Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1962-01-09; Planning Commission; MinutesMINUTES OF THE CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING January 9, 1962 The meeting was called to order at ?:30 P.M. by Chairman Grant. Present besides the Chairman were Commissioners Davis, Neiswender, Kistler, Hughes, Jarvie and Ward. Approval of Minutes of December 12, 196 1. Chairman Grant requested that reason No. 4 be o~i~e~~gT~~so requested that the last line on Page 3 be changed to read: "Parks and Recreation Commission study of increased facilities in Carlsbad". Chairman Grant also requested that paragraph 2 on page 4 be changed to read: "Chairman Grant appointed Commissioners Jarvie, Neiswender and Hughes to a committee to investigate this, with Commissioner Jarvie as Chairman. " Written Communications: There were no written communications. Oral Communications. There were no oral communications. " -..--. "IL" HEARING -.RECLASSIFICATION - Reauest of Eueene L. Geil from R -1. 7500 to CThinaiiiia6jAIZ"&ore Darficuescribed as- 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 change of zone. The Secretary reported there was one item of correspondence on this matter. Letter dated January 8, 1962 from Richard W. Rahe, 970 Tamarack, stating that he owned property across from Eugene Geil's land and stating his approval of this change and urged this reclassification on the basis that it will mean a definite improvement to the area and is the obvious and best use of the land. EUGENE GEIL, 1942 So. Pacific, Oceanside stated that he has owned this property since 1954 and would like this corner lot which is approximately 125' deep rezoned to C - 1 as the turnoff on Tamarack is one of only three turnoffs from the U. S. 10 1 Freeway and would allow the rest of his land of about 5 acres €or R-1 zoning. XAY MALICKA, P. C.Box 71, Carlsbad stated that the City Engineer has a map on this plan and this corner would be undesirable for R -1 use, as it is one of three connections with the Freeway; the connections being Tamarack, Elm and Las Flores. ;Chairman Grant asked if the zoning df this corner would affect the development of this proposed subdivision. MR. GEIL stated that it would be good planning to zone the property before building a subdivision. RICHARD R. PHARR , 956 Tamarack stated that he owns property across from this corner and has no objections to a C-I zone. MAX EWALD, 3308 Bella Lane stated that he feels the reclassification is justifiable, as any way of getting people to stop here would be beneficial to the whole community, BILL ZEIDERFELT , 3150 Harding Street, stated that he has the Palms Vista Apartments across from the property in question and looks favorably upon this change There was no one present opposing this request. Chairman Grant asked the commissioners if they had any questions before closing the public hearing. The public hearing was closed at 8:47. Chairman Grant mentioned he was sorry he was not here €or the public hearing on November 28, 1961 and it was a new hearing for him as he was not present when it was up for rezoning before and is not opposed to the reclassification. He stated that the lot backs up to a C,-1 zone and all of the proposed houses adjoining this lot would have their backs to it. Property east of the freeway along Pio Pic0 Drive was zoned potential R -3 and last year was changed to permanent R -3 zone from Elm to Palm. Commissioner Jarvie stated the hearing was presented more or Iess as it was before, and that he is not opposed to a service station going in there but is opposed to "spot zoning. 'I He stated that we should adopt a Resolution of Intention and zone the properk: along Pi0 Pic0 to R -3 and then go to a C - 1 zone on the corner. which would allow motels and apartments along the freeway, as the Oceanside Harbor will attract more people to this area. Commissioner Hughes questioned Mr. Kalicka as to whether it would make a difference with his plans if the property were zoned to R-3. MR. KALICKA stated that he does not have too much land left on Pi0 Fico and there would be much opposition from homeowners on Tamarack and Adams. Chairman Grant stated the subdivision was not before the Commission at this meet- ing, just the corner area. Commissioner Hughes stated that while they were not in agreement, he did not feel they should continue this hearing to a later date as it would. not be fair to Mr. Geil and Mr. Kalicka if the rezoning on this corner is not passed. The Secretary reported they could continue hearing on this property, and a Resolution of Intention initiated by the Planning