HomeMy WebLinkAbout1970-07-28; Planning Commission; MinutesI
/.-
be*. t
CITY OF CARLSBAD
MINUTES OF MEETING: PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE OF MEETING: JULY 28, 1970
TIME OF MEETING: 7:30 P.M.
PLACE OF MEETING: CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
POLL CALL:
City staff representatives present: Stuart Wilson,
7. E. Spano, R. A. Johnston, R. S; Osburn.
PPPROVAL OF MINUTES:
(a) The minutes of the regular meeting of June 28, 197
vere approved as submitted. (b) The minutes of regula
neeting of July 14, 1970 (adjourned) were approved as
submitted.
VRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
(a) The secretary introduced a letter received from
Yrs. G. W. Overly, 3941 Park Drive, regarding a drainag
?roblem to her property. This was acknowledged by the
:hairman and it was noted this was a matter of action
For the City Engineer.
)RAL COMMUNICATIONS: None.
?UBLIC HEARINGS :
(a) VARIANCE - To consider reduction of South sideyard
setback from 3 ft. to 0 ft.-1 in., for garage portion
>nly; applicant: Dr. Lois J. Smart, M.D., located on
VW Corner of Grand Ave & Ocean Street
Mr. Johnston presented the Staff Report of 7/22/70
in conjunction with a wall exhibit depicting this prope
ty location, surrounding streets, and beach proximity.
The report indicated the applicant's desires for a 2-
story apartment building, with subterranean parking fol same, landscaping and grading of the ocean bluff at the
end of Grand Avenue, etc. Also, that this particular
piece of property had previously been denied a variance for a zero setback for the entire lot, by a previous
3wner. It was the staff?s recommendation to allow this
variance, for the reasons and subject to the conditions
itemized in this report.
The applicant and her representative were present:
Dr. Smart, 269 S. Barrington, Los Angeles stated her a$
plication covered her plans for subject property, as WE
2s why this variance was necessary for the proper devel
3pment of this lot. Her architect, Mr. Per Stiko, Sari
Diego, passed a development plan of the proposed apart-
nent building to the Commission for viewing, explaining
the variance was necessary in order to obtain the requi
2ffstreet parking spaces for the eight units planned. Ye answered questions regarding the building layout, IC
Zonfiguration, etc., stating 4 parking spaces would be
lbove on the street level and 4 located below the level
vith a driveway provided for access to the parking area
The Commission questiondthe staff regarding the 3ity'S future use or plans for access to the public
beach area and Mr. Johnston advised it had long been hc
an access walkway could be constructed from this Grand
Avenue property, but the necessary crews and funds were not available. The South side property line and access
should Grand Avenue be extended at some future date we1
discussed at length, as well as what circumstances WOUJ
Exist if the City were to sell this property at any tin
COMMISSIONERS
'resent
Lbsent
lotion
1 yes
lo ti on
1 yes
!
?d
?d
4
7
COMMISSIONERS CITY OF CAFILSBAD
-2-
~~ ~
It was stated that unusual circumstances existed
for the granting of a zero ft. South sideyard (for the
garage portion only), in that this property adjoined
City-owned property, which could be used for access on1
the the applicant would grade, landscape and maintain
this area in the development of her property. Mr. Stik
stated the applicant wished to build something the City
could be proud of and he felt their plan would be a
definite attribute to the area and to the City, with th
City-owned beach access open for pedestrian traffic. Mr
Johnston affirmed that this pedestrian access was the
only one in Carlsbad from Grand Avenue, all the way to
Cassidy Street in Oceanside; also, whlle there was no
assurance the City would retain this property forever,
it was hoped so.
Following additional discussion of this setback
request, the safety features to be considered, the land
scaping of the embankment, public beach area and privat
beach frontage in this area, and distance from mean
high tide line for this proposed building, the motion
was properly made to approve this variance request,
subject to the conditions itemized in Staff Report of
7-22-70 and for the reasons given in that report; how-
ever, it was decided to enlarge upon Condition #2 regar
ing grading and landscaping, to indicate this refers to
the beach access property.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0.670 - A RESOLUTFOET OF
THE CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION GRANTING A VARIAN
ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWESTERLY CORWER OF OCEA
STREET AND GRAND AVENUE, FOR REDUCTION OF THE SOUTH SID
YARD SETBACK FROM THREE (3) FEET TO ZERO (0) FEET, ONE(1)
INCH, FOR THE GARAGE PORTION ONLY, identified by title
only and further reading waived; approval is granted
subject to the Conditions itemized i-n Staff Report of
7-22-70 (Condition #2 revised), and for the following
Reasons: (1) Due to existing topographfc conditions,th.e
requested variance will allow more flexibllity in pro-
viding the required off-street parking. .(21 The grantin
of such variance will not be materially detrimental to
the public welfare nor injurious to the property or im-
provements in such vicinity or zone in which the proper
is located. (2) The granting of such variance will not
adversely affect the Comprehensive General Plan of the
City.
