Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1966-12-13; Planning Commission; MinutesI I I B 'e;! !ROLL CALL was answered by Commissioners Smi'th, I :Sutherland, Palmateer, McCarthy, Little and I ;::;,I :Voorheis. Chairman McComas was absent. Also !present were City Attorney Wilson, City Engineer i ;~l*s~ :Lill, Building Inspector Osburn and Planning I :;I::: !Director Schoell. 11;: 1:' !Vice-chairman McCarthy welcomed Glenn I. Voorheis i ::;::: !as a new member of the Planning Commission. ::; ; 1'1 !APPROVAL OF MINUTES: ::;##I i Smith ;xi :< : : !(a) Minutes of the regular meeting of December 13:,Palmateer; I : ; :xi :1966, were approved as submitted. : McCarthy : I i < : : :i:;:; 1 ::;;:: .I I I I 1 I I I ~l:Iii ::;I)I :::;;; 4;; I l I I 1 I I I : Sutherlanci :x! x! ; : 1 Little ; : ;x: : ; I ; Voorheis : 4 I i :x: 1 I ,I ; I 1:: :WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: I I I I ; ; 1-1 1::::: 1. I:::;: I !Letter from J. Dekema, State Division of Highways,: i ;I::;; I 'Ilk :Dated November 28, 1966, regarding highway develop:- :ment in San Diego County during past year and en- : I ;-I; !closing freeway pr'ogress map of District 11 was i :;;::I ;*I I1 :read and acknowledged. I 1 I : ; i :*: L !:;#&I I1 . .* I /;;:: !ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: I I :I;::: 8 : : ;.; 6' ;,:::: 1 ! PUBLIC HEARINGS: I I : ; i: ; ; :(a) RECLASSIFICATION, continued - R-1 to R-3 ; ; 1.: I ' :(Multiple-Residential) Zone on the Westerly side I :ti:;: : : I ; ;.: :of Roosevelt St., Northerly of Magnolia Avenue. I I :::::: !Applicant: Miles T. Tolbert. :::::: 8 : : ;.I I :(b) PRECISE PLAN, Continued - To oonsider adop- I ::;a:: :;,:I; ition of a precise plan on the above described 1 : ; i ;.;.I !property. Applicants: Planning 'Commission 1 : ; ; 1 ;.t ;Resolution No. 448. I I I : i.i i * I ; ; ;-; I ; ,/- . I I 'I !The Planning Director reported that Mr. Thornton, i ::!;:; :Assistant City Engineer had again written to ,Te : :I:* :itchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company 1 1:::: :&I I1 :concerning possible use of the railway right of ;;;i:: !way for the extension of .State Street, but had I I :::!I;: :received no reply from them. I I :::;Il et ; I ; ; ; ; ;-I I ll~l;: :The Commission agreed to continue the above hear- : :::::; iings. I 1 ::;::: ,I;::: I 1, 1: i(c) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, continued - To . +I *I 1,:::: :consider allowing construction of a church build- 1,;::: ;&I I ' I :.I I 8: iing and off-street parking, on property at 1370 i ;::::: :Knowles Ave., on Northerly side of Knowles Ave., : ;:: !Westerly from Elmwood St. Applicants: Church of .I ;;;:;; :Christ. I I iikiii I ::;:i: !MR. DON HOLLY, Licensed Surveyor, representing the; ;; 8 1.1; :applicants, asked that this hearing be continued ; .:::;I :to an undetermined date in view of the opposition : :;n:a: ;I:':; $1;:' I' !of property owners in the area, as the applicant I 11,1: :needed time to work some problems out with them. : i;:::; .I I :I::,' 1 4 141 , 1:I: ;41;1: I1 II I I I I 'I I1 1: I I I- 1 I)# ;.: I II r I I I I I I I #I '1 I 1 1 I I I b ; i :.: i 1 I I I I I :There were no oral communications. I i I.! ; ; ; I I 1-1 I 1 1 I I I I I1 I I I ;:#I ;: 1 I' I I I 1'0 I I I I I I I( I 1 I ::;1;1 I I ;;+;: , I I I I I I> I I I I t b I I I L I I I I I I I 'I '> : ~- ! ~. I ; 8 -8' * % 8' I I I l I I . I I ',,~,,'**',','. 6 I I I I I I - I ', \ ' 8 x' I , s, *, '.,'*,'*, I -2- I 8, ,', ' *' I ; . of *$\q;. 8, \e, : I .$k\*, , /Pq, ; 1 i N a me *., *++, '*.,'%&A, I 8 I ~~~"-"""""""~""""""""""~O~~~~~~~~~~~~~o~o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~k~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,~~~~,~ : YenSer 8$3@.