HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968-06-25; Planning Commission; Minutes-8 I .””- . ..
L / *- .
MINUTES OF:
DATE OF MEETING:
TIME OF MEETING:
CTY OF CAWSBAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 25, 1968 7:30 P. M.
PLACE OF MEETING: Council Chambers
ROLL CALL .
Commissioner Gullett arrived at 7:41 P. M. Also
present were City Attorney Wilson, City Engineer Lill,
Assistant City Engineer Spa-no, Planning Director
Olinghouse, and Assistant City Planner Johnston.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
(a) No action was taken on the approval of the min-
utes of the adjourned meeting of May 27, 1968, due to
a lack of quorum and the matter was referred to the next regular meeting.
(b) Minutes of the regular meeting of June 11, 1968,
were approved as submitted.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
(a) Letter dated June 25, 1968, from Kamar Construc-
tion Company,;Inc., requesting relief from the require-
ment of the resolution of the Planning Commission and the City Council , approving the Tentative Map of
Laguna Riviera Subdivision, Item No. 11, requiring
that the park-school site be developed in conjunction
with Laguna Riviera Estates, Unit No. 1 or No. 2.
JERRY ROMBOTIS, stated that Item 11 in the Planning Commission and City Council resolution requires
that the park-school site be developed in conjunction with Laguna Rivieria Estates, Unit No. 1 or N8.2. They are asking relief from this requirement,due to the fact that the Carlsbad Union Schoo1,District is not in a position at this time to enter into an agreement to purchase or to develop this site. Since they are ready to proceed with the Laguna Riviera Subdivision, Unit No. 2,he stated that they would agree to develop
the park-school site in a subsequent unit.
When questioned, the City Attorney stated that a
resolution cou’ld be passed amending the prior resolu-
tion to. allow the school site to be built at a later date.
Commissioner Gullett arrived at 7:41 P. M.
DR. H. C. HARMON, Superintendent of the Carlsbad Union
School District, stated that the school board has been
working with Kamar Construction for several months in an attempt-to comply with the resolution of approval
to include the school site in Unit No. 2. He stated that the School District has not received approval from the State of California for the approval of this
site and will not receive approval until the middle
of August. He pointed out that they have discussed thi
at the School Board Meeting on June 24, 1968, and agre
to hold over so that Kamar could go bhead to develop
Unit No. 2.
resent
bsent
otion
Yes
CITY OF CARLSBAD
-2-
When questhed, Mr. Rombotis stated that they will be
ready to develop whenever the school is ready.
After further discussion, a motion was made to adopt
a resolution amending Item .11, in the Planning Commission Resolution No. 436, so that the school-
park site may be developed at a-later date. Item 11
shall read that "Lot 300 shall be' included in either Unit No. 3 or Unit No.4 and shall be fully developed
as part of. such units, including Park Dri.3e Half-
width.
Letter dated June 11, 1968, from 3. E,. Ris3ng, City
and County Projects Engineer, in regards to planning
assistance for scenic corridors along the State's Master Plan of Scenic Highways.
The Planning Director stated that he felt thf$ proposal would be worthwhile.and will contact the
State Highway Department as soon as possible.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
There were no oral communicatiobs.
PUBLIC HERRINGS:
(a) PREZONING - Continued - To consider an applica- tion for prezoning to C-M (Light Industrial Zone) located on the Westerly side of El Cami'no.Rea1, Northerly of Palomar Airport; being portion of,Lot F Rancho Agua Hedionda, Map 823, in the County of San Diego. Applicant: Camino Real Industries.
TENTATIVE MAP - CAMINO REAL INDUSTRIES - 40 lots,
continued. Located on the Westerly side of El Camino Real , Northerly of Palomar Airport. Owners
and Subdividers: Camino Real Industries.
The Prezoning, and Tentative Map were considered
concurrently.
The Planning Director stated that the County has indicated there will be an expansion in this area, bu
htifbelieved thatifibdd..riat effect the City but probabl
effect the County. He requested that the Commission
hear from the representative from the County.
Permission was granted.