Commission could be prepared for a hearing to rezone the property along Pi0 Pic0 from R-1 to R-3. A motion was made by Commissioner Jarvie and seconded by Commissioner Davis that this hearing be continued to the first meeting in February. All ayes , motion carried. ... c - -3- Chairman Grant instructed the Secretary to prepare a Resolution of fntention to rezone property along Pi0 Fico between Palm Avenue and Chinquapin from R-1 to R-3 and have it on the agenda for January 23, 1962 under "Old Business". He also appointed a committee composed of Commissioners Jarvie, Hughes and Grant, with Commissioner Jarvie as Chairman to atudy the rezoning of this property. HEARING - VARIANCE - Request of Robert D. Gilliam for a reduction in required Trontage from GT€oWiZaXoFZToTsp1it on property med on the solithiiae-uak Avenue between Lincoln - and Washington Street, being porxion of Traw ~oYTo3"5yXa~Z~%~e-Kg- parce 1 6 pw-zn, book 203of the Assessors Map of San Uiego county. "". I_ " .. 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 apgjication, setting forth the reasons for requesting the variance. There was no casrespondence on this matter. DR. ROBERT GILLIAM, 516 Cassidy, Oceanside stated that he had nothing more to add. There was no one present opposing this request. The public hearing was closed at 8:15. Commissioner Jarvie asked Dr. Gilliam how many pieces of land )re has in this location. DR. GILLIAM stated that he had three parcels of property and has a buyer for a piece of this property which is in escrow now and the lady is anxious for the escrow to be completed. A motion was made by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Cornmissioner Jarvie that Resoiution No. 233 be adopted granting this variance for the following reasons: 1. That there are exceptional or extraordhary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone. 2. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. 3. That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehen- sive general plan. The Chairman asked for a roll call vote. AYES: Chairman Grant, Commissioners Davis, Neiswender , Kistler, Hughes, NOES: None ABSENT: None Jarvie and Ward. Resolution No. 233 adopted. A short recess was called at 8:20. Reconvened 840 P.M. - - -4 - HEARING - TO AMEND THE MASTER STREET PLAN - Request of City Planning Commisn by Resolution omention No. 2s to amend €he carlZZ,yTaster StreetKn'ljiGXocating the propo ZTieXeiGiom EIm Ave. , easterly or= " -.- presexmrminus dy rerout - in~iEa~ienmen~ iii2iXGui Sky-Siion to inters" wm Uamv%nTie between v and thence easterly along the present rinhtLof -way 0- section with I?? Camino Rea! bse en Vista . -and ehestnlrtAvenTe. " The Secretary certified as to publication of notice of hearing and that notices had been sent to property owners in the area, although not required by ordinance. The Secretary reviewed Resolution of Intention No. 25 initiating this amendment and reported there were two items of correspondence. The Secretary read a letter from General W. A. Worton, 1212 Oak Avenue,Carlsbad dated January 4, 1962 requesting that the present Master Street Plan not be amended as he is opposed to the cul-de-sac and feels it would depreciate the property. Letter dated January 4, 1962 from Mrs. Elizabeth E. Hanson, 2782 Wynglen Lane, Apt. 3, Los Angeles, California stating that she is opposed to making Oak Avenue a dead end street as it would take away the future value of the property along Oak and there would be less chance of having the property rezoned €or multi-dwellings. Chairman Grant opened the public hearing by asking those to speak who are in favor of widening Elm Avenue to 84' wide and making it a major street and extending it to El Camino Real. He explained that the 1957 Whitnall Master Plan had shown the proposed extension of Elm Avenue in more or less of a straight line from the ocean to El Carnino Real, and this proposed plan Lay dormant for a good four years. There are some expensive homes in the path of this route, so the Planning Commission, together with the Council directed the engineering department to plan an alternate route. COL DAVID DUNNE, 3016 Highland Drive stated the street under the Master Plan would be in line with his living room, and that any route would be undesirable. The City has 60 miles of road that needs to be improved and they should keep up the existing streets HENRY MEIER , 181 1 Oak Avenue asked for engineering aspects on this proposed route. City Engineer, Lowell A. Rathbun showed the proposed routes on the maps prepared by the engineering department, and explained that both routes are feasible from an engineer's viewpoint. and should be considered. Tl1e O~~i~~;l~l~~3~tC exte.ldec-to Z1 i az2-4ao -. csl alone tlx ,;ro jec'cioa .