Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968-03-12; Planning Commission; Minutes‘I I I I *:CITY OF CARLSBAb -. 1 Minutes of: PLANNING COMMISSIOI, lDate of Meeting: March 12, 1968 I I ‘Time of Meeting: 7:30 P. Mi I I ”””_ p1 ace of ”””” Meeti nsr_,,~-,_C9un~il,Chamhers I I. I. 1. I. ‘I. I- : ROLL CALL’ was answered by .Commissioners Smith, I -11111~ I I I 1.1 1 I iMcComas, Jose, Little, Palmateer, and Voorheis. I I Illlll 111111 ;Commissioner. Sutherland was a.bsent. Also present : lwere City Attorney Wilson, Assistant City Engineerl 111111 :Holly, Planning Director Schoell, and Assistant. : 111111 1C.ity Planner Johnston. 111111 llllll -.I I I I I I t 111111 I 111111 I . ,I ,I I I I I I 111111 I Ill111 I I11111 I :APPROVAL OF MINUTES:. I :(a) Minutes of the adjourned meeting of February :Smith . I 111111 I lx I I I :8, 1968, were approved as submitted. :M-cComas :x: :x : I tJose I 1 ;x;x: ; ; I :Little I :Palmateer ; :, $ : : : I IIIXIII I I IVoorheis I I IX 1 I I ‘(b) Minutes of the regular meeting of February 111111 :27, 1968, were approved as corrected. I IMcComas 1x1 IX I I I 111111 I ismi th : : :x: ; : I I I I I I llllll I11111 I llllll I llllll 111111 llllll I11111 111111 111111 llllll 111111 llllll I 111111 I llllll 111111 I :Jose I IXkI I I I ::x:: I 1Palmatee.r I I N I I I I :Voorheis : : 5(: : II Ill ILittle ‘WRITTEN I -COMMUNICATIONS: I I llllll ~(a) Letter dated March 5, 1968, from-San Diego I :County Planning Congress, stating that the Plann-. I I I11111 ling Congress proposed three amendments to the congress Bylaws at the meeting of February 28, 196d, :It was directed that the Secretary-Treasurer poll I I 111111 member Commissions by mail and that each Cornmiso-- ; ision shall have one vote. {A motion was made to approve the amendments of :Smi th !Article IV-Officers, Article V-Election -of OfficershcComas I I I I I :and Article X-Dues. :Jose :x: k:: ; I IPalmateer I I K I I I I I I I I ::3(1:: I tittle ::I(::: I I Voorheis :x)( : I ‘Diego County Planning Congress, stating that a I Illlll :(b), Letter dated March 6, 1968, from the San . ISpr‘ing Meeting will be held on March 29, 1968, at : I11111 :7:30 P. M. bt the Town and Country Hotel. I I I I 111111 111111 llllll llllll I I llllll :(c) Memorandum dated March 11 , 1968, from Vice- Bayor .Dunne,stating that the City Counci-1 approved lthe appeal of Richard V. Jordon in connection with lthe use‘ of the Jordon property at Tamarack Avenue :and Pi0 Pic0 Drive. Also that the City Council yeaffirmed their position on the appeal of Paul land MatJdalena Ecke and authorized the standards +s set forth at their meeting held February 20, 11968, It was also stated that the City Council hill be happy to meet with the Commission in the ruture on the matter of signs or any other matters as the Commission request in order to resolve basic differences. I I ~RAL COMMUNICATIONS: I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I Jhere were no oral communications. ,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 I I I I I I I I I .I I I I I : PUBLIC HEARING: 5 i (a) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - continued, To erect I I a 100' radio transmitting antenna 'and building to : house transmitters. I I I I I I Location: Westerly .side of the railroad right of : ; way, Southerly of Palomar Airport Road. I : Applicant: Offshore Raydist, Inc. .I : The above hearing was conti'nued for further infor-: mation. I : Letter dated March 7, 1968, from R. L. WoFPen, I I ; the transmitting tower and equipment will in no I I way interfere wi.th existing radio, television or : other communications'system in the area and I : should there be any interf.erence they will take : steps to correct same or cease operations until : ; they can come to some solution of the problem. I Memorandum dated March 12, 1968, from the Plan'ning: I Director, stating that the Planning Department I : contacted KUDE Radio and Palomar Airport to deter-: : mine the effect 'of a transmitting tower on their' ; ; operations. KUDE Radio indicated that the tower I I transmissions should not