CY WEILER, San Diego Director of Public Works, stated
on June 24, 1968, the Board of Supervisors responded to the Planning Commission's request on the expansion
of Palomar Airport for aviation use. He read a letter
dated June 25, 1968, from the Board of Supervisors
statisig that based on the Board's current estimates the industrial development of Area 1, with the
exception of a small triangular giece approximately
75 feet in the Southwest corner, would not affect the ultimate development of Palomar Airport in relation
Motion Ayes
c 7'
CITY OF CARLSBAD COMMISSIONERS
to its general aviation needs; but that the Board has no way of projecting possible tommercial needs
in the area and it would be impossible to comment on
for general aviatdon:
this would interfere with the development.
The Chairman announced the Commission would now hear from the applicant or his representative.
recommendation the' Planning Commission set .forth,
at the prior meeting which was to have some statement
from the Board of Supervisors indicating that Area 1 will not interfere with the general aviation.facility
in the City of Carlsbad. He respectfully requested that the proposed prezoning and the amended tentative map be approved.
When questioned, Mr. Shamsky stated that this was considered to be the amended tentative map'and that all Area'l includes the proposed C-M area.
Area 2 they would have to dedicate necessary property and may or may not improve at this time, but will eventually have to have improvements in the future.
GRAHAM KELLY stated there was no subdivision map
proposed for Area 2 in an effort to accomodate the
future of Carlsbad and the future of the a$Cport. It
is a giving up subdivision.of the choice, the easily subdivided and a much more valuable area at thfs time.
To gain any access they will have to grade down the banks of the Latter Box Canyon and construct a fairly
steep road for access up through the interior: They
CITY of CARLSBAD
“4-
will hslve very heavy expenses to develop Area 1 by itself.
The Chairman announced the Commission would now hear from any others wishing to’speak in favor of these applications.
As there were no others wishing to speak in favor of the applications, the Chairman announced the Com- mission would now hear from anyone-wishing to speak
in opposition.
There was no one present wishing to speak in
opposition.
The Public Hearing was closed at 8:08 P. M.
After further discussion, a motion was made to adopt
Resolution No. 554 recommending to the City Council
Prezoning to C-M on property at Westerly side of
El Camino Real, Northerly of Palomar Airport for the
following reasons:.
1. That the proposed prezoning is in accordance
with the General Plan.
2. That the proposed prezoning will not be detri-
mental to the surrounding property, or to the City of Carl sbad.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 554:A RESOLUTION
PROPERTY AT WESTERLY SIDE OF EL CAMINO REAL, NORTHERL
OF PALOMAR AIRPORT, was adopted by .title only and
further reading waived.
RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL PREZONING TO C-M ON
AFter further consideration, a motion was made to
adopt Resolution No. 555.
Resolution No. 555 A RESOLUTION OF THE CARLSBAD
CITY PLANNING.COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE MAP OF CAMINO REAL INDUSTRIES, subject to the conditions recommended by the various city agenci and utility companies, and subject to the condition
that anything contained in Resolution No. 555,of the Carlsbad City Planning Commission, located in that portion of the tentative ssbdivision map, marked Area
2, shall be of no force and effect, except that prior to the processing of the final subdivision map, the s’ubdivider shall’cause said Area 2 to be split off
as a separate parcel, pursuant to applicable City, procedures, was adopted by title only and further reading waived.
(b) AMENDMENT TO PRECISE PLAN - To consider amendmen
to Precise Plan PP 6702, for increase in size and
height of sign, located on the Northwesterly corner of Tamarack Avenue and Interstate 5 Freeway, 9pplicant: Humble ‘Oq3 land” Refining Company and Koyl
Enterprises.
COMMISSIONERS
lotion
toll Call
\yes
lotion
toll Call
lye s
NOtlCe. ot nearing was ma. Ine secrexary certit that property owners in the area were notified and that publication was given and then read the applica- tion,
The P,lanning Director presented the original Precise Plan PP 6702 indicati'ng the proposed location of the service station and"restaurant facility and the original proposed sign plan. He also presented a map shawing the proposed amendment to the precise plan indicating the increase in the size and height of the freeway sign, referred to as Sign "A", and the corner sign, referred to as Sign "B". He rea.d and explained the Planning Department Report of the recommendations and the facts resulting from the staff investigation. He pointed out that the construction of proposed Sign I'B" would not be in keeping with proper planning principals and that it would not be in conformance with the proposed sign ordinance.
The Chairman announced the Commission would now hear from the applicant or his representative.
