HomeMy WebLinkAbout1967-09-26; Planning Commission; Minutesr
I P h I '\ . .. ', ,I , ~CITY OF CARLS' I I '\\ 't, \\\ ', '\ '. I I i Minutes of: PLANNING COMMISSION' I I .' ,, \,,'\\ ' ', '','8\ 1 I
\, ', ', ', '. '*
;Date of Meeting: September 26, 1967 i Name '*,,?+. \* ',,'$h !Time of Meeting: 7:30 P. M. : of \r 0' ' ; Place of Meeting: Council Chambers : Member '\S$J',$~'"\ : .o$;& +;?+, : ~""""""""""""""""""""~"-""""""""-""-"-"""~"""--"""--"-----~-"-
'9 I I! :ROLL CALL was answered by Commissioners Smith, I I :::;:I
iMcComas, Palmateer, Sutherland, Little, Jose and i ::::;I
:::#,I :Voorheis. Also present were City Attorney Wilson: ::;:;: i Planning Director Schoell , Chief Building Inspec- i ;pi::
:tor Osburn, and Civil Engineering Assistant Sprehe. *I II
I 4 I ::'IIt ::;; i APPROVAL OF MINUTES: I ;:: :::
I 'I:;;; i:::::
I :xi xi ; :
I I Ipalmateer : ; ix~ I :
I Sutherland i I : ; :xi
I I 9ose ?(; !xi ; ;
I :Little ; i i ; ;xi
I IVoorheis ; ; ; : ;x:
I I ipalmateer : ; !xi ; ;
I Sutherland i : :x; i I
I I Little : ixix: ; ;
I I bose : : :xi ; i
I * poorheis I : i :x;
I ;;*a;; WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: I I I I :;*:;;
I lnii::
:Letter from the San Diego County Pl'anning Depart- i i:::;: It
I I
II
I I I:
(a) Minutes of the adjourned meeting of Septem- :Smith
lber 8, 1967, were approved as corrected. :McComas : I : : ; I) Ix;
I
I
I
I I I I ::;::: i (b) Minutes of the regular meeting of September !Smith ; : :xi '1; ; ; :12, 1967, were approved as submitted. McComas $; !x; i ;
I
I
I
I
I
I:'#*
I (a) San Diego County Regional General Plan - I I ::::;; I@
jment dated September 22, 1967, with map showing i ii::::
:revisions requested by the Planning Commission, ; 891:;; i was read and acknowledged. I ;i!;l'
!ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
!There were no oral communications. I
!PUBLIC HEARINGS: I
:(a) RECLASSIFICATION, continued - To consider a :zone chawge from R-P to C-M on the Westerly side ;
:of Roosevelt St. between Laguna Dr. and Beech Ave.!,
:being the Easterly one-half of Lot 21 , Seaside I
:Lands, Map 1722. Applicant: Frances M. Peachey ; ! Reese. I
!Mr. Russell Grosse, Attorney representing the
:applicant, asked that this hearing be continued to!
:October 24, 1967, in order to get additional prop-!
:erties on the Westerly side of Roosevelt St. to :
irequest C-M zoning also. I
!A motion was made to cpntinue this hearing to bmi th
!October 24, 1967. NcCqmas
I palniateer
I I Sdtherland
I I gittle
I Uose
I
I
4 I
I I I :;4:, 1:
I I ::ii::
I '. I I I
.I
I
;I* ;:
I :i:iii
I
I
I I
6 I I
I
I I
I
1
I I
I
I
I
I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I
I 4 I I I 1 I I I I I I I 4 I I I I
I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I 1" ~~~ ~
I -2-
1 1 I I I I I I I I
I '\ \., . ,,', b "' I
I ', ',,'*, I I I ',, bb,',., ', , .
