HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968-01-23; Planning Commission; Minutesr c
e.
t
"
,-
..
I 1 .,\. \ ** I !CITY OF CARLSBAD- I I
" I I 3, '\8"., '8, 888:'., 1 I
: of \3&9$, 'N, ;$> :
I. I ;::;;: 11
I ::;;,I
:Minutes of: PLANNING COMMIS IN ; l8 88 ', '\ '8\", !Date of Meeting: January 23, 196$ N a me '*, '?$$ 8, t8 $a), i 'X3
:Time of Meeting: 7:30 P. M. Council Chambers :Place of Meeting: : Member ',L\0.9 $)'@,$\p\%',,; ,,, -? I ;"""~""""""~"""~"~~"""""""~""""""""""--"""~~""""""""-"---,"---
:ROLL CALL was answered by .Commissioners Smith, iMcComas, Jose, Little, Palmateer, and Voorheis. a ; ::;::: :Commissioner Sutherland arrived at 7:38 'P.M. Also ; ipresent.were City Attorney Wilson, Assistant City : ;Engineer Holly, Planning Director Sc.hoel1, and
*'*x' I I I 8, '8 '\ '8
'
k I
k :::'I1 I@
:::::I
IAss'istant City Planner Johnston. # @rI:;: :::;,I
i
l I .. a :::;i;
I I ::::;;
a :::, '11
:;'I:: .; t .: ; ; :
I :x;x; I ;
;Jose ' ' I I I :xi
Ipalmateer ; ; ;x: ;. ;
:APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
!(a) Minutes of the regular meeting of January 9, ISrnith
I iM.cComas !x: !x: : j1968, were approved as submitted.
L
.. :Li ttl e ::'I# ; ; :x: ; ;
I Xoorheis : : !xi ; I
# I ii #:I
I !!@I::
I ':liii
e I !-I:;
!WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: -8 I#!!::
I
%!
I
;There were no written communications. I ' 'I
I
!ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: I tl:;I;
I ;::;:; ; ; .; .; I 'I
I .;I:lI;
I I;;:;I :;;:::
I I ::;::: :::i::
::;1,1 I'
I :::::, 'I
I :p:;:
::;I,:
:I;:;:
::;:;I
a I t @ !There were no oral communications.
!PUBLIC HEARING: I
:(a) 'RECLASSIFICATION - To consider a zone change i ;from R-A-10 to C-2 (continued from November 28, 4 ::;i:: f1967.) L-ocated on the Southerly side of El Caminoi i::::! !Real and Easterly of Kelly Drive. Lot 1.
i('b) PRECISE PLAN - To consider a precise plan, Lot! :::i;: :1 Marja Acres. Located on the Southerly side of ; !El Camino Real and Easterly of Kelly Drive. I I ;!;;:: It 1;
!TENTATIVE MAP- Marja Acres Subdivision - 2 lbts i :Located on the Southerly side of El Camino Real ; jand Easterly of Kelly Drive. I I i::;:;
!The Reclassification, Precise Plan, and Tentative ; :Map were considered concurrently.
!Notices of the Public Hearjngs and thk Affidavit ;@I,#;
!of Publication were read. The Secretary certified; ;::a:I :that the property owners in the area were notified! iof the hearings and then read the application. :":I,
;The Secretary reviewed the application for a zone i :::;:I :change which was continued from November 28, 1967.;
!Commissioner Sutherland was present atg7:38 P. M. i la:l:
!and questioned the City Attorney if he was present: ::;;:I ;in time to consider this application and the City I :Attorney stated he was. I
!Letter dated January 19, 1968, Pacific Telephone ;and Telegraph Company, stating if underground t I :telephone facilities are desired to the existing I !building, it will be the responsibility of the I I :developer to provide the underground supporting i :structure. I' The exact locations will depend on I :final county road and approved subdivision maps.
D;'I::
I I
I
I I
4 ::!::; I'
1;::::
I @ I:;;:!
:;;I::
I i::;;:
I 18 1;::;;
;::;:;
1:;:::
I ;::;::
;::,:;
::;::;
*
n- I.
I I I i;,:;;:
I I
I
I I.
