Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1963-05-14; Planning Commission; Minutesl ROLL CALL waa answered by Commiersionars Davis, Waid, Ewald, Palmer, Jarvie and Sonnemsa. Also present were! City Attorney Stuart C . Wilson, Planning Technician I I Uhland B. Melton, and Secretary Price, Commissioner i Grant was absent. 1 4 : Davis APPROVAL OF MINUTES: i Ward " - Ewald were approved as corrected. : Jarvie WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (a} Minutes of the regular meeting of April 23, 1963, Palmer i Sonneman I I " I I I (a) City Manager - re: Street Lights requirement by i subdividers for new subdivisions. I I Mr. Melton asked that this be deferred to the next meeting in order for the staff to meet with the Gas and Electric Coi (b) City Manager - re: Policy in conducting public i hearings for zone changes, variances, etc. t I The Commission agreed this was a good idea and the City ! Attorney reported that cities can set up the€r own poltcies j (c) City Manager - re: Reclassification of Rorick i Property. It was the determination of the City Council ; that the Council concurred with the area being zoned in the: three R -1 zoning areas; however, the zoning areas are to ; be designated in accordance with a metes and bounds I I I I * I I I I b i description. This matter is being referred to the Planning :i:::: r"1;I Commis.sion for its concurrence and report. The Secretary explained that the Commission may concur I with the findings of the Council, concur with the findings ; {::I:: of the Council with certain reservations or do nothing an( ;:;::: after 40 days It is deemed tacit approval. used to adopt the change of zone classification. : Davis ; :xi%! : ; The Commission agreed that a memorandum should be Ewald ; approval of the zoning by metes and bounds. : Jarvie i Letter from George Geiger confirming telephone conver- : : sation that there would not be a public hearing on the I I Rorick Reclassification at the Planning Commission mest; ; ing on May 14, 1963. I ! (d) Xes, #903 of the City Council re: Tentative Map I i of Ocean View Subdivision. 1 1 4 I I i:iIii ;::I;, 11; I ('4 4;;o I ':::I; I *I::;* :;;1,1 :;I:*: I I Ward I sent to the Council, concurring with their findings and : Palmer I i Someman 11 1 #I * 11 1 I Mr. Melton stated that he has the map that the Council i I 1 I * I * I I 1 s b b The Council concurred with the recommendations of the : City Engineer and various City departments. 8 ! The City Attorney stated that he believes the map will not i go before the Commission again and the Council will use : : tho Resolution of the Flanning Commission. 6 I : By common consent, the Commission concurred with the I I I I t I I I I # findings of the Council. I I * 1 I I I I I I , I ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: I (a) Aqaence - on matters not appearing om agenda. I : There were no oral communications from %he audience. i I $ l a I I , I b I I I I I I 1 I I I I t I 1 I I 1 I 8, '\ '%, '*, \, ', ; ', b, '\ '\ '\ '. I I t I I '8, \+, '8, '+, 4 I I I ! N a me '\, '+$&,, ' '8' "&. i I I ; of .$,Ob ' *%;., ; I : Member +ii%, $'@.$+\$?vS\ $*,+:h 1 1 '\ ' ' I -2 - ." I ~"""~~"""""""""""""""""""""~"".~""""-~"..-"~~""-""""--"""--~--" i (b) Report of Planning Technician on Council action ori : Planning matters. Mr. Melton reported that some of the Rems have been taken care of. The Council authorized ; i application for the 701 Program on the Master Plan of the i :;d:lb i area of influence. The City participates 1/3 and the Fed-: llS;q : era1 Government participates on a 2/3 basis. The final i reading on the R-T amendment was adopted and this amen$- :;:::; ; ment will become effective June 7 1963, I I ;:;;:: I I I I "I,, ::it:: :::;:I :::;:i I( I I I I 1 TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP - FALCON HILL UNIT t 4 I I I I I I RCl. 2; continued I I The Planning Technician showed the map on the board and ; explained this would be the same map that will be shown a$$ i the