Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1961-11-14; Planning Commission; MinutesMINUTES OF THE CkRLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMLSSION MEETING November 14, 1961 The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Chairman Grant. Present besides the Chairman were Commissioners Davis, Neiswender , Kistler , Hughes , Jarvie and Ward. Approval of Minutes of October 24, L961. Chairman Grant requested that Page X, ~LiEF-i?rogFes-SLrepoF€ on Parks and Recreational areas in subdivisions, be changed to read: "Chairman Grant asked Commissioner Neiswender if the meaning of the word "subdivider" should be defined, " Chairman Grant also requested that the sixth line on page 2 be changed to read: "Carlsbad must create a receptive , profitable atmosphere, with no obstacles in order to get people to annex to and develop in our city. Builders must find an encouraging way to meet competitive prices with Cceanside and nearby cities, Commissioner Jarvie state that we should investigate the property south of the City limits with an annexing objective in mind. 'I A motion was made by Commissioner Jarvie and seconded by Cornmissioner Hughes that the minutes of October 24, 1961 be approved as amended. All ayes, motion carried. Written Communications. There were no written communications. Oral Communications. There were no oral communications, HEARING - VAkIANCE - Request of David M. and Barbara D. Beckett for variance in front yard setback from 20' to 10' 6" and a rear yard setback from 12.5' to 6' on property located on the south side of Shore Drive, on the southerly rtion of Shore Drive, West of Carlsbad Boulevard, eing Lot 3. Terramar Unit 1. in the City of Carlsbad. 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 Secretary then read the application setting forth the reasons for requesting the variance. We reported two items of correspondence on it, and read the two letters protesting this variance from A. 0. Innis, 5290 Carlsbad Blvd., and Ruth F. Hanes, 5215 Shore Drive. Commissioners discussed the size of Lot 3 which had been partially split, but then which was approved by the City Engineer. I -2 - SHELDON TYSON, 5257 Shore Drive stated that he had no objections to this variance as the lot is still 6000 square feet. Mr. Tysor, stated that the variance would not adversely affect other property. DAVID BAIRD, 5263 Shore Drive stated that he would be the one most affected by his building and he had no objection to his obtaining the variance. There is only one house that does not have a variance in this neighborhood and all of the rest have variames on account of the size of lots, and that the commissioners should consider the fact that this is on the radius of a curve. There were no verbal objections. Public Hearing was closed at 7:56 P.M. Commissioner Jarvie brought up the subject that there are no sewers in Terramar and that this is a small lot and it was recognized that sewer and disposal would be handled by the Health Department at such time when the Health Department requestr it. MR. BAIRD stated that there is a 4' easement on west side of property and he used part of it for his own line so he could hook up there to the sewer when the sewer lines are in. Twenty-five feet down there is solid sand and most of the water seepage on the beach is from the big reservoir between El Arbol and Santa Fe Railway right-of-way. Samples have been taken from this seepage by the health department and they have showed no danger. There was a discussion of the variances of other property owners. The Tyson and Hanes homes were there before the ordinance was passed. A motion was made by Commissioner Neiswender and seconded by Commissioner Ward that Resolution No. 227 be adopted granting this variance for the following reasons: 1. That such variance is necessary €or the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in question. 2. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrtmental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in mich vicinity and zone in which the property is located. 3. That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensiv general plan. The Chairman asked for a roll call vote. A YES: Chairman Grant, Commissioners Davis, Neiswender , Kistler , NQES: None ABSENT: None Hughes, Jarvie and Ward. Resolution No. 227 adopted. HEARING - RESOLUTION OF INTENTION - Amendmer-t to Ordinance No. 9060, to consider reclassification by addmg Po"ientta1 M Zone (Indushial on that monertv known as "L'ast carfsbad Annexation 2.1 'I in the City o';fCarlsbad, excepting therefrom, as the easterlv 75 acres as shown on " county Assessors Map of San Diego County, Book 16'/, Pages 3 and 4 e and lying East of EEL Camino Kea1 and South of Vista W ay. c 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 Secretary reviewed Resolution of Intention No. 24 initiating