interfere w,ith KUDE I : broadcasts. Also Mr. Harold Hurlbut, manager of I the Palomar Airport stated that.any tower lower I than 365' above sea level, which is the elevation .; of the. airport, would not create a direct hazard ; .I to airplanes in the airport flight pattern. Chairman Little stated that the application had I I been continued for further information and to I I i check with the airport and local television and ; ; radio stations. He pointed out that there has I I been no information that would indicate any harm I I : to. the airport or to the local television or I 1 radio stations. Because of the lew flying planes : in the area he recommended that a beacon be in- I I : -There was no Engineer's Report. I : Commissioner Palmateer's main concern was the low air traffic over the beach. He felt the I tower. was very dangerous to low flying planes and : that this use was not in a good location. He I I also stated that the could see no advantage that ; : this use would be to the City. When questioned,how much transmitting activity ; I there is during the winter months, the represent- I : ative stated that during the winter months the : 1 I transmitter is frequently used and that it does ; I operate in the summer months but very little. I I I I I I I I I I I I supervisor $or Offshore Raydist I.nc., stating .that: I I I I I I I I 8 I I I I stalled on the top of the radio antenna for safetx. I' I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I When questioned if thes use was primarily used I I -for locating oil in the sea, the representative i stated the biggest majority of the users are I I . I exploration companies. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . .. ~~~ ~ I .- .." 1 i i -. -3- I. of 1 I I. I 1. I. 'I. I. I '111111 I I I 1.1 I I I I Illill 111111 I llllll lltlil 111111 I I 1l1111 111111 I ,,I.tIIIl I 111111 11ll11 I I llllll 11l111 I. llllll I I11111 11l111 llllll 111111 111111 I 1.I I I I llllll 111111 111111 111111 111111 I11111 I I11111 111111 I 11111l I 111111 * 111l11 11111l I 111111 111l11 111111 llllll I I11111 Commissioner Palmateer state.d that another disadvantage is that the slope East of the trans-I mitting tower will erentually be all residential : 111111 property. This would destroy the view looking.' I .lIIIII out at the ocean. When questioned, the repre'sentative stated the I tower will be 11" wide 'and it is a triangl'e shape. ,I .. 111111 Commissioner McComas state-d that this use will be: controlled by a conditional use permit. At the ; presed.t time this area is not entirely developed I and that he could see no other logical use for the property in the area. He fe1.t that this use ; would not be harmful to the City or to the resi- I dents, therefore, on that basis he felt that he ; 111111 would not be incline'd to deny this application. I After fu'rther discussion, *a motion was made to adopt Resolution No. 546, granting a conditional I use permit on property located on the.Westerly side of the Railroad right of way, Southerly of ; llllll Palomar Airport Road, for the following reasons: I I I I 1. That the requested location is at the ' ; I I present time a good use for the proposed install- I ; ation. I I I I I I I I 2. That the granting of th'is conditional ; use permit will not affect air traffic utilizing I Palomar Airport. I '1 Resolution No. 546. A RESOLUTION OF THE CARLSBAD :Smith : CITY PLANNING COMMISSION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL tMcComas USE PERMIT LOCATED ON THE WESTERLY SIDE OF THE IJose 3 I I I I RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY AND SOUTHERLY OF PALOMAR :Littl'e ; AIRPORT ROAD, subject to the conditions that the ,Palmatee I I pr.oper air navigational beacon be installed on . :Voorheis I th.e top of the radio antenna; that this conditiona;l use permit ,be granted for a period of one (1) I I by the various City agencies and utility companies : and subject to the conditions listed ''A" thru I'D" I I .inclusive of the report of findings to 'the Commis-: ; s.ion by the Planning Department, was adopted by I : title only