Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1962-05-22; Planning Commission; Minutes, MlMUTES OF THE CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 22, 1962 The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. , by Chairman Grant. The Secretary swore in Mrs. Jane C. Sonneman as a new member of the Planning Commission, Also present were Commissioners Davis, Ward, Ewald, Palmer and Jarvie. lqproval of Minutes of May 8, 1962. A motion was made by Commissioner Jarvie and seconded by Commissioner Davis that the minutes of May 8, 1962 be approved as corrected. 6 ayes, 1 abstained as she was a new member motion carried. Written Communications. Letter from the Carlobad Municipal Water District to the City Manager, dated May 22, 1962 regarding proposed annexation of the district's Squires Dam site to the City of Carlsbad under an "uninhabited territories" annexation proceedings now under way. Their primary interest insofar as land use is concerned are any plans the City may have in regards to zoning for this area. They requested that this matter be studied and the information forwarded to their office. There was a discussion of the Land to be annexed and the topography of the land. The Secretary reported that the land would be annexed as R-1 and the Planning Commission can then change the zoning to R-A or any other if they wish. Oral Communications K,AY KALICKA , P. 0. Box 71, Carlsbad reported there is a section in the code of ordinances which permits zonipg prior to annexation, The land to be annexed is a tfemendous area and it would not affect him at the present time. CONTINUED HEARING - VARIANCE - Request of Harry F. Q LaVerne R. Kelley for reduction of frontage from 60' to 50'- The Secretary read a letter from Mr. Kelley, dated May 9, 1962, proposing an allternate plan if the Planning Commission did not feel they should grant this request. The plan would have a 60' frontage on Chestnut Avenue and then at a point 35' in dlepth on the west lot line it cuts back easterly 10 feet giving the balance of the Lot 50' width. T'here was a discussion among the Commission regarding the 60' frontage after smeeing the property. Most of the Commission felt that they should not have anything lees than 60' frontage on Chestnut and should be 60' straight through the property without having a jog in the property Line. It was pointed out that the garage on the property has an additional room on it which is on a concrete slab and that if a 60' Lot split were granted it would go through this building, and therefore, the building would have to be removed before granting a 60' Lot split. MR. SUTHERLAND, 3042 Highland Drive stated that the Planning Commission is responsible for the growth of the City, and felt sure that Mr. Kellcy knew about the setbacks and regulations before he built this garage. MR. KELLEY reported that the garage is over 10 years old. I L -2- A motion was made by Commissioner Ewa1.d and seconded by Commissioner Palmer that the request of Harry F. and LaVerne H. Kelley for reduction in frontage from 60' to 50' be denied, however that a lot split 60' width be gra&M for the following reasons: 1. That there are unusual circumstanccs connected with this property and would 2. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the be compatible with similar lots in the area. 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 this variance would not create a situation which would be detrimental to surrounding property. The Chairman asked for a roll call vote. AYES: Commissioners Ward, Ewald, Palmer and Jarvie. NOES: Commisioners Davis and Grant. ABSTAINED: Commissioner Sonneman. ABSENT: None The motion failed to carry for lack of sufficient majority, and, therefore, failed. It was agreed this request for reduction in frontage from 60' to 50' be denied for the following reasons: 1. That it would not be in the best interest of public necessity and convenience. 2, '. That the granting of such variance will adversely affect the comprehensive general plan. 3. That there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone. The following resolution was presented for consideration: Re solution No. 247. A RESOLUTION OF THE CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COM- VARIANCE OM PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS PORTSON OF THUM LANDS, TRACT 240, MAP NO. 1681 IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, was adopted on Commissioner Davis's motion, seconded by Commissioner Grant. A YES: Commissioners Davis, Ward, Grant * Palmer and Jarvie. NOES: Commissioner Ewald. ABSTAINED: Commissioner Sonneman. ABSENT: None. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP OF H0L:UAY MANOR. The Secretary certified to the mailing of notices to adjacent property owners and then read the recommendations from the various departments and agencies. The Secretary then read proposed Resolution No. 246 incorporating the recommendation; of the various departments and agencies as conditions for approving the tentative map. The Secretary read letters of protest from the following: L, M. Miller, 4055 Park Drive, Carlsbad Mr. and Mrs, Morris L. Sims, 4157 Park Drive, Carlsbad Georgiana W. Smith, 4039 Park Drive, Carlsbad Their main objection was that they felt there should be a street on the westerly side of their property so their property would not be landlocked, The City Engineer, Lowell A. Rathbun, showed a map of the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company which showed the position of the poles as recommended by the Engineering Department. The Secretary then read proposed Resolution No. 246 incorporating the recommcn- dations of the various departments