HomeMy WebLinkAbout1965-08-09; Planning Commission; MinutesCommissioner Sutherland was absent. Also presentl Iti*ia
!#I:#! were Ass't City Engineer Thornton, Planning . I I ; Director Schoell and Building Inspector Osburn.
I I ?
I !
~ NR. DONALD BRIGGS, JR., asked for a continuation of his request for a variance scheduled for 8 public heaping the next evening as the City Attorney did not have the improvement agreement ready. Vice4hairman McComas instructed Vr. Briggs to write a letter or to be present at the hearing and ask for continuation at that time.
I I I I I I 1 0
I 0 I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I
1 ! There was a general discussion of pages 66 throu&t 'I;;;;
I 76 of the Revised Preliminary DPaft Report of : ;:;::I : Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall for the Mastjer I Plan for the City. I *II;I@ I I:!!::
::::q
$!;:!
0 i:::;:
!
I
i ADJOURNMENT: By proper motion the meeting was adjourned : at 937 P. M. I ::;;,I
I ::!I!;
"il iiiIiI
! I
I I I I *
I I
I I I I I 0 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I
I I
I I
S S ! I t;!!;i I b I
;I;;;;
#!!#!I
I *
I I * ;;:;:;
l!!l!I
DISCUSSION HELD BY THE CARLSRAD CITY PLANNING
COMMISSION CONCERNING THE REVISED PRELIMINARY
ORAFT-REPORT BY DANIEL , MANN, JOHNSON AND FSEMDENHALL AT THE ADJOURNED MEETING ON AUGUST 9, 1965.
m+" Pa e 66 - TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION.
coincides with the advance planning in the County Master Plan of Mador Highways. The City staff has been working with the County Planning Department on the Major Highway System. He reported that the Office of the County Road Surveyor and the County Plansing Departments do not concur with their own individual Master Plan of Major Highways. The streets and roads as submitted have been reviewed by the Cities of Oceanside and Vista and in general are correlated with their maps. There is some deviation by road names. Where this occurs, if the City of Carlsbad constructs the street first, it will be named by the City of Carlsbad. The dividing road for street name change could be Melrose Drive which Is
scheduled to be a prfmmajor arterial highway for a north-south route.
ornton explained that 80% of the llf&N4 report on this matter
The Planning Director stated that Paul Real of DMJM was in basic
agreement with this map and has been furnished with a map.
Mr. Thornton stated that he started to revise the DMJM map but felt it was easier to make his own map.
- Rail Transportation. The Planning Director stated that Mr. Neal felt that it was an asset to keep railroad transportation in the City. There was a discussion on this matter and on the rapid tran- sit system in Los Angeles.
Mr. Thornton stated that he did not expect the alignment of the railroad to change much but there would be some over or under- crossing structures needed. He estimated that the overcrossing at Elm Avenue over the railroad would cost between $65,000 to $80,000.
It was felt DMdM should be more specific and encourage separated crossings. The need for an overcrossing in the future was discussed in view of the rapid growth of population. It was felt the rail- road in the City with overcrossings should be emphasized, and the Commission and DMJM should look into and deem where the spurs will be. There was discussion on encouraging spurs and if there would - be one to Palomar Airport.
I
c
I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t 1 I I I I 1 I I 4 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I * 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1
I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I
I I
i I I I I I I I t I t I
1 The Planning Director stated that L'ir. :.!ea1 felt! there should be a spur in the southern part of the City to serve the i-1 zones. The Planning ; Director stated that the spur would not be much i of a problem if the City has control of it hut ; would he if the County has control of it. I I
There !$'as some discussion on the zoning in the i County southeast of Carlshad anri the commercial : zoning proposed by the County on the southeast and r;outhw.rl?st corners of the intersection of : Palbmar Airport Road and El Camino Real. The i Planning Director reported that he and 8r. Palmateer and Paul Yea1 had attended the meetin4 in San Diego. The Planning Director stated tha; '
he would check with Plr, Roger Court9ey of the : 5an Diego County Planning Department as to the i status of the zoning.
Pa e 67 .. Air Travel - The Commission agreed thdt h paragraph under air travel shoulet he I deleted, and all biater Transportation should a140
be eliminated. Part of this information could! go under Water Recreation.