I \, *,,'., '\\ ',,'* I
:""""""""""""""""""""""""""""-"""""""""~""""""""":"",~:" ; Member $%'@..p\p o'.~
I '.l,:'I
1 ::::;I
I l:;*lI
I I ::;:I;
;Ig;:#
I::*:: j;;;::
I I I ,. -8'
I Na
I I ;
me ',, y9\0' *$$. '., - '$&, '
I *?$;%, ;J,$$$+ I
I :OLD BUSINESS:
:(a) Sign Study. The Planning Director presented i :a chart of proposed limits for the size of signs i jin different zones and explained that the purpose ; ;of the study is to prevent unsightly cluttering of: :the City and to make signs more effective to their! !users. He then discussed the size and type of the: :proposed signs with the Commission. I I
:The Commission decided to study and discuss signs :further at their next meeting. I I
i(b) Planned 1ndustria.l Zone. The Planning Directok :discussed the rough ddaft of the proposed P-M I !(Planned Industrial) Zone. He felt the City shouljd :replace the present IIM" and C-M Zones with a I I !Planned Industrial Zone and a Highway Related I I :Commercial Zone. The activities of the Planned I :Industrial Zone would be governed by performance ; ;standards. Certain requirements should be set up i
:Industrial Zone and part of the C-M Zone. Among i jpoints discussed were that the P-M zone would not ; :allow retail sales, except of goods manufactured I jor fabricated on the site and which sales are I :incidental to the business. Adequate landscaping !
!and setbacks are important. The main concern, as :far as zoning is concerned, is to enhance the !community by keeping industry separate from resi- i :dential and commercial areas, and to protect the : !investment of good industry from the infringement ;of marginal industry or non-industrial uses. I I
!Commissioner Little stated he felt bu1.k storage, .: llumber yards, gasoline storage and automobile I :wrecking yards should be excluded and placed unde6 ; conditional use permits. He felt it would be much I :easier to exclude these operations from the start.: :He also pointed out that electronics cannot with- i !stand the vibrations that would come from having : :an auto wrecking yard next to them. Unless provisi- i ions are made, the developer will try to sell prop-: :erty for the best price, so it is in the best i interests of the City to have restrictions. Lum-! .:her yards and saws cannot be heard until they are I I in operation. I I
i The Commission discussed deleting helicopters and i ;helistops and electric substations under conditioqal :use permits. Also the Commission considered I : deleting the last sentence under Paragraph A undet I Parking Requirements. I
The Chairman stated he would not exclude lumber : :yards but believed they should come in for a I I i conditional use permit. He pointed out that :industry changes over the years. He stated he : !would like the ordinance to state wholesale I I :business and that retail business in this zone : i should come under a conditional use permit. I
I
I
I I
I I
I I I
!as this ordinance would take over the present I I
I I
I " I I 1 I
I
I I I
I I
I 1
I I I
1 I I I I I
I #
I I I I I I I
4 I I I I I I
I
I I I I 1 I I ,;:::': 11
8 I ;i:;i; I I ~Y
-3-
I I I I
I
I \, b', 88.
I
I
' " ,, 8. 'b b' I I I I
I
I I '\ ', *, 'b '\ '8
6 I
I '. ',',~."'., I
I I '.,,'.,', y. 8 Name 8, *%. *,'*$% i
b$'\q;, 't %2 ;
I +Ly% +,+* I :""""""""""""-"""""""""""""""""""""""""'"""""""","~"","" : Member *6 @.++ ,d, ;
I ;:I I\ iiii
I 1 I : of
!Commissioner Little asked the City Attorney for a ;; :clarification of what constttutes retail sales as ; ;:::::
!in the electronic assembly business somebody else : ;;::;;
:is going to use the part and add it to something ! ;I;;Ia
:else. The City Attorney stated he would have to :::;::
;think this over. #;;I;;
I ;lI:t' 1:
!The Planning Commission discussed minimum parking i $'I8l I";: I requi rements.