and further reading waived. I I I (b) 'VARIANCE - To consider a reduction in the I I : rear yard setback from 20 feet to 15 feet minimum.: : Location: Northerly side of Ridgecrest Drive, I I I year; and subject to the conditions rdcommended I I I I I I I I I 1 I I Easterly from Seacrest Drive, being I I lot 73, Seacrest Estates Unit No. .2,' I Map 4280. I I Applicant: Richard E. Geyer. I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I Notice of hearing was read. The Secretary certi- ; : fied that notices were sent to property Owners I in the area and then read the application, signed ; . I by the applicant, and two property owners in the : : area who stated they were in favor of this applic-, I ation. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~~ ~ ~~ r I I I :x: : Ilk IIKIII I11111 I11111 llllll 111l11 11111l 111111 111111 111l11 111111 llllll llllll 111111 Illlll 11111l llllll llllll 111111 1l1111 111111 111111 111111 111111 111111 llllll 111111 I11111 I11111 I11111 I11111 11111l 111111 I11111 I I I 11.1 I11111 I11111 111111 llllll 111111 I11111 I11111 I11111 Illlll I11111 111111 I11111 Illlll 111111 11l111 - Letter dated March 9, 1968, from Mr. & Mrs. I I : Sheffler, stating as adjoining property owners ; 1 they were not in favor of this application.' : The Planning Director presented and explained the; I location map and a map of .the house location and I I the adjoining property owners, which pointed out : ; the reduction in the rear yard area. He also I I pointed out that there has not been'a variance . I : granted in thOS area. I : Chairman Little announced the Commission would I I : now he-ar from the applicant or his representative; ; and any others wishing to speak in favor of this I I appl i catlton. I : RICHARD E. GEYER, 32.15 Donna Drive, Carlsbad, : pointed out on the map property owners in the I' * area that had no ob6ection to the variance. He ; : stated without developing a two story home they I ;-are trying to build a home that will not interfere: ; with the view of the surrounding property owners. ; I He pointed out that the topography of one area I ; rises sharply about 7 feet,the,legal front yard ; setback is 20 fqet. They are.trying to set the . ; I house as far back as possible so that it will I fit the lot better. I Chairman Little fel't that the variance did apply I I I good use of the land and that it would not be I 1 'detrimental to anyone in the area. { The Chairman announced the Commission would now ; I hear from those wishing to speak in opposition. I I MR. CHAPMAN, stated he had no particular objection: but wanted to know how far the Northwest corner I would be from the house to the property line. I I Ch'airman Little answered 10 feet is required. I I Mr. Geyer stated he has discussed this with Mr. I I McCann who is with the Restriction eommittee of I I I Seacrest Estates and that he had no objection I ; 'to this variance. ; Cshairman Little announced the Commission would ; I now hear from any others wishing to speak in I ; opposition of this application. I I As there was no one present wishing to speak in I I opposition &lie Chairman declared the public I I hearing closed at 8:26 P.M. 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 I I I 3 I I I I 1. I I. I I I I I I I I CCmmissioner McComas felt that there would be : no real loss of open area areond the proposed structure. He stated bdthin the setback limits I I 111111 ; that are required in the City Ordinance this is ; I a legitimate request. He saw no objection to : this variance. .I I 111111 111111 I 111111 I 111111 llllll llllll I11111 I I I11111 11111.1 I 111111 I Illlll I 111111 I 111111 I 111111 I 111111 I 111111 I llllll 1 Illlll I Illlll I I11111 I Illlll I I11111 I 111111 I I I I I I I I I I I I I .I ~~ ~ ~~ . ." ". I I I I. I. 1. I. 