-f the existing Zlz ..venue. Lither route would have a 64' curb to curb width on an 64' street right-d-way. The second feasible route would be to swing Elm over to Oak and take route only over to Canon Street. r, c Street. After crossing to Canon Street there would be very little difference in the route between the blue route and the red route. Elm Avenue would be 84' wide and since the street on Oak is now 60' wide from Highland to Canon, it would mean that it would have to be widened 24 more feet. One of the reasons the engineers picked this route is that it would have the least amount of intersections. It would necessi- tate a slight fill just below Highland Drive on the east side and a 3 to 4 feet cut in front of the Ladd's place. The engimering department hd made rough estimates of the cost of the routes which did not take into consideration the amount of property severance. The first piece of property which would be taken would be the Schellenberger property and then the Harvey residence which would have to be purchased outright. The cost of the right -of -way acquisition would be approximately $34,000 on the blue route between Elm and Highland. The cost of right-of-way acquisition on the red route as shown on the map planned by Whitnall would be approximately $37,000. The engineering department estimated they would save approximately $14,000 on right -of -way acquisition costs on Oak Avenue from Highland to Canon. The red route would leave unusable lots on the southerly portion of the Schellenberger and on the northerly portion of the Anderson property. The construction cost would be higher on the red route as there would be approximately a 62' fill required at Canon and the construction cost would be about 50% more. The overall saving on the blue route would be approximately $17,000 less than on the red route. A cul-de-sac on Oak Avenue would be necessary because of 4 moving lanes of traffic and they have tried to eliminate as many intersections as possible. DON CHAPLIN, 1264 Oak Avenue asked if the engineers had considered extending the street to Elmwood and stated that the street could be improved to the lagoon. Mr. Rathbun explained that to go up Elmwood would not be a direct route to the east and they have to plan a direct east to west route. He stated that the farther north they go the more difficult the route would be. The City plans to have three routes to the east, Elm, Tamarack and Chestnut, and they propose to maintain the leading arteries of the City. MR. CHAPLIN stated that Chestnut would be better as a major street and does not feel we need another street now. He bought his property two years ago and plans to stay here. Mr. Rathbun stated that they could nht cross the freeway on Thestnut and the engineers should plan streets before homes are built. Chairman Grant stated that the ,engineers have brought out the matter of money for routing this route. Assistant Engineer, Toby Thornton stated that they are ' interested in getting the most for the general tax dollar, speaking of the City as a whole. They must have some guide to go by. A development is planned near this route, and this route would not interfere with the subdivision planned. Mr. Thornton stated that this proposed route does not necessarily mean this is where it has to go but the engineering depart- ment would like to know a definite route that the City wants. EDWARD M. PETERSEN, 3125 Highland Drive stated that he owns property on the corner of Highland and Oak and asked if they would take off 12' on each side of the street to make it a major street and if it would require lowering the street level on that corner which would necessitate retaining walls on corners at the intersection a8 was done on Chestnut. He stated that he is not in favor of the "S" curve as he feels it would be dangerous as well as a waste of money and that somebody will get hurt on either route. He stated that $16,000 would not mean much to the City and he would be glad to sell his property if it would be an improvement to the City. COL. SHALER LADD, 1810 Oak Avenue stated that if the street is widened on Oak the houses would be too close to the street, We asked if Falcon Hills Subdivision would be affected by the blue route 7 The City Engineer stated that Falcon Hills and Seacrest Estates were taken intd consideration and neither of these routes would interfere with the subdivisions. MR. BONDY, 1150 Pine stated that he does not like crossing over to Oak, and