and agencies as conditions for approving the tentative map, KAY KALICKA, representing Kamar Construction Company, stated that he had no comment on the report except the width of Tamarack Avenue. The City Engineer stated that the only difference to the developer would be the addition of overall width. There would be no difference to the developer in the cost of paving curb to curb as the City would make up the difference in cost beyond that of a local street. He asked the Planning Commission to make a decision on whether it will be a secondary or major street. The Engineering Department has made no further studies of Tamarack Avenue because of lack of time and personnel. Com- missioner Ward's committee studying the proposed extension of Tamarack, recommended that they have a 66' right of way with 48' curb to curb width. Commissioner Ward stated that their committee gave their first report on April 10, 1962 regarding the proposed extension of Tamarack to El Camino Real which recommended a present right of way of 48' paved road io Park Drive. This provi- sion would result in little damage to property and as Little damage as possible to the Briggs' property. The right of way may lay dormant for many years but they should have a precise plan. Commissioner Davis, also on the committee, called attention to the fact that the Master Plan provided that Tamarack connect with Chestnut Avenue. He stated that they were planning to change this route because of the expense, but after talking to Mr. Briggs he sees little difference in going through Briggs' property and going to Chestnut than the alternate plan. He stated that he views the Briggs' property as a business but the engineering department views it as acreage property. In view of opposi for property acquisition. He agrees with the theory that Tamarack must be put through to Park Drive with a 48' curb to curb width and 66' right of way. He feels the extension beyond Park Drive should not be considered at this time. tion of property owners on Sunnyhill and Skyline, he feels the cost would be about the same Mr. Rathbun suggested that they go to 68' to allow a 5' parking area. MR. KALICKA stated he is willing to give his part of the right of way but did not understand why Tamarack will drop down to 60' width. It would be carrying 4 lanes of traffic and then abolishing parking to have a 60' street. Commissioner Ewald questioned the fact that the street would be 68' from Highland to Park Drive, with 60' from Highland to Pi0 Pico. Mr. Rathbun stated that part of. the property is developed to Sunnyhill and Skyline and it would be necessary to prohibit parking but would still have proper curb to curb width. Highland to Pi0 Pic0 is 60' but would have to have 68' right of way and maintain 48' curb to curb width. C. R. "Tobyt' Thornton, Assistant City Engineer, stated that he had contacted the State Division of Highways and was told that before the State Division of Highways would widen or alter the existing structure over the freeway in the vicinity of Pi0 Pic0 and Tamarack that the City would have to develop and improve Tamarack Avenue from Carlsbad Boulevard to Highland Drive to a full major street design. The design would be 64' from face of curb to face of curb road width developed in an 84' right of way. The State Division of Highways would not be particularly con- cerned with the full 64' roadway or 84' right of way from Highland eastward. L. M. MILLER, 4055 Park Drive stated that the Master Plan which was often referred to would show a road going along the westerly side of their property, He is not opposed to the subdivision going in and has tried to work someghibg out with Mr. Kalicka but has not been able to get together with him. Their lots on Park Drive are deep and if there was a street there they would be able to divide their lots into two square lots on that end of their property. The only way they can get access to the back of their property now is to have a 300' driveway. He stated that this subdivision does not heip him or the others on Park Drive. Mrs. Smith owns lot 9 and was not able to be at the meeting. SYDNEY BALLARD, 4075 Park Drive, stated that he owns lot 11 and will be sewed in when this subdivision goes in. He came to protest because he feels there should be a street there. DR. ROY PALMATEER, 2497 Ocean Street stated that he owns 5 acres west of the proposed subdivision and has no general complaints about the subdivision. His property fronts on Highland and the proposed extension of Tamarack. The City Engineers have indicated a north side access to his property but it would be too steep to enter from Tamarack, He would like some other access coming up from Valley Street and the road the others have suggested would be accessible to his pxoperty. He would be willing to give right of way from his property. He has not had studies made for access to his property and is not registering a formal protest of the subdivision but is registering a protest of not having Valley Street extended. MR. KALICKA stated that about 3 or 4 years ago he had filed a map on this propert and it was approved. The school board met a week later and asked that he hold off fQr a short time. He held off and offered the property to the school. The school bonds failed, and after filing map again was asked the same thing again. This map is not the original map which was approved twice. This map has been worked on by the City Engineer for the past 3 months. The subdivider would bear practically all of the costs and would have to supply a pumping station. He does not object to helping schools but does not feel he ahould have to carry private .citizens. -5- The parcel is