Council meeting, I I I 1 I I P The Secretary reported that a revised map was brought in I. I the day before. I 1 I I 1 .. I : The City Engineer, Lowell A. Rathbun, explained that these maps are required by ordinance to go out for report$ ! from the various agencies ten days prior to the meeting ; I and he did not receive the revised map until 4:30 the day I i before, and did not have a chance to prepare his report ; : for the last map as there are several changes in the map. i Mr. Melton stated the subdivider came in late that after- - I I I i noon and as ked that the map of April 12 1963, be consideeed ; at this meeting, i Secretary Price read the reports of the various departme4s I and agencies. 1 I ! The City Engineer stated that he had a report from the i i Pacific Telephone Company accompanied by a sketch of i i underground cable lay out, The final map will show the ; underground cable layout. We did not have a report from I i the Gas and Electric Company but their poles will be in ; : the street. i Mr. Melton explained the size of the lots which will con- i i form to the zoning. I The City Attorney stated that he believed it would be just i t a case of varying the lot Lines to conform to the zoning. I : The Chairman asked the representative of the subdivider if these changes could be made without making a major t : change on the map. I I ! KAY KALICKA , P . 0. Box 71, stated that they are making i legal descriptions by metes and bounds and by the time the: : ordinance is prepared for zone reclassification, they will ; :Grades and drainage were discussed and the City Engineer! stated that the storm drain going into Monroe Street will ; discharge into a natural drainage channel and then to the I :lagoon. It will be up to the Council whether they would hade !City participation and have an underground channel. At i :the present time they have a concrete channel down to ; !Canon Street and an open channel on Canon Street. I Avenue ! When questioned about the progress on the Elm sbrr#d : i extension, the City Engineer stated that it is on their ! ; schedule of projects but they have not been able to make i :any recent progress on this. I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I t I - I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I not have to refer to the zoning by lot numbers. 8 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I % I I I I 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I * I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I The Cornmission agreed to recommend approval of the I 1 subdivision map of Falcon Hill Unit No. 2, subject to the i f recommendations and changes of the Engineer's report ; I and subject to the size of lots to conform with the colored i map Exhibit "A " . : Davis I Ward UNIT NO. 2, was adopted. I 1 1 I PUBLIC; HEARING; continued I I I RECLASSIFICATION - From Zone R-2 (Two-family 3esidential Zone) to Zone R-3 (Multiple-family Redidentiax i Zone) on property located on the southwest corner of Palmi I Ave. , and Harding Street. Applicants: Guy C, and Eunicd - ; C . Sensiba. I ' I I I I I The Secretary read a memorandum from the Planning Technician to the Chairman stating that property owners ; I in the area were notified and several have indicated by mail i and phone of approval and by adopting a Resolution of inte$- : tion the Commission would indicate an intent to prevent ; : "spot zoning'' and would eliminate several non-conforming: i uses and extend the R-3 zone to enhance the growth of the 8 area. ; Mr. Melton explained on the map the property he felt I should be zoned R-3 so this reclassification would not be i "spot zoning". I Cornmissioner Sonneman stated that she felt that when : i iike a change of zone, the property owner should come I :into City Hall to apply for a reclassification and pay the > : !necessary fee. She felt this request for R-3 on the Sensib$ :property was not out of line and that the Commission shod$ I act on the application only and