1990-09-25Encinitas
PLACE OF MEETING:
PHONE -
PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting Agenda
AND MINUTES/SUMMARY
CORRECTED & APPROVED 10/11/90
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
535 Encinitas Boulevard
Encinitas, California 92024
CITY: (619) 944-5050; PLANNING: 944-5060
Tuesday, September 25, 1990 - 7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL - 7:05 PM
Planning Commissioners Present: Lester H. Bagg, Chair; Harry
Couglar, Vice Chair; Bill Dean, Joseph C. Stumpf, Chuck Orr
Commissioners Absent: Bill Dean (Items 1-5 only)
Staff Present: Patrick S. Murphy, Community Development
Director; Bill Weedman, City Planner; Bob Warren, City
Engineer; Linda Niles, Associate Planner; Tom Curriden,
Associate Planner; Jim Jones, Assistant Planner; Chris Durand,
Planning Technician; Lea Kauflin, Secretary.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Led by Commissioner Orr
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS - None
4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
5. APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF CONSENT CALENDAR
Approval of minutes from meetings of August 28, 1990 and
September 13, 1990.
Pulled, see Item 9. Later continued because of ~
lateness1 of the hour.
Be
CASE NUMBER: 90-135 MUP/MOD
APPLICANT: Community Services, City of Encinitas
LOCATION: 1661 Lake Drive, Cardiff
DESCRIPTION: Major Use Permit Modification to construct
a 336 sq. ft. storage building at the Cardiff Sports
Park.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Exempt per CEQA Section 15301e(2).
ITEM PULLED: SA. ITEMS ADDED: 7A
ACTION:
Motion - Commissioner Couglar to close and adopt the
Consent Calendar as modified above.
Second - Commissioner Orr
VOTE - Ayes: Couglar, Orr, Bagg, Stumpf
Nays: None
lCorrected at 10/11/90 meeting.
PCMR2/SEP25-90.MIN (11/9/90) 1
52'' Encinims Boulevard, Encinitas, California 92024 619 944-5050
Abstain: None
Absent: Dean
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING(S) CONTINUED:
(Continued from meeting of August 28, 1990.)
CASE NUMBER: 89-090-TPM
APPLICANT: Eric Larson
LOCATION: 602 union Street West of Saxony Road
DESCRIPTION: Tentative Parcel Map to create four (4)
lots in excess of 14,500 sq. ft. each.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Exempt per CEQA Section 15301.
The Chair listened to the tape and is permitted to hear
this item. Commissioner Orr will be abstaining; left the
hearing room.
Staff Report presented. Donation to Orpheus Park ($5,000
for the acquisition of trees) is preferred over the
previously suggested YMCA donation. The Commission asked
about more information regarding Finding C. Essentially
staff feels this condition has not been met; ~it is not
of a superior design.
Public Hearing opened at 7:15 PM.
Chet Johnston, Project Engineer, 523 Encinitas Blvd,
representing Eric and Lola Larson. Finding D fulfills
the direction given August 28. Regarding Finding C,
feels the project significantly exceeds design standards.
Public Hearing closed at 7:17 PM.
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Significant community benefit: (1) Trees for Orpheus
Park or (2) YMCA. One Commissioner stated his view that
the Commission cannot determine how a project can exceed
mid-range density and requested additional guidelines
.and/or clarification by staff. Other Commissioners felt
this project should go forward. Further discussed
whether project design is significantly superior to what
can be expected.
ACTION:
Motion - Commissioner Couglar to deny 89-090 TPM because
Findings C and D, as far as exceeding mid-range
density, cannot be met.
Second - Commissioner Bagg
VOTE - Ayes: Couglar, Bagg
Nays: Dean, Stumpf
Abstain: Orr
Absent: None (7:35, 1039)
Discussion: Some Commissioners felt findings could be
made if a suitable off-site improvement could be made.
PCMR2/SEP25-90.MIN (11/9/90) 2
ACTION:
Motion -
NO. 89-090 TPM to the City Council
resolution.
Second - Commissioner Bagg
VOTE - Ayes: Stumpf, Bagg, Dean
Nays: Couglar
Abstain: Orr
Absent: None 7:50 PM (1574)
Commissioner Stumpf to refer the appeal of Case
for
PUBLIC HEARINGS CONTINUED:
(Continued from meeting of September 13, 1990)
CASE NUMBER: 90-213 PCI
APPLICANT: Texaco
LOCATION: City-wide
DESCRIPTION: Planning Commission Interpretation
determine what constitutes a structural sign change·
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Exempt per Section 15301.
to
Interpretation as presented by staff approved on Consent.