objects to having a cul-de-sac on Oak Avenue. Mr. Thornton stated that most developers want cul-de-sacs , and the first homes that are sold are on the cul-de-sac. MR. BONDY stated that the cul-de-sacs would be good with new construction but feels the C.ity would have a lawsuit if a cul-de -sac if put in on Oak. ROBERT TiEGEN, 1340 Oak Avenue stated that he is opposed especially to the “S” curve as it would mean intense lighting which would be detrimental to living condi- tions. He also stated that the red route would open up so much new land. He does not wish to see people lose their homes and is opposed to the blue route. RAY W. HARVEY, 1306 Oak Avenue stated that he sees no reason why the street ’‘ cannot go straigfit-as this’plan destroys tke wholc outlook of his.property. ,He asked what the City plans to do with this property and if the Planning Commission plans to buy up all of this property. PAUL PRUITT, 1450 Oak Avenue stated that he is glad to see somebody interested in the streets in town. He is opposed to the blue route and is in favor of the red route. SYDNEY A. FULLER, 3025 Valley Street asked if the houses had been built in the path of the red route since the route was proposed and why the City allowed them to build there ? Mr. Thornton showed the map of 1957 prepared by Gordon Whitnall and stated that it was never a precise route and the former map did not show a specific route. There is a private street there now. There was a discussion among the Commissioners regarding the Master Plan. Commissioner Neiswender read paragraph 2 from the Master Plan Guide. MR. HARVEY asked Commissioner Meiswender to read the last page on Elm Avenue from San Diego Freeway to El Camino Real on east , and he did. MR. PETERSEN asked why the City did not buy the property and keep Elm Avenue straight. The City should give a fair market value to property owners. MR. HARVEY asked where the City is getting this money. The City Engineer explained that the source of the money ;would be up to the City Council. The State Gas Funds on a per population basis provides for a certain percentage on Major and Secondary streets. MR. PETERSEN stated he has seen truck and trailers going up Oak Avenue with cement and lumber weighing about 27 a 000 pounds. Streets should be posted for heavy trucks to pay for permits for 20,000 pounds laden weight or more as is done in other cities. -7- MR. CHAPLIN stated that the City should use the money it has to pave the streets that are in now. COL. DUNNE stated that his piece of property lies in the path of the red route of the Master Plan, which was not a precise plan but a guide. Either route would be feasible but would not like it to go through his house or near it. MRS. ‘JOHN KADER, 3021 Highland stated that she lives across from Col. Dunne and it would ruin her home as she has a nice big home. The new road would be by her kitchen window. It would be all ri.ght if they bypassed her home. The lower end of her property did not matter so much, but no one wants to lose their home. She would like the Commission to establish a direct route and is in favor of the red route. She stated she would like to contact the engineer regarding property next to hers which belongs to Mr. Anderson and asked if the route could be brought farther north, as Mr. Anthony’s house is across the street. MR. DILLARD, 537 Oak Avenue stated that they live below the freeway but have a Lot they plan to build on. Mr. Thornton stated that he would recommend purchasing property on either route and have the Council expedite purchase. Others present that were opposed to the blue route were: ‘VERNE COLLINS, 1341 Oak Avenue. HAROLD YOUNG, 1080 Buena Place. JAMES RUTAN, 158 1 Oak Avenue. BOB PONTIOUS, 1571 Oak Avenue. The chairman polled the audience and counted 15 hands opposed to the blue route. MRS. OLE SATHRUM, stated that she owns property at 131 1 Oak Avenue next to Welch’s and would have a frontage on the cul-de-sac. MRS. ASHLEY, 1285 Oak Avenue asked if the City would take her property. Mr. Thornton stated that they would not take her property and also stated that the CEty is prepared to pay 64% of a major street and the other 36% to be paid by the property owners who would benefit from this. The Public Hearing was closed at 9:55. Chairman Grant stated this was the first public hearing on the Elm Street Extension and the Commissioners did not know how the people felt before. Commissioner Hughes stated he was glad to see the people taking an interest. Commissioner Jarvie stated he was glad to see the people turn out for the meeting and was not in favor of the