I
I
I I
I
I I
I I I t 1 I I 1
* I
I I I I I I I I' I
1
8 I
I
I I a I I b :The Planning Director pres,ented a map of the pro- ; !posed area and explained the location of the pro- i iperty, the zoning in the area, the facts' of the ; ;written.report resulting from the staff investig- i jation of the property, and. the circu.lation of 4 I ;traffic. He also presented a map of the location i :site showing the anticipated locations of neigh- ; jborhood shopping centers with the mile'radius :around each shopping center. He pointed out that: jthe Commission should take into consideration'what: ;does happen to the land along E1,Camino Real if i :this area is changed to commercial use. Accord- I ing to the General Plan, shopping centers are I located at an major intersection, which will serve: !as a control along the maj.or highways. I
:The Assistant City Engineer presented the tenta- i :tive.map of the proposed subdivision. He describe3 '.ithe location and area of each lot and stated that : :each lot will be developed in units. He indicated! !that as far as the Engineering Department is con- ; :cerned, there are several future changes to be i :considered. Some important points which were I :sighted were:
;have .a median strip, which is a separated roadway i .:type of development . He felt that a left turn ; !movement -across the divided highway would not be : ladvisible. into a pr,ivate driveway opening, there- I - ;fore the Engineering Department recommends a -60' i :in width right of way be provided at one access ; Ipoint.for an interior street.
!existing El Camino Real are impossible at this .. : :time since plans are in progress by the County fori jfuture construction; therefore the Engineering i ;Department recommends that a deposit be made I :covering the estimated cost of the improvements i ;with the City. He also pointed out the improve- : jment requirements for this development and Stated: :that the County plans for construction are approx-i :imately two (2) years in the futu're. I I
:When questioned what is meant by contro,lled cross-! jing, the Assistant City Engineer stated that I :it is a storage area provided for left turn move- jment, which will be away from the main flow of s :traffic.'so a left turn can be,made without stopp-i :ing traffic. He also stated that it is not a I jmajor intersection, therefore there will be no :signals and the estimated speed limit would be- !sixty (60) miles an hour.
I
i
I b
* I
b 1. The future design of El Camino Real will i
I 1
b 2. The construction of improvements on the
l 8
I I I
e ! # I I b !The Planning Director presented the precise plan I :and sta.ted' the applicant brings before the Com- I :mission a precise plan as part of a zone change :request. He explained the written report of the ; !facts resulting from the staff investigation of : :the property, the circulation pattern, the parking! !area development, "the existing uses in the area : ;and stated the proposed development would consist !of speciality shops. He also indicated the parking: ;area on the precjse plan does not feflect the :circulation from the requested interior street.
t
I I I
1 I I I
7 I 1
1 I
I
I
I
I I I
I I 8 a,,- .*. I I
I I I
I I ’8 ’,,’., ”, ””.\ I \‘ ‘\ ’ ’. ’. ’.
I ‘\ \\,’\, s \, 8’ ’, 8, I
I -3- Name ‘\, ‘<, ‘?&, i
: Member ~~,Q,$~O\c~,:
‘\L .o ,p,+$-, I
:“““-”““““““““““““““~“~“”““”““““““““““““~”“““““”““““-~~~“~l
I ;;I,’@ i Chairman Little declared the public-hearing open i ;::;;; I*;:
i and announced the Planning Commission would now ; 9 :;
8;:;: ; hear from the applicant or their representive. 8 ::*,I#
!:::I;
4 i MR. JAY’ F. HOFFMAN,- applicant, 4901 El Camino Rea<, I 11(I
; cussi ion of the meeting. of November 28, 1967. He : ::;;,I !::;;! ! indicated that it is an existing structure and (I’ i that there is roughly $60,000 invested in it,. He! i::;:;
: stated that they have tried to present this in i ;::::;
.e : .; : 8 i such a way that it will conform with the .regula- ; ;;I’ ’
tions of the City. The 1ast.discussion with the i :i:;. City Engineering and Planning Staf.f was that he ; It:*:& :;’:;:
would leave the method of ingress and egress until ;;:: :.: f the future development of-El Camino Real and that;
’ . : it could be re-routed so therewould be a single : I ;: ;;:: 1 enter and exist point. He also indicated that - i ; they have no intentions of having an upholstery : l:;8*l
i to consist of small speciality shops. One of the: - ; reasons why they have not listed specific uses iSj i that it is expensive to go around the country 1 I - ; selecting the type of shops they would like to : have in the development. He listed a few of the i ; speciality shops that will be put in; a.small
