HomeMy WebLinkAbout1959-01-13; Planning Commission; Minutest 0
1- The meeting was called to arder at 7:32 P.12. by Chairman Swirsky. Present besides the Chairman were Commissioners Ebright, Baumgartner, Fennel, Hayes and Jarvie* Absent Comfssioner skiWere
2- Minutes of December 23, 1958, It was moved by Corn, Ebright and seconded by Corn. Baumgartner that the minutes of December 23, 1958 be approved as submitted. Six ayes, notion carried.
3- HEARING - Variance. Request of Carl Lo and Alice hi. Lough for mduc- tion of front yard sot back from 20' to 10, of Lot I3 Terramar Unit #lo Notice a€' hearing was road, The Secretary certified as to the pub-
lication of lcoti6e of nearing and the mailing of' notices to property ownms in tb areao The Secretary then read the application submitted by tha owners setting forth the. reasons for requesting tb variance and the conditions relatZve thereto, There were no written protests.
No one present desired to make any commnt,
The public hearing was closod at 7:35 P.N.
It was mved by Corn. Ebright and seconded by Corn. Hayes that Resolution No. 102 be adopted cranting tho request of Carl Lo ani Alice i.1. Lough for a. reduction of front yard set back from 20' to
10' for the following reasons:
1, This is beach front property with the inherent peculiar characteristics and the available area for construction purposes is very limited.
2, Similar variances have been granted to neighboring propertieso
3, Granting this variame mill not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood as the variance PeqLested conforms to the existing pattern of other homes on the streets
Some discussion was given this matter, during which Corn, Ebright stated that the question of how to get proper sewerage on lots cramped for space would be a good problem to discuss during a study period, Corn. Jarvie asked b. Lough if the planned extension would be the
width of ths house ad was informed by Mr. Lough that it muld be the sarm ridth, The Chairman asked for a roll call vote. Chairman
Swirsk Commissioners Zbright, Bamgartner, b'cnnel, Hayes and Jarvie voted K. yes"e Connn. Strinser absent, Resolution No. 102 adopted,
r.
4- HEARING - Variance, Request of hrs. btha PA, Piper for reduction of lot width from 75' to 68,751 in order to permit a lot split to create 3 lots out of Lot 140, 7, Bellavista Tract, said property lying on the east side of W.;.;hland ur. between hover and Adams ste2 situated at 4334 Highland Dr.
Come EQmgaPtner v&.cated his seat as Cornmissioner,
The Secretary stated that there is a clerical error on tb azenda in that this area is zoned for 15,000 square feot rather than 10,000
sq, ft. as shown.
Notice of hearily., was read. The Secretary certified as to the publi- cation of iioi;icc of haring md the mailinz of notices to property ownws in the area. The Secretary then read tb application submitted by the owmr setting forth the reasons for requesting the variance
and the conditions relaLive thereto; and the names End addresses of . owners of adjacent Froperty who were in favor of granting the variance. There were no written protests.
MRe 1.KF.IOX SMYTH, 4228 Hipbland Dr. stated that creating the 3 lots would be an excessive reduction in the zoning restrictions; that the Master Plan calls for 75' frontage as the minimum, and that most of the lots in that area run from 90' to 150'; that it is a nice piece of residential property which could be split into 2 very satisfactory lots to conform to the area; that this is a desirable location and, as the purpose of' the lot split is to sell the lots and a wider lot wov.ld bring proportionately more than a narrow lot, 2 lots would
bring the same money as the 3 lots requested. He further stated he believed the Planning bor.mission should conform to the baster Plan 8113 not grant the variance,
DR. \r.'lLLIA:.I A. FREX, 4264 Highland be stated that in essence he agreed vri tih what &. Srayth had said.
F.R. EUGWE I:'ERNIGR, 4264 Highlard Dr. stated that he bd bought his property before the City was incorporated and that th County had in- sisted on a frontage of at least 100' and an area of 1 acre; that the set back had been 75' from the centcr of the street, am 18' from the
side lines, md the homes were built on that basis; vhen the City incorporated, they reduced the. frontage to 75' pd. reduced *e set backs to 20' from th.s front property line and 7~' from the side lines;
that the ownws had prevtously invested their money on 8n equal basis and many nice homes had been built in the area, and he thou@t the Plannine Cornmiss ion should take these facts into consideration,
CDR GILBERT Re BAU, 4400 H1f;hland Dr, stated that he had recently bought his lot and had understood that he would le protected on tbs size.of his lot by the zonirq regulations; and that he thou6;ht re= ducing the frontage would be detrimental to other property ownsrs who had invested money in the areao
-2-
hR. HOEAI'ZD EAUl,IGARTK'ER, 5065 Los Hobles Dr, stated it was his motherr who was applying for; the variance; that his mother was probably one of tb first to buy in the area and had well over an acre; that the County ordinance tvas no longer in effect arid the present ordinance requires 15,000 squme feet with 75' frontage; that tho request is for a reduction of €$ which is very small in comparison with some of the reduct ions vklich had been Granted recently; fram appearances there are apparently other variances in the section in lot width, area, front ani side yard sot backs, so this would not be the first variance from the Ordinance, He furthm stated Lhat the property is on a level piece of eround about 8' h.l:;her than the street and is rather secluded, so should not affect; the surroundin=; pmperty whatsoever.
