESS WHAT THE GUARDRAILS PROTECTED BEFORE AND WHAT REMOVING THEM DOES NOW.
YEAH, EXACTLY, THE PROJECT TEAM ACTUALLY DISCUSSED THIS SEVERAL TIMES.
LIKE IT WAS MENTIONED, ONE OF THE GOAL WAS EXPANDING AND WIDENING THE SIDEWALK AS MUCH AS WE COULD.
AND BECAUSE TRAFFIC IS SPEEDING ON CARLSBAD BOULEVARD IN A LEVEL THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE GUARDRAIL.
SO BASICALLY IT WAS PROPOSED TO REMOVE THE GUARDRAIL.
OKAY. OH, CHAIR, IF I MAY ALSO EXPAND ON THAT, THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS OF THE TRAFFIC SECTION GOES ON TO PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, AND SO THAT SECTION ANALYZES PEDESTRIAN ACCESS AND SAFETY.
YEAH. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION, COMMISSIONER HUBINGER.
SO IF WE IMPLEMENT THIS AND LET'S SAY WE WANT TO GO BACK AND PUT GUARDRAILS IN, ARE THEY PROHIBITED? I MEAN, ARE THEY ARE THEY STRUCTURALLY PROHIBITED OR IS IT KIND OF AN EASY FIX TO PUT THEM IN? I MEAN, WE CAN ALWAYS GO BACK AND PUT THE GUARDRAILS IN.
COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY. THANK YOU.
AND MY QUESTION IS, WHY GUARDRAILS? THE THEY SERVE A PURPOSE.
THEY'RE UGLY. WHY CAN'T A PLANTING BUFFER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT BE INCLUDED AS OPPOSED TO SOME KIND OF PHYSICAL THING? OBVIOUSLY, WE WANT TO PROTECT THE PEDESTRIANS, BUT IT'S OUR MAIN PROMENADE IN OUR COMMUNITY.
SO THE GUARDRAIL IS NOT GREAT, BUT OBVIOUSLY ENCOURAGES SAFETY.
WE'RE EXPANDING THESE WALKWAYS.
WHY CAN'T A PLANTER BUFFER BE PART OF THAT TO BE ABLE TO HELP AGAIN PRESERVE HABITAT, BUT ALSO CREATE A MORE PLEASANT WALKWAY TO THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE GOING THERE? I THINK THAT THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT CONCERN THAT HASN'T BEEN ADDRESSED HERE IS HOW DO WE IMPROVE ON THE GUARD RAIL SCENARIO TO MAKE IT WHERE MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING NICER? I THINK THIS IS OUR.
OUR KEY LOCATION FOR EVERYONE WHO GATHERS TO OUR COMMUNITY.
WE REALLY WANT TO HAVE SOMETHING NICE.
SO. SO IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT A PLANTING BUFFER BETWEEN THE PEDESTRIANS AND THE CARS? AND COULD THAT HELP WITH THE PRESERVATION OF HABITAT? UH, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.
LIKE I SAID, WE WE DISCUSSED THIS MULTIPLE TIMES.
WE EVEN DISCUSSED USING A BOLLARD IN THE AREA.
AND THE PROJECT TEAM THOUGHT BECAUSE ONE OF THE OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT WAS WIDENING THE SIDEWALK AS MUCH AS WE COULD BECAUSE OF THE LOCATION OF THIS PROJECT AND BECAUSE OF THE COMMENTS WE RECEIVED FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT THEY WANTED A WIDE SIDEWALK.
[00:30:05]
SO THE DECISION WAS BASICALLY JUST HAVING A, YOU KNOW, A SIMPLE SIDEWALK THERE THAT IS AS WIDE AS POSSIBLE.YOU KNOW, THE TREES HAVE DIED AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
WE'RE NOT REALLY KEEPING UP WITH THE MAINTENANCE OF OUR PLANTINGS IN GENERAL.
AND SO THAT'S MY CONCERN, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY WANT TO CREATE A NICE WALKWAY AND HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO INCLUDE PLANTS ON THE UPPER LEVEL AS WELL AS THE LOWER LEVEL, I THINK WOULD REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
MY BIGGER CONCERN IS COMMISSIONER CAMERON'S QUESTION REGARDING THE PUBLIC ACCESS AND RAMP LOCATIONS.
THIS PROJECT IS A CONCERN BECAUSE THE DISABLED STILL ARE NOT ABLE TO ACCESS OUR BEACHES AND FURTHERMORE, THEY CAN'T EVEN ACCESS THE BATHROOMS THAT ARE THERE.
AND THAT'S AN EVEN BIGGER ISSUE.
I THINK IF WE COULD START WITH JUST CREATING SOME KIND OF ACCESSIBLE LOCATION TO ALLOW OUR PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS OUR BATHROOMS IN THOSE TWO LOCATIONS ON PINE AND TAMARACK, I THINK IT WOULD COME, YOU KNOW, BE A HUGE BENEFIT TO OUR COMMUNITY.
AND, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY.
WELL, THIS IS ALL TAXPAYER MONEY.
SO, YOU KNOW, AND WE'RE WORKING ON A PROJECT RIGHT NOW.
WE SHOULD TRY TO INCLUDE THAT.
AND THEN IN THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON PAGE ONE, 61 178 OF ONE OF 333, IT TALKS ABOUT THE CULTURAL RESOURCES ALTERATIONS NEEDED TO COMPLY WITH ADA WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH BOTH THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR REHABILITATION AND THE CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE UNDER CR DASH ONE.
SO THE IDEA THAT WE CAN'T INCLUDE ADA ACCESSIBILITY INTO OUR MOST PROMINENT.
I MEAN, NOT THAT THE BATHROOM IS THE CULTURAL RESOURCE YET, BUT YOU KNOW, IF IT'S EVEN BEING STARTED AS A CONVERSATION, THAT THAT'S A CULTURAL RESOURCE IS HOW COME WE CAN'T IN THIS PROJECT GET THAT ACCOMPLISHED.
SO, SO THOSE ARE MY REAL CONCERNS WITH THIS.
AND YOU KNOW, WE WE ARE SPENDING LOTS OF MONEY.
AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE'RE WE'RE CONCERNED THAT THERE'S A CONCERN WHEN WE CAN'T ACCESS THIS FACILITY EQUITABLY. AND THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I'M WORRIED ABOUT.
IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN DO THAT WITH THIS PROJECT? YEAH. WITH REGARDS TO THE TO THE BATHROOM, LIKE I SAID, THOSE ARE ALL STATE PARKS FACILITIES.
SO I KNOW OUR PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT ARE WORKING WITH THEM AND I KNOW THAT THEY ARE WORKING ON SOME SORT OF ADA MEASURES TO FACILITATE BASICALLY ACCESS TO THE RESTROOM.
AND LIKE I SAID, THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS TO DESIGNATE THAT SITE AS A HISTORIC SITE, WHICH FURTHER LIMITS US TO DO ANYTHING WITH THE RESTROOM. YEAH, BUT IT SAYS THAT ADA WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE STATE.
GUIDELINES. SO THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I'M RUNNING INTO AN ISSUE IS IT'S YOUR YOUR OWN NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS SAYING THAT ACCESSIBILITY IS ACCEPTABLE AND YET WE'RE NOT SHOWING ANY ACCESSIBILITY IN THIS PROJECT.
AND I ALSO WOULD LIKE MR. STRONG, AS HE IS OUR LIAISON FOR THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION, TO TELL US THE STATUS OF THAT TAMARACK RESTROOM TO SEE IF THAT IS ACTUALLY PART OF ANY OF LISTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY BEING DISCUSSED BY HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
I CAN RESPOND TO THAT SECOND PORTION OF THAT STATEMENT.
THE STRUCTURE LOCATED AS THAT RESTROOM FACILITY IS NOT ON ANY NATIONAL, STATE OR LOCAL REGISTERS AT THE PRESENT.
THE ANALYSIS THAT WAS PERFORMED IN SUPPORT OF THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CONCLUDED THAT IT WAS POTENTIALLY ELIGIBLE AND THAT THAT'S WHY THERE WAS CARE AND SENSITIVITY TO THE SITE ITSELF AND THE RAMP LEADING TO THE RESTROOM FACILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS.
SO IT IS VERY POSSIBLE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER COULD PURSUE THAT DESIGNATION.
[00:35:02]
IN THIS CASE, IT WOULD BE THE STATE.SO BUT IT WOULDN'T COME TO YOUR I MEAN, THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION.
IF THE PROPERTY OWNER PURSUED A DESIGNATION THAT WAS A LOCAL REGISTER, IT WOULD BE PRESENTED BEFORE THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
WOULD THEY BE REQUIRED TO HAVE ADA ACCESSIBLE ROUTES TO THAT RESTROOM? THAT WOULD NOT BE A FACTOR IN THE CONSIDERATION OF THE DESIGNATION TO THE LOCAL REGISTER.
OKAY, I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION THEN THAT CAN WE ADDRESS THE THE MITIGATION MEASURE THAT YOU READ? ARE YOU READING THE ONE THAT'S ON PAGE 178 CR ONE? NOPE. 160 101 78 YEAH.
178 333 GOT IT IN THE ALTERNATIVE 161.
YEAH, YEAH. IT HAS TWO DIFFERENT PAGE NUMBERS SO WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE METAPHORICALLY ANYWAY.
I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE ISAAC CAN READ THAT TO US OR LAUREN.
BUT THE WAY I READ THIS IS THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY SAYING THAT THE BEACH REPAIR THE STAIRS NEEDS TO BE ADA COMPLIANT.
THEY'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT IF THEY DO ALTERATIONS NEEDED TO COMPLY WITH ADA, THEY WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE HISTORIC RESOURCE GUIDELINES AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT GETTING RID OF THE HISTORIC CHARACTER.
BUT I THINK WHAT THEY'RE REFERRING TO HERE IS JUST A MITIGATION MEASURE BECAUSE HISTORIC RESOURCES ARE SEQUA ISSUES THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT ANY ADA COMPLIANT REPAIRS WERE CONSISTENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA GUIDELINES AND HISTORIC STRUCTURES.
AND THE RAMP ITSELF WAS OF CONTEXT SPATIALLY TO RELATE TO THAT POTENTIAL HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE.
SO THEY HAD A BIG COLLABORATION WITH WRITING THESE MITIGATION MEASURES TO MAKE SURE THAT THE POTENTIAL HISTORIC NATURE OF THAT BUILDING WAS PRESERVED. WELL, I'M HAVING TWO PROBLEMS HERE, AND I THINK IT'S A BIGGER ISSUE.
AND REGARDLESS IF IT'S DESIGNATED HISTORIC OR NOT HISTORIC, WHICH I THINK ENDING TAMARACK, THE MAIN DRAG TO GET TO OUR BEACH IN A BATHROOM IS SUSPECT AT BEST.
IT'S NOT EXACTLY HOW YOU WANT TO END AN ACCESS TO A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND END IN THE BEACH.
RIGHT. BUT AND THAT'S THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE WITH ALL OF THESE STAIRS.
THEY DON'T REALLY END AT THE STREETS.
AND THERE ISN'T ANYTHING THAT'S REALLY SIGNIFICANT ABOUT BEING ABLE TO ACCESS.
YOU SORT OF HAVE TO STUMBLE ON THESE THINGS TO BE ABLE TO FIND THEM.
AND THAT'S KIND OF NOT WHAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN.
WE WANT TO MAKE THEM EQUITABLY ACCESSIBLE.
AND SO, SO THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THIS BUILDING SHOULD BE ABLE TO HELP US WITH GETTING AT LEAST THAT TAMARACK BATHROOM ACCESSIBLE BECAUSE THAT RAMP ISN'T VERY BIG AND IT COULD BE JUST SOME OTHER WAY TO BE ABLE TO RAMP THAT.
AND AT LEAST YOU'D HAVE ONE BATHROOM AT TAMARACK BEACH THAT ACTUALLY COULD BE ACCESSIBLE.
EVEN IF YOU COULDN'T GET IT FROM THE BOTTOM, YOU COULD DO IT FROM THE TOP.
SO I'M CONCERNED THAT WE'RE KIND OF MISSING AN OPPORTUNITY HERE.
THAT COULD BE WHAT THAT OTHER PROJECT WILL BE COVERING.
WHAT WE GOT IN FRONT OF US IS THE REPAIRS TO THE EXISTING STAIRWAYS AND A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THAT AND ADOPTION OF THE MITIGATED DECK.
AND IT SAYS THAT ADA WOULD BE CONSISTENT.
ALTERATIONS TO A HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
[00:40:04]
SO IF THERE I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE THERE'S SOME REASON IN THE MIDST OF THIS PROJECT, FOR SOME REASON THEY'D HAVE TO WORK ON THAT RAMP OVER THERE, THAT MITIGATION WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE ALTERATIONS THAT THEY WOULD DO WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE HISTORIC STANDARDS.BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S PART OF THE PROJECT NECESSARILY IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY.
SO YOUR MITIGATION MEASURE WOULD REQUIRE THAT.
BUT I DON'T WANT US TO LOSE FOCUS ON THE SITE.
LOSE SIGHT OF THAT? THIS IS A BEACH ACCESS REPAIR TO THE FIVE EXISTING STAIRS AND THE RAMPS IS A SEPARATE CIP PROJECT WHERE THESE ISSUES WILL CERTAINLY BE ADDRESSED.
WAS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY, SO YOU WOULD.
FENNELL DID YOU DID YOU WANT TO MAKE A SEPARATE PRESENTATION? OKAY, THAT'S FINE. ALL RIGHT.
OKAY. SO WE'LL NOW OPEN PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
MS.. WIELAND IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE HASN'T FILED, OR IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO HAS FILED A SPEAKER SLIP FOR THIS ITEM? NO, THERE IS NOT. OKAY.
SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON THIS ITEM.
AND DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF ON THIS? OKAY. OKAY.
SEEING NONE WILL NOW OPEN COMMISSION DISCUSSION.
ANY COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO DISCUSS THE ITEM? COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.
YOU WERE TOO QUICK TO SHUT OFF QUESTIONS TO STAFF.
I JUST HAVE ONE. OH, I'M SORRY.
THAT'S FINE. I WAS SLOW TO RESPOND.
UM. WE SPOKE EARLIER THIS WEEK AND I SENT DOCUMENTS TO YOU, SIR, AND THE OTHERS ABOUT THE USE OF SHOULD THIS PROJECT BE APPROVED. I TALKED ABOUT THE USE OF REGENERATIVE CONCRETE.
HAS THAT BEEN CONSIDERED OR WILL THAT BE CONSIDERED? WHERE DID MY TRUSTY ENGINEER.
YES. THANK YOU FOR THAT COMMENT.
ALL THE MATERIALS THAT WE LOOKED AT THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE DESIGN ARE SET FOR A MARINE ENVIRONMENT TO HELP WITH CORROSION AND THE TYPE OF ENVIRONMENT THAT WE WOULD BE DEALING WITH THAT.
BUT WE AREN'T NECESSARILY INCLUDING REGENERATIVE CONCRETE.
WE'RE USING SOME OTHER MATERIALS THAT WILL SUPPORT A MARINE ENVIRONMENT SETTING FOR THIS PROJECT.
WELL, WHAT'S OF INTEREST TO ME AND FOR THOSE MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WHO AREN'T AWARE OF WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, OTHER THAN MAYBE COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY, THE REASON WE STILL HAVE ROMAN AQUEDUCTS 2000 YEARS LATER, WHEREAS BUILDINGS BUILT IN THE 19TH AND 20TH CENTURY ARE CRUMBLING.
IS THIS USE OF REGENERATIVE CONCRETE? A TYPICAL CONCRETE LASTS, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, 8 TO 20 YEARS AT BEST.