restaurant, a beauty shop, a gift shop of gifts i sele’cted around the world. He stated the one : thing the Commission should consider and remember! is that .it is not a shopping center; it will be a: : place where people are going to come for specific: i items which they cannot get in a shopping center.; : ,There will be a delicatessen store, flower stall,: I artist booth where Carlsbad artist can display ; ’: there work, an adult hobby sh.op, candy shop, i knit shop for specia1i.t.y clothing, an antique : shop of genuine antiques, toy shop, book store, i i clock shop of mostly antique clocks and a card 1
: breakdown of the interior is going to be in 10 ;
i create an odor, noise or anything that will be ; ; offensive to the surrounding neighborhood. He i : pointed out again that it‘.is an existing structure
and the area we are using for this development is! : completely marginal land; it is only good for I i tommercial use and that people would not build in: : this area particulary with the six lanes of traffic: The most important point of all is it i : is a point of interest for Carlsbad. They have i i a tax situation here now, if they put another I ; $100,000 in for refurnishi% and developing cer.- I tainly the City of Carlsbad will benefit. Some : ; of the people in the surrounding area will have : : great use of this development; the people from thb i Indust’rial Park, La Costa and Lake San Marcos. I I
I commissioner McComas stated that the Commission i : had the idea that the precise plan would list i the specific uses to a limited extent. 4
I I I
’,\,8”
I ; of ’. .e,
I
I i
II
I b :::;:i
stated he would like to continue part of the dis-i- 4:;;;
i
:*:: ;:,;It I’
‘b shop, repair shop or a welding shop;;it is going I ::;:::
I I
I I
I
I t
- ; shop. All of the shops will be in small area. Thp - by 20’ units. There will be nothing that will i
I
I 8 I +
e
I
re I
1.
1
Mr. Hoffman stated that this was very difficult ; to clarify ., but they could submit to the Commir-j
sion an’exclusive type list where it would : exclude such things as furniture. repai,r and I i welding shops and so forth. I
r i
I 1
t I 1
” 1 I 3 I 1
I
1
~~ ~~ _____
I
I
I I
I I 8 I
* '8 ', -, * I I I I I I
, , ' ', '. * I I
'88 '., '., 'a, ',\'\\
-4- . I 8, ', '8, , \ ' I i Name 8-,'\$&, ', ',3
: Member '.$$0#,-7J!,9:;., ;"""""""""""""~~"""""""""~."""-""""-""-"""~~""""""""~-"~~-~--;-~; I ,d.@ \*PP'\O I
I i::;::
:::;:I
i:::;;
;::;t;
6 '8 8. ' ", '\ "
I I : of '$>3,,8'8,'q+s i 1
I I
'I
Chairman Little stated the Commission discussed i ;:'I:: ; this at the November 28th' meeting that possibly : I::!:: ; someday the applicant might want to sell this i :::;I; ; property as a C-2 zone. Without a specific !:;;I; 1 precise plan it' could be usedfor any type of bus-! '1. : iness listed under C-2 zoning. This is one of. ;
: uses, was discussed. I ::;;,I
! Mr. Hoffman stated that they would be very happy i .: : .; : I ; 61, I
I to go along with what is going to be more sp,ecifit.. :::;:
I I1
b
;,the reasons why a precise plan, listing specific I 1::::;
I :.; i
b e !:;;!!
They were lead to believe that externally .it was i :;I something to be nailed downed and-internally they: had quite a bit of lee way. i I
.. Chairman Little announced the Commission woali8:. : i hear from any others wistii$g to*speak'in -favor of! ; this application. I '.; I i There was no one present wishing to speak'in favor - : and the Chairman announced the Commission would ; i hear from all persons wishing to speak in opposi-: : tion. I
As there were no persons present desiri.ng to . i I speak in opposition, the Chairman declared the ;
.; pubTic hearing closed at 8:22 P. M.
3 Chaikman. Little asked the City Attorney if there : were any regulations how the*.Commission could ; I put certain restrictions on this zone. #
The City Attorney stated the precise plan is the i device by which the Commission can control the ; : use. b
b
I I
I
,- t
* I
c
I
I t
1. I
I I I I - -9 : Comm.issioner Sutherland stated the basic problems! : are that it is spot zoning, it is a traffic I i hazard and is against the master plan. There is i
1 residential area could be developed. . b
: Commissioner McComas stat-ed that under the cir- i' cumstances he felt it would be hard to. get resi- ; i dents into the area because of the traffic and so: : forth. He stated he would rather have a develop-: : ment like this in the area knowing it woudd be ; i maintained. 8
I
.- : enough land involved so that a well designed 1 .. I
e I I
t I I I t Commissioner Palmateer stated he agreed with ; Commissioner Sutherland-that it was spot zoning I I and that the General Plan should be followed '. ; ; since it notes specific recommendations for the i I location of commerical areas. I
I The following resolutions were presented: t I
: After further discussion, a motion was made to i i adopt Resolution No. 533 denying application for i ; .change of zone on said property for the following: ; reasons: 1
: create unsafe traffic conditions within the El i Camino Real right of way. I
I * 4 I
I 8
L I I
.I * * 1. That the adoption of a C-2 zone would I
I I
.