pointed out that there is t lovely property on the Palisades with R-I and R -3 zoning. :The Chairman asked for the applicant or his representativ4 !to speak. !No one spoke in favor of this request. :FRANK C. TRUMBLE, 910 Palm Ave. objected to this i :being made an R -3 zone. :JOE EPPING, 619 Momar Lane Escondido, stated that !he owns the lot adjoining this property and objected to this i :reclassification as it would down grade his property. :The public hearing was closed at 8:39 F. M. i After due consideration, Commissioner Jarvie moved that !this request for a zone change from R-2 to R-3 be denied '4 :because it would be "spot coning". I t I I I t I I I I I I I I I I - : property is non-conforming , or if a property owner would i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I + I I :The motion died for lack of a second. I ;;;:;I 1: !It was agreed that the request for a zone change from R-2 i Ward + ;x: i J Ito R -3 as submitted be denied as being "spot zoning" and ; Ewald ; ; :x; ; I ithat a resolution of intention be drawn up on property as i Palmer 1 : x:x: ; jshown by the Planning Te6hnician. ; Jarvie I ;x; ; ; 1; I I I Davis i ; :x; : I 11 I I I I I ; I Sonnernan ; I:;,:; :x: ; ; I I I !:;::I I *!*;I; I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - I I I I - I I liminarf finding of facts of the-.Sarlsbad Flanning Cog?- i mi s sion: ut ;;:::: I I :;i:;; I::::: ":: I I:: 1:: p;:" I :'I ::: I 1:;1:: general plan and further the economic interests of the Cit$ and the incZividua1 property owners concerned. :;::;: I I ::: :;: I ;;I:## Xesolution of Intention No. 41. ZZSCLUTION 32- INTEN; :;;;,I 11;: TION ST TEiE CAXLSBAD CITY E'LANNING ,I:CMMISSZSN :::I:: ;;l;t@ TG J,DVEZTISE :LGNZ CHJ,:;NGE iTZCM 3-2 TT, 2-5 ;1:4: OF CEI<T&tIiq PRGFEETY LYING ZAST CF NIhDISCjN : Davis 11;:; I :x; I ; BZTWEXN CHESTNUT AVENUE ANG TALM AVENUE TC( y:ard I !x+ : THE WZSTEILY L?IGI-IT LF Yi'J'iAY CT; STATE I?XIESWAY Zwald ; ; ;x; i 101 AND LC'TS 5, 6, '7 and 11 MA2 2027, BLCCM A, : Palmer !x : ;xi ; : ALLES AVCZADC ACZES IN THE GITY GF CARLSBhD, I Jarvie ; I :x; i i was adopted. ; Sonnernan I : :xi : : I 11111' FUBLIC I-IEAXING; Continued I IIT' R-1-4000 sq.ft, (Vlater Front one-family residential i :;a:;: zone) - Resolution of Intention No. 38 of the Carlsbad : 1,:::: City Planning Commission to amend Ordinance No.9060: i::::: to create an R-1-4000 sq. ft. (Water front one-family : residential zone) I ;t:::: l:l::f Mr. Melton stated that there is a moratorium set up on ;id;: planning and would like a clarification of what it covers. i I ::I: ((Ill The City Attorney explained that this would be one of the : items that falls under this moratorium. :111,1 Davis :xi ; 4 I i There was discussion of the Commission wishing more I Ward : I I )$ i : clarification on what comes under the moratorium. t Ewald i I ;x; I I Palmer I :x: ; : ;: It was agreed that this 3-1 -4000 sq.ft, zone be tabled i Jarvie ; I :Xi : indefinitely. ; I Sonneman: ;;/I* !x :x: i ; PUBLIC HEA ZING; continued I $#:I I I 1. That the area is not properly zoned at present for !ts highest and best use. I I ;:::" I III 2. That a comprehensive general plan for the develop; ;:::I: 1::; ment of the whole area is necessary for the orderly devel4p- l:;l!l ment of the area. I 3. Such a rezoning would better suit the comprehtnsi4e I::!:! B*,l:l I 111 I 11 I I I $;I;: 1 I :::I:: ;;:::: p;:q ::i::: I ::::;; :t::;: I ::;:;: I I l;'l,l I 1 I I:&# I ::;I:: I ;I I:: 1;;;; I I 1:;:;: 'bl;;: I I @;;;Il II 1 ::p;l I II ;y;:: I - I I VARIANCE - For reduction of the northerly side yard i I' setback from 10' to 5' on property located at Lot 38 Lebarr Estates No. 2 Map 4944, in the City of Carlsbad.! i::::; Applicants: Xabuco Development Corp. The Gitv Attornev reported that he had contacted Rabuco i I It!I i Developkent Gorp. kegarding the conflict between them i : and the Vickerys and they have a signed agreement that : Vickerys are out of the deal and Rabuco is the owner. NG : changes have been