*9+, :The Commissio'i discussed the continuance of this i ;:;;I1 I* :hearing and felt that a specific date should be I ::::;; lset for hearing this matter since there were a ; *;I I'*I)( 1:;: inumber of property owners present who were con- I :; ::;; jcerned with this hearing. I ;ll;l~ (11 I l:~l;: I {:i;:: :The City Attorney stated it was not illegal to ;:;;:: continue the hearing and it was not necessary to i 'i:,;: :hear from. the audience at this time. : : : : ,.I 1 :;I*;: I :::;,I ;SI :The Chairman asked if there was any reason why : 1,;:: :the Commission should not continue this hearing. i :::;,I 11;: I I :;I#*; I :;i::1 :MR. LEO WILLIAMS stated he lives at 1394 Knowles i 1,::: !Avenue which is next to the property being consid4 ::p81 ;:I:#' I1 :ered and wished to protest this application. He I I1 ipresented a petition wjti;, 29 signatures opposing : ::p:: :;;b#l 11 :this request for the following reasons: I ; I : 1'1 i (1) The surrounding area .is' presently zoned R-1 : ; 1:; v.; :and is developed as strictly a residential area. i ;::::a 1:: 1:: I(2) With the recent closing of Elmwood St. and ; :;;:;: :construction of the City Library Facility, Knowlei ;; ;': 81 I I if; 91 IAve. will have to 'serve this area as an artery to ; ::;I :the downtown area and the Freeway, and therefore,: ~:;~ll 1:: jwill be more heavily travelled. I c ; : i i ;*; ; (3) Knowles Ave., as presently developed, is not ;:,:la ::::;; jof adequate width to carry two lanes of traffic : 4::la :and allow any street parking. i ; I I t.: I I 1 1;:i;: 11#111 :Mr. Williams stated that the petition takes in I :1:116 I* : I ;..: ; : jabout 1GO% of the property owners in the area and: lll;;; :some of them live out of town and work. I I i :.: :-I I /:;;; !This petition was given 'to Secretary Palmateer as [ 1::;;; ia matter of record. I $:i::: I ::;:;: I ::I:;: !A motion was made to continue this hearing to :Smi t h ::i<:: : Tuesday, January 24, 1967. jsutherland I I i x .:. 11 ; I :Palmateer :x: ; : -: 1 I ' ' jMcCarthy I :.: I 1 I :Little I :x:< : : ;: L :Voorheis i ; ; \\ : i TENTATIVE MAP - SANDALWOOD DALE UNIT NO. 2 ::4:l; SUBDIVISION - 14 Lots located on property at the i :;I::' ,I:, ': ;Southeasterly corner of kasswood Ave. and Highland '11::1 :Dr. Owners: Bee Cee Co. and Howard H. Cloud. I . I :.I I i Subdivider: Bee Cee Co. I I I:! 4 !.: li 1 I 1 I I I I I I I 11 I I 11 - I I I I :(I I I I 1 I I I I 1 r . I 11 I' a' I I I :I1 I 1 I I I ; ; ; :.I ;::;:I . 4 Secretary Palmateer certified that notices of I I 1 1 :this subdivision were sent to the adjoining, I I ! property owners and to the various departments i and agencies. I ..' :There were no written communications other than : I from the various departments and adencies. :The Planning Director explained the tentative map: called attention to a policy established when the! : former City Engineer was with the City regarding ; i lots fronting on cul-de-sacs. This policy stated! : that when an odd lot contained area 10% in excess: [ of the required lot area, the lot width could be i i reduced to 50' at the front yard setback .line. I 1 * I b 'I I I I I I 1 1 1 and location and zoning on this property. He I' 1 1 -3- I i I I I I I 1 I I I , b I I ". . :The City Engineer stated there were no particular i !problems on this subdivision. He explained that i :Basswood Ave. will be improved by the subdivider. : !The Northerly side of Basswood Ave. will have to! :be cut down to match. The main drainage is being : jtaken care of in Sandalwood Dale Unit' No. 1 Sub- :division. There will be standard improvements. : !All lots have a minimum of 7500 sq.ft. except for :those fronting on Highland Dr. which are 10,000 ; isq.ft. or more. The areas shaded in blue are to i :be dedicated streets and will be improved. I I :MRS. HELEN DAIGER, 3384 Highland Dr., stated that !her property is across from this proposed subdivi-: :sion and is the only property that will be affectejd, !as it extends approximately 400' down Basswood. i :She stated her brother was told by the staff at : :City Hall that the top of the hill on Basswood : :would have to be cut down about 3 1/2'. She asked; :how this cut would affect the two entrances from ; :Basswood,, how wide the street would be and how I I jmuch wou1.d be takem off of her property. She also! :asked if the street would be improved at the City% jrequest or if the contractor was requesting these :improvements. 