WHEREAS REGENERATIVE CONCRETE CAN LAST 60, 80, 90 YEARS.
YOU KNOW, MY FEELING IS IT'S GOING TO COST A LITTLE MORE.
BUT LET'S AVOID YOU COMING BACK HERE IN TEN, 15 YEARS TO DEAL WITH THIS.
AND SO WE ARE ALSO COMPLYING WITH THEIR STANDARDS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AS WELL.
BUT SOMETIMES THE FUTURE REQUIRES SOME VISION RATHER THAN BUREAUCRATIC COMPLIANCE.
WE HAVE A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND WE HAVE A HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN.
THIS IS GOING TO INCREASE ACCESS.
THIS IS GOING TO PROMOTE ACCESS.
SO IT'S GOING TO FACILITATE ACCESS.
SO THERE SHOULD BE NO COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ISSUE.
THEIR VIEW WE'RE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING TO OBSCURE A VIEW WHERE YOU NEED STAIRWAYS AND YOU NEED A FENCE ALONG THERE FOR SAFETY PURPOSES.
[00:45:01]
SO THERE'S NO ABSOLUTELY NO VIEW IMPAIRMENT.AND IN TERMS OF ACCESS, IT'S IT'S FACILITATING IMPROVING ACCESS HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN.
I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED HERE THAT WE HAVE A PLAN LOOKING FOR A PROBLEM.
I'VE READ THROUGH THE REPORT AND I'M NOT TRYING TO BE CUTE OR I'M NOT TRYING TO BE CRITICAL HERE.
I'M LOOKING FOR THE REPORT HERE AND IT SAYS POTENTIAL BAT ISSUES, POTENTIAL NESTING ISSUES.
AND YET NONE OF THEM HAVE BEEN SPOTTED THERE.
IF WE HAD A SURVEY OR SOMETHING THAT SAID, OH, IT LOOKS LIKE WE MIGHT HAVE A PROTECTED SPECIES, THEN I WOULD BE MORE INCLINED TO SAY WE NEED THAT. I GUESS I DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO HAVING IT.
MY OWN TAKE IS THAT MAYBE THAT WE'RE WE'RE BEING A LITTLE OVERLY CAUTIOUS HERE IN DOING IT DOESN'T HURT, BUT I'M JUST NOT SEEING THAT WITH WITHOUT EVIDENCE OF ANY SPECIES.
AND I LOOK THROUGH THE REPORT, IT SAYS POTENTIAL, POTENTIAL, POTENTIAL.
NOTHING ACTUAL, BUT I CAN SUPPORT IT NOTWITHSTANDING.
I JUST WANTED TO HAVE THOSE THOSE COMMENTS.
I'M NOT SO CONCERNED ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION FOR THE RESTROOM, PARTICULARLY SINCE THE OWNER, THE STATE PARKS IS NOT APPLIED FOR IT. I'M INTERESTED IN FUNCTIONALITY.
I WANT THOSE BATHROOMS TO WORK AND I WANT THEM TO BE CLEAN AND I WANT THEM TO BE ACCESSIBLE.
BUT IN TERMS OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION, I JUST CAN'T SEE THAT HERE.
THAT'S WE DON'T HAVE AN APPLICATION BEFORE US ON THAT.
WE WANT CLEAN, SAFE, ACCESSIBLE RESTROOMS. AND THE HISTORIC ISSUE IS NOT SOMETHING I'M TERRIBLY CONCERNED ABOUT, BUT I CAN SUPPORT THIS PROJECT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER STINE.
WELL, THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR THEIR PRESENTATION.
I THINK THAT GIVEN THE EMERGENCY PROCLAMATION THAT WE OURSELVES VOTED ON A YEAR AGO AND WE ARE STILL IN, I DON'T THINK THAT I CAN SUPPORT THIS RESOLUTION EITHER OF THEM ACTUALLY, BECAUSE IT HAS TO MEAN SOMETHING LIKE WHEN WE SAY THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE OUR STREETS SAFER AND COMMIT ALL OF OUR CITY RESOURCES TO DOING THAT, WE HAVE TO ACTUALLY DO IT.
AND I THINK THAT POLITICIANS SHOULD DO WHAT THEY SAY.
AND I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A PROBLEM IN CARLSBAD WHERE OUR STREETS ARE TOO SAFE RIGHT NOW.
I MEAN, THAT WAS RESPECTFULLY THAT WAS BASICALLY THE ANSWER THAT I RECEIVED, WHICH IS THAT WE DON'T ACTUALLY NEED THESE GUARDRAILS, THAT WE CAN JUST NOT HAVE THEM. AND IT'S PERFECTLY COMPLIANT WITH THE LAW.
AND, YOU KNOW, THAT MAY BE TRUE, BUT.
IT TAKES ASSISTANT, IT TAKES SOMETHING THAT EXISTS NOW WHICH MAKES US MORE SAFE AND TAKES IT AWAY.
AND WE'RE DOING THAT AT A TIME WHEN WE'VE DECLARED ROAD SAFETY TO BE AN EMERGENCY IN THIS CITY.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.
COULD YOU EXPAND ON THOSE AGAIN OR SINCE THAT DID GET BROUGHT UP BY COMMISSIONER SABELLICO? CAN YOU CLARIFY THE QUESTION ONE MORE TIME? WELL, I THINK AS I REMEMBER WHEN THE GUARDRAILS WERE BROUGHT UP EARLIER.
MR. I'M SORRY, MR. AJIDEH. MR. AJIDEH YEAH.
I THINK, MR. JIA, YOU MADE A COMMENT, I BELIEVE, ABOUT THE REMOVAL OF THE GUARDRAILS AND THE SPEED.
WHEN WE DESIGN A ROAD, THERE ARE CERTAIN BASICALLY CODE AND REQUIREMENTS.
SO BASICALLY ONE OF THE CRITERIA FOR GUARDRAIL IS SPEED.
THE SECOND ONE IS THE SLOPE THAT BASICALLY YOU'RE TRYING TO PROTECT A PEDESTRIAN OR CARS.
IF THERE IS A SLOPE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PAVEMENT.
SO FOR THIS PROJECT, OUR DESIGN TEAM LOOKED AT THE THE SPEED ON CARLSBAD BOULEVARD AND ALSO THE SLOPE AND DETERMINED THAT REALLY GUARDRAIL IS NOT REQUIRED.
SO FOR THAT REASONS GUARDRAIL WERE REMOVED.
[00:50:06]
YEAH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.A QUESTION I HAD IS JUST FOR CLARIFICATION SO IT'S NOT REQUIRED.
I GUESS WHEN I ASK THE QUESTION INITIALLY AT THE START OF THE OF THIS AGENDA ITEM, MY INTENT WAS TO HAVE THE ANSWER BE IT'S NOT REQUIRED BECAUSE THE SPEED HAS BEEN REDUCED ON CARLSBAD BOULEVARD.
AND IT'S THAT REQUIREMENT IS IS BASICALLY NO LONGER REQUIRED BECAUSE THE SPEED HAS BEEN REDUCED.
AND IT'S AND THAT REQUIREMENT COMES FROM WHAT SOURCE? STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CODE NUMBER X, NUMBER Y, WHATEVER THE CASE MIGHT BE.
THERE'S GOT TO BE SOMETHING THAT IS THAT IS GENERATING THE ANSWER THAT YOU'RE GIVING US.
WHERE IS IT COMING FROM? YEAH, WE CAN WE CAN PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION.
I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION RIGHT NOW HANDY.
BUT BUT BESIDES THIS, WHAT WE ARE DOING ALSO PART OF FUTURE PROJECTS.
WE ARE DOING ROAD REALIGNMENT AND WE ARE ADDING BUFFERED BIKE LANES IN THE AREA.
SO THAT'S ANOTHER BASICALLY BUFFER BETWEEN CARS AND THE PEDESTRIAN, THE BUFFERED BIKE LANE AND OBVIOUSLY CURB AND GUTTER THAT SEPARATES THE ROAD FROM THE SIDE.
EXACTLY. AND SO, THEREFORE, A LOT OF THIS DISCUSSION THAT'S GOING ON MIGHT BE MOOT BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY TAKEN CARE OF WITHIN THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TRAFFIC OR WHATEVER.
I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION FURTHER, MR. GARRARD. DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION YOU CAN PROVIDE? AS HE'S APPROACHING, THE STANDARDS, THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY DESIGN STANDARDS ARE CONSIDERED NOT IN ADDITION OR IN ADDITION TO THE THE I'LL CALL IT A HORIZONTAL DEFLECTION IN THE GEOMETRIC DESIGN, BECAUSE THERE IS THE BIKE LANE, THERE IS THE BUFFER ALREADY, THERE'S A REDUCED SPEED LIMITS.
WELL, JASON IS UP HERE NOW SO HE CAN SPEAK TO IT.
BUT JASON, ALL THAT'S FACTORED INTO THE CONSIDERATION, THE DESIGN SPEED OF THE ROADWAY.
CORRECT. AND I'M ASSUMING THAT'S THE CASE.
YEAH. SO I'M NOT A TRAFFIC ENGINEER EXPERT.
JOHN KIM IS OUR CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER.
BUT WE'VE HAD WE'VE TALKED ABOUT GUARDRAILS ON PRIVATE PROJECTS.
AND THERE I CAN TELL YOU THAT, YES, THERE ARE DESIGN FACTORS FOR GUARDRAILS.
THERE'S A VERY LOW, LOW CHANCE OF CARS VEERING AND GOING INTO THE SIDEWALK.
THAT ANALYSIS IS DONE PER STANDARDS AND STATE STANDARDS FOR GUARD RAILS.
THANK YOU. DOES THE GUARDRAIL PROTECT PROTECT CARS FROM GOING DOWN THE CLIFF OR IS IT THERE TO PROTECT THE PEDESTRIANS OR BOTH? TYPICALLY ARE THEREFORE PROTECT PEDESTRIANS.
THERE'S A CURB STILL, RIGHT? YES. YEAH. OKAY.
SO ARE WE IN DISCUSSION OR ARE WE? WELL, I APOLOGIZE, I, I JUST WENT FROM COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION, BUT THEN COMMISSIONER SABELLICO BROUGHT UP THE POINT ABOUT THE GUARDRAILS AND THEN I DID A SIDE CONVERSATION.
IS IT OKAY TO GO BACK? BECAUSE I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT ISSUE AND IT DID COME UP, SO I KIND OF VEERED AWAY FROM MY SCRIPTED THING HERE TO GO AND HAVE STAFF COME.
AND SO SHOULD I MAKE A COMMENT OR WAIT AND LET'S DO STAFF AND OR YOU CAN MAKE A COMMENT.
OKAY. SO I THINK I JUST THINK THIS IS A BASIC MAINTENANCE PROJECT, RIGHT? AND WE'RE MAKING IT INTO SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOT A LOT OF BELLS AND WHISTLES.
AND I THINK THERE'S SOME GOOD POINTS BEING MADE ON THE THE GUARDRAILS.
[00:55:07]
I MEAN, IT'S A IT'S AN EYESORE, REALLY FOR THE CITY.AND SO THE THE CITY'S JUST TRYING TO ADDRESS A BASIC MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENT.
AND I THINK WE SHOULD GIVE THE CITY THE RIGHT TO DO IT.
AND SO I INTEND TO SUPPORT IT.
SO I'LL TAKE THE BLAME FOR THAT.
WHAT YOU DID SAY IN DISCUSSING THIS PROJECT.
IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE COME TO THE OPINION THAT THE GUARDRAILS ARE NOT NECESSARY, THAT BE AN ACCURATE STATEMENT? THAT'S CORRECT. AND FOR COMMISSIONER MEENES, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WE JUST FOUND IT THE STANDARD THAT IT COMES FROM IS FROM THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
WHILE WE LOOK THROUGH THE DOCUMENT TOO.
I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF CODES AND STANDARDS OUT THERE, SO THANK YOU FOR GIVING US THE TIME TO LOCATE WHICH ONE IT WAS TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, AND I APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE I REALLY FEEL IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THAT THAT INFORMATION BE PROVIDED.
AND AND, AND COMMISSIONER DAVE, THAT'S THE FIRST THING CAME IN MIND.
HIS COMMENT IS THE SAME AS MINE I THINK.
SO THEREFORE, I SUPPORT THE SUPPORT THE PROJECT.
WERE THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND WOULD ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO DISCUSS IT? COMMISSIONER STINE YES, JUST REAL BRIEFLY, I THINK COMMISSIONER HÜBNER'S COMMENTS WERE SPOT ON.
WE DON'T HAVE A STREET PROJECT BEFORE US.
SO I THINK WE'RE GETTING OFF ON A BIT OF A TANGENT.
BEFORE US IS A REPAIR WORK JOB.
AND YOU CAN SEE BY THE PHOTOGRAPHS THESE STAIRS ARE BADLY CORRODED.
ANYTHING CLOSE TO THE OCEAN FOR TIME.
THE OCEAN AIR IS VERY CORROSIVE, SO THEY DON'T MAINTAIN THEMSELVES AND AT SOME POINT IN TIME THEY NEED A MAJOR, NOT JUST A CLEANING, BUT YOU HAVE TO GO IN AND DO SOME BASIC MAINTENANCE WORK TO PRESERVE THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THESE.
SO I THINK THE PROJECTS IN KEEPING WITH THAT AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD GET OFF ON DECLARATIONS OF EMERGENCY IN STREETS BECAUSE THAT'S NOT BEFORE US. OKAY.
COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY. THANK YOU.
THIS PROJECT SEEMS TO ME INCOMPLETE BUILDING IN KIND IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH.
SPENDING LOTS OF TAXPAYER MONEY ON THE NEED FOR EQUITABLE ACCESS.
YOU CALL IT A BEACH ACCESS REPAIR PROJECT, BUT YOU'RE NOT CREATING EQUITABLE ACCESS.
I THINK THAT ONCE THE FUNDING WAS NOT PROVIDED FOR THAT.
THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO INCLUDE THE ACCESSIBILITY COMPONENT.
AND SO I'M CONCERNED THAT OUR CITY HASN'T QUITE FIGURED OUT WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO OUR CITIZENRY.
AND OUR CITIZENRY WANTS TO ACCESS THIS LOCATION.
THESE STAIRS HAVE BEEN CORRODING FOR YEARS.
SO THE FACT THAT NOW WE'RE FINALLY GETTING TO DO THIS PROJECT, I'M GRATEFUL, BUT IT'S NOT.
ENOUGH. IT NEEDS TO BE FEDERALLY ACCESSIBLE AS PER THE GUIDELINES THAT SUPERSEDE OUR CITY AND OUR STATE REQUIREMENTS. SO I REALLY HAVE A VERY DIFFICULT TIME SUPPORTING A PROJECT THAT IS INCOMPLETE AND DOESN'T PROVIDE EQUITABLE ACCESS TO OUR BEACH.
AND WE'RE BUILDING THE SAME THAT DOESN'T HELP OR IMPROVE THE FLOORS THAT ARE ALREADY THERE.
SO I'M VERY I RELUCTANTLY HAVE TO DENY THIS PROJECT BECAUSE I REALLY DO NOT FEEL THAT IT'S COMPLETE.
IT NEEDS TO HAVE EXCESSIVE ACCESSIBILITY FOR ALL PEOPLE.
[01:00:06]
THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY. COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.I'D LIKE TO ECHO WHAT COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY HAS JUST SAID.
TO ME, THIS IS A MAJOR MISSED OPPORTUNITY.
I CANNOT AND WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS ON THIS ONE? OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
MAY I HAVE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER STINE.
MOVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN.
OKAY. DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? I SECOND. OKAY.
OKAY. THE MOTION PASSES 4 TO 3.