made in the application. : No one spoke for or against this application. The public hearing was closed at 8:58 P. M. k 1 I * I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I : Mr. Melton explained the location on the map and reported i that there was only one point that would be close to 9 l/Z' : and the rest of the setback would be more than 10'. I I I I I 4 : It was agreed that this request for a variance should be granted for the folbwing reasons: I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1. That the granting of such variance will not be I I I I rrzkrially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious i i to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone ! : in which the property is located. I I I t I 1 I ESTATES UNIT NO. 2, MAP 4944 OF THE CITY OF i CARLSBAD, was adopted. i PUBLIC HEARING: I * ! t I i RECLASSIFICATION - From R -1 -7500 and R-3 to C -1 i ; (Neighborhood Commercial Zone) on property located at i i the Southeast intersection of Fio Pic0 and Elm, on the ; : South side of Elm Street , between Pi0 Pic0 Dr. and i Elmwood, being Assessor's Parcels 1 2, 4 and 4 of Book: : 156, Page 180 of the Assessor's Map of San Diego County.: Applicant: C , J . Heltibridle. Notice of hearing was read. The Secretary certified as to! iDublication of notice of hearing and the mailing of notices to property owners in the area. The Secretary then read : I the application setting forth the reasons for requesting thii i reclassification. I I I 1 I 1 t I I I 1 I I I There were no written communications. I I i The Chairman asked the applicant to speak. : G. J. HEZTIBaIDLE stated that he had nothing more to ! i add to the application but was there to answer any questioGs i the Comrnission may have. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I No one present spoke for or against this request. I I I I I I I I I I I I i The public hearing was closed at 9:18 F. M. i Mr. MeLton explained the property on the map and the i i present zoning of the property. I I 1 I 1 I i After due consideration, it was agreed that this request I ; for reclassification from Zone R-1 and R-3 to C-1 be i recommended for approval for the following reasons: I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1. That granting this application meets the require - i : ments of the ordinance. : 2. That it would be in the best interests of public I 1 I I I I 1 I I I & 1 I I I necessity and convenience. I I I : PUBLIC HEARING: I t I I I 1 R EC LA SSIFISA TION - From X -2 (Two -family i Residential Zone to I?-3 (Multiple-family Residential Zone) : on property located on the Northerly and Southerly sides : i of Chinquapin, between Carlsbad Blvd. and Garfield StreeB I more particularly described as Lots 5, 6 and 7 of Block I,: : Falisades Map 1747 and ?or. of 31k.'.". , "alisac'es ?'a. ? ,I I s + I I I I !';:I: I I I I I 1 ', *, '\ ', '8 '* I I I 8, \, ',* I -6 - I I I *., + ', y*, I I I I '\, '\\'., I I I I i of '\$.%., '* 'Q.,, : i """"""""" * """""""""-"""""""""""" ""- ."""_. """""""_ :$3u"y-.L4 I1 I I 4:;;; I i:::;; '8, ', \\ \ ', a I ! Name ', '*&, '\,"%\ i 1 Member *e'S',,b \o\%, : I b?! 4 * +,& . :Map 1803, in the City of Carlsbad; being Assessor's i Parcels 13, 14 and 15, Book 206, Page 013 and Parcels i :;:::; : 3 and 4 Eook 206, Fage 070 of the Assessor's Map of Sanj 8z:;Il ll~l;: Diego County. Applicants: Orville C. and Marie Cook ; :::;:: I Jeffers. :Notice of hearing was read.. The Secretary certified as to! i publication of notice of hearing and the mailing of notices ; :to property owners in the area. The Secretary then read 1 ithe application setting forth the reasons for requesting : :this reclassification. I Letter from Richard E. Geyer requesting as agent of the Jeffers that a continuance be given to their request for a : I change of zone relative to the above property and that he i i would like to amend their application to include an adjacent i parcel of real property owned by Irene P. Buro. The I I property is