r
I 1 8, ., ** ' . . \ 8, I I
I I I
I I I
- I '8, 't,",, '*\ '\, ', I
I ', '\\ ',, ',, ',
I - N a me' *,, a++, *,, ++ i
I : of '$>$)$, '\ >%',, I
I I I I S8 \ 8 ' 't
b8't% I -5- '?A ;
'\L 0 \q\,+'+ 1 ~""""""~""""-"""""""""""~."""""-""-~"-""""~;"""""""-"--"~--~----~' ; Member ~$.~,~~O\~\*
I. I '~~l;,
I I ::::;;
s 2. That the proposed zoning does not conformi !:;:I*
!to the General Plan. 8 ;;:lll
IPlanning Commission Resolution NO. 533. A RESOLU- $mith l,)l I
;TION DENYING APPLICATION FOR CHANGE .OF ZONE FROM BcComas ; ; !x: : I
:R-A-~o TO C-2 ON PROPERTY AT THE SOUTHERLY SIDE OFgJose F; ;x;
:
!reading waived. ;Sutherland., I : ;x:xi !x: ; ; : :
e I@
!A motion was made to- adopt Resolution No. 542 deny:' ing application for Precise Plans PP 6708 for the ; I:::;!
following reasons: 1 1. That the Precise ,Plan did'not contain f :+:; ;sufficient detail and did not designate specific i :::::; @:I8';, ; uses.
2. Tha.t the adoption of Precise Plan PP 6708i ::;;:I
'; :would create unsafe traffic conditions within the ; (El Camino Real right of way. I
!Planning Commission Resolution No. 542. A RESOLU- kmith
:FOR MARJA ACRES ON PROPERTY 800 FEET EASTERLY OF gose
!KELLY DRIVE AND SOUTHERLY OF EL CAMINO REAL, was little
I 8 4:: 4 ii::;;
I ; ;x; : :
: ; i"i ; : I 1 i: Ii,i
I1
I1 !EL CAMIN0 REAL, APPROXIMATELY 800 FEET EAST OF Little : : :KELLY DRIVE, was adopted by title on1y.in.d furtherpalmateer ' : IXi ; ; '
I goorheis
1's
I
8 "I :::;:;
I I
I
!TION DENYING APPLICATION FOR PRECISE PLANS PP 6708bcComas
jadopted by title only and further reading waived. Palmateer
8 butherland
t Voorheis
!A motion was made to.adopt Resolution No. 543 dis-1 , ;approving- the Tenta.tive Map of Marja Acres Sub- I I :division. b
!Planning Commission Resolution No. 543. A RESOLU- kmith
.ITION OF THE CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION IcComas :DISAPPROVING THE TENTATIVE MAP OF MARJA ACRES SUB-aose
!DIVISION, was adopted by title only and further tittle :reading waived. Palmateer
I Voorheis
iCorrection to Minutes:
;Commissioner Sutherland requested a correction be i :made to the minutes of the meeting of January 19, i
i1968, regarding the freeway interchange..recommend-; :ations to the City Council. That the minutes I jshould have included the Northeast quadrant of Elmi
:Avenue be maintained as a green area and part of : jthe Civic Center complex. By common consent the :correction was made as requested. I I
I I
I I I I butherland
I I
I
I I
I I 4 s
I I
I I
:OLD BUSINESS: I I
!(a) Sign study. The Planning Director stated that!
:at the last meeting the Commission approved the ;
:basic size of the signs and that the Planning Dep&+t- Iment is working on the sign ordinance, which will
:be completed and presented to the Commission at th+ :next 9. meeting. I
1 I
I I I I # 9
I I
I I I I
I
8
t 1
I I
I I
I I
I 1
t I
I 8
I I I t I I I i 1
1
~ ~... ~-
I
I
I
I I
.. I 8, ', -, - ' I ' ', I I
I I I
I I I ", '+, '*, ' '8, '' '\ I
I i NB me *8, '++, *\, '?faJ, i
I : Member .$2L"@. .@.("o\.+.O .F',.";+ ,d,l I
I '3, '. ' ., ', ''
I ', '\ '\\ '\ '\ ', I
I -6-
1 : of '$"%> ', \e,
:"""""""""""".""""""~.""."""""""""""""""~~"""""""""~"~":--"~'
,;I:;:
:Chairman Little stated that in the sign ordinance i :i::::
Ithe freeway oriented signs should be given some : ll:i::
;specific size as far as the width is concerned. i i:;::!