CASE NUMBER: 88-178 MUP/EIA
APPLICANT: Mobil Oil
LOCATION: 310 Encinitas Boulevard
DESCRIPTION: Major Use Permit for a car wash,
convenience store with alcohol sales, and gas pump
islands, all to be open 24 hours a day on site presently
containing a service station (to be removed).
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Negative Declaration pending
adoption.
Staff Report presented, reviewing CAB I and CAB II
hearings. Proposal is in compliance with Uniform
Building Code (UBC). Discussed turn lanes on Saxony Rd.
related to line of sight. Proposed project will not
impact traffic significantly differently from the present
use.
Public Hearing opened at 8:03 PM.
Ken Huepper, 18634 Lancashire Way, San Diego 92128,
representing Mobil Oil. CAB concerns have been
addressed. Here to answer questions. No other speakers.
Public Hearing closed at 8:05 PM.
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Questions raised: (1) One unisex restroom. Response:
Used widely; have not encountered any problems. (2)
Gallons which will be pumped. Response: Anticipate an
increase. There will be 18 versus previous 8 fuelling
positions. A minimum of 150,000 gallons per month will
be pumped. (3) Traffic study. Page 5 of traffic study
reviewed (Page 8C-47). Concerned about near grid-lock
occurring on the road segment west of I-5. Response:
PCMR2/SEP25-90. MIN (11/9/90) 3
The project won't generate traffic; only service traffic
generated by other uses. City Engineer stated
improvements do not affect anything west of I-5.
Conditions for the signalled intersection will not
change.
Ken Huepper stated reducing curb cuts from 2 to 1 and the
curb cut on Saxony Rd. will be further away from the
intersection.
One Commissioner stated his disagreement with staff
findings--feels applicant is not mitigating existing
problem nor has additional traffic been addressed.
Discussed traffic in the area of Saxony Rd. and Encinitas
Boulevard. Summarized foreseeable difficulties in
traffic patterns at Saxony Rd. and Encinitas Blvd. The
City Engineer reviewed plans for improvements of that
intersection.
Another Commissioner would like to see marketing~jee~=e
projections2 and how ADTs were obtained. Table
indicating Level C or B reviewed by Ken Huepper. Traffic
data questioned and existing conditions reviewed. A
very specific study of this intersection is needed.
Access to the project going east on Encinitas Blvd.
discussed.
Ed Buttorao, 1400 Third St. Promenade, Santa Monica
90401. Answered questions on signs as did Ken Huepper.
The Chair asked questions r~garding lights, trash
enclosure, Te~e~4~brick exterior2, light fixture cuts,
level of lighting, moving vents behind retaining wall.
He also asked about reducing height of main sign.
Response: The sign is within the guidelines and without
a freeway visible sign, the height of the sign is
important.
Klm Wiley, Wiley Group, 710 13th St., Studio 312, San
Diego 92101. Mature heights of shrubbery questioned by
the Commission as well as the use of Bird of Paradise on
the corner. Response: Reviewed heights of shrubbery
while keeping in mind line of sight. A miniature variety
of the Bird of Paradise may be possible.
The Commission suggested plantings along the existing
wall (will be painted Bahama Beige). Response: Planned
landscaping is well beyond what the City requires. Area
is needed for parking.
Stucco areas should be revised to a brick similar to
existing. Major sign: Presently 8'; Commission feels
the sign should be reduced in height.
2Corrected at 10/11/90 meeting.
PCMR2/SEP25-90.MIN (11/9/90) 4
ACTION:
City Engineer asked for specifics: Chair stated need to
examine use at this intersection and other uses all
around this intersection. The Commission also asked to
look at the assumptions that led to the ADTs coming to
and from the station, including marketing forecasts for
the site. "Right Turn Only" needs to be reviewed. Best
way to exit is on Saxony--what queue problems exist on
Saxony? Also need a visual that clearly shows the
problems inherent in that intersection. Need to see that
a maximum of three cars that can queue up at that
intersection. Gallons to be pumped per month and
estimated number of cars needed to reach this projection.
Don't use SANDAG figures; make it site specific. Wants
to know how SANDAG came up with their car wash
projections; has been a dramatic change in the market.