I
I I
I I I I
I I I I
" Pacre 69 - CIRCULATIO!! SYSTEFS - Delete the last i sentence in tile first ParaqraDh. I I 3bjectives 3. Omit l~singie-iamilylh. It was aqreed that these objectives are vital I I I
for making] a coed city. "Super-blocks" were explained. They consist of!
1,OOr! or 1500 people usually centered around a : scclool acting as a unit to acquire parks to !let! streets and to work toward obtaining a better ; neighborhood. t I I
* I
1
Page 52 - Automobile, Eus and Truck Transporta-: tion. 3rd paragraph, 4th line "perhaps in con-!
junction with the restored Sat?ta Fe Railroad i Station." should be deleted. I I
I I - Fage 7C - !!IGt-!t.IAY STANDARDS - CARLSBAD GENERAL PLP.N - The Commission were in aqrcement that thd Engineering Department and the Planning 9irectof have spent a great deal of time studying this :
and their recommendations should he incorporated within the report. I I
F4r. Thornton recommended the follovring changes
be made:
I
I
I I
Prime Najor Arteriil Highway
Add direct access not recommended Include controlled intersections
I I I I I I I I I I
Insert between Prime Flajor Arterial Highway and: Major Collector Highway I I 74ajor Arterial Highway - 102' R/!d - include controlled intersections. Add "Direct access not recommended''. I I
E4ajor Collector Highway - Add "Direct access not recommended"
I 1
B I
I I I I Residential Collector Street - Add "Direct access not usually recommended".
I I I I I I I
:
I I I '8 8 '8 ', '8 '8 I 8 I I I
I I I
I 88 '8, ', 8 8 '
I 4 8 8 ' '8 8U,888
I I -3- I "8, "\:s8 "8,',:) I
I I I Na me 8*U **$ '8, 8t% i
I I of '*$+%+ ' ., ;
I : Member ' ,o @\ ;'&@ 4%;
I I
~"""""""~""""""""""~"""""~"""""-"--"-"-""---;"-"-""--"--,-- --""-" i Page 70, continued. I I ;:x;:;
i he fcl t there is a need for +:;: : a precise plan in the ordinance for the new I I @:;;I*
,I::;:
i master highways. He felt the ordinance then 8 I ;::I:: : could control the access, building setbacks and : 1:;::: i establish the official grade both horizontal and 3 ::;:::
; vertically. About 50% of the right of way I ;: 11 I negotiations will be made so they will not have I +!:: I access to Elm Avenue. Direct access is not I l*@t::
; generally recommended for these streets and ther4 :$::
;;;:I' I will be a need for a setback ordinance if the I::::: : streets are precise planned in order that the Cih 1::;;; I can control the future buildings on these street$. :I!:;: : tle felt that Tamarack Avenue will 90 through to ; 11 i:::::
1:::;: I:
I I ;:::i;
I I f I :i::::
I !:;;::
I I* 'It
I
I@ I ::!!:;
I
I I
It
11
El Camipo Real as it will he one of the ways to I
beach. He felt that Chestnut Avenue sl~ould
: cross the freeway from the back area to the I I ;:i;::
I I I I remain a residential collector street. I
A crossing on Chestnut avenue between Harding :;I'
Street and Madison was discussed. It was pointed! :::;:; i out that the Superintendent of thc School Districjt ::;:::
: was positive that if they have a !ligh density I
::;I'I
:;I::; : near the beach they will need a new school at thd ::i:::
I Pine Avenue location. I ::;I:,
I I I i::iii i The Planning Director suggested that the Comrnissibn ::it::
i study the reconmendations made by the Engineering: :ii:it
: Department since DMJM is agreeable, and that I :::I:; I eventually pass an ordinance requiring set5acks I :::i;;
I for streets that are precise planne?. I !:;:I;
I I I :::;;I *e ::;:::
1 " Page 72 - Major Arterial Hiqhways - In 2nd llne .i I;;::: : after "traffic route," add "controlled intersec- ::q: i tions ,'I I I I :::;I; ;::';'
I 4::::: i See F?CW 1 ist for pages 73, 74, 75 and 76. I ::;:::
i The Commission discussed the streets and roads anp ;::i:i : agreed to the following: I 4 ::pi:
I
II
I
8' I
*I
t
1
I
I I I
I
I I I I I iiii;: I:
I 6 I
I
I I ::I:;;
I I I ;::;:; I"
I I I ;;':;: '1,)
I I I :I::;;
I I :;:It'
:;I:::
I 'I a!:;;
I I I :a::;; ;::;;;
t I 1;'I'I
I I ::I:::
I I i::;!!