I I ;::::: :The Planning Director in reviewing the draft I #*'I*: I 1:;1:1 :stated they are working toward getting good devel4p- i:;::: iment in town which would be better in the long run: i;:;:: :than to penalize the City by getting a lower type ; d;:I
:of industry in to make a "fast dollar". He reportdd ::;;::
:';I:; !looking at many industrial developments with front: ;:;;I; :yard setbacks from 20' to 60' and that it makes a1:l ;:,::I ::::;; I1 ithe difference if the front yard is planted with : 1::;II
!no parking. He proposed a minimum planted area 06 :::;:: ;lo' on the side yard and rear yard adjacent to thd :;al" :;:::: :property lines. Loading docks aould be on the side ::;'::
!or back. t I :; 4;:
!The Building Inspector suggested setting up diffe4- :I::;:
:ent setbacks on one acre sites than on the larger; ;: 'I::
!sites. I I ;:::;; ;::::;
I I ;;
!The Planning Director stated the developers could i
:place additional deed restrictions upon themselves! :;I' ;; :ii:
:if they wished. The buildings could be 25' from ehe 'I;: :;::;; :rear yard property line. There should always be i a:;;;
ispace for a ten foot drive around the building. : ::::I; : He would 1 i ke to see the City be able to compete ..I 4:;:: ::;I:,
!with Rancho Bernardo's industrial development. I ::,I::
I .I :;::I;
a:
lb~I1l
4
I I 1
I
I
I
I I ;:!i::
I I I :;41;; i;::
I
I
'
I
I I i In discussing electric substations, Mr. Ted I ;I, I i I.; :::!I;
::;I
;I#;;!
I I ;;::;:
I ::::':
I :;;:::
I :::::;
::I:::
::::;: :;::;:
I I I :;::;; 18 t
I iii;;;
I ::;:;:
I ::;:::
I I ::;:;: I*
I I I I I::::;
::;::; :::::! :!::I:
I I :;::;:
I I :I;@l; I I 1;;::1
I I ::;:;:
I
'
:Richmond, San Diego Gas & Electric Co., stated
itheir Company is landscaping their substations : ::I:;;
:completely now in an effort to beautify and shiel$ Ithem. They have just started landscaping them ; ;;ll;I
:this year and have planted large trees on the
Istation at Mesa Drive and El Camino Real in I I ,;:;i: : Oceanside.
:Upon discussing property near the airport, the I i:::;: i Planning Director pointed out that care should be; I ;Ill
:taken since this is not flat land. He questioned i ::I::;
:whether they should set a minimum lot width. He ; ;:::i:
:stated that in San Diego loading docks are not i
:visible from adjoining property or streets.
:The Chairman mentioned the fact that this area is i in I sever&ly limited for obtaining skilled personnel. i :!!:!;
I Commissioner Little stated that 90% of their I ppople have to be trained where he works.
!After further discussion the Chairman invited the :::!;I
#I
:Commission to look at the Machine Shop at Highes i :*I I:
i in Oceanside which has a 10,000. sq. ft. building: I 'I :and loading docks in Oceanside, and to study and 4 : discuss this further.
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I I i t
I I I
I 8 I I I
I I
'11
I I I
~~.
