HomeMy WebLinkAbout1957-02-12; Planning Commission; MinutesI February 12, 1957
Meetirg called to order at 7:06 P, 13. by Chairman Swirsky, Present besides ., the Chairman were Conmissioners Yourell, Fennel Baumgartner, Engelmann, Strixzer (7:ZO P. Me) Planning Secretary Ewa i d, City Engineer Kubota, Planning Consultant Kalicka,
Commb Fennel moved approval of minutes of the regular meeting of January 29th, as submitted, All ayes, motion carried,
Secretary EmId read Notice of Public Hearing on the application of First Baptist Church, by A, T, Channel, for condttional use permit to allow erec- tion of a church building on the east side of Pi0 Pico betweenddagnolia and Tamarack, legally described as a portion of Tract 236, Thum Lands.
Letter from app3.f.cant dated January 29th, requesting transfer of application fee from former request to the present application, was reade
Mro Kalicka explained that no report had been prepared by his office'as yet for the reason that there were several .factors fnvolved which it was hoped could be resolved at thls hearing: (1) pgmiasion must be secured for a lot split; (2) applicant must dedicate ha a street if the application is approved, and location of the right-of-way would have to be determined. Applicants stated they have acquired addltional property to rovide proper accesso The property has 285' frontage on Pi0 Pic0 and is E 00' deep,
Appearing in support of the application were '& M. Cb&enw, 351 Acacia, and Walter Crabbe, pastor of the Church, Mr. ColWn asked. ,approval of the ap- plication with the understanding that the street location wlll be worked out and revised plot plan submitted at the next meeting, Tbere were no protests,. oral or written.
. ... .
- ..
After discussion, Comm, Fennel moved that a conditional use permit as re- quested be granted, subject to approval of a revised plot plan, and revision ofthe application to icclude the additional ground purchased, Seconded by Comm. Jarvie, Seven ayes, no nays, motion carried,
Regarding the request to transfer their application fee, Chairman Swirsky advised applicants that this was a matter of law and not of discretion of the Commission, readins from the ordinance the section providing that such fees are not refundable, Applicants were instructed to turn in (3) a letter re: inclusion ofthe additional property in the application; (2) a lot split application; and { 3) revised plot plan showing right-of-way and all pertinent details, f
Mr, Kalicka presented a prslfninarg map showing proposed m$or and secondary streets showing realignments and extensions, park sites, and shopping or commercial centers, pointing out the following features for members' study:
(1) Consideration of El C&no Real and Carlsbad Boulevard as the east and we& "boundaries", with' Elm 4ven148, Tamarack Avenue, and Cannon Road ex- tended as connectors between the-'tm,
(2) ' Chestnut., State, Pio' Pico, Highland, and Jefferson (to Elm) proposed as secondafy streets,
I "
t ,-
(3) Eventual tying in of El Canfno Res1 into U, Sa 101 below present south city limits,
(4) Major streets (Sh, Tamarack, Cannan Road) to be 84-? wide; secondary streets 669, County plans for regional development include widening and fmprcvement of El Camino Real to a four-lane 180' highway,
($1 Joint park facilities with Oceansida (Hosp Eucalyptus Grove), making Vista Way and El Camino Real iaportant awessess
(6) Areas (shown in green on nap) recommended for acquis5tion by %he City (recreabionaI. areas, etc,) ,
(7) Two shopping centers, one in easterr. area (end of Chestnut) ana one in Terramar - vital ff Carlsbad 3oulevax-d severed duri.lg process sf Harbor de- velopment *
Cole David DUM@ was present and protessxd the extension of Elm through his property on Highland Drive, but was advised that the map is pmely schematic and a starting point for discussion and study, with public hearings to be held later after full consideration by %he Planning Conmission,
Mr. Kalicka brought out that Pi0 Pfco will become an. important street with further development esst of the Freeway, carrying tmffic from that area toward downtown areas via Elm and Tamarack Avenues, It, was felt that this will eventually create a traffic prob3m at the Elm Avenue underpass and will. probably require signalizing the intersection of Elm and Pi0 Pica, Fie: the probl2m of traffic inbound from the Freeway bottle-necking Elm at %kat point, the suggestion was made that perhaps sou6hbouxd traffic could be taken off at Grand, mere w4s also some discassion 83 to desirabtlity of an interchange at Chestcut instead sf the preeenb pedestrian underpass, but the concensus of optnion was that both this and the constructho:? of an off-ranp at Grand, as sugzested, would be excessively costly aaci unfeasible in the near future
A suggestion was mace that railmad under-gasses at Elm .?ad, Tamarack should be shown on the map as future bargaining featun!s,
The meeting was adjourned at 9:l$ P, M,
Respec!Xt.lly submitted,