blue route after hearing their opinions, as the route should be in a more straight line. He is happy to see the engineers working on this. He stated that he has been on the Planning Commission for five years. Commissioner Ward stated that he is in favor of a right-of-way at an early date. . -8- Commissioner Kistler stated that he is in €avor of doing something about a proposed route. Commissioner Jarvie asked about the cos0 of the preliminary wotk on the blue route. Mr. Thornton reported there were about $400. bf field work and about $150. office time spent on adal studies. Commissioner Neiswender stated that he wal gratified to have these people here at this meeting and wishes more would come often. He would like a little more detailec explanation of this red route as most of the people want the City to progress. A motion was made by Commissioner Hughes and seconded by Commissioner Kistler that the amendment to the Carlsbad City Master Street plan in accordance with Resolution of Intention No. 25 be denied for the following reasons: 1. Preponderance of testimony of property owners in the affected atea showed they felt that the “S” curve which would intersect Elmwood and Oak Avenue was not a desirable feature from traffic standpoint. That such an intersection would be extremely dangerous and hazardous. 2. That the proposed extension of Elm Avenue as originally set forth in the Master Plan was adequate and would serve the best interests of the public. The Chairman asked for a roll call vote. AYES: Chairman Grant, Commissioners Davis, Neiswender , Kistler. Hughes Jarvie and Ward. NOES: None. ABSENT: None, Motion carried. The Secretary reported that if the City Council so desire they can direct Engineers to prepare a precise plan for a route. Old Business. Report on harbor zoning. Commissioner Jarvie, Chairman of the committee on harbor zoning, with Commissioners Neiswender and Hughes, met with Chairman Grant and the Secretary and discussed zoning and the improvement of Hoover street. Commissioner Jarvie also stated that if Hoover Street is widened to a 64’ street and followed the shores of the lagoon in an easterly direction from Hoover as shown on the Patterson preliminary report, it would make a very logical spot for a park and is in hopes the council will consider such a plan.. The Parks and Recreation Commission are meeting in the City Hall on January 29, 1962 at 7:30 P.M., and Commissioner Jarvie urged the Parks and Recreation Committee of the Planning Commission to attend this meeting. C.ommissioner Neiswender is Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Committee and also is serving on the Harbor Zoning Committc It was the Secretary’s recommendation that this be taken to the council as they would be the proper body to approach Mr. Ecke regarding the use of his land by the lagoon at the end of Hoover Street for a park. ”- .. . Commissioner Jarvie read the last paragraph on page 1 of the C.ounci1 Minutes of December 19, 1961 and stated that he has all kinds of time and does not like this remark. He has called for joint meetings with the Council and Parks and Recreation Commission and is willing to work. Chairman Grant stated that on January 4, 1962 he met with the Mayor and City Manager to discuss the promotion of civic activities, to further industrial develop- ment, tourist and recreational activity. The Mayor selected five persons from cros: sections of town to work on Chamber of Commerce committee.to accompbish the following objectives: 1. Future projected boundary lines for the City of Carlsbad to facilitate progressive and orderly planning. 2. To suggest three tentative industrial park sites. The City Council should be the one to direct the Planning Commission as they are the supreme authority. The Council should ask €or specific things and the Mayor recognizes that this has not happened. The Secretary stated that lack of proper zoning has delayed progress. Fringe property could be zoned from the C,ounty if annexed within a year. The Secretary asked the County Planning Congress to have it done and they have stated they would when they could get to it provided property is annexed within a year. Chairman Grant stated that the City Manager discussed hiring a full time Planner for $6,000 per year to assist the Secretary. New Business. The SecretarFreported the letter from the Chamber of Commerce, dated December 13, 1961 regarding the goals for future planning. Chairman Grant instructed the Secretary to file the letter. By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 10:25 P.M. Respectfully submitted, J. H. PRICE, Secretary