h I I I I I I
I
h I 8, S', a
I s8 ', \ '8 's '8 I I
b 88 I 4 1 4
I
I I
I 'S 8L,'88, '8 '~,~8~
t I -4- 8, '8 '8 8\8 \, '
I I N a me '\ '$$. ',8 '&
I I : of ''.$*;?b. *.'~p, :
I : Member .,(.'.o ,o%..~+~,o. x,v;\+ $6, ;
I ::;i;:
::/,I I;:::
', 8 6' 8\
:""~"""""""'""""-"""""~"""""""""""""""""-"'""""""""-""","" '0 IJ i NEW BUSINESS: I I ;It
:(a) Precise Plan - Northeast Corner of Tamarack i :;;:::
:Avenue and Pi0 Pic0 Drive. ::;:::
4 I 1;::;: :Letter dated September 19, 1967, from Richard V. i :::::: !Jordan requesting the Planning Commission to 8
:;;:::
:initiate proceedings to consider a precise plan I ;:a:;: i:!!::
ion above property. I I ;::;I4 I#
I llII;:
;After due consideration a motion was made to adop4 I:;;lI :::::i
:the following resolution: I * :';l:l
:Resolution No. 518. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING Smith ::ki;; :COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD DETERMINING : Palmateer !x: ic i i :
!THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD TO CONSIDER McComas : ixb i ;
:RECOMMENDING A PRECISE PLAN TO THE CITY COUNCIL : Sutherland i 8; : ; :AND ORDERING NOTICE THEREOF TO BE GIVEN, was read i Little : ~ !in full and adopted. : Jose :;x::: IO
I 0I:''I
I I
I I I I
I 8 ;:4:: I I
I
I I
I I I i!:::: II
II
I*
I(
I I I I Voorheis i i i : :
/- !(b) First Baptist Church. The Building Inspector :::::I j:':::
1,:::: ::;;;; I(
::I::: ;::I;:
:I,:;:
I I 11
jcalled attention to the fact the First Baptist I :Church is in violation of the zoning ordinance. ; :The State paid the church for the whole building :
iand then the church bought the building back for i i$50.00. The church has a bond of $1500.00 with : :xi;: te to remove a portion of the building, an4 {:a ;I;: :all church removed was the steps in front. I I ;:@I+ :The Building Inspector reported telling Mr. Andre4 :::: :Channel1 , Mr. Minor Starr and others, many times : ithey would have to remove a portion of the buildi4g :i::::
:in order to comply with the 20' front yard setback: :'I:'l
$'I:*
:when the freeway is widened as the front of the ,i ::I:::
:church, as it now stands, will only be' about 6 : :; ' : i ;.;
:inches from the right of way on Pi0 Pic0 Drive. I I,;I;:
:He stated he would have to serve notice on the :
:congregation on Sunday morning and give them 30 i 'I*:#;
I :;;I:, :days to comply with the zoning ordinance. They ; :;;::: inow have a different pastor and the new pastor i ::;::: ::;::: :says he did not know of this requirement. I :l#'I; I I;;:'
:(c) Service Station Appearance. There was no I 8: ;:;t:t
ireport from the Committee appointed to study this i ;:;::: :matter. Some of the Commissioners agreed the I 1:;:;; istations called to their attention were unsightly.; !:I:::
/'I;
:The Committee stated they would get together re- : VlI;: :;i;;1 igarding this matter.
i(d) Setbacks in R-3 Zone. The Building Inspector i I:!i:l
:pointed out that the former City Attorney gave her: :!:;;I ::i !opinion of the ordinance, that an accessory buildijng ::;I*: :could be built to the side property line, and the ; i;::;: I:,
!City has several expensive buildings with accessorp i::::: :buildings built to the property line. The presen;t 1;:::: ::;;:I !City Attorney has a different interpretation of : :the ordinance, which makes these nice developments! ;I::::
jnon-conforming, and asked the Commission's indul- : 1*4:t:
fgence in this matter. The width of the lots in thg ;::::;
;:;l:l
iR-3 zone near the beach makes it very difficult to: 1::::: ::;::: :develop the properties without building an accesso!ry ::;:I:
!building to the property line. I ::I:;:
i ADJOURNMENT: By proper motion the meeting was ad- McComas ; : i ; ::
ijourned at 9:52 P. M. : Palmateer : : :xi : I i Sutherlan4 : : x; I ; : Little :xi $ : I
I I oor eis : ! IX: ! :
ii:;;;
1'1 *I I
;ii:ii
I
I
I I ::;; 1::
I
.I I t ::I::; :: 'II
I
;I1
*I(
I i Smith I ' :xi ; I
Secretary i Jose ; :x: x: I ;
I
I