Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1961-09-12; Planning Commission; Minutes&I\TUTES GF THE CHRLSEAB CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING September 12, 1961 The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Chairman Grant. Present be- sides the Chairman were Commissioners Davis, Kistler, Hughes, Jarvie and Ward. H bsent, Commissioner Hardwick. Approval of Minutes of August 22, 1961. A motion was made by Commissioner Rughes and seconded by Cornmissioner Ward that the minutes of August 22, 1961 be approved as submitted. All ayes, one absent, motion carried. Written Communications: There were no written communications. Oral Communications: There were no oral communications. CONTINUATEN OF RESUEST OF PHILIP 3. MILLER for reduction in front - yard. set-back. Notice of hearing was read. The Secretary certified as to publication of notice of hearing and the mailing of notices to property owners in the area. The Sec- retary then read the application, setting forth the reasons for requesting the : variance. There were two items of correspondence on this matter. Letter, dated August 19, 1961, from Roy and Pauline Drace and Marjorie and Achille Nardelli, in support of this application for variance, stating that it would conform with the general building practices in that area and would be an improve- ment to the neighborhood. Letter, dated August 12, 1961, from Dr. Angus 3. DePinto, objecting to the grant- ing of the variance as he felt the street was too narrow and might at some time have to be widened. There was no one present to represent the applicant. MA X EWALD, 3308 Belle Lane, stated that he would like to make a statement in general on this Ocean Street property. He felt it might be wise for the Planning Commission to make a blanket variance for the property in'this area. The Secretary stated that he had checked the properties in this area and they were all set back anywhere from 3 to 6 feet. Dr. DePinto, who lives in Phoenix, has property to the north of subject property. The public hearing was closed at 7:45. After a short discussion among the members of the Commission, it was decided that it was in line with other construction in the neighborhood and would not be detrimental to the neighborhood. A motion was made by Cornmissioner Jarvie and seconded by Commissioner Hughes that Resolution No. 219 be adopted granting this variance for the following reasons: -a- I. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and sone but which is denied to the property in question. 2. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or iq'kious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. 3. That the granting of such variadce will not adversely affect the compre- hensive general plan. The Chairman asked for a roll call vote. AYES: Chairman Grant, Commissioners Davis, Kistler, Hughes, Jarvie and NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hardwick. Ward. Resolution No. 219 adopted. KEARING-RECLASSIFICATION- Xequest of Jane Sonneman for change of zone classification from R-3 and R -1 to C -4 on getween Hope and U.S. LO1 Freeway and thence northerly along the westerly boundary of U.S. 101 to the south side of Grand Avenue , being Easterly of above parcels that was a Freeway opening and close 5, Page 320, 'Book 203, of the Assessor"s Niap of San Diego County. roperty located on the north side of Elm Street arcels 7,8 and 9 and that portion of land lying Notice of hearing was read. The Secretary certified as to publication of notice of hearing and the mailing of notices to property owners in the area. The Sec- retary then read the application setting forth the reasons for requesting the change of zone. JANE SONNEMAN, 1044 Elm Street, stated that she believed the application was self explanatory. That property at one time had been zoned C -1- and that com- mercial use was the best use for it. It abuts the Freeway ramp coming into Carls bad and the land next to it is of the same type so it would not be spot zoning. MARYA NN JCHNSCN, 988 Grand, stated that in 1953 Mr. Nielson had asked for a change of zone to C-2 on his property which had not been granted and now it was being requested again on both the Sonneman and Nielson property. She stated that she had lived there a lot longer than most people and the people in that area have a nice quiet street, which they like. The street is very narrow and she did not see how it could be coi-nmercialized, especially since two cars cannot meet on that part of the street. The property owners on that street do not care what happens on Elm Street, however. She felt that the Master Plan .must have cost the City quite a bit of money and it should be adhered to. EDITH KREUGER, 1022 Grand asked the Chairman to point out the boundary lines of the subject property, after which she asked of what benefit the reclassi- fication would be to the property on the north side cf Grand, and would her taxes be changed. -3 - , MRS. SBNNEI\/IAN stated that it was her understanding that taxes were affected by usage. The Secretary stated that he had calSe?. the County Tax il.,ssessor's office, who does the assessing for the City, and was informed a change of zone in itself would not