J. B. MERRIMAN, Representative for Humble Oil, stated that the sign height approved at 35' cannot be se,en from the North bound traffic on the freeway.' In order to promote business a sign must be visuable. To substantiate this they flaged the sign and took some photographs that show the relationship of this sPgn with the Union Oil sign,,which is located across the street, and also to show that the sign cannot be seen from the freeway. He presented the photographs to the Commission. The first photograph was taken' about 2000 feet south of the off ramp on Tamarack showing an orange colored flag and established the fact that the flag was not visable. The second photograph was taken about 1000 feet fromthe freeway off ramp and at 55 feet high only the top portion of the flag!)was visable. The third photograph was taken just before going off the off ramp and at 35 feet the flag was located behind a tree. He' stated that the trees will De removed for the widening of the freeway, but there ape other trees in the area that willlnot be removed that will effect the building. The fourth photograph nsas take.n from the North going South on the freeway nshich is approximately 2000 feet North of the off ramp at 35 feet high. This photograph was taken to compare their sign with the Union Oil sign and is approximatelj 1alf.the size of the proposed sign. He stated a surfac type sign is necessary to ide.ntify the service station xfter 1eav.ing the freeway.
-OW OLSEN, Realtor, stated that he was a member of the Sign Committee and that the new proposed sign ordinancc that may;.or may not be accepted, had a moratorium on sizes of.existing signs. He felt that the Planning :ommission's decision should comply with the proposed ;ign ordinance, due to the fact that if this applicatic
is approved, the applicant may have to take the sign
.~. "" " ""
Bill Winterberg, Representative for the Advertising Division for Humble Oil,
stated that one of the criteria for this application is the hardship of this service
station. There has been considerable expense for the improvements for the
entire block and the revenue is required by the freeway traffic. He also
stated that they could not go much less in size than the appearance of the
colored flag to have the sign legible from the freeway. He pointed out the
corner sign, which will be faced on the frontage of the service station, could
possibly be adjusted if the Commission feels that the size is too large.
a I
c
CITY OF CARLSBAD
-6-
~ ~
rhe Chairman announced the Commission would now hear
from any others wishing to speak in favor of this aPP-
lication.
\s there were no others wishing to speak in favor of
this application, the Chairman announced the Commissio~
,vould'now hear from anyone wishing to speak in opposi-
tion.
Yo one was present wishing to speak-in opposition of
the application. The Chairman declared the Public
Hearing closed at 8:48 P.M.
Zommissioner Jose stated that he would recommend that
this application be continued to the next regular meet.
ing of July 9, 1968, as the Sign Ordinance will be
presented to the Planning Commission for their consid-
eration on that date.
Mr. Merriman stated that the service station is almost
completed, and any further delay on the action of the
sign will put them in business without advertisement.
He requested that action be taken at this meeting.
After further consideration, a motion was made to
adopt Resolution No. 564, denying amendment to Precise
Plan PP 6702 for the following 'reasons:
1. That the proposed amendment to Precise plan PP
6702 would not be in accordance with the .recent-
ly approved freeway service facility signs;
2. That the granting of this amendment to Precise
Plan PP 6702 would not be consistent with the
proposed sign ordinance of the City of Carlsbad,
Resolution No. 564, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
TO PRECISE PLAN PP 6702, was adopted by title only and
further reading waived.
COMMISSION OF. THE CITY OF CARLSBAD DENYING AMENDMENT
A recess was called at 9:21 P.M. The meeting recon-
vened at 9:28 P.M.
(c) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT To consider allowing
construction and use of a U.S. Post Office Building
and parking facilities, located Northerly of Chestnut
Avenue, between Harding Street and Interstate 5 Free-
way. Applicant :. K. ' S. BakE?," ef %1*~~wks.
(d) RECLASSIFICATION - R-3 to R-P (ResidAntial Pro-
fsssional Zone), located Northerly of Chestnut Avenue,
between Harding Street and Interstate 5 Freeway.
Applicant: K. S. Baker, et al.
The Conditional use Permit and Reclassification were
considered concurrently.
-c * I.. .." . .. - .~
.. mi
COMMlSSlOMERS
lotion
to11 Call
iye s
L. I L_ . -
I
\
i
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Notices of' hearings were read. The Secretary certi- 'fied that property owners in the area were notified and that publication was given and then read the applications.
Letter dated June 14, 1968, from W. R. Dotson, District Advance Planning Engineer of the Division of Highways, stati-ng that at the .present time they have no proposed freeways or improvements to existin freeways in this area.