Legally described as Lots 3 and 4, Block "Ii1 ; : Palisades. Mrs. Duro is agreeable to this change and an I application is on file with her consent. I 11 1 I I :::;I8 I I ::@I:: 'I:;:; ::I $1 It1 I:, ::I::: :;l:*a :;l:If 11 I I 18 I I 81 I I ,;':;: I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I :No one present spoke for or against this reclassification. : i The public hearing was closed at 9:31 P.M. I Mr. Melton explained the location of the property. I I t I I 8 I I I 1 I I I I I I I C. R, Thornton, Assistant City Engineer, stated that the i : Engineering Department designed Chinquapin Avenue to go! straight through to Carlsbad Boulevard at the time they i : designed the sewer system of Carlsbad Boulevard. I I 4::A The Commission discussed this being a desirable piece of I: : property and whether zoning this property would be in con: i flict with the Council's request for a moratorium, and : ::;;I; It, I : whether this property would be considered as lagoon i property. The question arose on whether this would be i : "spot zoning." without Mrs. Duros property. : ?he Secretary pointed out that the hearing could be : Davis ; I ;x; I : i continued if the hearing was reopened. Ward ;x;x: i There was a motion made that the public hearing be re- I Palmer i !X: : ; opened and that it be continued to May 28, 1963, in order i Jarvie ;x: :xi ; i i to include the two additional lots of Mrs. Puros. : Sonneman i i X! : I I I i::;:: l::;l8 !:ll:: I 1::::: ::::i: I I ::;::: I I I :;*:;: :;:::: I : Zwald : : :xi : I 111 I I ! l!!l:; Commissioner Sonneman registered objection to other property owners corning in on some one else's application and hoped the Council makes a policy so that other propertv owners cannot come in on application without paying extra i i for this. I I I 8 I I I The City Attorney explained that the original application i :would be amended. I I I I I I I ; PUBLIC HEARING: I I I I : VARIANCE - To consider a reduction of the northerly i side yard setback from 5' to 2' and southerly side yard : setback from 10' to 5', and request for permission to construct a house on lot with less than 40' frontage, on i property located on the northwest corner of Chestnut and i Roosevelt, on Lot 32, Block 30, Carlsbad Townsite, Map i i 775 in the City of Sarlsbad. Applicant: May Martinez ; : Ross. 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 application setting forth the reasons for requesting thig I I I I I I 1 1 i variance. I I 4 I 8 I I I 1 I I I ! I I '.' I I I I I I I I + I I 1 I * I I I I I I I I I \ \' I -7 - I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I t No one present spoke for or against this request. : The ?uhLic hearing was closed at 9:50 ?. M. I I I I :I#;:; I I!!#!. Mr. Melton egplained the property on the map and showed :;I:;: i the various zoning in that area, and stated that the applica+t ~l:;ll :::::I i wishes to remove the old building and build a new building: ::It:: : Mr. Melton explained how they build "patio houses" next I :;!;;: ;to the property lines in Germany. 1 1 :::;:i I Secretary Frice called attention to the Commission that i ithe Building Code would require a fire resistant wall with i i this setback. I;;*;# I 1 I ;:'#:I I::,; ;::;:I :ii:;: IS I :::I1: I ::I I:' 11 Some of the Commission felt the "patio house" appiicatian i :I;::: ::t:ll should not be considered unlers the whole biock was done i 11:: I in this manner. :i;::; I :::;I; I ::;;:: :It was agreed that the request for said variance be granted :::;:; :for the following reasons: I :;l+;l I :;:;:: I I 1(1141 I 1 , That the granting of such variance will not be I I ;::;;; :;!;:: jmateria1L.y detrimental to the public welfare or injurious I :::** 8: :to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone i :;I::: !in which the property is located. 