be grounds for an increase in the assessed valuation on the property or surrocnding property if the use remained the same. But if the commercial property were developed, it would make it more valuable and would increase the value of the property around it. The change of zone itself would not affect the taxes. lW3S. IiREUGER asked if spot zoning of this sort might not set a precedent. NlRS. JOXNSBN stated that if the zone change to commercial is granted on both Mrs. Sonneman's lots, there is nothing to stop her from selling her lot on Grand Avenue to someone who wished to commercialize it. She reiterated that the street was mucE too narrow for this andkhe only way cars could get out was by turning in driveways or backing out. MRS. SONNEMAN stated that the people SpkYning property on the south side of Grand Avenue had given property to the City for the widening of said street but that it had not been done yet. Some of the neighbors parked their cars cm her vacant lot and it does not bother her at all, but she can see no other use for this property than a commercial use. Jefferson Street is C-2 and yet there are nice residences there. The public hearipg was closed at 8:15. There was some discussion among the Commissioners as to whether it would be good planning to change the zoning on the property on Grand or not, although it was agreed that the Elm Street property should be commercial. It was brought out that a master plan was difficult to follow closely, that it had to be flexible. k motio was made by Commissioner Jarvie and seconded by Commissioner Kistler/ Bat arcel 8, excepting a 10' strip 120' long adjacent to and easterly of assessor's parcel 7, extending to Grand Avenue, and the southerly 50' of assess- or's parcel 7, be recommended to be re-zoned from 3-3 to C-2, but denying reclassification on the remainder of the subject property, by adoption of Res- olution No. 220, for the following reasons: 1. That the property is on a commercial street. 2. That for many years this has been a C -2 zone. 3. That it is adjacent to the Freeway and the best use to which this land could be put. 4. There were no oral or written objections to the re-zoning of this portion. The Chairman asked for a roll call vote. m AYES: Chairman Grant, Cornmissioners Davis, Kistler , Eughes, Jarvie and WSrd. NCES: None ABSENT: Cornmissioner Hardwick. Resolution No. 220 adopted. - HEA XING - RESOLUTIGN 8 - Amend-ment to Crdinance No. 9060 reclassifying from Zone R-a-(MuL- tiple Family Residential) to C-2 (General Commercial) that portion of Tct 117, Carlsbad Lands, being all of parcels fO,ll,L2,13 and 14; the southwesterly 175 feet of parcel 4 and the southwesterly 85 feet of par- cels 5 and 6, Page 32, Book 203, of the Assessor's Map of San Diego Countyf Notice of hearing was read. The Secretary certified as to publication of notice of hearing and the mailing of notices to property owners in the area. There were two items of correspondence on this matter. Letter, signed .by Mr. and Mrs. Carl Manos and Mrs. Stella H. Brown stating that they were in favor of the proposed zone change. Letter, dated August 9, 1961, from Lawrence C. Lockley stating that they were owners of property on the north side of Elm Street and as such felt that this zone change was inevitable with the growth of Carlsbad and would support it actively. Mr. EWALD stated that if this zone change were approved, he felt the dividing line between the zones should go in a kkraight east to west line. There was con- siderable discussion among the Commission on this and the Secretary explained that some of the properties face on Grand and are R-1 and the rear wrtion will be C-2. The public hearing was closed at 8:55. It was decicLed that more study should be given this matter and the Chairman appointed a committee, consisting of Commissioners Kistler, Jarvie and him- self, to look into the matter further. h motion was made by Commissioner Ward and seconded by Commissioner Mistler to continue this matter until the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission on September 26, 1961. All ayes, one absent, motion carried. The Chairman reported to the Commission that, because Commissioner Hardwick was unable to be present at this meeting, the progress report on industrial i zoning would not be heard, The Chairman stated that he would give the report himself, should Cornmissioner Hardwick be unable to attend on September 26, 1961. k .Newt bdness: The Chairman stated that Commissioner Hughes had proposed a change of zone classification from R-1 to R-3 on the property on the south side of Grand Avenue that adjoins the proposed zone change to G-2 on Elm Avenue. The reason for his proposal was that there should be a buffer strip of X-3 property between an I? -1 zone and a C -2 zone. A fter a short discussion, a motion was made by "Commissioner Hughes and seconded by Cornmissioner Ward that the Secretary be instructed to prepare Resolution of Intention No. 21 directing him to advertise for a-zone change from R-1 to R-3 on that portion of Grand Avenue lying east of Mome Avenue. All ayes, one absent, motion carried. Adjournment: By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 9:55 P.M. Remectfullv submitted.