Letter dated June, 10, 1968, from Howard C. Harmon, District Superintendent of the Carls.bad City Schools stating that it is his opiiion that this would not b a good location for a post office. The Conditional Use Permit will be placed. on the agenda for school board discussion on June 25, 1968, and will deliver a letter on June 25, 1968 regarding the official posi:tion of the school board.
Letter dated June 25, 1968 from Howard C. Harmon, Secretary of the Carlsbad Union School District Board of Trustees, stating that the school board wishes to express objection to a post office in said location because of the increased vehicular traffic that would be generated, Since the proposed location of the post office is across Harding Street from the Pine Street School, increased traffic would be a hazard to school children who liv.e in the immediate vicinity and walk b'etween home and school at various times during days that school is in session.
Letter dated June 14, 1968, addressed,,to Frank Kirk, President of ttie Carlsbad Chamber.of Commerce, from
H. J. Olander, Manager of the Carlsbad by the Sea Gracious Retirement Home,stating that a great majori ty of residents at Carlsbad by the Sea find it neces ary to use the post office facility which is located conveniently within walking distance from the Re- tirement Home. To move the location of this Post Office Branch to a remote area twelve blocks away would create an undue hardship for the people. Also attached to the letter were 18 letters objecting to the Conditional Use Permit of residents at Carlsbad by the. Sea.
The Planning Director presented a map, referred to as Exhibit "A" indicating'the location of the.area, the landscaping and the parking spaces provided. He then read and explained the Planning Report for the Conditional Use Permit and the Zone Change arid'the facts resulting from the staff investigation. He pointed out that the proposed location will generate undue traffic circulation within the residential are and that it is not easily accessible for the non- driving public. He also pointed out that a zone change to R-P is not necessary to allow construction of a post office, as such a use can only be permitte by a ConditionaT:Use Permit and that subject zone change would not be in conformance with the General P1 an.
\ t!
II
,-
CITY OF CARLSBAD
-8-
Mr. Spano -presented and explained the Engineer's Report. He stated that the driveway locations shown on Chestnut Avenue are not desirable as the Westerly driveway is too near the intersection and recommend that the drive,way request be conditioned upon approva by the Engineering Department. The Engineering Depa.rtment also recommended that. ornamental street lights be required.on both Chestnut and Harding and that all utility services be underground to the new facility.
The Chairman announced the Commission would now hear from the applicant or this representtt3iwe.
ROBERT NELSON, 555 Grand Avenue, CdiPlsbad, represent- ing Mr. and Mrs. Baker and Mrs. Zeliath, stated that the post offiee has been trying to find a location in Carlsbad for approximately 3 years. He stated that there are two factors that mest be considered;
U. That the area must be approximately one and h half acres, to handle the traffic and mailtruck loading and unloading; 2. That the property mast be within a price limitation as the property will not be owned by the government, but privately owned. He requested that the Planning Commission delete Itlem 4, of the Planning Department's Report, stating that the moving of the post Cffi'ce will be detrimental to the welfare and prosperity of the downtown business area, as he felt that the Planning Department should not be involved in the economics of the downtown business. He also stated that the proposed location is visable from the freeway and that signs could be used to direct people to the post office. He understo.od that the Chamber of Commerce appointed a committee to study thPs proposed site and thatapepresentative would be at the meeting to present their report.
RICHARD KING, Regional Real Estate Officer for the Post Office, stated that they have been working on this project for more than a year and have given much consideration and fell it will be an asset to the Community. He stated that there will be pedks- trian traffic on the East side of the freeway but felt that the traffic would not be detrimental to the surrounding area.
GEORGE SAUNDERS, Carlsbad Postmaster, stated that this project was started at the request of the City Council in December, 1966. The need for a post office is very evident as there are 34 employees working in an area of approximately 4,000 sq. ft.
The Chairman announced the,Gmmmission would now hear from any others wishing to speak in favor of the appl i cati ons.
As there were:no others wishiqg to speak in favor, the Chairman announced the Commission would now hear from any one wishing to speak in opposition.
COMMISSIONERS
COMMISSIONERS CITY OF CARLSBAD
-9-
JRS, CHARLES ,.WOODS, 3948 Skyline Road, Carlsbad, presen
ed a petition with 234 signatures objecting to the Con
ditional Use Permit.