MR. G'ZRl?IGK stated that &. Baumgartner's statement regarding the affect on surrounding property micht be solizewhat true, but granting
this variance would be establishin@ a precedence and there would be others who would then apply for the sane, so eventually there would be more small lots, and the smaller the lot the cheaper tb residence which would be detrhental to the section; and that he would like to help improve the prcpmtg rather than see it g3 downa
MR. SMYTH stated that Baumgartner had referred to %e fact .that previous variances had been granted, but the Good Eook says, "Go thou
and s in no more e "
The public hearing vas closed at 7r50 P.M.
It was moved by Corn. Jarvie and seconded by Gomm. Fennel that Reso- lution No. 103 be acopted @anting the request of &s.- Letha ld. Piper for reduction of lot width from 75' to 60.75' in order to permit a lot split to create 3 lots for the following reasons:
1, Tho variance requesteci is within reasono
2, Each of the 3 lots vroulb have more than the required area,
3, The property is elsvated so the reduction tvou3.d not be noticeable.
4, Granting tk:is variance will not be dctrirnontd. to the sur- roundinc property ir. the neigh;mrhood,
Considerable discussion vas Given this matter. Corn. Ebright pointed out that durin; the various meetings that haa been held on zoninc, the majority of peoFle had wanted a minimum of 759 frontage in this section; that these lots FX)LI~U be substandard accordinz to the orcll- nance; that the smallest lots in the city are requireci to have 60' frontage on interior lots and 70' on corner lots; that the width of a lot is more important than the area; that Seacrest Estates has a minimum frontage of loOD and the cheapest lot sells for.;,,5,000; he then read Section le02 of Ordinance 9060 and stated that this variance
did not come under an$ of these 4 reasons for panting a variance.
-3-
Corm. Hayes stated that most of the lots in the area are mre thm 75' and granting tb variance would seem to be breaking faith with the many rneetinzs that have been held to determine that minimum, Comm. Fennel stated that in support of his second to the motion, he considered this a justifiable variance vhich vo111ci not be detrimental to the property; thE.t there is a trend away from large lots to smaller ones; and that many expensive homes in cities are built on small lots, The Chairmm asked f'or a roll call voteo Chairman Swbsky, Cormis- sioners Fennel and Garvie voted "Yes"; Commissioners Ebright and Hayes voted. flNoff ; Commissioner Baumgartnar abstained; Comiss ioner Stringer absento Resolution iio, 103 failed to pass for lac!: of sufficient maj or i ty,
Comm, Baumgar tner resumed his chair.
5- TENTATIVE SUBnMSIClN RAP - Linmar Village. The tontative mp of tinmar Village was Frosented to tb Lomission for their reviewo Proposed hsolution No. 101 was prescnted to the Cormission for lheir review, recommmdinL; to the City Gouncil the approval of the tenta- tive map of Linmar Village, subject to certain conditions listed therein,
The City Ene;ineer stinted that Tamarack hmnue is shown on the Master Plan as a primary street, and Jefferson as a secondarg street, No street width has ever been set by the City, but the subdivider shows them as 601 streets, which is not objectionable providing adequate set backs are provi6.ed for future wLdening, Sewers ard water are available and there are no particular complications except that sone way cf drainage should be arranged to the south requiring easements from property owners e
MEI. DON HOLLY stated. that he represented idre Hale and the main ques- tion seemed to be drainage, but they were talking to the owner of the property to the south and were getting the situation settled; that Hale is cortemplating the purchase of tb property to the south for another srlbdivision which would (TO to Chinquapin; that if Mr. Hale did not purchase the Perachino property, it would be neces- sary to provide a ctannol to provide a clrdnage outlet from the southern end of the subdivision to Chinquapin; that n temporary barrier at the end of Linmar Lane will bo shown on the construction
plans; he then stated he had understood Jefferson St, vas a local street in that areao
Comm. Bright asked when there would be 8 f irn plan on taking land from subdividers as had been done on several occasions; and stated .that the wording in line 5 of para, 6 should be changeci from "recom- mended . e to be widened at the south", to "required a . e to be widened at the soutkt".