4 I :a;: +:I1 4 ;+:8: 'I-:* 1:::;; : affect the comprehensive general plan. I y1:: I i Davis , :#I' ; : ;xi : : i 3esolution No. 297, k RESOLUTION 03 THE CARLSBAD; Ward ; : ;x: i i :'cITI"p F Lh NC~ COMMISSION GRANTING A VARIANCE : Ewald ; i ; Ix; ; : :CN PRCERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 32, SLCCq palmer I i !xi i i i 30, CA3LSBAD TOWNSITE, MkF 775, OF THE CITY CF : J'arvie :x: :x; : : : CARLSBAD, was adopted. i Sonnernan ; ixjx; i I I i::iii PUBLIC HEARING: I I ;:::;: : VARIANCE - To consider a reduction in side yard set-: :is::: back from 7 2/2' to 3' on property on the northwest corner: :;::I: :of the intersection of Chestnut and Donna Crive at 2044 i 1*1,1: ;Chestnut kve. , being Lot 21, Village Homes Unit No. 2, I :::::I : Map 4165 in the City of Cartsbad, Applicants: Wilmoth V4:. :;::;; i and Jimmye J. Watkins I I ~l:;l; !Notice of hearing was read. The Secretary certified as to! :*1;1; ::*n;1 publication of notice of hearing and the mailing of notices : 4:;: :l;l,l i to property owners in the area. The Secretary then read : i:;::: I the application setting forth the reasons for requesting thii :I:::: t variance. :;;I;: I b IiiiIi i There were no comm.unications. I I::::: I I I ,:I:;: i The Secretary presented two photographs of the property I Ii:i:i i and the house for the Commission's inspection. I,:l:l I :;;:;: I I:: ::: I+:;: ;:::I: I ::: ti: t :;;:;; I 4 ,:I:; I ::;;;I I ! I:::;: ;til: 1:;:: :I::: +{I1 '11: :::::; I *ll;lfi I I h I - I I I I I I I I I I 1 2. That the granting of such variance will not adverseiy I - I I I I I I I lIiiii 1:' at ;;:;:I I' I Ill I I I I 1 ::::i: ,I * * I I I I *I I I I I I The Chairman asked for the applicant or representative to: ; speak. 8 1 11 I I No one spoke for or against this application. I b * p;:: 'I The public hearing was closed at 10:05 P. M. I I 1 l;;l;l :!I:!* I I i Mr. Melton explained the property on the map and the : : location of the carport. He stated that he felt it should be: i a carport only and not be enclosed. All of the other hornets : in that area have two car garages except this one. It is i paved and the property owner uses it now but wishes to puf : a roof on it. I I ! It was agreed that the application for a variance from 7 1h2' I to 3' be granted, with the provision that the carport be i : covered only and that no storage or other structural I i facilities be included in the carport, for the following i 1 I I reasons: I 1 I 1 I I I I I 1. That the granting of such variance will not be I I materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious i to the property or improvements in such'vicinity and zone: : in which the property is located. I I I I -1 #I I I I I I 2. That the granting of such variance will not advers$,ly ;:1:1, l!!l!l 1 affect the comprehensive general plan. I t i Resolution No. 298. A RESOLUTION OF THE CARLSBAO Ward -t : ; !x; : : I PL"FTG COMMISSIGN GRANTING A VARIANCE I Ewald i !x: i I - : ON PROFERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 21, 1. Palmer !x: :XI : ; .- I i VILLAGE HGMES UNIT NO. 2, UP 4165 IN THE CITY i Jarvie ; ; Ix: i I i OF CARLSBAD, was adopted, : Sonneman ; I.. i +X: I PUBLIC HEARING: 1 I I I VARIANCE - To consider a reduction of the rear yard! i setback from 10' b 5' on property located on the east sid$ i of Madison between Oak -4ve , , and Fine Ave. , being Lots ; : 13 and 14, Block 47 Carlsbad Townsite, Map 775 in the i i City of Carlsbad. Applicants: Fred M. .and Virginia Y. ; : Dyke. i Notice of hearing was read. The Secretary certified as t< i publication of notice of hearing and the mailing of notices ; ! to property owners in the area. The Secretary then read i - i the application setting forth the reasons for requsting this: i variance. : There were no communications. i The Secretary reported that the building permit was issue? i but the Building Inspector who issued it is now deceased i i and there is no record of it. Mr. Dyke cannot get a certi$cate : of occupancy as it requires a variance. ! The Chairman asked for the applicant to speak. ! FRED M. DYKE stated that the building permit was i issued on July 26, 1960, by Mr. RatcLiff for a small