LOU OLSEN, 3191,Highland Drive, Carlsbad, presented
copies of a report outlining his opposition to the pro
posed'Post Office site, wherein he pointed out that th
site was not desirable because of traffic, zoning,
nerchants and valuation.
RALPH PALMER, 3955 Skyline Road, stated that he was
appointed Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce Committe
in regard to the study of the proposed. Post Office sit
3e presented a report from this committee stating thei
findings in regard to the proposed site, Some facts
indicated in the report were: 1. If the proposed sit
is granted, the Postmaster estimated it will be ready
for occupancy in November, 1969: 2. A branch of the
proposed size will serve the community for a minimum
3f 20 years with sub-stations supplementing the main
Dffice as growth demands: 3. The removal of the Post
3ffice will free parking spaces for the benefit of
shoppers patronizing stores in the downtown area:
4, The proposed site could work a hardship on some
nerchants who benefit from the Post Office patrons who
3lso patronize the nearby stores while they are:. in
the area; and 5. With the development of the May Com-
pany and subsequent developments, the downtown busines
district will need all the traffic-pulling power it ca
develop. The Committee favors a site that would be
located within or adjacent to the present business
district and believes that the proposed site location
is not good planning. If subject application is
denied, the Committee recommends that a City Planning
group work with the post office, to select another site
as quickly as possible.
rhe Chairman announced the Commission would now hear
from any others wishing to speak in opposition.
4s there were no others wishing to speak in opposition
the Chairman declared the Public Hearing closed at
1O:Ol P.M.
lfter further discussion, a motion was made to adopt
Resolution No. 562, denying a Conditional Use Permit
for the following reasons:
1. That the moving of the Post Office from the cen-
tral business district will be detrimental to
the welfare and prosperity of the downtown area:
2. That the proposed location will generate undue
*ITY OF CARLSBAD I
W
COMMISSIONERS
traffic,circulation within the residential area,
. and being across the street from the Pine Street
School will create a potential hazard to the
school children:
3. That the subject site is- not easily accessible for
the non-driving public and the proposed entrance
will be approximately 600 feet 'from the nearest
bus line:
4, That the proposed Post Office site is located in
the center of a high-density residential zone:
5. That the proposed location does not have immediate
access to a major collector street:
6. That the proposed Post Office site is not in a
location which is easy to find by the public and . 4 .4 - '" @.i"". 5;' ** * ke d p*p I
*i Y .ni"li ".A - " - ~ .- a,.".. ne,? C' S&&$ff8$' OF, & bmLSB& cI*
A 'CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
LOCATED NORTHERLY OF CHESTNUT AVENUE, BETWEEN HARDING
STREET AND INTERSTATE 5 FREEWAY, was adopted by tF'tle
mly and further reading waived.
4fter further consideration, a motion was made to
3dopt Resolution No. 563, denying application for a
zhange of zone from R-3 to R-P for the following
reasons:
1. That the proposed zone change is not in conform-
ance with the General Plan;
2. That the proposed zone change would not be compa
tible with the surrounding property.
Xesolution No. 563. A RESOLUTION OF THE PEARNING COMM
[SSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD DENYING APPLICATION FOR
IHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-3 TO R-P ON PROPERTY LOCATED
JORTHERLY OF CHESTNUT AVENUE, BETWEEN HARDING STREET
WD INTERSTATE 5 FREEWAY, was adopted by title only an(
Eurther reading waived.
ILD BUSINESS :
(a) Planned Community Ordinance, The Planning Directo: requested that the Planned Community Ordinance be
deferred to the next regular meeting of July 9,
1968, in order to present the final copy.
(b) Planned IDdwstrial Ordinance. The Planning Direc-
tor read "and expxained the final draft of the
Planned Industrial Ordinance.
ifter further discussion, the Planning Commission unan.
.mously agreed that the Planned Industrial Zone, as
, I.
i) ~ . -*
Motion
Roll Call
Ayes
Mot ion
Roll Call
Ayes -.
(317-y OF CARLSBAD
-11-
presented, be recommended for adoption and to be forwarded t'o the City Council for their consideration.
NEW BUSINESS:
(a) There was no new business.
ADJOURNMENT:
By proper motion, the meeting
P. M.
Respectfully submitted,
n
was adjourned at 10:29
TONI DERRIGO, Recording Secretary
COMMiSSIOMERS