Landscape Plan is okay except for the Bird of Paradise.
Staff S,,mmary: Continue to October 23, 1990, so that
the applicant can submit information relating to:
(1) More traffic data for consideration; (2) Brick facade
treatment; (3) Sign modification; (4) Vent pipes to be
moved behind retaining wall, if possible; (5) Substitute
species for present Bird of Paradise; (6) An additional
restroom; (7) Visual representation of the intersection;
(8) Up-to-date information on traffic counts.
Motion - Commissioner Orr to continue to October 23,
1990 SO applicant can provide additional
information as listed above.
Second - Commissioner Couglar
VOTE - Ayes: Orr, Couglar, Bagg, Dean, Stumpf
Nays: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None (9:25 PM, (1645, Tape 2)
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Ae
ACTION:
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
shop·
ENVIRONMENTAL
recommended.
88-353 MUP/DR/EIA
Surfside Auto Body
1508 N. Highway 101
Expansion of an existing auto body repair
STATUS: Negative Declaration is
Motion - Commissioner Couglar to continue3 to October 23
as requested by the applicant in order to make
changes to the application.
Second - Commissioner Orr
VOTE - Ayes: Couglar, Orr, Bagg, stumpf
Nays: None
Abstain: Dean
Absent: None (9:30 PM, 1737 Tape 2)
3Corrected at 10/11/90 meeting.
PCMR2/SEP25-90.MIN (11/9/90) 5
CASE NUMBER: 89-078 TPM/MUP/EIR
APPLICANT: North Coast Presbyterian Church
LOCATION: South side of Manchester Avenue
Pacific Ranch Drive and Trabert Ranch Road.
betWeen
DESCRIPTION: Review adequacy of Environmental Impact
Report in addressing the environmental issues. This is
not a Public Hearing on the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Draft EIR 45 day review period
ends October 22, 1990.
Staff Report presented. (9:35 PM)
Public Hearing opened at 9:45 PM.
Philip Hoffman, 4018 Manchester Ave. Biological issues
not adequately addressed. Page 9 references 12 houses,
another page says 6 houses and another page says 9
houses--needs to be clarified and addressed more clearly.
certain recreational uses on Manchester (triathlon)
should be addressed. Traffic element of the report:
Page 38 states 38,000 sq.ft., actually 41,000 sq. ft.
Assuming that part of this is not generating traffic and
estimates are conservative anyway needs to be reviewed.
The EIR should more adequately~ address alternate
proposals.
Ted and Becky Vincent, 3838 Manchester Ave. Project
surrounds them on three sides. Will be making a mixed
use in a residential community; project would be
incompatible with residential use. Lights from parking
lot and from cars (490) coming and going at designated
times will severely impact this rural residential area.
Only 20-30 cars would be coming and going if 12 homes
built on this parcel. Project more suitable for E1
Camino Real or Encinitas Boulevard which support
commercial use. Location and size: 45,000 sq. ft.
building is larger than a possibility of 12 homes.
Visual quality: parking lot lights, lights from cars.
Knows that Manchester will be widened. Concerned about
unsafe conditions; bad enough already on Manchester.
Left hand turns if going west will be a problem. Feels
wildlife will be affected--road runners and coyotes are
common at present. Economic concerns also expressed.
Issues are covered in memos sent to Planning. Going to
make the land use more a commercial area, or at least a
mixed area. Impact of turn lanes need to be understood.
Traffic will happen at church times; a queuing study has
not been done. No alternatives included regarding noise
as with other issues addressed.
4Corrected at 10/11/90 meeting.
PCMR2/SEP25-90.MIN (11/9/90) 6
Public Hearing closed at 10:00 PM.
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Biological resources: P.8. Intrusion of non-native
species, i.e., landscaping. Alternatives need to be
proposed. Proposed mitigation to biological issues are
totally inadequate. Preamble on the loss of habitat is
very good: 27 acres becoming 3 acres or less, urban run-
off, agricultural (irrigation) run-off. Property in
wetland area has not been dealt with adequately.
Negative impacts noted, but mitigation falls5 woefully
short. Page 46 refers to San Elijo Lagoon as blocked--
will be reopened. Need to review the mean high tide mark
and its relationship to this particular project.
Map, p.47: Should show the project and the relationship
of the project to sensitive areas. Include wetland
boundary, 100' setback and the 2.7 acres for preserving
natural resources.