I e I :::;I; I:;I;I
I i::;t* 11;
I ;::;::
I I I ::;I:, 4:;:;
I I iIiiIi
I I ;;l'l; I I I ;;::;;
I I I iliii:
I I !::;;!
I I !::::I
1 ::I;:;
I *;;*;I
I i:::;:
I I ,**'I;
I I I I :::!:; ;: '
# ,I:;:!
I ;::;:;
t ;:;*:I
I t ::;:::
I t *I;!;:
# I 1 i!;#*;
I I I :i: ;:;I I;
;:I
I I ::;:;:
I 4 !if1::
I 1 0 C !I;:
I
I
I I I I I
I 1
I
I
I
a
I
I I
4 1 I I I I I
I I I
I
I
I I
I I
I
I t I I 4
I
I
I l
I
I
I I
I
I
I 'I I
I
I *I
I
I
I
I
I
I I a I I I
4
t
I
I
1
I
I
I t I I
t
I
I
I
I
t
%:!I!
-4-
RECOMMENDED STREET AN2 HIGHWAY PROGRAM
PRIME MAJOR ARTERIAL HIGHWAY - 126 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY:
El Camino Real Anza Freeway (State Freeway 78) to ..MelEebse Br. Me1 rose Drive Anta Freeway (State Freeway 78) to El Camino
Palomar Airport Road Carlsbad Boulevard to Melrose Drive. Real
MAJOR ARTERIAL HIGHWAY - 102 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY:
Agua Hedionda Road Carl sbad Boul evard to Me1 rose Dr. (Precise Pl an) Alga Road El Camino Real to Melrose Drive.
Calavera Road El Camino Real to College Boulevard. Camino Sobre Las Lomas College Boulevard to El Camino Real. Carlsbad Boulevard North City Limits to South City Limits. Col1 ege 5oul evard Anza Freeway (State Freeway 27 to Camino
Elm Avenue Carlsbad Boulevard to €1 Camino Real. Francisco Drive Agua Hedionda Road to Melrose Drive. La Costa Avenue Old 101 to El Camino Real. Tamarack Avenue Carlsbad Boulevard to San Diego Freeway.
Sobre Las Lomas.
(Interstate Route S).(Precise Plan immediateli
Batiquitos Way Calavera Drive Camino Sobre Las Lomas
Kelly Drive Macario Road Marron Road Los Monos Drive Poinsettia Lane State Street
Sunset Drive Tamarack Avenue
'/" Unnamed Road
Poinsettia Lane to El Camino Real. College Boulevard to Agua Hedionda Road. Francisco Drive to College Boulevard and
Marron Road to Batiquitos Way. Kelly Drive to El Camino Real. Jefferson Street to College Boulevard. Camino Sobre Las Lomas to Melrose Drive. Carlsbad Boulevard to Melrose Drive. Agua Hedionda Road to Carlsbad Boulevard.
Col 1 ege Boul evard to Francisco Drive. San Diego Freeway (Interstate Route 5) to
East of and parallel with El Camino Real from
El Camino Real to Batiquitos Way.
Kelly Drive.
Palomar Airport Road to Alga Road.
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR - 60 FEET TO 68 FEET RIGHT OF MAY:
Adam Street Chestnut Avenue Chinquapln Avenue Highland Drive Hillside Drive Jefferson Street Las Flores Drive Monroe Street Park Drive
Tamarack Avenue to Park Drive.
Pi0 Pic0 Drive to El Camino Real. State Street to Adams Street. Intersection of Las Flores Drive to Hillside DE. Intersection of Highland Drive to Kelly Drive.
Elm Avenue to Anra Freeway (State Freeway 78) Jefferson Street to Highland Drive. Marron Road to Park Drive. Monroe Street to Kelly Drive.
Page 77 - The Planning Director stated a report on the market analysis
was brough to him from DMJM the Friday before. Page 77 is a summary of the report that was made a year ago.
It was pointed out that the development of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon wot would be a different type of development than the Oceanside Harbor as they do not permit water skiing there.
The Chairman instructed the Planning Director to give a summary of the Market Analysis on Tuesday after the regular meeting of the Planning Commission.