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I :The City Engineer stated the crest of the hill * I !would have to be cut down approximately 3 1/2' at I :the highest point. The curb line would be about : !lo' from the building. The cut would affect the I :dwelling on the north to some extent. I I :MR. HOLLY stated he believed it would affect the I !patio more than the garage. It is a balance 1 :between good engineering safety. He explained jthis is a tentative map and they need the approval! :of the Planning Commission and Council before get-: Iting into the study of all of the. details. I I :MRS. DAIGER stated she was opposed to this sub- :division as she felt it would be creating problems! jfor her. !The City Engineer stated that they try to work'the: :problems out. Normally the houses are not that : jclose to the property lin'e. The adobe wall is on i :the street right of way. I 1 :MRS. DAIGER stated that she was told the wall was ion City right of way, but before Carlsbad bycame ; I- :a City Basswood Ave. was a 40' right of way. -* *I I I I I I I I I 6 I I I I 1 \: I I I I 1 I I I :The Commission discussed the fact that this cut' jwould be compara'ble to the cuts that were made at :the intersections of Highland Drive and Chestnut jAve. and Tamarack Ave. and Highland Drive w'hen :they were improved. !After further discussion, a motion was made to jadopt Resolution No. 476, recommending the appro- :Val of this tentative map to the Co.unci1 subject jto the conditions in the 21 items recommended by 1 , :the various departments and agencies. I I I I I b: I I 1 I L I I I ..~ . ~ ~ ~~~~~ 1 I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I 6 I I I b I 1 I 1 I I I I I I 1 b 1 I I I I I ! rc r I I 1 I I I I I I -4- I I 1 Resolution No. 476. A RESOLUTION 0 i CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND THE TENTATIVE MAP OF SANDALWOOD DA I I 4 I F THE CARLSBAD : ING APPROVAL OF\ LE UNIT NO. 2 : SUBDIVISION, was adopted by title only and furthefMcCarthy I reading waived. :Little I Voorheis I I I 1 ! OLD BUSINESS: I * (a) Appeal of the decision of the Planning Com- i mission by Archie Koyl, et al, regarding rezoning; : precise plans and tentative map on property at the i Northwest corner of Interstate 5 and Tamarack Ave:, : - continued. I I I t I 1 I 1 I I I I I I : MR. EARL THOMPSON, Attorney at Law, stated he represented Mr. Koyl and wished to inform the Commission of a number of changes. The only I parties involved in the map are the owners and i i two tenants. D.A.R.Development is not a party to; ; this development. Any reference to Mr. Strella 1 should be deleted.as he has no interest in this I project whatsoever. Cooky's restaurant proposed : for this development has been eliminated. Mr. I i Thompson presented a letter and brochure from i King's Retreat,.Inc. stating their intent to lease ; the property for a restaurant. I I I 4 I t * b I I The Commission questioned the verification that : : Mr. Strella has no interest in this proposed de- I velopment since his name appears on the tentative: : map. I b I 1 The City Attorney stated the Commission would hav4 i to take Mr. Thompson's statement on this as it : : sounds like there is a change in ownership. I I ! MR. THOMPSON stated that Archie a.nd David Koyl i i and Edward Bryant are the owners of the property : and Archie and David Koyl will be the subdividersf I I I I I 1 i It was pointed out that Mr. Bryant owns Lot 14 in: I the existing subd.ivision. i The City Attorney explained that this matter was ;referred back to the Planning Commission by the ; Council since there were changes made. This re- :quest was made by Mr. Thompson on the request of i Ithe owners. The Commission can study the new I I :proposal and report back to the Council that the : !plan as presented should be considered at a puijlit : hearing or that it has no merit. i Commissioner