odd shaped and the lots barcly meet the City requirements. It looks easy on paper and every one has a way to ope-2 ,their property. In one case the sub- division would share costs and the other way the other property owners would have to share their own costs. He felt their property would be better off on a cul-de-sac. ROY KLEMA , Engineer for Mr. Kalicka, stated that the subdivider will bring water and sewers up to the property of those that are raising objections so that they can get these facilities at a minimum. He explained how it would help Dr. Palmateer and stated that he has made a lot of studies with the engineering department to protect the adjacent property owners. MR. MILLER stated that he has been living there about 16 years and if the map has been presented to the council that this was the first time he has heard about it being developed. He still believes that he has something to lose without a street back there. He is not adverse to this development and does not want to stand in the way of it and wishes to cooperate. He knew eventually the property would be developed but there is a lot he does not understand and wishes Kamar well. MR. KALICKA stated that the map did have a hearing and would like to point out that he has never filed a map with the City to landlock property. Many people are guided by the lines on the map. He has given up two lots so people in back could get water and sewer cheaper and would lose 3 or 4 lots if they give up any more property. MR. BALLARD asked how he could get sewer service out of the present setup. MR. KLEMA and MR. KALICKA explained on the map how this service would be available to them. MRS. HAYLMGS, 4025 S. Park Drive stated that they thought there was a precise plan to extend Valley Street South. MR. KALICKA stated that the area studies in the Master Plan were just suggestions and were never adopted and no engineering was done. Mr. Rathbun stated that they have a proposed tentative map up for approval and they do the best job on pl aahing that they can which requires cooperation of the s ubdividor . Commissioner Jarvie asked Mr. Kalicka if they could delay this subdivision. MR. KALICKA reported that it would hurt very much as they have spent 3 months working on this and considering it. They are extending sewer and water to these adjacent property owners and he could have had another lot instead, These people are not qualified engineers and he also has problems on the sewer pump. B'y common consent it was agreed to continue to an adjourned meeting, Tuesday, May 29, 1962 at 7:30 P.M. , so the Planning Commission could study this land and whether Valley Street should be extended. A, short recess was called at 9:45 P.M. Reconvened at 9:58 P. M. HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION - Request of Francis J. Fox from R-1 (Residential) to C-2 (general commercial) on property located on the South side of Harrison between U. S. 101 Highway and Adams Street, said property being portion of Thum Lands, Tract 238, Map 1681 and Block C, Lots 11 and 12, resubdivision Tracts 238 and 243 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 zone reclass- ification, and the signatures of property owners in Carlsbad who do approve the zone change but are not property owners within 300' of this area. There were no oral or written communications. The Secretary showed an aerial map of this property and reported that the Fox and Winters properties have conditional use permits. Land to the east of lot 10 is land Mr. Ecke is considering leasing to the City. FRANCIS FOX, 4215 Harrison Street stated that he is the owner and operator of Fox's Snug Harbor and there are 4 property owners involved. Some years ago a conditional use permit was granted to Henry Conant on parcel 8 x 2. He introduced Mr. Paul Ecke. PAUL ECKE stated that since his property has been reappraised the valuation has been raised 1000% and felt that by giving C-2 zoning there this present property taxations would be justified. His daughter, Barbara Winters, has a motor repair shop there and thought this would be a practicable solution for now. He requested that the part for park area be left out of the zone. There was a discussion regarding the generous offer of Mr. Ecke to lease property to the City for a recreational park for taxes. A . W. GLISSMAN, 4400 Park Drive, stated that he owns Whitey's Boat Landing and has a request in for the same type of zoning and is confronted with taxes also. The Conditional Use Permit allows that permanent buildings cannot be built without being subject to being torn down. This is his ninth year there and with the water there feels that all of the property along that side of the lagoon should bg%ngd. DALE JOSLYN, 61 0 North Ditmar , Oceanside, stated that he represented the Otceanside Sportsmans Club and they are in favor of this C-2 zoning. There are 95 paid-up members and others are waiting. Some of the members are from out of tmwn. No one spoke opposing this. The Secretary reported that Mr. Conant had had a Conditional Use Permit but if it is not used within one year it becomes void. Mr. Glissman has a Conditional Use Permit Ordinance for boat Launching as it is the only way it is permitted in an R-1 zone. The public hearing was closed at 10:22 P. M. There was a discussion regarding selling liquor on the lagoon, the sewer facilities and the fine job that Mr. Fox has done in cleaning up and maintaining the property. -7- It was pointed out that the zoning is compatible with the use of the lagoon as it is now; that now is the time to rezone from the freeway to Pirates Cove; that commer- cial zoning should be in since it is next to the freeway; that all of the property owner would benefit from this; that a definite overall plan should be made with regulations and not have spot zoning. It was agreed that the change in zone would not in any way affect the rights and privileges held by edsting Conditional Use Permits on the property and the following facts exist: 1. That the property is used now as C-2 under a Conditional Use Ordinance. 