Traffic Report. Table 4, page 26, Existing Daily Volume
and Existing Project Volume: Need something like this
with actual numbers for Sunday. Level of service at
level B (Table 6): What are the numbers rather than the
conclusions? Wish they would address alternatives to
parking. One alternative presented is an overflow lot:
what surface will be used so as not to impact the
project? Run off will be a major problem. Lower the
parking to what is required.
Discussion of alternative sites for the project was not
adequate. Light discussion fairly good, but mitigation
of lowered lighting levels in the lagoon is inadequate.
Noise: Questioned reference to 61 db being acceptable
for wildlife.
Grading mitigation during construction in this sensitive
area needs to be covered in more detail. View impacts:
keeping height of structures down is a good approach.
Can't make 500 cars look like they aren't there.
Suggested shuttling people away from the site. Problems
have been identified but mitigations not adequate.
Protection of wildlife corridors. Although development
can occur, it should retain the ability for animals to
access this highly desirable environment. 2.7 acres into
one section of the project, but says that it is over 50%
open space. A better definition of the 50% open space;
should not include grass area between parking areas.
Cumulative impact of human activity (mainly recreational)
on the wetland area. Difficult to understand how this
5Corrected at 10/11/90 meeting.
PCMR2/SEP25-90.MIN (11/9/90) 7
impact would be equal to a residential area. Impact of
7 houses vs. this project needs to be assessed.
The Chair reviewed comments made. Asked if the traffic
study was done on the larger project or the presently
proposed one. How is this project will impact the house
surrounded by the project should be addressed in the EIR.
The conclusion that the residential use would have a
greater impact than this project needs explanation.
Staff clarified that additional alternatives should be
explored in Encinitas.
The Commission requested a more definitive statement on
the mitigations and how viable they are.
Relocation or elimination of the playing field should be
considered. No Project Alternative: Take out overlays
for sensitive areas and setbacks, then calculate density.
CASE NUMBER: 89-297 TM/EIA
APPLICANT: Wagner
LOCATION: Easterly extension of Camino Del Rancho,
Olivenhain
DESCRIPTION: Proposed 9 lot Tentative Map
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Negative Declaration recommended.
staff Report presented. (10:30 PM, 705, Tape 3).
The Commission'asked if the restorative contour grading
can be adopted. Response: Applicant wants to restore
to natural grade. Trails also need to be addressed.
Public Hearing opened at 10:45 PM.
Doug Logan, 465 First St., Suite A. Pointed out new
alignment for transitioning from the public road to a
private road. Stated a 60' IOD goes all the way through
the project to the north edge. Highly disturbed areas
are Lots 6-7, east of cul-de-sac and when first entering
the property. The "borrow" pits are as much as 50'
deep.
Alesandra Kornafel, 465 First St., Suite A.
disturbed areas.
Pointed out
Doug Logan stated CAB asked for a private road.
fill is under the road.
Maj or
The Chair stated that a condition should be added-
informing prospective buyers6 regarding the amount of
fill on each specific lot. The City Engineer referred
to the grading ordinance and the time needed for material
6Corrected at 10/11/90 meeting.
PCMR2/SEP25-90.MIN (11/9/90) 8
to settle. The final grading plan will reflect before
and after conditions.
It.was stated it that the project~ is almost a
continuation of Crystal Ridge. Each Commissioner should
be sure to view the property before it is voted on.
There are 40% slopes, etc. and is a very controversial
area. A lot of grading will occur.
One Commissioner stated he needed additional definitions
for finished grade, contour grade, natural grade.
Difficult to determine what is proposed as natural grade.
Doug Logan: Grading on top is in less than 25% slopes.
Site is an eyesore. Never been any opposition to the
project. There are 4 legal sites and the "borrow" sites
will be filled in. Asked about 7A in the resolution.
The City Engineer stated it should be deleted (Page 7A-
14).
Trails: The Vice? chair stated the staff recommendation
is a good one; trails are not necessary. The Olivenhain
Commissioner stated that the trail outlined is being used
now. Just to the north of the parcel map (north and
northwest) lies another trail. There is a trail that
goes along the top of Crystal Ridge, across Crystal Ridge
Road and along Regal Ridge Road. The project trail is
within the sewer easement.
The chair asked if the Commission agrees in priqci~le
with the c~nt~ur grading filling of the borrow Pits'.