SO, MR. STRONG, IF YOU COULD INTRODUCE THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, PLEASE.
[2. ZCA2020-0007/LCPA 2020-0007(PUB2020-0004) – CITYWIDE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS]
THANK YOU. AND BEFORE I INTRODUCE ITEM TWO, I WANT TO SPEAK TO BOTH THE REMAINING AGENDA ITEMS, TWO AND THREE.THEY BOTH ARE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS.
SO I'M JUST GOING TO POINT OUT THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN ITEMS TWO AND THREE.
THE SECOND ITEM WHICH I WILL INTRODUCE NOW IS THE CITYWIDE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS.
AND PRESENTING ON THIS ITEM IS ASSOCIATE PLANNER SHELLY GLENN.
GOOD EVENING CHAIR MERZ AND PLANNING COMMISSION.
THEN I WILL DISCUSS THE PROPOSED CITYWIDE OBJECTIVE SCIENCE STANDARDS.
OKAY, SO THE CITYWIDE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS PROJECT IS APPLIES TO ALL ELIGIBLE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AND MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITHIN THE CITY BOUNDARIES. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AREA AS SHOWN HERE.
IN RESPONSE TO THE STATE'S HOUSING CRISIS.
THE STATE IS DOING ALL IT CAN TO INCREASE HOUSING PRODUCTION.
ONE WAY THE STATE IS DOING THIS IS THROUGH APPROVING LEGISLATION THAT WOULD DECREASE HOUSING REGULATIONS WHILE PROVIDING PREDICTABILITY IN THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS. PURSUANT TO THE NEW STATE HOUSING LEGISLATION, APPLICATIONS FOR ELIGIBLE MULTIFAMILY MIXED USE PROJECTS MUST BE APPROVED OR DENIED BASED ON OBJECTIVE STANDARDS AND NOT EXISTING SUBJECTIVE DESIGN GUIDELINES OR STANDARDS.
SO THE CITYWIDE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS PROJECT IS INTENDED TO COMPLY WITH THE NEW STATE HOUSING LEGISLATION, AS WELL AS THE CITY'S MOST RECENTLY APPROVED HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM 1.11 TO ADOPT CLEAR OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AND MIXED USE PROJECTS.
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CITYWIDE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS WILL COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THE SB2 GRANT AWARDED TO THE CITY TO FUND THIS PROJECT. AND LASTLY, IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THESE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS ARE CONSIDERED A STARTING POINT TO ENSURE THE CITY HAS STANDARDS IN PLACE FOR NEW PROJECTS AS EARLY AS FALL OF THIS YEAR AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS, AS JUST DISCUSSED.
THESE STANDARDS WILL BE REVIEWED REGULARLY AND UPDATED AND UPDATED AS NECESSARY.
OKAY, SO THE CITYWIDE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS ARE APPLIED TO PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR STREAMLINED MINISTERIAL REVIEW PROCESS PURSUANT TO SB 35. LIMITED DISCRETIONARY REVIEW PROCESS PURSUANT TO SB 330, AS WELL AS OTHER ELIGIBLE PROJECTS AS DETERMINED BY CURRENT STATE LAW THAT WOULD
[01:05:07]
GO THROUGH THE STANDARD DISCRETIONARY REVIEW PROCESS.PLEASE NOTE THAT THE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS ARE NOT THEMSELVES AN EXPEDITED REVIEW PROCESS, BUT ARE USED IN THE PROCESSES LISTED ABOVE AND THEREFORE WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY DOES ADOPT THESE STANDARDS, THESE PERMITTING PROCESS PROCESSING OPTIONS ARE AVAILABLE TO ALL ELIGIBLE PROJECTS AS OF TODAY.
SO HERE ARE SOME COMMON EXAMPLES OF ELIGIBLE AND NON ELIGIBLE PROJECTS, AS DISCUSSED.
THE THREE PROJECTS IN THE GREEN BOXES ARE ELIGIBLE PROJECTS WHICH INCLUDE MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS THAT PROVIDE AT LEAST 50% AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS, MIXED USE PROJECTS THAT PROVIDE AT LEAST TWO THIRDS SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR RESIDENTIAL USES AND DUPLEXES AND LIVE WORK PROJECTS.
THE TWO PROJECTS IN RED ARE TYPICAL NON ELIGIBLE PROJECTS, AND THEY INCLUDE OFFICE, COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS AND MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT WITH PROPOSING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT.
SO THE PROPOSED OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, WHICH ADDRESS BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN, ARE PAIRED WITH EXISTING OBJECTIVE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SUCH AS MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS, SETBACKS AND DENSITY.
SO ELIGIBLE PROJECTS MUST COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS IN ORDER TO BE APPROVED.
HAVING THIS DOCUMENT LIVE OUTSIDE OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL MUNICIPAL CODE ALLOWS THE PROJECT TO INCORPORATE MORE GRAPHICS AND VISUAL THAN IS POSSIBLE IF IT WAS LOCATED IN THE CODE CHAPTER.
THE MANUAL IS ORGANIZED INTO SIX SECTIONS.
THE INTRODUCTION PROVIDES INFORMATION REGARDING PROJECT ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS, WAIVER PROCESSING AND CONFLICTING CLAUSE REQUIREMENTS AND THE LAST SECTION DEFINITIONS.
THIS CLEARLY THIS PROVIDES DEFINITIONS OR CLEARLY DEFINES TERMS THAT ARE USED IN THE MANUAL AS NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT THESE STANDARDS ARE OBJECTIVE. OKAY, SO NOW I WILL DISCUSS IN FURTHER DETAIL THE SECTIONS TWO THROUGH FIVE.
SECTION TWO IS REGARDING SITE DESIGN STANDARDS AND THIS ADDRESSES SITE LAYOUT, BUILDING PLACEMENT, ALSO VEHICLE SURFACE PARKING, PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION AND ACCESS, OPEN SPACE AND LANDSCAPING.
HOWEVER, IT IS NOTED THAT THERE ARE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS IN THE LANDSCAPE MANUAL.
SO THIS DOCUMENT DOES REFERENCE THAT MANUAL VI DOES INCLUDE A REFERENCE TO THAT MANUAL.
SECTION THREE BUILDING DESIGN STANDARDS RELATE TO BUILDING MASSING FORM ARTICULATION, INCLUDING BUILDING ENTRANCES, WINDOW TREATMENTS, COLOR AND MATERIALS. SECTION FOR ADDITIONAL MIXED USE STANDARDS INCLUDE STANDARDS THAT ADDRESS VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL MIXED USE PROJECTS.
A COMMON CONFIGURATION FOR VERTICAL MIXED USE PROJECT IS WHEN THE GROUND FLOOR THERE'S GROUND FLOOR RETAIL WITH DWELLING UNITS ON THE SECOND FLOOR AND ABOVE, AS SHOWN IN THE GRAPHIC HERE, A HORIZONTAL MIXED USE IS WHEN THE RESIDENTIAL AND NON RESIDENTIAL USES ARE LOCATED IN SEPARATE BUILDINGS BUT WITHIN THE SAME DEVELOPMENT SITE.
THEREFORE SHARING SAME SITE FACILITIES SUCH AS PEDESTRIAN ACCESS OR COMMON RECREATIONAL SPACES.
OKAY. AND THEN SECTION FIVE UTILITARIAN DESIGN STANDARDS CONTAINS MANY DIFFERENT TOPICS AS LISTED HERE, WHICH ARE CONSIDERED SMALL ELEMENTS BUT ARE PRESENT IN NEARLY EVERY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
THE CITY DOES INCLUDE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SIGNAGE IN IN THIS IN THE SIGNAGE ORDINANCE.
THEREFORE, THAT IS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE IN THIS MANUAL.
THE PROJECT WAS PREPARED WITH CONSIDERATION FROM THE COMMUNITY AND FROM INPUT GATHERED FROM THE COMMUNITY THROUGH A PROJECT INFORMATIONAL WEBINAR, A STAKEHOLDER MEETING CONSISTING OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY AND OTHER OUTREACH EFFORTS THROUGH THE CITY'S WEBSITE AND PROJECT MAILING LIST. THERE WAS ONLY ONE LEAVER LETTER THAT WAS RECEIVED AND IS ATTACHED TO THE STAFF REPORT.
PUBLIC COMMENTS WERE OVERALL MINOR AND REGARDING FEASIBILITY OF THE PROPOSED STANDARDS.
OKAY. IN CONCLUSION, THE CITYWIDE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS WILL.
[01:10:02]
EXCUSE ME. HELP STRENGTHEN LOCAL DESIGN REGULATIONS.SINCE THE CITY CURRENTLY CANNOT ENFORCE EXISTING SUBJECTIVE DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.
IT IS TO ENSURE PROJECT COMPATIBILITY WITH THE EXISTING COMMUNITY CHARACTER BY ENSURING PROPOSED BUILDINGS ARE DESIGNED TO FIT WITHIN THE CITY'S COMMUNITY CHARACTER. REDUCE PROJECT COSTS AND LONG REVIEW TIMES THROUGH IMPLEMENTING STANDARDS THAT PROVIDE DEVELOPERS WITH CLEAR DIRECTION, THEREBY CREATING A SENSE OF PREDICTABILITY.
AND LASTLY, TO ENCOURAGE RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION FOR BOTH AFFORDABLE AND MARKET RATE UNITS BY CREATING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE IN MEETING THE CITY'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDS AND FEASIBLE AND IMPLEMENTING THE CITY'S ALLOWED DENSITY.
OKAY. STAFF NOW RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AND INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOCAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT IN ORDER TO APPROVE THE CITYWIDE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS PROJECT.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
STAFF IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU, MISS GLENN. ARE THERE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF STAFF? YES. COMMISSIONER STINE.
MISS GLENN. AND LOOKING AT THE STAFF REPORT, YOU MADE MENTION THAT THERE WAS A VERY RECENT PUBLIC WEBINAR. THAT WAS JUNE 8TH.
AND THAT AND THAT WEBINAR, MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE THAT THE PLAN THAT'S PROPOSED TO US TODAY WAS BEFORE.
IN OTHER WORDS, THE PEOPLE AT THAT WEBINAR SAW THE SAME THING THAT WE HAVE HERE NOW.
YES. SO WHAT WAS REVIEWED? SO WHAT THE WAS THE CITY RELEASED A PUBLIC DRAFT OF THE CITYWIDE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS EARLY MAY TO JUNE.
SO ONCE THE PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD ENDED, WE DID RECEIVE MINOR COMMENTS.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE DID TAKE NOTES AT THESE MEETINGS.
AND SO THERE ARE MINOR MODIFICATIONS MADE AFTER THAT WEBINAR.
BUT, YOU KNOW, THEY ARE MINOR AND THEY HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED IN THIS DRAFT PLAN.
AND SO SO YEAH, THERE WAS JUST MINOR MODIFICATIONS MADE.
SO, SO THOSE COMMENTS WERE INCORPORATED THEN IN WHAT WE SEE HERE TODAY.
OKAY. WAS THERE ANYONE AS A RESULT OF THAT WEBINAR WHO WHO RECOMMENDED THAT THE CITY NOT ADOPT THIS PLAN? NO. THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY? YEAH.
THANK YOU. YEAH, I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PLAN.
IT DOES DIFFER FROM THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO PLAN.
THE ONE THING I DID WANT TO ASK IS ABOUT THE VERTICAL MIXED USE VERSUS HORIZONTAL MIXED USE THAT IS DEFINED IN THIS PARTICULAR.
AND SO I WAS HOPING YOU'D JUST DESCRIBE THAT A LITTLE BIT.
AND HOW DOES THAT RELATE TO MAYBE AIRSPACE SUBDIVISIONS OR ANY KIND OF OTHER USE OF THESE TYPES OF ZONING? I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU DESCRIBE IT.
ZONING METHODOLOGIES, I GUESS, OR WHATEVER.
ROBERT EAFORD, PRINCIPAL PLANNER AND ADVANCE PLANNING.
I'LL ANSWER YOUR SECOND QUESTION FIRST.
SO THESE STANDARDS ARE FOR ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.
SO SUBDIVISION WOULD MAKE A PROJECT INELIGIBLE FOR THIS.
TO ANSWER YOUR FIRST QUESTION, THE REASON THAT YOU SEE THOSE DEFINITIONS IS THAT WE ARE INTRODUCING NEW STANDARDS FOR VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL MIXED USE INTO THOSE DESIGN STANDARDS IN THIS MANUAL THAT WILL BE FOR EVERYTHING OUTSIDE OF THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO.
THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN ALREADY ENVISIONS MIXED USE, HAS VERY ROBUST REGULATIONS AS IT RELATES TO THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU SEE THAT IS HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL. I THINK WE'LL HAVE MORE DISCUSSION IN ITEM NUMBER THREE SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WHAT IS IN THAT PLAN.
BUT BECAUSE IT IS SO THOROUGHLY INTEGRATED WITH THE VERTICAL, WITH THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN, YOU WILL NOT SEE SPECIFIC DEFINITIONS THERE BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY STANDARDS THAT SPEAK ABOUT THOSE TOPICS NOT NEEDING THAT SPECIFIC NAME, WHEREAS IN THIS ONE WHERE IT'S A MORE GENERIC OVERARCHING FOR THE REST OF THE CITY, WE DID NEED TO CALL
[01:15:09]
THOSE OUT. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE STANDARDS THAT ARE IN THE MANUAL FOR THE REST OF THE CITY, IT'S ESTABLISHING A BASELINE.IT GOES NOWHERE NEAR WHAT HAPPENS IN VILLAGE AND BARRIO.
BUT WE DID WANT AT LEAST SOME MINIMUMS. SURE THAT THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
THE OTHER PIECE HAD TO DO WITH ONE OF THE THINGS THAT DIFFERS ALSO TALKS ABOUT THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO PLAN, TALKS ABOUT ACCURATE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES.
SO I GUESS MY CONCERN WITH THE OVER ARCHING EMPHASIS OF THIS IS THAT WE HAVE SEEN A LOT OF PROJECTS COME TO US THAT USE THE WORD MEDITERRANEAN FARMHOUSE, COASTAL, THINGS LIKE THAT THAT DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT TRUE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES.
AND SO SHOULD THIS SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THAT AS A MINIMUM? THAT'S MY QUESTION. SURE. COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY, SO THE BIFURCATION OF THAT APPROACH WAS ACTUALLY IN THE COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STUDY AND TO DEVELOP THOSE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES FOR THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO SPECIFICALLY.
THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE DIRECTION FOR THE CITYWIDE, SO WE WERE FOLLOWING THROUGH ON THAT DIRECTION.
SO DOES THAT MEAN WE'RE STILL GOING TO GET MEDITERRANEAN AND FARMHOUSE AND COASTAL? OR ARE WE GOING TO GET TRUE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES THROUGHOUT OUR CITY? THE THE MANUAL DOES NOT PRESCRIBE TRUE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES IN THE SENSE THAT YOU ARE THAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING.
SO AGAIN, THE CITYWIDE SPEAKS TO A LARGER PORTION OF THE CITY.
IT DEALS WITH EVEN MORE DIVERSE ARCHITECTURAL, EXISTING ARCHITECTURAL STYLES.
WHETHER THEY'RE TRUE OR NOT IS ANOTHER DISCUSSION.
BUT THERE'S EVEN MORE DIVERSE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES WITHIN THE REMAINDER OF THE CITY.
SO THIS DOES NOT TRY TO DEFINE THAT AND CONSTRAIN THAT.
IT TRIES TO ESTABLISH THE THE.
THE DESIGN FEATURES THAT WE FEEL WILL MAKE PROJECTS COMPATIBLE.
WELL, JUST TO BACK UP JUST A BIT.