(b) RECLASSIFICATION OF ZONE - To consider Change of
Zone from R-1 and R-P to RD-M(Residentla1 Density-
Multip1e)Zone for property located at 3515 Roosevelt St
between Chestnut and Magnolia Avenues; Applicant: Willi
R. Dindinger.
Mr. Johnston presented the Staff Report of 7-21-70
referring to a wall exhibit as it applied to the variou
portions of the report, specifically, size of lot, sur-
rounding zoning, general area and streets, etc. The
report covered the proposed density factor for RD-M zon
as opposed to R-3 zoning, offstreet parking requirement
public improvements within the RD-M zone, and requfre-
ment of a Parcel Map prior to development of subject
apartment complex by the applicant. The staff recommen
approval of this change of zone, for the reasons given
and subject to conditions also itemized.
I
Motion
A yes -
E
c
Y
I
m
I
sd
I
1..
CITY OF CARLSBAD
,, -3-
~~~
The applicant's representative, Mr. Keith Dindinge
San Diego, stated he concurred in the Staff Report's
recommendation and, the conditions of approval; he adde
a 24-unit apartment building is planned for this proper
which is less than R-3 zoning would allow due to the of
street parking requirements of the RD-M zone. There we
no others to speak in favor of this application and the
Chairman called for any who wished to speak in oppositi
of it.
MR. ROY SANCHEZ , 3482 Roosevel t Street, stated he
had discussed this. rezoning matter with other property
owners in the area and he and others from this general
area had also attended meetings of the CIC, where Clty
staff was present to study the problems and aspects of
rezoning in this section of the City. Property owners
nearby this property in question felt rezoning was pre-
mature at this time, and would be detrimental to the
this would be spot-zoning. The public hearing was clos
'area if apartments were built there. He added he felt
iat 8:32 P.M.
The Chairman discussed the Cityst and the CX's
activities regarding hopes to rezone portions of this
general area. He added that R-1, R-2, R-P and R-3 zone
exist at this time. Commissioner Palmateer queried Mr.
Spano how realignment of Chestnut Avenue, if any, woul
affect this area. Mr. Spano stated there would be no
realignment of Chestnut at this location, but a future
bridge/overcrossing at the railroad tracks was under
consideration. Commissioner Little questioned the need
for school space for the added children in the area und
such rezoning and for a 24-unit apartment building, as
the schools in this area are already presssed to double
sessions.
Chairman Jose referred to the City's application f
leased housing funds which proposes many multiple-famil
dwellings in an area from Tyler Street to Roosevelt, in
the near future.
Following additional discussion of the new RD-M 20
and it's requirements, the motion was properly made to
recommend a Change of Zone from R-1 and R-P to RD-M Zon
for subject property, for the reasons and conditions gi
in Staff Report of 7-21-70.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0.669 - A RESOLUTION OF
THE CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO T
CITY COUNCIL APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-1 AN,
R-P TO RD-M (RESIDENTIAL DENSITY-MULTIPLE) ZONE , ON
PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ROOSEVELT STREET
BETWEEN CHESTNUT AND MAGNOLIA AVENUES, identifled by . title only and further reading waived. This recomsendat
is made subject to the reasons given below and under th
Conditions as itemized in Staff Report of 7-21-70:
(1) The proposed use is in conformance with the General
Plan of the City; (2) The proposed use will be compatib
with surrounding land uses.
NEW BUSINESS: (a) CONTINUED - RESOLUTION OF INTENTION#7
To consider setting public hearing date of August 25,.
1970 for Aqua Hedionda Lagoon Land Use Element Amendmen
(Residential Density portion).
F"
t.,
COMMISSIONERS
7,
?
1
1
? Motion
A yes
!n
/
T
COMMl SSIONERS CITY OF CARLSBAD
-4-
Mr. Johnston read the department's memorandum of
7-01-70 and referred to a revised map, displayed on the
wall, entitled "Land Use Amendment No. 2. The memo
covered the city's needs for control of land use, dens
and preservation of natural features, as well as the
type of manmade environment created through development
as refers to this Aqua Hedionda Lagoon area. This had
been brought about by the recent development interests
there and the departmentEs desire to utilize P-C zonins
for much of this area. He also added the resolution he
been rewritten as requested to state that residentfal
land use density only is being considered here, but thi
does not preclude the need for complimentary uses as tI:
may arise .in the future. The title of the former reso3
tion has also been revised to further clarify this poir
The Commission discussed the future development 01
this Lagoon property in general and it was stated that
this vehicle was necessary to-best plan for the proper
development of this prime land. The motion was duly
made to adopt the Resolution of Intention #72, setting
a public hearing date of August 25, 1970, for subject
amendment, with a copy of same published as required bg law.