2. That it would be in the best interests of public necessity and convenience. 3. The property is well suited for commercial zoning for future planning and development of the lagoon. The following resolution was presented for consideration: Resolution No. 248. A RESOLUTION OF THE CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING "ENDING RECLASSIFICATION FROM ZONE R-1 TO C-2 OF CERTAIN DESIGNATED PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, was unanimousl.; adopted on Commissioner Someman's motion, seconded by Commissioner farvie. Chairman Grant appointed Commissioner Sonneman to serve on the Committee studying the zoning of the lagoon with Commissioner Jarvie. HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION - Request of Paul Ecke for reclassification from zone R-A [Residential AnricuLturaL) and R-3 ~~~ ~ w ultiple-family Residential) to R-T (Recreation: rist) on property located on the East and Wes sides of Carlsbad Boulevard. commencing 700' - Sduth of Hridpe at southerlv end of Garlsbad ~. -~ ~ -~ ~- ." - " "~ Bate Park and extending southerly 1000'; said operty being portion of Lot H, Rancho Agua edionda, Map 823 and Miscellaneous Map 209 Cn 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 zone reclass- ification. The Secretary reported that the only surrounding property owners are the Gas & Electric Company and the Pacific Ocean. Residential-Tourist and Recre- ational Tourist are synonymous. The request does have the support of the Gas and Electric Company. There were no written or oral communications. PAUL ECKE stated that his present intentions are to permit Mr. Leuders to sell b.ait and rent rubber rafts from truck, or mobile unit. GENE W. LEU DERS, 4235 Harrison Street, stated that the majority of cities have R-T zoning and there is only one other place in the city that is zoned R-T. They will be offering services that are needed there as there are no facilities now to serve the people; there is nothing but newspapers and trash there now. It would be a movable installation and would be on the east side of the lagoon. PAUL ECKE stated that the Gas and Electric Company was negotiating for a trade for that land to provide for Terramar Drive to go through. Mr. Leuders intends to maintain this all of the year and it would be an advantage to the City. Food has not been discussed. There was no one presenS opposing this reclassification. The public hearing was closed at 11 :02 P. M. There was a discussion about the movable bins and special vehicular equipment. MR. ECKE stated that he would go along with whatever the City wants and will put in a building if necessary and there would be no trailers. The Secretary stated that off street parking would have to be provided before any buildings can be built. MR. LEUDERS reported that there are 50 to 60 cars parked there now on Sundays and a cross walk will have to be put in. FRANK W. DeVore, San Mego Cas & Electric Co. stated that since there is a traffic problem involved, it would be in the best interest to locate on the west side now. It was agreed that the following facts exist: 1. That it is in the best interest for the progress of the City of Carlsbad. 2. There were AO objections from surrounding property owners. 3. That such reclassification will not adversely affect the comprehensive general plan. The following resolution was presented for consideration: Resolution No. 249. A RESOLUTION OF THE CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING RECUMMENDING RECLASSIFICATION FROM ZONE R-A AND R-3 TO R-T OF CERTAIN DESIGNATED PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, was unanimously adopted on Commissioner Palmer's motion, seconad by Commissioner Ward. HEARING - VARIANCE - of Lester M. Bonar for reduction in frontage to 72. '10' and 74.28' in order to create a Lot split on property located on the west side of Highland Drive between Elmwood and Oak Avenue, more particularly aescribed as Carlsbad Lands, Tract 119, Map 166 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 Chen read the application setting forth the reasons for requesting the variance. There were no written or oral communications for or against this. JACK KUBOTA , 2965 Roosevelt Street, stated that he represented the applicant, Mr. Bonar , and there is an old garage on Parcel No. 1. Lot No. 1 is a true rectangular . When this property is surveyed, which is required Lf this variance is " -9 - granted, the actual front footage might be a couple of hundredths of a foot different. D. M. DUNNE, 3016 Highland Drive stated that he lives diagonally across from this property and a survey was made 5 or 6 years ago when it was agreed 75' was the minimum frontage desired. He realizes that they are not asking for much variance and that it is just aaibbling, but when a variance is made it can be a precedent. He felt it does depreciate property. MR. SUTHERLAND, 3042 Highland Drive, stated there should be no lots with less than 125' frontage. MRS. DAVID DUNNE, 3016 Highland Drive stated that she is proud of that section of the City and there is a lot of money involved there. We have such a beautiful City and wish to keep it that way. JACK KUBOTA stated that Mr. Bonar is asking for a variance for reduction in frontage but that the lot area minimum in that section is 10,000 