SO I GUESS MY CONCERN IS THAT THIS DOCUMENT REFERENCES COMMUNITY CHARACTER A LOT.
AND IF WE DON'T HAVE A DEFINITION OF COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND WE DON'T REALLY DEFINE OR TALK ABOUT ACCURATE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES, I'M CONCERNED THAT NOT ONLY ARE WE NOT GOING TO GET COMMUNITY CARE THINGS THAT ARE.
SO SO I'M JUST A LITTLE CONCERNED THAT I DON'T THINK IT'S ENOUGH TO NEGATE THIS, BUT I THINK IT'S A CONSIDERATION THAT WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ON BECAUSE.
THIS IS NOT HELPING THAT PRESERVATION.
BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S ENOUGH TO SAY NO TO THIS.
I THINK WE NEED TO CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION.
BUT I THINK ARCHITECTURAL STYLES, ACCURATE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES COULD BE IDENTIFIED.
YEAH. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. WE WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO'S FILED A SPEAKER SLIP ON THIS ITEM? MS.. VILA? NO, THERE IS NOT.
OKAY. SEEING NONE. WELL, SEEING NONE.
WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON THIS ITEM.
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR ACTUALLY APPLICANT AND OR STAFF? OKAY. OKAY.
SEEING NONE, WE'LL NOW OPEN COMMISSION DISCUSSION.
WOULD ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO DISCUSS THE ITEM? COMMISSIONER SABELLICO.
THANK YOU STAFF FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
I KNOW IT'S BEEN A VERY LONG PROCESS TO GET THIS BEFORE US.
SO THANK YOU FOR WORKING OVERTIME.
UM, YOU KNOW, BOTH LITERALLY AND FIGURATIVELY TO BRING THIS FORWARD HERE.
[01:20:01]
I DO WANT TO BRING UP SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN BRIEF, WHICH WERE THE FACTS THAT HCD EXPECTS CITIES TO REVIEW THESE DESIGN STANDARDS REGULARLY.AND THE REASON THEY WANT CITIES TO DO THAT, I BELIEVE, AND I DON'T WANT TO PUT WORDS IN EITHER OF YOUR MOUTHS, IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WE AREN'T HAMPERING DEVELOPMENT THAT COULD COME FORWARD WITH THE ADVENT OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES OR CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, ARCHITECTURAL STYLES DO CHANGE AND WE DON'T WANT TO FREEZE CARLSBAD IN THE YEAR 2023 BY NEVER REVIEWING THESE DESIGN STANDARDS EVER AGAIN.
BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMMISSION IS ALL IN ON THE IDEA THAT WE HAVE TO COME BACK AND TALK ABOUT THIS AGAIN REGULARLY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO BE EVERY YEAR OR EVERY TWO YEARS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THE MOTION THAT IS HOPEFULLY PASSED THAT WE COME BACK TO THIS.
I THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER SABELLICO.
I JUST WAS GOING TO POINT OUT THAT ONE OPPORTUNITY THAT MAY FALL INTO THAT IS THE GENERAL PLAN.
SO THAT AND THAT DOES HAPPEN ANNUALLY.
SO THAT MAY BE AN OPPORTUNITY.
AND SO IN ADDITION TO THE YEARLY ANNUAL UPDATE, THERE WILL BE A MORE FORMALIZED TRACKING METHOD WHERE WE GO THROUGH AND DOCUMENT THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT HAVE BEEN PRODUCED UNDER THE DESIGN GUIDELINES. AND IF THERE'S BEEN ANY IMPEDIMENTS OR FRUSTRATIONS TO ATTAINING THE MAXIMUM YIELD DENSITY ON THOSE SITES.
THAT'S GOOD. AND THANK YOU FOR THAT.
SO THANK YOU. AND ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS.
ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE ITEM.
COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY. I MOVE TO APPROVE.
WE WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC PUBLIC HEARING ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE.
[3. AMEND 2021-0008/LCPA 2023-0016 (DEV08014) – VILLAGE AND BARRIO OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS]
WOULD YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE THE ITEM, MR. STRONG? YES, THANK YOU.AND PRESENTING THIS ITEM IS SHELLY GLENN AND ASSOCIATE PLANNER.
THANK YOU, MR. STRONG, AND GOOD EVENING.
I WILL THEN HAND IT OVER TO OUR CONSULTANT, MR. BLACKSON, WITH STUDIOS TO DISCUSS THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS.
IN JULY 2018, A CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED A COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN.
THE FOLLOWING YEAR, CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED COASTAL COMMISSION'S MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE MASTER PLAN, AS WELL AS DIRECTED STAFF TO RETURN WITH A WORK PLAN ADDRESSING EIGHT VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN TOPICS, INCLUDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS WHICH IS BEING PRESENTED TO YOU TODAY. IN DECEMBER 2019, CITY COUNCIL REVIEWED RECOMMENDED OPTIONS TO ADDRESS THE EIGHT WORK PLAN ITEMS AND DIRECTED STAFF TO FORM A DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, INCLUDING A PALETTE OF ARCHITECTURAL STYLES.
[01:25:02]
JANUARY 2021 CITY COUNCIL APPROVED APPLICATION OF A LOCAL EARLY ACTION PLANNING GRANT TO FUND THE PROPOSED PROJECT.AFTER THE GRANT WAS AWARDED TO THE CITY IN OCTOBER 2021, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH AVRP STUDIOS, AS WELL AS THE CHARTER FOR THE FORMATION OF A DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE TO ALLOW THE COMMITTEE TO WORK IN COORDINATION WITH AVRP STUDIOS AND STAFF IN DEVELOPING THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS. AND FINALLY, IN MARCH 2022, CITY COUNCIL APPOINTED NINE INDIVIDUALS CONSISTING OF VILLAGE AND BARRIO RESIDENTS, BUSINESS OWNER, PROFESSIONALS AND COMMISSIONERS TO SERVE ON THE COMMITTEE. THE VILLAGE, THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL HELP ENSURE THAT THE CITY HAS ENFORCEABLE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS FOR ELIGIBLE VILLAGE AND BARRIO MULTIFAMILY MIXED USE PROJECTS TO APPLY AS REQUIRED BY STATE REGULATIONS.
NOTE THAT THESE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS ARE CONSIDERED A STARTING POINT TO ENSURE ENFORCEABLE STANDARDS ARE IN PLACE AS EARLY AS FOLLOWS THIS YEAR, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM 1.11 AND THE LEAD THE LEAP GRANT IN WHICH THIS PROJECT IS FUNDED BY.
A LIMITED DISCRETIONARY REVIEW PROCESS PURSUANT TO SB 330, AS WELL AS OTHER PROJECTS SUBJECT TO STATE HOUSING REGULATIONS THAT WOULD GO THROUGH THE REGULAR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW PROCESS.
THE PERMITTING PROCESSING OPTIONS ARE AVAILABLE TO ALL ELIGIBLE PROJECTS AS OF TODAY.
BUT ELIGIBLE PROJECTS INCLUDE MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS THAT PROVIDE AT LEAST 50% AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS, CERTAIN MIXED USE PROJECTS THAT PROVIDE AT LEAST TWO THIRDS SQUARE FOOTAGE OF RESIDENTIAL USES AND DUPLEXES AND LIVE WORK PROJECTS.
THE TWO PROJECTS IN RED ARE TYPICAL NON ELIGIBLE PROJECTS, WHICH INCLUDE OFFICE, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS, OR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT PROPOSE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT.
OKAY. SO LASTLY, THE PROPOSED VILLAGE AND BARRIO OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS, WHICH ADDRESS TOPICS SUCH AS BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN, ARE PAIRED WITH EXISTING OBJECTIVE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, SUCH AS MAXIMUM HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS, SETBACKS, PERMITTED USES AND DENSITY.
ELIGIBLE PROJECTS MUST COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS IN ORDER TO BE APPROVED.
OKAY. I WILL NOW TURN IT OVER TO MR. BLACKSON TO GO OVER THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS.
ARE YOU GOING TO DO THE CLICKER HERE? DO YOU WANT ME TO DO IT? AND WHAT DO I DO? GREEN BUTTON. WELL, THAT'S EASY.
CHAIR, COMMISSIONERS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND THIS IS ACTUALLY DONE WELL, I THINK, BECAUSE THIS AREA OF THE VILLAGE IS YOUR HISTORY.
THIS IS WHERE MAJORITY OF MEMORY IS.
AND THE OTHER PARTS, THE OUTSIDE OF DOWNTOWN IS WHERE MOSTLY EXPECTATION, IT'S ALL NEW.
WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE.
SO I THINK THAT THIS THE THIS APPROACH OF USING ARCHITECTURAL STYLE, WHICH IS UNIQUE FOR OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS ACROSS THE STATE, IS APPROPRIATE BECAUSE YOUR VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN IDENTIFIED AS COMMUNITY CHARACTER AS BEING ECLECTIC.
AND THE REASON WHY IT USED ECLECTIC IS BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN BUILT OUT OVER TIME.
YOU TRULY HAD A SPANISH REVIVAL, AND IN THE 1920S YOU TRULY HAD ARTS AND CRAFTS.
IN THE 30S YOU TRULY HAD MID-CENTURY MODERN IN THE 50S AND 60S AND YOU.
AND THEN TODAY THOUGH, YOU'RE SEEING MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS.
THE APARTMENTS ARE THIS CONTEMPORARY PLURALISM THAT TRIES TO BE ECLECTIC BY COMBINING STYLES INTO ONE BUILDING WHICH DOESN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT CARLSBAD UNDERSTANDS, WHICH IS THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL BUILDING BEING A DIFFERENT, UNIQUE, TRUE ARCHITECTURE, CREATES AN ECLECTICISM.
OH, BOY. SO WE, SORRY, I DIDN'T EVEN DO THE FIRST ONE.
[01:30:01]
RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO WE CAME UP WITH SEVEN.WE ACTUALLY WERE TASKED WITH FIVE.
WE DECIDED TO HAVE SEVEN BECAUSE THIS DOES THIS DOES GO FROM THE OLDEST VICTORIAN TO THE LATEST, WHICH IS, WE HOPE, THE CALIFORNIA CONTEMPORARY THAT'S SPECIFIC TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AND NOT JUST LIKE ALL THE OTHER BUILDINGS DONE BETWEEN LOS ANGELES, HOUSTON TO BEYOND LOOKING THE SAME.
THEY WANT TO LOOK SPECIFIC HERE.
SO WE WERE VERY DIRECT OR I SHOULD SAY OBJECTIVE ABOUT THE STANDARDS THAT THAT DO CREATE A SPANISH REVIVAL BUILDING. WE WERE SPECIFIC ABOUT THE MATERIALS.
WE WERE SPECIFIC ABOUT THE FRONTAGES AT THE BASE OF THE BUILDING, THE PROJECTIONS AND WINDOWS THAT ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILDING, AND THEN THE ROOFS AND THE MATERIALS THAT GO WITH IT.
THE SAME WITH THE DOWNTOWN MIXED USE AMERICAN MERCANTILE BUILDING, WHICH IS USUALLY WE RECOGNIZE ACROSS THE US WEST ARTS AND ARTS AND CRAFTS IS A IS A VERY COMMON SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BUILDING TYPE.
SPANISH REVIVAL IS A VERY COMMON SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BUILDING TYPE AMERICAN MERCANTILE AS WELL.
WE'VE SEEN THESE. IT HAS SPECIFIC STOREFRONT REGULATIONS AND SPECIFIC MATERIALS.
WE WERE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT THE TYPES OF COLORS BECAUSE COLOR WAS A BIG PART OF THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AND QUALITY OF THE MATERIALS SPECIFIC ABOUT THE MATERIALS, THE DEPTHS OF THE WINDOW RELIEF, SO THAT THE WINDOWS ARE NOT JUST VINYL WINDOWS THAT ARE STUCK TO THE WALL OF OF CONTEMPORARY BUILDINGS, BUT ACTUALLY DESIGNED IN THE SPIRIT OF THE AGE OF THE HISTORY.
AND SO THE VICTORIAN, WE ALSO WERE VERY DIRECT ABOUT PUTTING THE OLDER VICTORIAN MANSION TYPES OF HOMES THAT HAVE MIXED USE AND THE SMALLER BUILDING TYPES AND NOT ALLOWING IT TO BE A PART OF THE NEW CONTEMPORARY BUILDING TYPES WITH THESE LARGE APARTMENT BUILDINGS.
SO WE PUT THE RIGHT STUFF IN THE RIGHT PLACE AT THE RIGHT SUBDISTRICT.
THE COLONIAL CAPE COD IS STILL AROUND.
IT'S VERY HARD TO DO A LARGE APARTMENT BUILDING WITH A COTTAGE FROM THE BEACH, SO WE KEPT IT TO THE SMALLER AREAS, LIKE IN THE BARRIO CENTER AND THE VILLAGE GENERAL EDGE AREAS THAT ARE ALL RESIDENTIAL AND NOT ALLOWING FOR A MIX OF USES IN THOSE TYPES OF BUILDINGS EXCEPT IN THE HOSPITALITY ZONE.
AND AND SO BECAUSE WE KEPT IN LINE WITH THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN LAND USES, WE DIDN'T CHANGE ANY OF THE DIAGRAMS OR ANY OF THE OF THE OF THE RULES FOR LAND USES.
IT IS OUR TYPE OF BUILDING, BUT IT'S OF TRADITIONAL MODERN FROM A CENTURY AGO.
AND THEN NOW WE HAVE THE MOST THE ONE THAT WE'RE NOT, WE'RE STILL KIND OF LEARNING ABOUT IS THE CALIFORNIA CONTEMPORARY. AND THE IDEA HERE WAS TO USE A SOLID BASE THAT REFLECTS UPON THE SALK INSTITUTE.
THEN THE CENTER, THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILDING IS A IS A MID-CENTURY MODERN WHERE YOU HAVE A VERTICAL ELEMENT THROUGH OPEN FLOOR TO CEILING, FULL GLASS WINDOWS, FULL BALCONIES TO FINALLY A ROOF THAT'S A FLAT ROOF, A BUTTERFLY ROOF THAT'S VERY LIGHT AND SITS ON TOP.
THESE ARE THE ELEMENTS OF CALIFORNIA MODERN STYLE THAT WE'VE ASSEMBLED TOGETHER.
SO IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THE BUILDING FROM HOUSTON, MIAMI OR LOS ANGELES.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S FROM SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA.
SO WE BELIEVE WE GOT THE STYLES, THE MATERIALS, THE STRUCTURE, THE BUILDING TYPES AND THE RIGHT PLACES WITH TO GO ALONG WITH THE EXISTING VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN LAND USES.
ALL RIGHT. AND THEN WE ALSO TOOK ON THE THE UTILITARIAN ELEMENTS THAT YOU SAW, AND WE TOOK OUT THE SPECIFIC ONES THAT WERE IN THE GUIDELINES SECTION OF THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AND TURNED THEM INTO STANDARDS IN THE APPENDIX SECTION.
SO THERE ARE STANDARDS FOR PEDESTRIAN ACCESS OR STANDARDS FOR THE FRONTAGES OF THE BUILDINGS.
THERE ARE STANDARDS FOR THE BACKS OF THE BUILDINGS AND THE UTILITIES AND HOW WE HOW WE ACCESS THE BUILDINGS WITH THE VARIETY EITHER PEOPLE OR VEHICLES OR WITH ELECTRICITY OR WATER OR THINGS OF THOSE NATURE.
WE TALK ABOUT LANDSCAPING AND WE USE THE SAME SIGNAGE.
WE TRY TO HAVE MORE LANDSCAPING, MORE GREEN ROOFS, MORE THE BUILDINGS.
WE DID A STEP BACK ON THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE ON THE SIDE STREETS.
YOU HAVE TWO TYPES OF STREETS.