Considerable discussion was eivon to the future videning of Tamarack in that area and the difficulties In connection therewith because of the narrow fPeew6.y overpass. Because of no precise plan for Tamarack Ave,, and the physical factors involved, it was decided
-4
that the tentative map could be approved if the sSdivider would offer to dedicate tke most northerly 12' of lots 1, 12 and 13 sub3ect to the demacd of the City,
It vas' moved Q Coml. L%right and seconded by Corn. Jarvie that Resolution No, 101 be adopted subject to the following conditions:
1, That the subdivider dedicate a 1' buffer strip at the south end of Linmar Lane,
2, That the tc:mporary cul de sac at the south end of Linmar Lone
be a requirement, not a reconmndation*
3, That the subdivider offer to dedicate the most northerly 12'
of lots 1, 12 ard lZI for future street purposes.
4, That if it is determined that Jefferson St, is a locd street in that area, the aCditiona1 3' set back on lots 12, through 18 be waived
The Chairman asked f'or a vote on the motion, 6 ayes, Corn. Stringer absent. Resolution No. 101 adopted,
6- Report of Corn. H~as' committee on day nurseries in R-l Zoneso Comm, Hayes stated 1-hat it was the majority feeling af the cormittee
that Ordinance 9060 be amended to allow day nurseries in R-1 zones with a condftional Z.S~ permit, subject to review at a flxed time of one or two years, alth the ri&t to revoke the permit If complaints are received; that EL condition of the conditional use permit should
be that the day nursery meet the mquirements of state laws and county ordinances; and that the City Attorney work out the wonling
for the anendment.
It was tb decision of the Commission tn send the findings of the committee to the Citv Attorney with the request that he tmrk out R wording for tho mertdment, after which a public hearing would bo seto
7- Memorandum fron City Council re Chamber of Commerce letter requestfnp;
study of Inclustpial Zoning Ordinanco, Tho Secretary read the menoran- durn from tb City Gcnmcil and the letter fro:n the Chamber of bomerceo
The L-hlrmm stated that he wculcl appoint a comfttec to mako a study of' the Industrial Zclning Ordinance ani report back with any proposed changes to the o~dlr~ance. C01.m~ btr inger VJHS al>pointed Chairman, wi th Comm. Tamel and Sec.y. Price appointed as menibers to act on the con- mfttee,
8.. Secretary's Report: UI.
as The Socz-etery stated that a nemorandurn had been sent $0 the City bounci1 rcgLwdjng the right of' way on Y'ashington St., vrhich the Council had received very vrell, and that they had referred it to the Public viorks Gomm?zfss ion for study as to feasibility,
b, The Secretmy stated that the Council had taken the requested aotion regarding utility easements, ami had directed the City Kanager to write a letter tc, the san Diego Gas cnd Electric Co, backing up the Commission, The Secretary then stated that there had been no reply to the letter, but- t.hat Mr. hans had been at the office to discuss the matter and had been expected to attend the meeting tonight,
c. The Secret&.ry stated that he had contacted the o'piners of the property located on tb north side of Oak St, regardinz a possible change of zone for that area, but they wore all satisfied with its present status and Lid not aant 8 chargo at this time. It was the decision of the CorwAssion to tdce no further action.
9- \T.rritten Cornmicaticmi - 8
a, The SecretE.,-y read a copy of a letter from the Park and Recreation Commissicn to the Traffic Safety Conritteo rogardinc the planting of street trees in the center of each "EulbT1 in tfie many existing end future cul de sac streets in the city.
10- Oral Comunications
a, The Chairmgn stated that he had met url th tb sm Die@ Plannfng Conpess tke doy before and they are trying to deyise a new system, The new Bomd of Directors will elect the new officers. The meetings wrll be romd table discussions Instead of importing speakerse, They will want one c,f the Directors to come from this Commission, and an election or appolntmnt mill be held at the next meeting, so the Commission shorn gfve it some thought.
b, The Secretory stated that Ar, VJhitnall would be in Carlsbad on the 3rd Tuesdiiy of each mnth for work and coordinacion, and tbt the meeting on lfie 4th Tuesday will be for study purposes, Some of the ideas that were presented for LIP. \:'hitnall to work out EL program on were the developnsnt or cm~mrcial property; the ilnster Plan; and
how to handle E Stuations such as the widening of Tarnaraack Ave.
11- Adjournment, Ey proper motion, che meeting was adjourned at 9:15 P.u.
Respectfully submitted, ay" 3. H, PRICE, Secretary