Sutherland pointed out .that only 4 o< ithe Commissioners present were eligible to vote ; : on this matter. :MR. THOMPSON stated the purpose of requesting :these matters referr.ed back to the Planning Com- !mission was so that all of the facts could be :presented to the Planning Commission because of / ;substantial revisions in the precise plan and I I :tentative map, with the view of the Planning ':Commission recommending the change of zone to the: :Council. If this is not the case, he wished'to i : withdraw the application and submit a new appl ica-: i tion. He stated that he would like all members o$ 1 4 I 1 ' 1 / I I I I I I I a1 1 1 I 1 I I * 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 I 1 I I 1 I 1 # I ! ~~ ~~ ./ r 1 I I I 4 t I i . *- ', ~,,'~,'~*., y*, 1 , 8 '. ', '8 '., I 1 \. '8. s,, 88 8' , I -5- I 1 I N a rn e '*., '*$$, '*, '4+, I I I : . of 'ZQ ;;*, ,+, '\ '*/. q2 : I '.L.C.g\ +"'j : :""""""-"""""""""""""-"-"""""""""~""""""~l""~"""""""~~"~"~~~ : Member $j'@$Lg\G 8 i the Commission to be able to consider this and i i;ll:I i in the best interests of the owner and City and -!' :::; ; those affected, he felt it would be better to ; ;;* a,;::: i withdraw the applications and submit new applicaj :;I:#' I tions. :;!I:: I :;;&" I I ;lo;:; 441 : The City Attorney stated he believed it would be I ;:; ;:: I better to refile so this could be re-advertised. i ):I ; : : ; ;.; t::I*l I :;l:tl Ill( i MR. THOMPSON requested that the applications be I ;:;I:: : withdrawn. I ;;;::: I I 11:;; 1 :,I : A motion was made to accept the request for with4 ,,I:,' :i:::; I1 i drawal of the applications for zone change, pre- i ;l;~ll : cise plan and tentative map and to send a report; 1,;rt :::I:: I ::;i:: ; until new applications are submitted. I ::::;: ; 11 I ; i :.: (b) Zone changes and public improvements. The i . I ;.; I I I 1 .; Planning Director stated that the Committee did i ;;$;I I )I)* : meet with him and the Engineering Department re- : ;::a;: I I ,(I i garding.Zone changes and Public Improvements and I : ; I.: I1 ; would have a repo'rt at the next meeting when 1:s 8 ;::::: I( I ::::+ k ; : ; i'i i (c) Industrial sites. Possible site locations i ,1:::; ;::a : for San Diego Consolidated Co. were discussed. I t 1;;:;: I I : ; ; : :.: I i.: 1 : : : I Commissioner Sutherland pointed out the need fori 1;::; ; this type of business. He stated that any :;18hl : community can grow a lot cheaper and easier if : : ;. .: ; : 4#:/ they have a plant of this nature. : : i.: , I The Chairman asked the Planning Director to pro- i ;::::I : ceed with consideration of three areas, which 1 ::::;: ::I::: were,the area near the sewer treatment plant off: 14 Il ;.I 1 : Avenida Encinas, the area near the South Coast : ::::;; i Asphalt Products Co. plant on Vista Way, and the i ;::I ; canyon South of Letterbox Canyon, Westerly of El I It Camino Real on the Graham Kelly, et a1 property. i NEW BUSINESS: I 1 (a) Initiation of Precise Plan - EI Camino 'hsa! ; Unit No. 5. The Secretary read a letter from ' I t Jerry L. Rombotis, President of Kamar Constructi4n I Co. dated December 6, 1g66, requesting the Plan- : ; ning Commission to initiate a precise plan on i : property on El Camino Mesa Unit No. 5 at the I I i Commission's next regularly scheduled meeting of : December 27, 1966. This would be in conju9ction: , I with the Tentative Map and request for Zone .' *I I : Change. I .i ; The following resolution was presented: I I I I I 1 1 ',% 8,' I ',,,I* 11 I, L 1 I I 1 I I 1 to the Council that no action would be taken I. 1 I I b El 48 I 1 I I I I I I Chairman McComas is present. I I b I I I I I 11 I I A I :::::; $1 I1 I I' I : ; i .I. i I I 1 I 1 I I I I *I I I I I in full and adopted. I I I. c c -6- I I I : (b) Election of Officers. Commissioner McCarthy stated that,Chairman McComas had asked that the i ADJOURNMENT: I I BY Proper motion the meeting was adjourned at : 8:43 P. M. I 1 i Respectfully submitted, . b I i DOROTHY M. OSBURN I Recording Secretary I 1 I t I I I ' t 1