YOU HAVE A PRIMARY STREET THAT GOES NORTH SOUTH.
THAT'S MOST OF THE LOTS ARE ON 8 OR 9.
BUT THEN YOU HAVE YOUR SIDE STREETS.
SO THERE'S ONLY TWO LOTS ON THEM.
AND IF WE STUDY THE SUN ANGLE, DO WE HAVE A STEP BACK ON THOSE SPECIFIC CORNER LOT?
[01:35:05]
AND IN BLOCK LOTS SO THAT WE DON'T THROW A SHADOW ACROSS THE ALLEY ON THE OTHER BUILDING, AND YET WE'RE ABLE TO GET TWO, 3 OR 4 STORIES THAT'S ALLOWED IN THE IN THE PLAN.SO WE BELIEVE THAT THE THAT THE ALL OF THESE COMPONENTS PUT TOGETHER WERE A RESULT OF TALKING WITH THE PUBLIC, DOING OUR STUDY AND OUR ANALYSIS AND WORKING THROUGH THE PROCESS AND SPECIFICALLY THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE, WHICH WAS VERY, VERY HELPFUL AS WELL AS STAFF.
THIS HELPED INFORM STAFF AND THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE PREFERRED STYLES OF THE COMMUNITY.
AND SO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DID MEET FOUR TIMES TO DISCUSS THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS BEGINNING IN APRIL OF 2022 AND ENDING IN MAY OF THIS YEAR.
STAFF HAS MADE ADDITIONAL REVISIONS AS PROVIDED IN THE MEMO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TODAY.
THESE REVISIONS ADDRESS THE THREE TOPICS SHOWN HERE.
THEY INCLUDE MINOR CORRECTIONS OF AND FORMATTING UPDATES, BUT IT ALSO INCLUDES RETITLING, THE LIVE WORK BUILDING TYPE TO SMALL MIXED USE BUILDING TYPE IN ORDER TO MORE ACCURATELY LABEL THIS BUILDING TYPE.
SO. SO THAT WAS THE REVISION THAT STAFF MADE.
SINCE THE CITY CURRENTLY CANNOT ENFORCE EXISTING SUBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES.
ENSURE PROJECT COMPATIBILITY WITH THE EXISTING COMMUNITY CHARACTER BY REQUIRING ELIGIBLE PROJECTS TO BE BUILT USING AN ECLECTIC MIX OF ACCURATE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES THAT HAVE BEEN TRADITIONALLY BUILT THROUGHOUT THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND LASTLY, TO ENCOURAGE RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION FOR BOTH AFFORDABLE AND MARKET RATE UNITS BY CREATING OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE IN MEETING THE CITY'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDS AND FEASIBLE AND IMPLEMENTING THE CITY'S ALLOWED DENSITIES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT TO APPROVE THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS PROJECT.
WITH THE CHANGES REFLECTED IN THE RATIO PROVIDED TO PLANNING COMMISSION.
THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION STAFF IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU, MISS GLENN. AND THANK YOU WAS A WONDERFUL PRESENTATION.
SO ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF STAFF? YES. COMMISSIONER STINE.
A FEW CLARIFICATIONS, MR. BLACKSON. THE SEVEN ARCHITECTURAL STYLES THAT THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING AS PART OF THIS PLAN.
TO WHAT EXTENT DO THESE STYLES ARE THESE STYLES ALREADY PRESENT, PRESENT IN THE VILLAGE, AND TO WHAT EXTENT WOULD WE BE ADDING SOMETHING NEW? THEY'RE ALREADY IN THE VILLAGE.
OKAY, BUT WE'RE NOT INTRODUCING SOMETHING THAT HASN'T BEEN THERE BEFORE IS WHAT I'M HEARING.
IS THAT CORRECT, SIR? THAT'S CORRECT.
OKAY. AND I'M LOOKING AT SOME OF THE COMMENTS VERY QUICKLY THAT STAFF HAS PROVIDED, AND PARTICULARLY ONE FROM A DIANE O'CONNELL WHO IS CRITICAL OF THESE DESIGN STANDARDS AND SAID INSTEAD OF IT BEING A DESIGN THEME, IT'S A HODGEPODGE AND SHE'S DISAPPOINTED.
WILL YOU RESPOND TO THOSE COMMENTS, PLEASE? IT'S NOT. OKAY, IT'S TRUE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL BUILDING TYPE.
AND SO IT DOES EVERYTHING TO AVOID BEING A HODGEPODGE.
OKAY. BUT IF IT'S BUILT OUT THIS WAY AND WE HAVE SAMPLES OF EACH OF THESE STYLES.
[01:40:09]
IT WILL BE KIND OF AN ECLECTIC MIX.WE WILL HAVE ONE STYLE IN ONE CORNER AND ONE STYLE IN THE OTHER, CONCEIVABLY.
RIGHT. WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE TODAY.
OKAY. AND YOU THINK THAT'S THAT'S GOOD PLANNING TO HAVE THAT VARIETY? YOU THINK IT MAKES IT LOOK THE VILLAGE LOOK BETTER? AND I THINK YOU'RE USING THE RIGHT WORD BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE A VARIETY OF STYLES AND BUILDING TYPES TO CHOOSE FROM FOR EACH BUILDING.
AND YES, I THINK IT WILL WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS WHAT'S HAPPENING TODAY WITH THE LARGE INFILL APARTMENT BUILDINGS IS THAT THEY THEY THEY'RE THEY THEY HODGEPODGE STYLE SO THAT IT'S ECLECTIC, BUT IT DOESN'T FIT WITHIN.
IT DOESN'T FIT WITH ANY TRUE STYLE.
SO YOU'RE NOT YOU'RE SEEING A CONFLICT BETWEEN A TRUE STYLE THAT'S THIS DECADE TRUE STYLE.
THAT'S THIS DECADE. AND THEN EVERYTHING ELSE LOOKS THE SAME FROM OUR CURRENT CONTEMPORARY BUILDINGS.
OKAY, HOW ABOUT ON ADJACENT LOTS? FOR EXAMPLE, IS THERE THROUGH THIS PLAN AN EFFORT TO MAKE SAY THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT ELIGIBLE DEVELOPMENT ON LOT A, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT TO LOT B? IS THERE ANY EMPHASIS ON MAKING THOSE TWO DEVELOPMENTS IN TERMS OF ARCHITECTURAL STYLES COMPATIBLE? NO, EXCEPT THAT THEY ARE COMPATIBLE FOR ALL FOR ALL THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE VILLAGE.
SO YOU WON'T YOU WILL SEE A SPANISH REVIVAL BUILDING FOUR DOORS DOWN THE NEW BUILDING BECAUSE THE SPANISH REVIVAL TO IT DOESN'T MEAN THERE IS NO SAYING THAT THE NEXT BUILDING NEXT DOOR HAS TO BE EXACTLY LIKE THE BUILDING THAT THE NEW BUILDING THAT'S PROPOSED.
BUT IT IS SAYING THE NEW BUILDING THAT'S PROPOSED IS LIKE ANOTHER BUILDING THAT'S IN THE VILLAGE.
IS THAT FAIR TO SAY? THAT'S FAIR TO SAY, BUT I'M GOING TO BE A LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT THAT.
NOT EVERY STYLE IS ALLOWED IN EVERY AREA BECAUSE THE VICTORIAN AND THE OLDER STYLES ARE ONLY ALLOWED IN THE BEACH AREA WHERE THE HOTELS AND THE OLDER HOTELS, THE OLDER VICTORIAN BUILDINGS ARE AND ALLOWED IN THE BARRIO CENTER AND PERIMETER AREAS WHICH ARE MOSTLY RESIDENTIAL AND MOSTLY SMALL LOT SMALL BUILDINGS ON SMALL LOTS.
BUT THAT BUILDING IS NOT ALLOWED IN THE EDGES OR IN THE BARRIO.
SO IT'S SUBAREA SPECIFIC, SUBAREA SPECIFIC.
EVEN THE PINE TYLER AREA HAS MORE OF AN INDUSTRIAL FEEL.
OKAY. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS FOR YOU OR MS. GLENNON. I NOTICED THAT THE VOTE ON THIS WAS IT WAS NOT A SLAM DUNK.
IT WAS FOUR, THREE, TWO, AND I ASSUME THE TWO WERE NOT THERE.
IS THAT RIGHT? SO WE HAVE FOUR, THREE OF SEVEN PEOPLE.
FOUR SAID, YES, GO FORWARD AND THREE DID NOT.
IS THAT RIGHT MS.. GLENNON? CORRECT. OKAY.
CAN YOU KIND OF SUMMARIZE WHAT THE MAIN OBJECTIVES EXCUSE ME, OBJECTIONS OF THE THREE PEOPLE WERE AND WHETHER OR NOT THE STAFF HAS MADE ANY CHANGES SINCE THEN TO KIND OF INCORPORATE SOME OF THEIR CONCERNS OR ADDRESS SOME OF THEIR CONCERNS? CORRECT. SO THEIR MAIN CONCERN WAS, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS ACTUALLY A MOTION MADE BEFORE TO NOT ALLOW THE CALIFORNIA CONTEMPORARY OR TRADITIONAL MODERN IN THE VILLAGE CENTER DISTRICT.
THEIR CONCERN WAS THAT THERE WERE A LOT OF BUILDINGS IN THE VILLAGE CENTER THAT WERE CONTEMPORARY, THAT THEY DID NOT WANT TO SEE THOSE TYPES OF BUILDINGS BE BUILT THERE.
SO WHAT WE DID TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS WAS WE MADE SURE TO ADD ADDITIONAL DESIGN STANDARDS OR REGULATIONS FOR THOSE STYLES TO SOMEWHAT BEEF UP, YOU KNOW, THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS TO ENSURE THAT IF THESE, YOU KNOW, LARGER BUILDINGS THAT ARE CONTEMPORARY BUILDINGS IN THE VILLAGE CENTER, YOU KNOW, REFLECT THE STYLES THAT REFLECT GOOD DESIGN THROUGH THESE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT WE ARE REQUIRING THEM TO IMPLEMENT.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE BUILDINGS THAT THEY'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY'RE CONCERNED WITH, THOSE, YOU KNOW, DID NOT HAVE DESIGN STANDARDS IN PLACE AT THE TIME WHEN THEY WERE BUILT.
SO NOW THAT WE DO HAVE THESE DESIGN STANDARDS, WE THINK THAT ADDRESSES THEIR CONCERN.
OKAY. DID YOU HAPPEN TO GET SO YOU YOU MADE SOME CHANGES TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS?
[01:45:06]
HAVE YOU GOT ANY FEEDBACK FROM.IF NOW WITH THESE CHANGES, THEY WOULD SUPPORT THESE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS.
I HAVE NOT RECEIVED A DIRECT ANY COMMENTS FROM THE THREE COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
NOT FROM THE COMMITTEE. IT WAS REALLY THE MODERN VERSUS TRADITIONAL.
OKAY. THAT WAS THE COMMONALITY.
THAT WAS THE THEME. THE CONFLICT.
IT'S JUST THAT WE WANTED TO CONTROL IT WITH ARCHITECTURE STYLE.
AND YOU'VE ENHANCED THE CALIFORNIA CONTEMPORARY STANDARD IN RESPONSE TO THEIR CONCERNS, RIGHT? ESPECIALLY IN TERMS OF THE DRB'S ISSUES WITH COLOR AND THE IDEA OF HAVING THE ACCENTUATED FRONT DOOR, THE RAILINGS BEING THE RIGHT MATERIALS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
AS I UNDERSTAND IT AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THESE ARE EXCLUSIVE CATEGORIES.
IN OTHER WORDS, AN ARCHITECT WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO BLEND.
TWO, THESE ARE ONE OF SEVEN AND NOT A COMBINATION.
IS THAT RIGHT? YOU MUST HAVE A SEPARATE BUILDING TO BE HAVE A DIFFERENT STYLE.
OKAY? IT MUST BE ONE OR THE OTHER.
CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR.
GOOD QUESTIONS. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER MEENES YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THEN.
THERE ARE SEVEN OPTIONS FOR A DEVELOPER TO LOOK AT.
IF A DEVELOPER COMES IN WITH OPTION EIGHT, NINE AND TEN, IS IT NOT PERMITTED? IT'S NOT ALLOWED TO GO THROUGH THE STREAMLINED PROCESS, WHICH MEANS IT'LL BE DISCRETIONARY AND YOU'LL HAVE TO YOU'LL GET A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT.
THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE STYLES RIGHT NOW.
OKAY. THANKS FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
SO WE WERE DISCUSSING EARLIER ELIGIBLE PROJECTS IN ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.
IF SOMEONE CAME IN, THEY ARE AN ELIGIBLE PROJECT AND THEY'RE NOT DOING A REZONE, THEY'RE NOT DOING YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT INELIGIBLE FOR SOME OTHER REASON. WE HAVE TO USE THESE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS SO WE WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO DENY THAT PROJECT.
BUT IF IT IS ELIGIBLE, WE DO HAVE TO APPLY THESE STANDARDS.
EXCELLENT. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
APPRECIATE. COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.
WE MET. YOU PROBABLY DON'T REMEMBER ME LAST SUMMER AT THE SENIOR CENTER.
I THINK I MET YOU AND YOUR WIFE.
YEAH, THERE WAS AN ARCHITECT, I THINK, FROM LA.
CORRECT. I HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THE ATTENDEES BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER.
THE ARTICULATE NATURE OF THE COMMENTS, WHICH WERE TO ME VERY UNSUPPORTIVE AND FRANKLY, POLITELY HOSTILE. BUT I'M CONCERNED THAT YOU WENT FROM 5 TO 7. TO ME, THAT'S INAPPROPRIATE FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS I COULD TALK ABOUT.
I ENJOYED OUR MEETING LAST SUMMER.
I THOUGHT YOU WERE VERY INFORMATIVE AND I LEARNED A LOT AS A FAILED ARCHITECTURE STUDENT.
SO I HAVE APPRECIATION FOR BASIC ARCHITECTURE.
BUT I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT SHELLY, I'M LOOKING AT AN EMAIL FROM A MR. CONNELLY, WHICH WAS DATED JULY 14TH, AND HE WAS A MEMBER OF THIS DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE, AND HE SAID HE WAS UNABLE TO VOTE.
BUT HAD HE VOTED, THIS DESIGN REVIEW PROJECT WOULD HAVE BEEN DEFEATED.
ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE EMAIL I'M TALKING ABOUT? YES, I AM. WAS THERE ANYTHING IN HIS EMAIL WHICH YOU DISAGREED WITH? IF IT WAS NOT TRUE.
[01:50:01]
UM, YEAH, THERE WERE TWO MEMBERS THAT WERE ABSENT.SO I DO KNOW THE OTHER MEMBER WAS SUPPORTIVE.
UM, BUT YEAH, I DO UNDERSTAND HE HAS THE SAME CONCERN ABOUT HAVING VILLAGE HAVING CONTEMPORARY THE CALIFORNIA CONTEMPORARY AND TRADITIONAL MODERN IN THE VILLAGE CENTER.
AND UM, AGAIN, THAT WAS, UH, YOU KNOW, DISCUSSED AND YOU KNOW, WE HOPE TO HAVE ADDRESSED THAT THROUGH ADDING ADDITIONAL DESIGN STANDARDS. UM, I WILL SAY REGARDING THE SEVEN STYLES, THEY WERE BASED ON, AGAIN, THE OUTREACH EFFORTS THAT STAFF CONDUCTED.
UH, WHEN WE MET WITH THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE, THERE WERE FOUR MEETINGS.
AND AT THAT TIME, A LOT OF A MAJORITY OF THEM, I THINK A MAJORITY OF THEM DID LIKE THE CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURAL STYLE, UM, AS WELL AS TRADITIONAL MODERN.