sq. ft. , but that these lots are in excess of 14,000 sq. ft. It is only substandard in that many years ago they did not add 2 or 3" to the front of this property. Mr. Kubob has a neighboz who has less than the required amount of frontage and he was opposed to it, but the neighbor has built such a beautiful home that he is proud of it. Mr. Bonar would like a division of this property so he can offer it for sale. He has a small stucco house with an added studio. There is an old garage on part of one lot and the rest of the lot is vacant It was pointed out that there are lots of less frontage nearby. MR. SUTHERLAND reported that there are larger houses in that particular area. Chairman Grant explained that the Commission does not look at just the present area of a few homes but considers the general area as a whole. The public hearing was closed at 11 :32 P. M. The Commission discussed the size of lots in the area and it was pointed out that s.ome lots nearby are less than 70'. It was agreed that this request should be granted for the following reasons: 1. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the zone 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 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 Secretary requested that granting of this variance for lot split be made subjed to the approval of monumentation by the City Engineer. The request was agreed to. The following resolution was presented for consideration: Resolution No. 250. A RESOLUTION OF THE CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING -GRANTING A VARIANCE ON PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS PORTION OF CARLSBAD LANDS, TRACT 119, MAP 1661 IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, was adopted on Commissioner Ewald's motion, seconded by Commis- sioner Ward. A YES: Commissioner Ward, Ewald, Grant, Jarvie and Sonneman. NOES: Commissioner Davis. ABSTAINED: Commissioner Palmer . ABSENT: None. HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - Request of North San Diego County YMCA for a Conditional Use Permit to allow aquatic facilities €or the youth of the area with a professionably super- vised program of fishing, swimming, sailing , canoeing, rowing and overnight camping and the construction of a por - table accessory building, located at the easterly side of the A. T. & S. F. Railway right of way and the westerly portion of the center bay of Agua Hedionda, Map 823 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 Conditional Use Permit. The application was signed by Elwood Trask whose property adjoins this property. RUSSELL GROSSE, Attorney, 3562 Garfield Street, showed a proposed drawing of the YMCA camp worked by Paul Ecke, Jr. , and the A. T. h S.F. Railway. PAUL ECKE stated that it was a fine gesture of the Railway and the Gas Co. to allow them the use of this property. A. H. GLISSMAN brought up the subject of chemical toilets. MR. GROSSE stated that they will take this up with the County Health Department as a health permit will be necessary. This will not be a daily operation, as it will be used on weekends, and they will have a locked gate. BOB GO FF, Box 668, Encinitas Executive for North San Diego County YMCA, stated that they intend to have both boys and girls using these accomodations, and it would be a beneficial area to work in and is anxious to get started. A policy will be drafted by the YMCA. The programs will be for the YMCA members but others may use this area also. The Power Company owns land immediately east of the Railway. The City of Carlsbad will be in the middle and will lease the land next to 'this. MR. CLISSMAN questioned whether it would interfere with other fishermen going in there. FRANK DEVORE stated that.*hanks to these gentlemen they have gotten a road in there so they do not have to enter this beach area from the railroad tracks as they did before. The public hearing was closed at 11:55 P.M. The Secretary stated that they would have to have permission from the Health Department before they can build this building. MR. GROSSE stated that the building they propose to construct will be for boys and girls and will be a regular building and will not be able to be seen from the outside. This request is in compliance with Ordinance 6020, Section 1. It was pointed out there would be 8 fence around the railraod side; they would have the necessary facilities; it would be beneficial to the community; the road would be closed to automobile traffic but anybody can walk there from Tamarack. After discussion' by the Commissiin it was agreed that the Conditional Use Permit be approved and forward to the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, for its atten- tion for the following reasons: 1. That the granting of this conditional use permit will be compat9%e with usage of surrounding property and will not be of an injurious nature. 2. That the granting of such condition use permit will be in the best interest of public necessity and welfare. The following resolution was presented for consideration: Resolution No. 251. A RESOLUTION OF THE CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING H, AGUA HEDIONDA , MAP 823 IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, was unanimously adopted on Commissioner Ewald's motion, seconded by Commissioner Palmer. CT~KANIISSIONTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ON A PORTION OF LOT Old Business. By common consent it was agreed that the nomination of a vice-chairman be decided at the adjourned meeting on Tuesday, May 29, 1962 at 7:30 P.M. A djournment . By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 12:04 A.M. Respectfully submitted, J. H. PRICE, Secretary