!He pointed out that a two foot (2') sign with 8 i;;:;: 1)s' ;rounded letters forty feet (40') 1on.g could ::'I::
!possibly -be put up. D :;::;:
;4::;;
:By common consent of the Commissioners.it was :;;;:f
!agreed that a 25' width would be an adequate.size i :::;:; : :.; ; I ; :for freeway oriented signs and should be included ; -*,:,
:in the sign ordinance. 4. ::;I: : : : ;.! i I After further discussion, the Planning Director : !::ii;
stated that at the last City Council Meeting the : :;a a ; :.:
!Council requested to have .a joint meeting with the! ::;; :::;:; ':
. . ;Planning Commission to dis'cuss the freeway inter- i i!l*;l :changes and other items of importance. He also : '1'1 ::;; :stated it will be a public meeting. !i:;:; s '%;;;a
:It was the consenus of the Commission that'a joint; ; -1 1:;:;
c :meeting should be held on Thursday, February 8, I iriii;
- :City Library to discuss freeway interchanges,signsi, ;::I::
b * ;'I 11
8
4
a b a .. b ,:::I
I
I i L
*B
I
I :::;:I
i1968, at 7:30 P. M. in the Conference Room at the i ; : :.; : I
i:;:ii
idiscuss. 1 :!;:;:
iindustrial.zoning, master plan updating and any : :other planning matters that the Council wish-to i
:NEW BUSINESS:
!(a) Investigation of the intersection at El Caminol :;i:;: !Real and Chestnut Street. The Assistant City Eng-: :ineer explained that at the last meeting the Chair; :;:::I 'I
:man brought up the fact that he is being confrontep ::I::: :by people complaining about the intersection of 1 i::::: :El Camino Real and Chestnut Street. The Assistant! I:!!;: I
:City Engineer illustrated the conditions of the : :II;iI
jinter.section and stated the Engineering Department! ;el;8;
:is working on the problem. He also stated he has ; ;:;::1
A ;:;I::
!contacted the County Highway Department and noti- : ,11:*: :::;::
c :fied them of the conditions. I I:;,::
I I :;::;: i(b) Washington Street right of way. The Assistant i ::;::: ::::I; :City Engineer presented a -map of the Washington ; !'Street right of way. He stated that the travel ;::;:; :;:::: :way at the present is being utilized entirely with; ;;::;:
!in the railroad right of way and does not contain i !;:;I:
:any dedicated right of way. He pointed out on the ; ;::::; @I*(
:map that'since State Street is projected to par- : :;i;;; bllel the railroad he felt there would be no pur- I::*:: pose of extending this street. I I 1:;:::
I I :'*;I; # l:;;:l
!After further consideration, the 'Rlannin'g Cornmiss? d : ; : I :.:
$on concurred that the continuation of Washington ; ::,:::
Street is not advisable financially for the benefit! ::i:
that would 'be derived,therefore, no action on Wash-: :;!:I!
lngton Street extention should be taken. t; Ill
.#;*:I;
0 ::'I::
I ,:;i:;: * :;;I;: : :;I:;:
::;i::
Ill
I
t
:;;I
i I.:: 1;
4 I I ;;pi:
I( I:;::: I'
I I I I 1:;:;; ::;i;; '. I ;ii:;:
I I i f:::;:
I I I I 1:;l;l I.::;;;
1 !;;:I; "!!,
4
I I *
* I
I
I I
I I llal'; I I.
1 I I
I I
I ;;;I:: : :;::;:
I :;&:<;
i I I ;::::;
1 1 ;:;;;'
I ~ . .. !. ::I!:
I 1 I I I
I
1
I
I
3 "I'
.,
,. .- .
,-
7-
-7-
I I"""""""""""""""""""""""
I
I :ADJOURNMENT:
!By proper motion the meeting wa
;P. M. to. Thursday; February 9, !in the Conference Room at the C ;cuss freeway interchanges, .sign !master plan updating and any ot ;that the Council may wish to di
!Respectful ly submitted,
e s
&
!TONI J. DERRIGO, :Recording Secretary
p
"""""""""I""-
s adjourned at 9 1968, at 7:30 P. ity Ljbrary to d s, industrial zo her planning mat scuss. '