SO WHEN WE BROUGHT FOR THE THIRD MEETING, WE BROUGHT ALL SEVEN STYLES FORWARD FOR THEIR REVIEW AND THERE WAS NO ISSUE WITH THOSE SEVEN STYLES. SO WE PROCEEDED THAT, UM, TO PROVIDE STANDARDS FOR THE SEVEN STYLES.
IN. IN THIS EMAIL, HE CLAIMS THAT DEVELOPERS WOULD GRAVITATE TO EITHER THE DISLIKED TRADITIONAL, MODERN OR CALIFORNIA CONTEMPORARY BECAUSE OF COST ADVANTAGES.
CAN ANY OF YOU SPEAK TO WHAT IS HE TALKING ABOUT? I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST CHEAPER, CHEAP LOOKING OR CHEAP..
BECAUSE THE THE CONTEMPORARY THE EXISTING MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS THAT YOU'RE SEEING TODAY THAT AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, THEY COULD BE FROM PHOENIX TO HOUSTON TO MIAMI.
THOSE THOSE ARE THEY HAVE VINYL WINDOWS.
EVERYTHING WE'VE DONE WITH THIS IS TO THE CONTEMPORARY BUILDINGS IS TO CREATE THE MID-CENTURY MODERN STYLE THAT THAT'S REFLECTED BY DEEP SETBACKS, DEEP WINDOWS.
THE TRADITIONAL HAS TO HAVE A 2 INCH SETBACK, JUST LIKE THE TRADITIONAL BUILDINGS DO.
THAT'S THE WHAT YOU'RE WE'RE GETTING INTO IS THE IDEA THAT A CHEAP BUILDING IS JUST A SIMPLE BOX THAT HAS ARCHITECTURE ATTACHED TO IT, AND THIS IS TRYING TO BE AN ARCHITECTURAL EXPRESSION FROM THE INSIDE OUT.
COULD ONE OF YOU WALK US THROUGH? THE. IN FACT, I GOT THE SUBDISTRICTS.
YEAH. SHALL YOU TALK? WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN THE BRIEFING EARLIER THIS WEEK.
I FOUND THIS VERY INTERESTING.
COULD ONE OF YOU EXPLAIN WHICH SECTIONS WOULD HAVE WHICH TYPES OF OBJECTIVE DESIGN, STANDARD FACILITIES? WHAT DO WE DO? HOW DID THAT HAPPEN? WE DO. RIGHT THERE.
AND THEN WE'LL DO THE ONE. SIR? SO, MA'AM, I'M NOT ASKING FOR A HALF AN HOUR DISSERTATION.
I MEAN. NO, THIS IS BASICALLY.
WE HAVE TWO SLIDES. I'M SORRY.
THEN YOU HAVE THE PERIMETER, WHICH HAS MORE A SLIGHTLY MORE DENSITY BECAUSE YOU'RE ALONG THE FREEWAY AND THE RAIL LINE, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE PINE TYLER, WHICH IS REALLY A MIXED USE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WHERE THE WHERE THE TRAIN WAS.
CAN YOU DO THE SLIDE BEFORE THAT SHOWS THE VILLAGE? AND YET YOU HAVE THE VILLAGE, WHICH IS REALLY YOUR VILLAGE CENTER IS YOUR SHOPPING CENTER.
IT'S YOUR MAIN STREET, IT'S YOUR 100% CORNER.
IT'S WHERE ALL YOUR RETAIL IS.
YOU'RE SEEING A LOT OF BIG BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN BUILT THERE ALREADY.
THEN YOU HAVE TWO DIFFERENT OTHER TYPES.
AND THEN YOU HAVE THE HOSPITALITY, WHICH IS YOUR OLD HOTEL AREA.
AND THOSE HAVE DIFFERENT THOSE ARE THOSE HAVE LESS DENSITY THAN THE VILLAGE.
SO THE VILLAGE IS LIKE THE HIGHEST HIERARCHY AND THE BARRIO CENTER IS THE LOWEST OF THE HIERARCHY OF INTENSITY AND MIX OF USES AND ALSO THE ABILITY YOU HAVE FEWER BUILDINGS OF FEWER ARCHITECTURE TYPES TO CHOOSE FROM AND THE RESIDENTIAL AREA AND THE MOST TYPES TO CHOOSE FROM IN YOUR VILLAGE CENTER AND FREEWAY COMMERCIAL AREAS BECAUSE YOU
[01:55:08]
WANT MORE TO HAPPEN THERE.SO FOR INSTANCE, YOU COULD NOT HAVE THE VICTORIAN IN THE BARRIO, YOU CAN HAVE THE VICTORIAN IN THE BARRIO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT IN THE VILLAGE CENTER, OKAY, BECAUSE THE VILLAGE, IT'S TOO BIG.
YOU DO HAVE IT IN THE HOSPITALITY, WHICH IS WHERE THE OLD VICTORIANS ARE.
WELL, THIS I'VE BEEN VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS WHOLE PROJECT.
THIS OBVIATES SOME OF MY CONCERNS.
BUT COMMISSIONER STINE MENTIONED SOMETHING WHICH WHICH VERY MUCH CONCERNS ME, AND THAT IS, LET'S SAY, WHAT WOULD PROHIBIT US FROM UNDER THIS EXPEDITED OR OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARD FROM HAVING, SAY, A VICTORIAN RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO A CALIFORNIA CONTEMPORARY, SOMETHING THAT WAS TO ME VISUALLY JARRING.
AND I THINK THAT'S THAT'S UPSETTING, BUT THAT'S ECLECTIC.
THAT'S ALSO BASTARDIZATION AND HODGEPODGE IN SOME PEOPLE'S MINDS.
THAT'S FINE. BUT THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN, IN ITS INTENT AND PURPOSE SECTION SAYS THAT ECLECTIC ARCHITECTURE, THE ECLECTIC STYLE IS WHAT IS ECLECTIC.
ARCHITECTURE IS WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR.
AND THAT ECLECTICISM IS FOUND IN THAT VARIETY OF TYPES OVER TIME, ESPECIALLY IN YOUR VILLAGE WHERE YOU'VE HAD 120 YEARS OF CONSTRUCTION GOING ON AT DIFFERENT ERAS WITH DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONSTRUCTION, IT'S YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET AWAY FROM THAT.
SO WE WANT WE BELIEVE THAT WE'RE THIS IS THE SPIRIT OF YOUR VILLAGE AND BARRIO.
MASTER PLAN, INTENT AND PURPOSE.
THE VERY FIRST PARAGRAPH TALKS ABOUT THIS.
IT DOES. SORRY, JUST TO ADD TO THAT.
YEAH, IT DOES STATE IN THE VISION STATEMENT OF THE VILLAGE MASTER PLAN, YOU KNOW, FURTHER IN KEEPING WITH THE ECLECTIC MIX OF BUILDING DESIGNS PREVALENT IN THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO. SO THAT'S AGAIN, THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE MASTER PLAN AND ITS VISION.
I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT THERE'S ALSO IT'S CALLED VISUALLY JARRING OR CRINGE WORTHY.
AND THAT'S MY MAIN CONCERN WITH MUCH OF THIS.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I COME AFTER YOU.
WE HAD TALKED IN THE PREVIOUS.
UM, CITYWIDE STANDARDS ABOUT VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL MIXED USE.
AND MR. EFFORD HAD GIVEN US A REASON FOR NOT HAVING DEFINITIONS IN THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO.
PREDOMINANTLY PREFERRED OR WHAT'S THE WHAT'S THE FOCUS AND WHAT ARE WE ACTUALLY IN THIS OBJECTIVE DESIGN? HOW ARE WE ADDRESSING IT IN THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS AS FAR AS VERTICAL OR HORIZONTAL MIXED USE? AND SO, YEAH, LET ME KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
THANK YOU. I'LL MAKE THE EFFORT.
KICK ME. PREDOMINANTLY, THIS IS FOR A BUILDING.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN YOUR VILLAGE.
IN BARRIO. THIS IS STREAMLINED PROCESS RULES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND THEN SO SO THERE'S FIVE DIFFERENT BUILDING TYPES.
MIXED USE IS BY EITHER ALL HOUSING OR ALLOWS FOR MIXED USES, AND THEN THOSE ARE BY SUB DISTRICTS SO THAT WE DON'T PUT A LARGE VICTORIAN APARTMENT BUILDING, WHICH IS NOT IN CONTEXT WITH A VICTORIAN ARCHITECTURE.
THE OTHER, MOST OF THE OTHER ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE OTHER BUILDING, THE LARGER BUILDING TYPES.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO CONTROL THE ARCHITECTURE STYLE, SO IT'S NOT A TOTAL HODGEPODGE.
IT MATCHES THE BUILDING SCALE WITHIN EACH SUB DISTRICT.
[02:00:01]
THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE A RANGE, A NARROW RANGE WITHIN EACH ONE.SO I GUESS THAT OH, WHAT'S PREFERRED.
SO THE WAY THAT ALSO IT'S CONTROLLED IS BY THE BUILDING FRONTAGE.
HOW YOU ENTER THE BUILDING CONTROLS THE USES.
AND THE WAY THAT THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO PLAN IS MASTER PLANNED.
ARE WE REQUESTING DEVELOPMENTS THAT ENCOURAGE HORIZONTAL MIXED USE OR VERTICAL MIXED USE? SO THIS EXERCISE IS ABOUT THE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ELIGIBLE PROJECTS AS THEY WERE DEFINED EARLIER, LARGELY RESIDENTIAL.
SO IT IS AS PRESCRIPTIVE AS WE COULD MAKE IT.
SO IT'S NOT REALLY A SCALE OF PREFERRED ENCOURAGED.
THOSE ARE THE TYPES OF GENERALITIES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM.
WE'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE THE PREDICTABILITY AND THE CERTAINTY FOR APPLICANTS WHEN THEY COME IN.
AS HOWARD WAS MENTIONING, YOU'RE IN THIS DISTRICT AND YOU HAVE THIS SIZE PROGRAM.
SO THEN WHAT BUILDING TYPES FIT WITH THAT AND THEN WHAT ARCHITECTURAL STYLE? IT'S THE ESTHETICS OF IT, RIGHT? FIT WITH THOSE COMBINATIONS.
SO THAT REALLY IS TAKING IT A FARTHER STEP TO START SAYING WHAT IS THE PLAN ENCOURAGE, WHAT IS THE PLAN PREFER IT'S AS PRESCRIPTIVE AS POSSIBLE SO THAT YOU JUST FOLLOW IT AND YOU DO IT OR YOU DON'T DO IT AND THEN YOU GET TO MOVE FORWARD.
SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF ANY OF THESE PARTICULAR STANDARDS ARE GOING TO HELP US CREATE THAT VERTICAL, BECAUSE IT'S NOT JUST RESIDENTIAL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
WE ARE TALKING MIXED USE AS PART OF THIS OBJECTIVE DESIGN EFFORT.
RIGHT? SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
ARE WE GOING TO CONTINUE TO SEE THESE HORIZONTAL ARTIFICIAL LANDMARKING OF DRIVE THRUS OR ARE WE ACTUALLY GOING TO SEE TRUE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES WITH COMBINED VERTICAL MIXED USE? THAT'S WHAT I'M HOPING.
ARE WE MOVING TOWARD A MORE CONFORMED VERTICAL MIXED USE OR IS THAT NOT PART OF THIS CONVERSATION? UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU.
SO ANOTHER GOAL OF THIS PROJECT IS IS NOT TO AMEND THE MAIN VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN.
THIS EFFORT IS NOT TO START CHANGING USES, START CHANGING HOW PROPERTIES ARE USED, EVEN DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AS IT RELATES TO DENSITY AND HEIGHT UNTOUCHED. WITH THIS, THIS IS A DESIGN EXERCISE.
SO FOR BETTER OR WORSE, THE VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN AND HOW IT HANDLES HORIZONTAL MIXED USE VERTICAL MIXED USE REMAINS THE SAME WITH THIS. AND THAT IS ONE OF OUR GOALS IS TO.
THIS IS TO ADDRESS THE DESIGN ASPECT, WHICH IS SUBJECT TO THE STATE REGULATION.
SO YOU'RE SUGGESTING WE WILL SEE MORE HORIZONTAL MIXED USE? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING? CAN'T SAY. WELL, THE NEWSPAPERS SEEM TO DISAGREE WITH YOU.
YEAH, THAT'S REALLY MY BIGGEST CONCERN WITH THIS.
I THINK THIS IS A HOLISTIC PLAN.
I THINK IF WE START PICKING OUT PIECES, WE WON'T ACTUALLY HAVE ANY TYPE.
OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND OUR COMMUNITY WON'T HAVE ANY TYPE OF STANDARD TO GO BY TO BE ABLE TO SAY THAT THAT'S A TRUE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE THAT IS FITTING WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
WHAT I DO LIKE AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, MR. BLACKSON, THE THING THAT IS REALLY SIGNIFICANT ABOUT HAVING SEVEN STYLES IS THAT THEY ARE VERY SPECIFIC
[02:05:04]
TO WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE PLACED RIGHT THERE.SO CAN YOU DISCUSS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE TRANSITION BETWEEN THE DISTRICTS AND HOW THAT'S BEING ADDRESSED? BUT IT'S THE STYLES THAT ARE PART OF THAT, BUT ALSO THE SCALE.
CORRECT. THERE'S TRANSITIONAL SCALES.
YES. AND THAT WAS THAT'S THAT WAS EXISTING BUILT IN THE EXISTING VILLAGE BARRIO MASTER PLAN.
SO THE ABILITY TO TRANSITION, THEY TRANSITION.
IF YOU NOTICE, MOST OF THE TRANSITIONS HAPPEN MID-BLOCK IN THE ALLEYWAY.
THEY DON'T HAPPEN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET LIKE MOST ZONING PODS DO.
SO THE TRANSITION IS REALLY BETWEEN REAR YARDS ON EACH OTHER AND THE FRONTAGES ARE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME, MOSTLY RESIDENTIAL OR MOSTLY SHOPS AND MIXED USE ALONG THAT SAME STREETSCAPE.
SO THAT THE STREET TREES IS A RHYTHM.
THERE'S A PATTERN THAT CREATES THAT ALLOWS FOR THAT WALKABILITY.
AND THOSE ARE THAT'S ALREADY BUILT IN.
SOME OF THE LATEST IF YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE NEW TOWNHOUSES IN THE VILLAGE GENERAL, YOU'LL HAVE A STUCCO SPANISH WITH ARCHES BASE AND A CAPE COD BOARD AND BATTEN BUILDING A RESIDENTIAL ABOVE.
AND NONE OF IT LOOKS LIKE ANYTHING YOU'VE EVER SEEN BEFORE, WHICH IS SORT OF WHY WE'RE HERE.
THE VILLAGE AREA IS MORE INTENSE, THE BARRIO IS MORE RESIDENTIAL.
AND SO WE'VE TRIED TO GIVE IT'S NOT SO SPECIFIC THAT YOU CAN'T YOU DON'T HAVE 2 OR 3 OPTIONS.
IT'S PER BUILDING TYPE PER SUB AREA.
AND SO AND YOU USUALLY GET THREE, THREE OPTIONS WHAT WE TRIED TO DO.
SO THE IDEA THAT YOU'RE NOT CREATING A TRACK DEVELOPMENT.
RIGHT, IS IS WHAT OUR VILLAGE.
IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE CARLSBAD.
IT'S GOING TO FIT IN THE CARLSBAD CHARACTER.
WELL, AND AND ONE OF THE THINGS, YOU KNOW, AS WE WERE REVIEWING THIS, YOU KNOW, WE WERE LOOKING AT THE SPANISH REVIVAL AND I, I CARRY AROUND THIS.