Need to determine extent of the restoration grading.
City Engineer: 9B same as 7A.
and exceptions not needed.
Standards cover all.
On Condition 11, waivers
Interim Olivenhain Road
Motion -
Second -
VOTE - Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
Commissioner Couglar to continue to October
11, 1990 to allow the Commissioners to
individually walk the site and to have
applicant submittedinformation to demonstrate
original topography. Additional comments
included: delete condition ?& and 11, review
recreational trail, concur with filling in the
borrow pits, and add condition to notify future
property owners of the areas where fill has
occurred. '
commissioner Stumpf
Couglar, Stumpf, Bagg, Dean, Orr
None
None
None (11:25 PM, 2755, Tape 3)
7Corrected at 10/11/90 meeting.
PCMR2/SEP25-90.MIN (11/9/90) 9
CASE NUMBER: 90-152 ZOA
APPLICANT: City of Encinitas
LOCATION: City-Wide
DESCRIPTION: Amendment to the Zoning Matrix regarding
alcoholic beverages (sales for off-site consumption),
hair salon, custom manufacturing, fleet storage, outdoor
sales, swap meets, caretaker dwelling unit, second hand
dealers, storage of nonoperating vehicles, transient
habitation, and cellular facility. The purpose of the
amendment is to provide consistency within the Use
Matrix, to clarify use types for enforcement purposes,
and to modify use type by zone.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Under review.
Staff Report presented.
Public Hearing opened at 11~30 PM.
Mary May, 533 F St, Suite 209, San Diego 92101,
representing U. S. West Cellular. Have requested
definition of cellular facilities be included in the
zoning amendment. Supports staff recommendation.
Public Hearing closed at 11:32 PM.
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Staff recommendations accepted except:
#7) Outdoor sales/swap meet: Add public/semipublic.
#8)
Second Hand Dealers and Antique Stores should be
treated the same way. Present second hand dealers
and antiques stores are located in General
Commercial. Antique stores are listed in Local
Commercial and Light Industrial. Ask Code
Enforcement if this would create a problem.
#9)
Non operating vehicles: Asked about stating in
excess of two and adding a time period (30 or 60
days). Ask Code Enforcement regarding specifics on
abandoned cars on a monthly basis.
This item onlycontinued to October 23 by consensus.
CASE NUMBER: 90-149 ZOA
APPLICANT: City of Encinitas
LOCATION: City-Wide
DESCRIPTION: Amendment to the .Zoning Code fence
regulations to allow barbed wire and Iow voltage
electrical fencing in residential areas for large animal
containment, and prohibit barbed wire and electrical
fencing in non-residential zones.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Under review.
Staff Report presented (11:55 PM).
PCMR2/SEP25-90.MIN (11/9/90) 10
PL~NNIN~ COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Residential Zones
Consensus as proposed.
Commercial Zoning
continue to october 11, 1990. Two Commissioners favors8
Option 5A and two Commissioners favor 5B; one needs more
time for discussion and more information. Need to obtain
information from commercial users.
Light Industrial Zones
Continue to October 11, 1990.
Animal Enclosure Requirements
Consensus as proposed,s
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR BY PLANNING COMMISSION
Item 5A. Approval of minutes from meetings of August 28, 1990
and September 13, 1990. September 13, 1990 minutes not
available.
Continued to October 11, 1990 by consensus.
10.
REVIEW CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS TAKEN ON September 26, 1990.
The Community Development Director reported upcoming topics.
The Chair asked that when the setback issue is rescheduled for
City Council hearing, he and the Vice Chair be notified'.
11. PLANNING COMMISSION/DIRECTOR REPORTS
Discussion regarding findings to exceed mid-range density.
Continued to October 11, 1990 by consensus.
12. ADJOURNMENT
ACTION: Motion - Commissioner Dean to adjourn to the next
regularly scheduled meeting to be held
Thursday, October 11, 1990.
Second - Commissioner Orr
VOTE - Ayes: Dean, Orr, Bagg, Couglar,~Stumpf
Nays: None
Absent: None
A proponent or protestant of record may appeal a final decision of
the Planning Commission by filing the appeal within fifteen (15)
working days after the hearing through the Office of the City
Clerk, City of Encinitas, 527 Encinitas Boulevard, Encinitas, CA
92024.
8Corrected at 10/11/90 meeting.
PCMR2/SEP25-90.MIN (11/9/90) 11