this reclassification, and stated that he had written property owners in the area for comments and views on it before this Resolution of Intention was adopted. The Secretary read a letter from Dr. Emory Moore, 2005 East 0cean.Blvd. , Long Beach objecting to this zone change because it is not suitable for industrial zoning. Letter from Glenn R. Feist , Attorney at Law , who claimed he represents several groups in this area, stating that such a move would be poor planning and that his clients objected to any such change. KAY KALICKA, P. 0. Box 71 stated that he owns considerable property adjacent to this area and felt that a zone change would do more harm than good. Oceanside has had C-M zoning on property adjacent to his ownership and he has been in court for over a year, The proposed shopping center west of El Camino Real has been delayed because of court procedures, and because of engineering problems with the State Division of Highways over drainage and access. He said it would be impossible to develop land for luxunious homes near an industrial zone. Mr. Kalicka stated that the Kamar Company which he represents, wished to record their very strong protest €or having Potential M zoning in this area. JAMES H. LYONS, Attorney at Law, 411 West Fifth Street, Los Angeles, representing A. J. Industries, developers who have property on the north side of Vista Way, stated that they are opposed because industrial zoning would depreciate the value of surrounding property. They feel that M zoning should be near the railroad or in an area near the airport. Their property overlooks Vista Way, which is the main entrance to Vista, and is under development for fine homes, and it does not make sense to put M zoning along the best homesites. He submitted if industrial area is in that location, they will not get the right kind of businessmen to make a go of it, the fly-by-nighter. Because of lack of transportation facilities, it would be vacant in a short time. His clients do not want this and for the benefit of the city, it would be better not to have M zoning on this property. DALE AUSTIN, City Attorney of Oceanside, stated that he was with City Manager Franklin Lilley and city planning director Ernest Taylor, and that he was not a property owner in the city of Carlsbad. He presented map showing proposed property zoned C-M in Oceanside. He mentioned that Carlsbad and Oceanside are neighbors and it was necessary for them to cooperate as they had when Carlsbad presented the bill for the lagoon. He further stated that the zone change would be -4 - highly detrimental to Oceanside as a whole, and that industry could be noisy and would be incompatible to the surrounding developments. He thought that the drive to Vista on Vista Way is one of the most scenic drives and would not like to have manufacturing along the side of it. It would be a burden on property owners: no evidence had been presented before the commissioners to support the finding of fact that this would be in the need for public necessity and convenience. Chairman Grant reported that this summer they had zoned property on the Marron Ranch to M, and that an asphalt plant and rock crushing operation had been allowed under a conditional use permit, and after further studying decided to make Potential M zoning of this property by Vista Way and El Camino Real, and that making it "Potential" the Planning Commission could control what does go in. The Palomar Airport is up the street on El Camino Real; and Vista Way, now an Expressway, soon will be elevated to a Freeway status. There is the new hospital and the new college will be in shortly, and it seems the logical place for M zoning which could be controlled; as farther east on Vista Way is a bowling alley, various other establishments of commercial and industrial nature, and the dairy by the expressway. Oceanside has a similar situation on Short Street as there is M zoning surrounded by fine homes and there is no apparent imcompatibility. These things were discussed among members, and the fact that on September 22, 1961 letters were written to the property owners. They felt these logical wants were not incompatible as R-A could develop into C zone. The Chairman requested that the record show that no one spoke in favor of the proposed zone change. CARROLL KELLY, El Camino Real, stated that he owns 50 acres within the zone change and 25 acres adjoining. His property looks down on Vista Way and feels it would be better if zone is nct changed. MRS. EMORY MOORE, 2005 East Ocean Blvd. , Long Beach stated that the existing M zoning on the quarry has a conditional use permit, and is time limited and not permanent. She has worked with planning commissions before and has found spot zoning to be a bad thing as it creates hazeards. She stated that although industrial property was more expensive than residential