AND I THINK MOST OF YOU GUYS HAVE SEEN THIS OR HAD THIS, YOU KNOW, AND JUST LOOKING IN THIS GUIDE, YOU KNOW, CARLSBAD BY THE SEA AND THERE'S MANY SPANISH REVIVAL BUILDINGS, BUT CARLSBAD BY THE SEA IS ONE OF THE BEST EXAMPLES IN THE VILLAGE.
THE CRAFTSMAN IS THE MAGEE HOUSE, ALL OF THE BUILDINGS ON STATE STREET.
BUT THE KILLIAN BUILDING ESPECIALLY, ARE THE AMERICAN MERCANTILE.
THE TWIN INNS ARE OBVIOUSLY VICTORIAN.
THE BARRIO BUNGALOWS AND COTTAGES REALLY SPEAK TO THAT COLONIAL REVIVAL, CAPE COD AND THEN THE RED APPLE AND ARMY NAVY ACADEMY IS THE TRADITIONAL MODERN. AND THE THE NEWER STUFF ARE THE NICE TOWNHOMES AT THE END OF STATE STREET.
AND WE ARE GOING TO SEE SORT OF MORE OF THIS.
WHAT IS OBVIOUSLY A CONCERN IS A HODGEPODGE.
BUT I THINK THAT BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN TRULY THOUGHT OUT AS ARCHITECTURAL IN NATURE AND REALLY SUPPORTED BY THE STAFF HERE AND MR. BLACKSON'S OFFICE, I THINK WE'VE GOT SOME REALLY GOOD BONES TO WORK WITH, AND I'M HOPING THAT OUR COLLEAGUES WILL BE ABLE TO HELP US APPROVE THIS TODAY.
THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER STINE.
YES. GOING IN A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT DIRECTION, MISS GLENNON, IS THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD STILL IN EXISTENCE, OR HAS THAT BEEN DISBANDED AT THIS POINT THAT THE WORK HAS BEEN DONE? CORRECT. THAT ONCE THE WORK IS DONE, THEY NO LONGER HAVE TO MEET?
[02:10:03]
SO YEAH, THEY HAVE BEEN DISBANDED AT THE LAST MEETING.ONCE THE LAST MEETING HAS ENDED, THEY NO LONGER HAVE TO MEET KNOW.
SO THEIR WORK IS DONE AND REASON.
AND LET ME ASK ANOTHER QUESTION.
IS THERE ANY TIME SENSITIVITY OF GETTING THIS TO COUNCIL OR IF THIS WAS TO WAIT ANOTHER 60 TO 90 DAYS FOR FURTHER REVIEW, WOULD THAT BE AN ISSUE? YES, IT IS TIME SENSITIVE DUE TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM 1.11, WHICH REQUIRES, YOU KNOW, A PROVIDES A TIMELINE OF IMPLEMENTING THESE PROGRAMS. AND THIS ONE IS TO BE IMPLEMENTED BY SEPTEMBER.
IT DOES COINCIDE WITH THE THE LEAP GRANT IN WHICH THIS PROJECT IS FUNDED BY.
AND SO THERE IS A GRANT DEADLINE OF OF COMPLETING THE WORK BY SEPTEMBER AS WELL.
OKAY. AND THE REASON FOR MY ASKING THE QUESTIONS IS THAT THIS IS A DIFFICULT ONE FOR ME.
AND THE REASON IT IS, IS I'M NOT AN ARCHITECTURE.
I DON'T HAVE A BACKGROUND IN DESIGN.
I'M NOT EVEN A FAILED ARCHITECT OR ATTEMPTED ARCHITECT.
THIS IS LESS THAN A ROUSING ENDORSEMENT FROM THIS COMMITTEE.
TWO WERE ABSENT. I UNDERSTAND.
AND I GOT SOMETHING ABOUT ONE OF THE ABSENT PERSONS SAID MAYBE THEY WOULD VOTE AGAINST IT.
I WOULD FEEL MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE IF THIS CAME TO US.
MAYBE IT'S NOT REALISTIC TO GET A 9.0, MAYBE NOT.
AND MAYBE EVEN GETTING EVERYBODY TOGETHER IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER IS NOT REALISTIC.
BUT BUT I'M THINKING THIS WAS CONTROVERSIAL.
WE STILL DON'T KNOW IF THE OTHER MEMBERS WOULD, AFTER MAKING THESE CHANGES, WOULD SUPPORT IT.
WOULD WE GET A72? WOULD WE GET, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THIS? BUT THIS IS THIS SHOWS ME IT WAS VERY CONTROVERSIAL AND THERE WAS MUCH LESS THAN A SOLID MAJORITY THAT SUPPORTS GOING FORWARD ON THIS.
SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TROUBLED WITH.
AND WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER.
IT'S HARD TO GATHER PEOPLE TOGETHER.
SO, COMMISSIONER, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH, WELL, THOSE THOSE THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS.
AND PERHAPS COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY CAN WEIGH INTO THIS.
I THINK YOU WERE ONE OF THE FOUR SUPPORT OF THIS, RIGHT? MR. LAFFERTY YEAH, I WOULD I WOULD VALUE HEARING FROM HER AND HER HER IDEA ABOUT WHETHER WE SHOULD GO FORWARD AND AND MAKE A JUDGMENT ON THE MERITS OR WHETHER OR NOT IT SHOULD BE KICKED DOWN FOR FURTHER REVIEW.
DID YOU HAVE AGAIN? WE'RE IN THE QUESTION SECTION.
SO DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY, DO YOU HAVE WOULD YOU.
OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND I DID, I GUESS.
WERE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I HAD A FEW, BUT.
OH, YES. COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.
I DON'T HAVE QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT, BUT I WOULD LIKE COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY TO RESPOND TO COMMISSIONER STEIN'S COMMENTS BECAUSE FRANKLY, MAYBE IT'S LAWYERS THINK ALIKE, BUT THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT VERY MUCH CONCERNED ME, THE LACK OF CLEAR CONSENSUS, AND ESPECIALLY WHEN MR. CONNOLLY SAID WERE HE PRESENT, HE WOULD HAVE VOTED AGAINST, WHICH WOULD HAVE MEANT THE WHOLE RECOMMENDATION WOULD HAVE FAILED.
YEAH. AND THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN.
WERE THERE ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SO I GUESS THAT NOW I HAVE A CHANCE TO ASK A QUESTION THAT TOO, AND YOU DID SORT OF QUICKLY SUMMARIZE THE DIFFERENCE, AS I THINK YOU SAID, TRADITIONALIST VERSUS I CAN'T REMEMBER YOUR EXACT WORDS, BUT IF YOU COULD MAYBE IN YOUR OWN WORDS, SUMMARIZE THAT A LITTLE BIT.
SURE. TRADITIONAL VERSUS MODERN.
AND YOU USE TWO TERMS. I DIDN'T WANT TO PUT THE WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH.
I COULDN'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE TRADITIONAL VERSUS MODERN.
OKAY. THERE YOU GO. I THOUGHT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT STYLE.
AND THAT'S WHEN YOU GOT TO SEE THE 1950S IS WHEN THE MID-CENTURY MODERN CAME ABOUT.
YOU SEE THE BOXES, YOU SEE THE HUFFMAN SIX PACKS THAT ARE INFAMOUS THROUGHOUT SAN DIEGO AREA.
[02:15:06]
AND AND SO THE STYLE CHANGED DRAMATICALLY FROM AN INDUSTRIAL FROM THE TRADITIONAL AGE TO AN INDUSTRIAL AGE.THE ISSUE IS, IS THAT THESE LARGE APARTMENT COMPLEXES ARE MISH MASHING STYLES SO THAT THEY HAVE A FORM OF ARCHITECTURE THAT'S EXPRESSING SOMETHING, BUT IT DOESN'T IT DOESN'T RESONATE AS A TRUE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE.
THE OLD STUFF'S WORKING GREAT.
AND THAT'S THAT'S MY NUTSHELL OF IT.
BUT THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT COLOR AND CHARACTER AND MATERIALS AND QUALITY AND LANDSCAPING THAT WENT ALONG WITH THAT DISCUSSION. BUT IT WAS TRULY MODERNISM OR NO MODERNISM.
YOU DIDN'T MENTION THERE WAS AN IRVING GILL BUILDING IN CARLSBAD THAT WAS LOST.
AND SO THERE IS A HISTORY OF IRVING GILL WORKING IN CARLSBAD.
IT'S A VERY RELEVANT TO CARLSBAD MODERN STYLE.
AND THEN THE CONTEMPORARY ONE IS REALLY THAT'S TODAY'S BUILDING TECHNOLOGY.
AND SO WE'RE MESSING WITH TODAY'S BUILDING TECHNOLOGY TO MAKE IT A CARLSBAD STYLE.
CHAIR IF I MAY ADD A CLARIFICATION ON THIS POINT AND SPECIFICALLY TO MR. CONNOLLY'S EMAIL.
SO ON NUMBER FOUR, HE SAYS WELL, I DO NOT BELIEVE THEY ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THE EXPEDITED PROCESS.
IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CHOSE TO REMOVE THOSE TWO STYLES FROM IF THAT WERE THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THIS BODY, IF THEY WERE TO BE REMOVED, THEN ANY ELIGIBLE PROJECT, THOSE WOULD NOT BE OPTIONS FOR THEM.
AND SO THE DISCRETIONARY IS ACTUALLY OFF THE TABLE UNLESS THEY DO NOT MEET THE ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA.
SO THERE IS A RAMIFICATION FOR REMOVING THOSE ALTOGETHER IS ELIGIBLE PROJECTS WOULD THEN WOULD ONLY BE ABLE TO USE THE FIVE THAT REMAIN, WHICH ARE THE MORE HISTORIC ROOTED STYLES, WHICH IS NOT WHICH WASN'T EVER BUILT IN THE STYLE OF A APARTMENT BUILDING.
IT'S 150FT WITH TWO STAIRWELLS THAT YOU SEE TODAY.
OKAY. YEAH. THANK YOU. IT WAS VERY HELPFUL.
IT'S FUNNY BECAUSE ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS MENTIONED IS A FAILED ARCHITECT.
I LISTENED TO LEASE AND SELL INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS ARE METAL BEAT UP BUILDINGS.
AND SO. TYLER THAT'S IN PINE TYLER.
NO, YEAH, YEAH. SO IT'S FASCINATING.
IT'S FASCINATING TO TO HEAR THE EXPLANATION SAYING SO IT SOUNDS WOULD BE CORRECT.
THAT'S THAT'S PART OF WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH.
IS THAT IS THAT CORRECT? VERY CORRECT.
YOU'LL SEE WHAT YOU DESCRIBED ONE NEXT TO THE OTHER, WHICH IS ACTUALLY KIND OF INTERESTING.
SO THAT'S KIND OF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, RIGHT, WHERE..
YOU CAN WALK, BUT YOU CAN DO THAT IN THE BARRIO AND SEE THE SAME THING.
YOU CAN SEE A MID-CENTURY MODERN CHURCH NEXT TO A BUNGALOW.
AND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT AND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BASED ON YOUR PRESENTATION.
THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S PART OF WHAT YOU'RE THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT IS, RIGHT.
THAT'S WHAT YOUR VILLAGE BARRIO MASTER PLAN INTENT AND PURPOSE SECTION SAYS DIRECTLY.
OKAY. YEAH. THAT'S FASCINATING. OKAY.
THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING THAT. YOU'RE WELCOME.
AND AND OKAY, DO WE MISS VIGELAND DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER SLIPS FOR LET ME LET ME OPEN THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER SLIPS? WE DO. WE HAVE TWO.
SO IF YOU PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, LORI ROBBINS OR LORI ROBBINS.
YEAH. AND THEN SO EACH EACH SPEAKER HAS THREE MINUTES AND YOU'LL SEE IT ON THE CLOCK.
[02:20:07]
SO PLEASE STAY WITH THEM.OKAY? THANK YOU. AND STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE.
HI, MY NAME IS LORI ROBBINS AND I LIVE IN THE VILLAGE.
THE REASON I MOVED TO CARLSBAD IS BECAUSE IT IS ECLECTIC.
I HAVE AN ARCHITECTURAL BACKGROUND.
MOST OF THE PEOPLE ON THAT DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DID NOT HAVE ARCHITECTURAL BACKGROUNDS.
THEY WANTED CARLSBAD TO LOOK LIKE PARIS.
I MOVED HERE TO CALIFORNIA FOR HIGH WINDOWS, HIGH CEILINGS, BIG WINDOWS, LIGHT COMING IN, NOT FOR SMALL WINDOWS AND LOW CEILINGS. I'M FROM MASSACHUSETTS.
IF YOU LOOK AT CARLSBAD RIGHT NOW, IT'S ECLECTIC.
SO ALL THE STYLES SHOULD BE ALLOWED, ESPECIALLY THE MODERN AND THE CONTEMPORARY.
I THINK PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THAT PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE AND WHAT'S JARRING IS WHEN YOU GET THOSE MIXED MATCHED BUILDINGS, WHICH WE'RE GETTING NOW, AND THEY DON'T HAVE A STYLE THAT IS JARRING.
THE TRADITIONAL MODERN LOOKS LIKE A CATHEDRAL, AND THAT'S IRVING GILL.
AND HE ALSO DOES FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT TYPE STYLES, WHICH I THINK MOST PEOPLE ENJOY.
SO IT NEEDS IT NEEDS TO BE SHOWN AS A GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPERS.
THE CONTEMPORARY CALIFORNIA IS THE SALK INSTITUTE.
THE VILLAGE IS NOT AN INSTITUTE, OKAY? THERE ARE SOME BEAUTIFUL EXAMPLES.
THERE'S A CONCRETE BASE TO THE ILLUSTRATION.
WE NEED TO CHANGE THOSE ILLUSTRATIONS AS A GUIDE TO OUR DEVELOPERS AND OUR GUIDE TO PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW ARCHITECTURE BECAUSE THEY LOOK AT THAT AND THEY'RE LIKE, OH MY GOD, OKAY.
THE ONLY OTHER THING I HAVE TO SAY IS AND I HAVE NO TIME IS THE THE FENCE AND HEDGE FRONTAGE IS PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE IT IS NOT MEASURABLE AND VERIFIABLE.
AND YOU'RE GOING TO END UP WITH SOMETHING THAT'S NOT ARCHITECTURAL.
WHY DON'T WE CONSIDER PRIVATE PATIOS WITH TRELLIS SCREENING? THE FENCE AND THE HEDGE IS GOING TO GATHER A QUARTER OF TRASH AND WILL PREVENT POLICING FROM THAT AREA.
AND MAINTENANCE FOR WATER IS CRAZY.
YEAH. ROBERT WILKINSON HERE IN CARLSBAD.
HOPEFULLY YOU HAVE ALL SEEN IT.
IT WAS TITLED THE LEGACY OVERLAY.
I'M IN SUPPORT OF ALL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE.
I THINK MOST OF IT IS VERY GOOD.
THE PROBLEM I HAVE IS WITH THE MINIMUM MAXIMUM OR THE MINIMUM WIDTH.
THE MAXIMUM WIDTH OF A BUILDING.
AND THIS RESPONDS TO THREE THINGS THAT WERE IN THE PAPER ARE COLLECTIVE DEFINITION OF THE TERM AND TITLE VILLAGE, THE COMMUNITY CORE VALUE OF SMALL TOWN FEEL AND THE LINEAGE OF THE AREA AS IT WAS SUBDIVIDED INTO 50 FOOT WIDE LOTS.
SO FROM THAT I PROPOSE THAT THERE BE THREE THAT THE STREETS IN THE THREE THESE THIS IS DIALED INTO THE THREE CORE AREA DISTRICTS AND THAT THE STREETS ARE MAIN STREET WHICH HAS A 50 FOOT WIDE BUILDING A VILLAGE STREET WHICH HAS 100 FOOT WIDE BUILDING AND A CARLSBAD STREET, WHICH GOES TO THE 150.