RESOLUTION OF INTENTION N0.72 - A RESOLUTION OF THE
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION DECLARING ITS INTENTION TC
CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT (RESIDNETrAL
DENSITY PORTION) OF THE GENERAL PLAN, EAST OF INTERSTAZ
5, BOUNDED BY HARRISON STREET, ADAMS STREET, EXISTING
AND FUTURE PARK DRIVE, FUTURE KELLY DRIVE, AND CANNON fi
EXTENSIONS, identified by title only and further readil;
waived.
OLD BUSINESS:
(a) 'Continued' Items Attachment - Planning Director
reports:
70.2 Garfield Area Reclassification & General Plan
Amendment: Cont'd to 7-28 meeting for additions
polling of owners.
Mr. Johnston displayed a wall plot showing the
restilts of the second polling of owners, with a results
50% being in favor of reclassification and amendment of
the General Plan; 23% not in favor of either; and 8% in
favor of reclassification, but not General Plan Amendme
Nineteen percent of the total 75 canvassed gave @no
reSpORSe." Mr. Johnston covered 4 alternatives for the
handling of this area at this time and the Commission
discussed each, although it was added that this area's
reclassification has been before this group for at leas
3 years. (1) Rezone those parcels where the owner want
a zone change; (2) Rezone the total area; (3) Rezone a
select area; (4) Abandon the project for the present. T
General Plan Amendment also could be done for the total
or in part. The area's land potential and current and future tax assessments were discussed. Mr. Johnston sta
from his discussions with property owners who do and do
not want rezoning now, that he would not expect a great
#deal of apartment building immediately upon.rezoning, b
mixed use would continue for some years. Also, the
bepartment's recommendation to utilize the RD-M Zone he
1
tL?
Y -
Motion
Ayes
RD
..
?
?d
4
X
CITY OF CARlLSBAD COMMl SSIONERS
-5-
attempted to adhere to the General Plan recommendation,
while adding the best development requirements, street
improvements, offstreet parking, etc., and this was wit
a Specific Plan being necessary. .He further reminded
the Commission that the RD-M Zone amendment to the City
ordinance was a direct result of Mrs. Llewella Davies
application in 1969 for this general area to reclassify
to R-3 zone, which had been signed by many petitioners,
all for the area West of the railroad tracks.
Commissioner Palmateer commented that the area Sout
of Tamarack and Chinquapin was well-established residen
with alot of trees and smaller lots, which did not ap-
pear to warrant rezoning at this time; however, those areas West of the railroad and North of Tamarack would
seem to warrant rezoning as proposed in the General Pla
MR. F. S. FOUNTAIN and MRS. LLEWELLA DAVIES, proper
owners from the area under consideration were present,
and asked to present some facts as the original applica
tion in this matter had started with them; they were ad
vised this was not a public hearing but they could ad-
dress the Commission if they wished. Mr. Fountain dis-
cussed their earlier petition circulated to 45 property
owners in the area, and signed by some 37 of them, desi
ing reclassification. He discussed the tax situation
in the existing R-1 zone and stated the AssessorEs Of-
fice may well already be assessing the entire beach are
under R-3 zoning. He added rezoning of those properti'es
desiring it need not be considered "spot zoning", nor
would the City see concurrent apartment building, but
it would be spread out over many years.
Mr. Johnston was requested to prepare a more comple
map, with the names of those desiring rezoning indicate
and comparison of the Davies application petitioners wi
those polled in the broader area by the department will
be made. This item of business is continued to the mee
ing of August 11, 1970.
70.3 Buena Vista Lagoon Study: To be continued
70.4 Mobile Homes Study: Mr. Johnston advised of the
response from Western Mobile Association and stated we
are awaiting such response from the Trailer Coach Assoc
ation as well: Continued to meetina of 8-11-70.
70.5 Density Study: In conjunction with 70.2 above.
70.6 Public Utility Zone: Work Committee will meet
on Friday, August 7th at 12:OO Noon for second review.
Planning Director will report.
70.8 Scenic Corridor: Continued for completion of
priority projects.
70.11 Problem Area Zoning Study: CIC study project
70.12 Revised General Plan - Aqua Hedionda Lagoon Amen
ment: Covered under New Businessla)
70.20 Revised General Plan: A continuing project in
the Planning Department
70.21 Review of Harbor Report: Long-range project in
Planning Department, following review by work committee
COMMITTEE REPORTS: None
r
CITY OF CARLSBAD
-6-
IDJOURNMENT:
The motion was properly made to adjourn this mee
ing at 9:32 P.M., and received voice vote approval.
Zespectfully submitted,
\ Jancy Jo LeandGr,
Zecording Secretary
COMMl SSIONERS
do ti on
1 yes