property, the best use of this particular land was not industrial but residential, and that industry or commerce which might be allowed in the area ought to be of a semi- institutional variety, such as the hospital and the projected college. Mrs. Moore questioned the city's need for industry with the statement that in some cities with- out industry and-or a sound tax base, residential properties were penalized tax- wise because of lack of industry. . Chairman Grant assured her that this was not the case in Carlsbad as the City has a very favorable tax base. The commission was merely attempting, by providing zoning for industry, to put the city on a more secure economic base. MR. LYONS, requested that Chairman Grant's remarks be stricken from the record as he had not shown fact to support the contention that Carlsbad had the need for industry, if it had a favorable tax base. TED VALLAS, 220 Fifth, Encinitas , stated he has 46 acres adjoining this land which is being developed with underground phones, and is a prinkipal stockholder in the El Camino Country Club, and this particular property does not seem to be the right kind of property for industrial development, i, e, , San Clemente did and now it is a failure, He has been in the industriaL business and knows the needs and feels there is no additional area for expansion, and that the area under con- sikbation is inadequate. He stated the place to start industries is in a larger -5- place as large parking areas will be needed, and wished to go on record for opposing this. MR. KELLY asked how many years ago the property by Solamar was zoned M. The Secretary stated that it had been 4 or 5 years. MR. KELLY asked if they can't get an industry down there, why should they put one in here? Commissioner Jarvie stated that it was being held up because of freeway and sewer, mainly sewer. ROBERT WETHERAN, 921 Laguna Rd. , Fullerton, stated he came with his firm to Oceanside and invested $400,000 in Oceanside, his property being adjacent to Mr. Vallas. He did not look into the past history and examine the boundaries of the city, at that time, but has since examined the surrounding area and see6 no reason for such a proposal and cannot justify this change. He feels the area is not large enough for electronics for example. He is opposed to it and his firm is opposed to it, as it would adversely affect his property. MR. VALLES stated that statistics showed that by the year 2000, 450,000 people will be in this area. A lot of them will want homes and there will be little property left on the coastal plain for people coming out here. San Diego is enticing industries out by Miramar with many homes hearby. City of Carlsbad has one of the best potentials but this proposed change would not be conducive to its maximum potential development. MR. KALICKA asked the amount of acres involved, He wants Planning Commissior to hold off for a couple of months as he has been working with the State regarding his property. Commissioner Jarvie stated there were some 360 acres involved and asked what had happened to the planned shopping center. MR. KALICKA replied that they had to go to court with the City of Oceanside and that they had a drainage problem, and they did not vision the obstacies confronting them. MRS. MOORE asked when action would take place on this proposal and would like to know the results of any committee meetings held on this proposal, and be advised of any public hearings. Public hearing was closed at 9:ll P. M. Commissioner Hughes stated that he is very opposed at this time. Property in southern part of city is M zoned and is not being used. MR. BERRY HAYES gave verbal objection to this to Commissioner Hughes and stated if this goes potential M zone there will be need of a buffer strip and it will degrade the area. He wants to go on record as opposing it. Commissioner Neiswender stated that any potential is detrimental. He wants to go on record as being against potential zoning change. Commissioner Kistler stated the public hearing was very beneficial. Commissioner Ward stated that the feeling were so strong against it that he felt he was opposed also. Commissioner Jarvie stated that the public hearing was very good, as it shows how the people feel about it, Commissioner Neiswender stated he did not mean to close the door on this but at this time feels P-M zoning would be premature. A motion was made by Commissioner Hughes and seconded by Commissioner Neiswender that Resolution of Intention No. 24 be denied for the following reasons: 1.. That such reclassification would be materially detrimental to the property and improvements in such vicinity in which the property is located. 2. That such reclassification is not dictated by public convenience and/or necessity. 3. That there is other land that could be used for this purpose, and the land that is already zoned M should be used first. 