hous4 : with a living room, bedroom bath and a little space for a: i kitchen. It took a long time to build this and the present i : building inspector stated that he could not have a kitchen I without applying for a variance as the building is 5' from ; ; the alley line on a concrete slab. He explained that if it : I were built on lumber it would be no problem to move this 1 : house. He built the house for his own boy. ! FLORENCIO RODXIQUEZ, 675 Oak Ave., stated that : i there were no doors to the alley so there would not be any! 1 I I I I 4 I I I I * * , I * t I I 9 I 8 I I I I a I * I I I I I t 1 I I I 1 I I I I 8 : hazzard. I I The public hearing was closed at 10: 38 F. M. I I I I I I : Mr. Melton explained the location of the property and : house on the map and that it is a modern building and the : side yard setbacks are maintained, They have two garagqs i and own Lots 15 and 16 also which are vacant except for ; : some parked vehicles. I I I 6 I I I 4 I I I I I I I 1. I '\'\"'., 8%. ',','' I I I b ' ', '.,'\, I '\ *+8 '\ , ' I I -9 - I ; Name' ', '.$ '.,"$% i I : of '.+'$+, \',*f+8 ; I : Member '\e&\$ $@f.&$?' \9 ,IL" 4.1 1 :""""""""""""""~"-"""""~""""""~."""""-""""~~""""""""" """"-d ;It was agreed that this request for a variance be granted I ;ll.ll 1::::: i for the following reasons: I I ::p:: 11 l'; 1 :::I:# I 1. That such variance is necessary for the preservatitn !h::; f 3[.: : ; ; I *, s, * 8' I I I I I ,\88\' 1 I I I I I I I :and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by: al;:l8 I other property in the same vicinity but which is denied to i :::I:: ;Il:l1 ; tEe pro;lerty in question. I I : 2, That the granting of such variance will not be I ::;: !materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious ::I:;: !in which the property is located. I ;::::; I 4:::; !Resolution No. 299. A RESOLUTION OF THE CARLSBAD:. Ward :; I": ; I1 ; I y P-'ANNING"MISSION GRANTING A VARIANCE: ; Ewald ' ;::+:: ION PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 13 AND Palmer ; i !x; : : : 14, BLOCK 47, CARLSBAC TOWNSITE, MAP 775 IN THE: Jarvie :x; ;x! ; : !CITY OF CARZSBAD, was adopted. i Sonneman ; Ix:x: : 14 ; ;OLD BUSINESS: 1 I ::ii:: I I 8 I ;;;::: I $4:; !There was no old business. I I 1:;::: I I ::(I:: :NEW BUSINESS: ;18*tfi 1 8 I ;:4+ 11;: 1 ;::':; !The Chairman stated that he felt residences should have a i i;;;:: :minimum side yard setback of 5'. I I ::I I*;: l I $ 1:;::: Io :Commissioner Davis asked that the Planning Technician i::::: !obtain recommendations of other high class cities on this i::::: I:,s,l :matter (not Los Angeles). I ;:;;:: I :::;I, 8: :The Chairman stated that he felt Seacrest Estates, Falcon I::::, ;;*I:: :Hill Unit No. 1 and Ocean View Subdivision should be re- I ::;:;: Izpned from R -A to R-1 as R-A is the lowest use on the : ::::;: ;highest residential property. The subdividers were afraid! :I1 11( jof opposition and covered it by deed restrictions. 1:::;: I I :::;I; I !I:::: !The City Attorney stated that he feels that the firm that is I I ::ll:s *I#, :doing the study for rezoning of the City and lagoon will Il::;; - {come in with a package deal and that the City is paying thexb . :::::: :::;:: I a lot of money for this study. I I 1::::: :Objectives and Policies, San Mego County Regional Plan I ;l:ll@ i;:;;; :No. 6 r-ouslng . * I !:;Il; 1::: :By common consent this matter was deferred to the next :meeting. I ::::Il I::::( 1: I* I I I 1 I ::;#I: :;#lll I to the pqoperty or improvements in such vicinity and zone : :I I!;: It :; I I I : ,.payis . i :.:* ; : I 11 I I I I :I1 I* I I I I - I I I * I I 11 4) I )I( 4 I I I I I 't1:I; I I I I Il'l :::;:I I I i::::; I I I ~ADJOUXNMENT: I b 1 I I :By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 10~35 P. Mi :Respectfully submitted, I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I :J. H. PRICE, Secretary I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 8 I 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I 1:,1:1 ,a::::