'I* I' I -111111 ; Commissioner Palmateer st,ated that he did not I I I I 1.1 I I 111111 I believe that the criterias of granting a variance I I 111111 I were met by this application. He .felt that there ; 111111 111111 1 was no exceptional circumstances in the proberty. I llllll 111111 I .IIIIII : Commissioner McComas stated that the topography ; I llllll 111111 I of the land was a good enough reason for granting I ,I ,I I I I I llllll : the variance. I 111111 I I 111111 111111 : A motion was made to adopt Resolution'No. 548, I .. llllll 111111 i granting a rear yard setback.9ariance from 20 I tlllll ; feet to 15 feet minimum, on the North side of I llllll I 111111 I Ridgecrest Drive, East ff-om Seacrest Drive for I I llllll : the following reasons: I 111111 111111 I llllll I 111111 I llllll I11111 I 111111 I llllll llllll I' 111111 I 111111 I llllll I 111111 - 111111 I I I. I I I I 1. That the granting of th+s variance wi.11 I : not be. materially detrimental to the public I welfare or injurious. to the surroundi-ng property. I ; ordinary circumstances applicable on the property I I I I 2. -That there are exceptional or extra- I due to topographic features that do not apply I I 111111 generally to other property in the area. Resolution No. 548. A RESOLUTION OF THE CARLSBAD :Smith 111111 I 111111 I 111111 I 111111 I I :x: I(;;; ; ; #;/ ; I :Voorheis 1 I I I I ; CITY PEANNING COMMISSION GRANTING A VARIANCE ON . PcComas ; ; r ; ; ; I PROPERTY ON THE NORTHERLY SIDE OF RIDGECREST IJose I IX& I I I : by title only and further reading wa.ived. IPalmateer I ; ; ;x ; ; DRIVE EASTERLY FROM SEACREST DRIVE, was adopted ;Little I I I I 3 I 111111 I 111111 I llllll I 111111 I I I11111 111111 I 111111 I 111111 I 111111 I llllll { OLD BUSINESS: : (a) New Sign Ordinance. I 111111 ; The Planning Director presented to the Commission I11111 llllll ; copies of portions from the Electric Sign Company ; 111111 ; aa.mph1et illustrating examples of cluttered sig'ns ; I at' various types of businesses and an illustration I11111 I11111 ; of a service station that was landscaped correctld 111111 I which gave the city a beCter environment. He I felt that signs can be beautified in many ways I I 111111 I which is one step to a better environment. There; ; will 'be two types of signs, a poll sign and a I w'a11 sign. The signs should be parallel to the I I 111111 : building facing in one direction. He felt that ; I the sign ordinance should not be too restrictive I ; but should try to get the minimum size sign that 111111 ; can be read with ease. He also felt that it I I would -be beneficial if the Commission would ; arrange a wokk session with the Downtown Merchants: 111111 1 to see what thei-r overall views are. He then ; presented the rough draft of the sign ordinance I ; and stated that they tried t-o stay with the I I existing code as much as possible. He briefly ; I reviewed Sections of the sign ordinance and then I llllll ; read and explained the definitions.. He also I presented a map illustrating' the location of signs: ; that are allowed in the proposed sign ordinance. 11111.1 I I 111111 111111 Illlll I 111111 111111 111111 llllll I 111111 111111 llllll Illlll llllll Illlll 111111 I 111111 I llllll 111111 I 111111 I 111111 111111 111111 I 111111 111111 I11111 I 111111 Illlll 11l111 llllll I 111111 I 111111 I 11111l I 111111 I 111111 I 111111 I I11111 I llllll I I11111 I 111l11 I I11111 I 111l11 I 111111 I I I I I I I I 8 I I I I I I I 1 I i I I I I I I I I I Chairman Little stated th.at he would like to : get a volunteer to contact the Chamber of Cgmmerce: 1 and the City Beautification Committee to discuss ; I the' sign ordinance and to get their feelings and I to see if they ape willing to assist the Commis- : sion in setting up s'ome standards for the ordi- I I : nance. I I I I * I Commissioner McComas volunteered to contact these : I two orgahizations. I I I .. I I : After further discussion, it was agreed that the I : Commissioners study the rough draft of the sign : ;ordinance and to discuss the ordinance at the I I next meeting. I I I I I I I : NEW BUSINESS: I : There was no new business. : ADJOURNMENT: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I : BY proper motion., the meeting .was adjourned at . I I I I 9:43 P.M. I I I ; Respectfully submitted, i JOA,;.$-a?kJ./d I I 'I {TONI J. DERRIGO, I Recording Secretary I , ..