4. That there were overwhelming protests of surrounding property owners, and no favorable comments were received from any affected property owners. The Chairman asked for a roll call vote. A YES: Chairman Grant, Commissioners Davis, Neiswender , Hughes, NOES: Commissioner Kistler . ABSENT: None Jarvie and Ward. Resolution of Intention No. 24 denied. A short recess was called at 9:20. Reconvened at 9:35 P.M. Old Business: (a) Progress report on Parks and Recreational areas in subdivisions. Commissioner Neiswender reported the committee has been working on fithis matter and will advise the Secretary when they ;want a hearing on this. Chairman Grant requested that they keep in mind that time is of essense. (lb) Lebarr Estates No, 2 --Relocation of water main on 20' public right-of-way. City Qhe Engineering Department wanted more information from the property owners involved, as the Engineering Departmer- had been advised by Mr. VJm, Butters, the owner of the property, that this proposec subdivision will be completed by another subdivider. The Engineering Department has requested that Mr. Butters make this known in writing to us and what their intentions are. Ne recommends that this matter be deferred. New Business: City Engineer asked for a committee for the extension of Tamarack Avenue , from Highland Drive to El Carnino Real. He wants to keep Planning Commission informed on the progress, There are short portions of Pi0 Pic0 , Skyline and Sunnyhili which are developed. 84' right of way as required by major street Master Plan is extreme cost of right-of-way. The engineers recommend 74' right-of-way. After much consideration of this problem, it appears to be more practical to reduce the roadwa! " 7 " to 52' and this will provide for two 12' and two 14' driving lanes and that when the volume of traffic became heavy enough to need four moving traffic lanes that parking would be prohibited. This would also provide 5' parkways and 5' sidewalks in a 74' right-of -way. Woodland Hights and Tamarack Manor are improved and the suggested roadway will utilize that property as it is now, Under the Master Plan of 1957, all properties that front on Tamarack have been faced with giving 12' off their property for major street right -of -way. Toby Thornton Assistant City Engineer has worked revising Don Brigg's Laguna Terrace map to comply with this proposed extention of Tamarack and finds that it is practicable. They will not have to purchase any property with residential houses on it. He has made an investigation so that nobody would be land locked in this area. The strong area of protests would be in the Highlands. Commissioner Neiswender stated this was better planning for Tamarack to intersect El Camino Real south of Chestnut. There was discussion among commissioners about this. Commissioner Jarvie stated that it was better to get in on the map before people build on their property. Cornmissioner Kistler felt this was a better plan. The Secretary stated that he had discussed with the City Engineer the revised street width from 84' to 74' and that he could not agree with the engineering dep.artment as to the .Feasibility of building a major street with only 52' of pavemen; or 4 traffic lanes. A major street to perform its function as such should have 4 moving traffic lanes available at all times in addition to provisions for parking on either side. The proposed street by the engineering department's own statement would be substandard to the extent that it would be necessary to ban parking on Tamarack when Tamarack began carrying a volume of traffic that a major street is designed to carry. The Secretary also pointed out that Tamarack, during its entire length will be serving a residential area, and that to enforce a no parking ordinance on this street would be difficult if not impracticable. The Secretary pointed out to the commission that to determine the street width and traffic control, they should not consider what the present day traffic needs are but should also take into consideration what the traffic needs will be 10 years from now. Chairman Grant appointed committee of Commissioners Ward, Kistler and Davis , under Chairman Hughes. Commissioner Jarvie asked about the expense of an 84' street. The City Engineer said they would have to make an estimate of comparative cost for 84' street versus 74' street. Gas tax funds would be used. Commissioner Jarvie stated that he was in favor of long range planning. Chairman Grant feels this should be considered money factor involved. Mr. Thorton asked that a date be set for this week for a meeting of the committee at the Engineers office at 1:OO P.M. and they should consider the width and money before the meeting. Adjournment: By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 1O:OO P, M. Resr>ectfullv submitted, 3. H. PRICE, Secretary