NOW, THE THE WORK THAT WAS PREPARED HAD 150 FOR EVERYTHING.
I READ SOMETHING THAT WAS IN THE HANDOUT TONIGHT THAT SAID 200 TO 2 TOO BIG.
I MEAN WE WANT A SMALL TOWN FEEL RIGHT AND THAT THE CORE
[02:25:04]
VALUES THAT CAME FROM THE COMMUNITY VISION SOME 15, 20 YEARS AGO, PART OF THAT WAS TO REVITALIZE THE DOWNTOWN VILLAGES AS A COMMUNITY FOCAL POINT.SO YOU WANT A SMALL TOWN FEEL.
NOW, ONE LAST THING ON WHAT THIS DOES PRODUCE IS A WE'VE ALL SAID AN ECLECTIC CHARACTER OF THE VILLAGE, AND THAT CAN BE A VERY VALID POINT.
THAT CAN BE VISUALLY BUSY, TOO BUSY.
AND HOW YOU DEAL WITH THAT IS HOW YOU WORK, WHAT YOU DO IN THE IN THE IN THE THE THE PUBLIC REALM.
AND THE STREETS AND THE MOST COMMON ELEMENT YOU USE TO CALM THAT VISUALLY SITUATION DOWN IS THE STREET TREE PROGRAM SO THAT YOU HAVE A REAL PROGRAM FOR YOUR STREET TREES.
AND WE DO NOT HAVE THAT EXAMPLE.
YOU MAY KNOW THAT I WAS INVOLVED WITH THE IDEA OF GRAND PROMENADE.
GRAND AVENUE HAS OVER 12 DIFFERENT TREE SPECIES AS STREET TREES.
OKAY. WOULD STAFF LIKE TO RESPOND TO ANY OF THE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THAT ARE MADE? I DON'T MIND.
I APPRECIATE BOTH SPEAKERS AND THEY'VE BEEN COMING.
WE'VE BEEN TALKING THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.
THEY'RE THEY'RE ACTUALLY FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES.
AND WE DIDN'T USE PICTURES BECAUSE PICTURES DON'T ALWAYS GET IT ACCURATE.
SO WE JUST USE DIAGRAMS AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY JUST GUIDES FOR THE STANDARDS TO SHOW EACH ONE.
IT'S NOT A SALK INSTITUTE INSTITUTIONAL BUILDING.
THE BUILDINGS ARE DONE BY THE BULK SCALE OF EACH DISTRICT, THE GUILD BUILDING.
WE ACTUALLY SPECIFICALLY STOLED IT FROM THE PICTURE THAT SHE SHOWED.
AND IF YOU LOOK, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE CHIMNEY IS IN THE MIDDLE.
SO I'M NOT SURE WHERE THE CATHEDRAL THING CAME FROM.
THAT'S A RIP OFF OF A GUILD BUILDING.
AND THE IDEA OF STREET TREES, I WISH WE COULD THAT THIS IS ABOUT A PRIVATE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ON WITHIN THE VILLAGE AND THE BARRIO, AND THAT'S A PUBLIC REALM ISSUE. SO BUT I DO APPRECIATE THEIR WORKING WITH US THROUGHOUT AND GIVING US THE COMMENTS.
OKAY. OKAY, SO DOING COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR THE STAFF? OH, OKAY. ALL RIGHT. OKAY.
SO, SEE, NOW OPEN UP FOR COMMISSION DISCUSSION WHEN COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO DISCUSS THE ITEM.
COMMISSIONER SABELLICO. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK PRESENTING THIS.
IT WAS VERY INSIGHTFUL AND I ENJOYED HEARING ABOUT IT AND FROM THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS AS WELL.
AND YOU KNOW, MY MY HAT'S OFF TO THE COMMISSION WHO WORKED HARD FOR TWO YEARS NOW TO COME UP WITH THESE PLANS.
YOU KNOW, UNDER, YOU KNOW, A KIND OF A TIME LIMIT THAT'S COMING FROM THE STATE.
PERSONALLY, I ESPECIALLY LIKE THE VARIETY IN THE VILLAGE.
I ACTUALLY REALLY ENJOYED THE FACT THAT ONE OF THE PUBLIC SPEAKERS IS FROM MASSACHUSETTS.
I LIVED IN MASSACHUSETTS FOR A TIME.
MY GRANDMOTHER OWNED A HOUSE RIGHT ON CAPE COD ON THE BEACH.
I JUST I WOULD NEVER LIVE IN ONE OF THOSE HOUSES, BUT I ENJOY THE FACT THAT OTHER PEOPLE LIVE IN THOSE HOUSES AND I GET TO SEE THEM IN CARLSBAD AND I'M REMINDED OF OF MY GRANDMOTHER. SO IT'S IT'S REALLY I JUST I REALLY LOVE THE ECLECTICISM OF THE VILLAGE AND I WANT TO KEEP THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. YOU KNOW, THERE'S A RIGHT WAY AND A WRONG WAY TO DO A VARIETY.
I WILL BASH ON MY ALMA MATER AND THE ALMA MATER OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER HERE, UC SANTA BARBARA.
YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU GO ON CAMPUS TO UC SANTA BARBARA, EVERY BUILDING IS JUST MADE FROM THE CHEAPEST MATERIALS THAT WERE AROUND AT THE TIME THAT THE BUILDING WAS BUILT. AND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT'S GOOD BECAUSE IT'S TAXPAYER DOLLARS, BUT STILL, YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT.
IT'S NOT IT DOESN'T EVOKE ANY, YOU KNOW, GREAT FEELINGS.
SO I REALLY JUST LIKE WHAT WHAT YOU GUYS COME UP WITH.
[02:30:02]
AND I THINK THAT'S A REALLY POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT HERE.AND, YOU KNOW, MORE TO THE POINT, THIS IS A COMPROMISE.
I KNOW THAT THIS WAS A COMPROMISE.
I UNDERSTAND IT WASN'T A 9-0 VOTE OR EVEN A 7-2 VOTE.
I MEAN, SOMETIMES WE HAVE FOUR, THREE VOTES.
IN FACT, WE JUST HAD ONE EARLIER TODAY.
AND I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTIVE OF EFFORTS TO FURTHER LIMITS THE COMPROMISE FOR FURTHER LIMIT THE NUMBER OF ARCHITECTURAL STYLES THAT ARE ALLOWED IN EACH SUBZONE. SO I THINK THIS PLAN DID A VERY GOOD JOB OF RESPONDING TO COMMUNITY PREFERENCES, PRESERVING COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND GIVING DEVELOPERS CLEAR GUIDELINES SO THEY KNOW WHAT WE EXPECT AS A CITY.
AND SO I'M READY TO SUPPORT THIS VERY GOOD JOB AND THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER MEENES.
YES. I ALSO WANT TO THANK STAFF.
I WANT TO THANK OUR CONSULTANT AS WELL AS THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE.
I THINK THE JOB THAT WAS DONE, THE INTENSITY OF AND THE THOROUGHNESS OF THE DOCUMENT AND THE PLAN ITSELF IS EXCELLENT. I THINK IT IS AN IDEAL.
IT AUGMENTS THE BARRIO VILLAGE MASTER PLAN WELL, AND IT'S REALLY WELL NEEDED AND NEEDED AT THIS TIME BECAUSE WE, SINCE THE ORIGINAL VILLAGE AND BARRIO MASTER PLAN WAS ADOPTED BACK IN 2018, 2019, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN KIND OF SCRAMBLING A LITTLE BIT AND TRYING TO SHORE IT UP.
AND I THINK THIS IS GOING TO DO THAT.
ONE THING I DO, AND IT'S JUST IT'S JUST A SIDE NOTE MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE THAT NEEDS TO BE, I THINK, AT LEAST ADDRESSED IS THAT AND YOU GO THROUGH ALL THE SPECIFICS OF THE DOCUMENT REGARDING BUILDING HEIGHT AND AND ARTICULATION AND AND SETBACKS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
BUT ONE THING, IT'S LIKE THE MONKEY IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM IS DENSITY BONUS.
AND WE HAD THAT HOPE APARTMENT PROJECT THERE ON CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE THE OTHER DAY.
WE'VE GOT ONE COMING THAT'S OUT IN PUBLIC REVIEW RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS THE ONE ACROSS THE STREET, SMART AND FINAL.
FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, IS THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT BECAUSE OF DENSITY BONUS, YOU KNOW, RATHER THAN FOUR STORIES, THEY'RE LOOKING AT A DENSITY BONUS OF FIVE STORIES.
AND SO THEREFORE, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT.
YET AT THE SAME TIME, THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA STILL DICTATES WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO.
BUT WE AS A PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL STILL HAVE DENSITY BONUS AND STATE REGULATIONS THAT SOMETIME TAKE THAT, I SHOULD SAY, AUTHORITY AWAY FROM US.
SO IT'S JUST A NOTE MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK.
THERE THERE WAS A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE FEAR OF MODERN ARCHITECTURE, WHICH I UNDERSTAND IT'S A FEAR, BUT YOU HAVE UNDOUBTEDLY HEARD ME TALK ABOUT HOW FARMHOUSE, COASTAL AND MEDITERRANEAN ARE NOT QUANTIFIABLE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES.
THIS PROGRAM WILL HELP RECTIFY AND QUANTIFY AND CREATE A BASELINE FOR A HOLISTIC PLAN OF TRUE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES THAT HOPEFULLY WILL HELP ENHANCE THE ECLECTICISM AND OUR, YOU KNOW, JUST INFILL IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE LOVE.
AND I THINK THAT THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT IS UNIQUE AND WE'RE A UNIQUE CITY.
SO I THINK WE DESERVE TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT NOT ONLY SETS UP A STANDARD FOR A BASELINE OF THIS WORK, BUT ALSO, YOU KNOW, CONTINUES THAT GOOD WORK THAT WE ALREADY ARE STARTING TO YOU KNOW, NURTURE WITH THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT IS BEING TOLD TO US BY THE STATE.
YOU KNOW, THAT WE NEED TO HAVE THIS THESE TYPES OF REQUIREMENTS.
SO I'M GRATEFUL TO ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS FOR THEIR INSIGHTFUL CONVERSATION AND COMMENTS.
[02:35:04]
THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO COME TO US AND NOT BE REGULATED.SO WE HAVE SOME BASELINE NOW AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN CONTINUE TO IMPROVE IT, GET BETTER AT IT.
COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY AND COMMISSIONER HUBINGER.
I CAN JUST IMAGINE WHAT THIS WAS LIKE IN THE COMMITTEE.
SO, YOU KNOW, THAT DOESN'T BOTHER ME IN THE LEAST.
SO I JUST WANTED TO TO CONGRATULATE YOU.
I THINK I THINK WE SHOULD VOTE POSITIVELY FOR THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE TO HAVE THESE STANDARDS.
AND I THINK YOU'VE DONE A TERRIFIC JOB.
AND IT'S REALLY HARD TO DEFINE ECLECTIC.
I MEAN, IT'S LIKE THE WORD UNIQUE.
I ALWAYS ASK PEOPLE, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY UNIQUE? YOU KNOW? SO THAT IN AND OF ITSELF IS GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE.
SO I JUST WANT TO COMMEND YOU FOR A TERRIFIC JOB AND A WELL NEEDED STANDARDS.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION FROM THE COMMISSIONERS.
I THINK MR. STRONG. YOU DID. THANK YOU, CHAIR.
I'M GOING TO ASK SHELLY GLENNON TO QUICKLY WALK THROUGH WHAT THAT DOCUMENT ENTAILS SO THAT WHEN A MOTION IS MADE, THE CONTEXT OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS FULLY PRESENTED. THANK YOU.
OH, OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. STRONG. YES.
SO AS DISCUSSED DURING THE PRESENTATION, THESE WE DID MAKE SOME MINOR CHANGES.
THE MAIN TOPICS, AS SHOWN HERE, YOU KNOW, HAD UPDATED SOME FORMATTING ISSUES, CORRECTED SOME REFERENCES, AND WE RETITLED LIVE WORK BUILDING TYPE TO SMALL MIXED USE BUILDING TYPE TO ACCOMMODATE ALL SMALL BUILDING TYPES THAT INCLUDE COMMERCIAL OR OFFICE WITH RESIDENTIAL. SO IF YOU DO WANT TO GO THROUGH THE DOCUMENT, YOU'LL NOTICE THE ITEMS THAT WERE UPDATED ARE IN RED FONT UNDERLINED IN RED FONT.
SO AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WE JUST CLARIFIED SOME OF THE TERMS OR.
YEAH, SOME OF THE TERMS IN THE DOCUMENT.
AND I DO I DO BELIEVE THERE'S SOME OF THE THE STYLES OR ARCHITECTURAL STYLES WERE MISSING IN SECTIONS 4.6 AND 4.7.
BUT THOSE ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE TABLES THAT ARE PROVIDED IN THE PLAN.
UM. AND YES, I'M JUST MINOR CHANGES.
THERE WAS A CHANGE IN UNDER CANTILEVER ROOMS. WE CHANGED IT TO STATE MINIMUM EIGHT FEET WIDE OR MAXIMUM 16FT WIDE.
I THINK IT ORIGINALLY JUST STATED MINIMUM EIGHT FEET INCORRECTLY.
SO THAT WAS A CORRECTION THAT HAD TO BE MADE.
THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION.
OKAY. SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, I HAVE A MOTION ON THE ITEM.
AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SABELLICO.
OKAY. SEEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS, PLEASE VOTE.
OKAY, THE MOTION PASSES 7 TO 0.
SO WE'LL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND I THINK I FORGOT TO MENTION EARLIER, WE CLOSED THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
SO WE CLOSED THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY AND NOW WE'VE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONERS?
[PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER REPORTS]
YEAH. THANK YOU. A.[02:40:03]
COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN. I ATTENDED THE VIRTUAL ALL DAY TRAINING SESSION THAT MR. KEMP RECOMMENDED AT THE END OF THE MONTH.I'M GLAD IT WAS AT LEAST PRETTY GOOD.
THERE'S SOME THINGS YOU CAN PICK AND CHOOSE.
AND IT WAS AFFORDABLE TOO, RIGHT? EXACTLY. I WAS ABLE TO ATTEND WELL WITHOUT A COAT AND TIE.
I WOULD LIKE. HOW DO WE DO THAT? DO WE RUN IT THROUGH CYNTHIA OR.
OKAY, I GOT IT. I'LL MAKE SURE YOU GET IT.
OKAY, COOL. COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.
[CITY PLANNER REPORT]
FOR THE FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS, THOUGH, I WANTED TO DISCLOSE THAT IT APPEARS THAT THE AUGUST 2ND MEETING WILL PROBABLY BE CANCELED.THAT'S TENTATIVE CANCELLATION.
BUT AS OF NOW, NO NEW BUSINESS IS SCHEDULED.
THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION IS IN THE THROES OF IMPLEMENTING ITS MILLS ACT CONTRACTS.
THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT I PRESENTED AS INFORMATIONAL ITEMS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PREVIOUSLY.
SO AS A FOLLOW UP TO THAT, WE DID RECEIVE TWO MILLS ACT CONTRACT APPLICATIONS AND THOSE WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ON SEPTEMBER 11TH AND THE REQUEST OF FORWARD RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION IS ALSO CONSIDERING A PLAQUE PROGRAM TO SUPPLEMENT HISTORIC PRESERVATION EFFORTS AND LANDMARK HISTORIC PROPERTIES. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
ANY REPORTS FROM OUR ATTORNEY, MR. KEMP? NADA. OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, WE WILL ADJOURN.
THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.