Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1970-08-25; Planning Commission; MinutesCITY OF CARLSBAD MINUTES OF MEETING: Planning Commission DATE OF MEETING: AUGUST 25, 1970 TIME OF MEETING: 7:30 P.M. PLACE OF MEETING: City Council Chambers ROLL CALL: City staff members present: Stuart Wilson, E. J. Olin house, R. A. Johnston, and J. E. Spano. (Commissioner Gullett was present at 7:50 P.M.) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the regular meeting of August 11, 1970 were approued by voice vote, as they were submitted. I WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (a) VARIANCE - To consider Reduction in Required Lot Width from 60 to 55 ft., creating a Lot Split, on prop located at 1310 Knowles Ave, between Elmwood Street an Gregory Drive; Applicant: Alexander R. KNIGHT I Mr. Johnston read the Staff Report of 8-18-70 in full, referring as necessary to a wall projection of the parcel under consideration, adjacent properties, and other ownerships on the same block having previous received the same vari.ance consideration. The staff recommendation was to approve this application for the reasons given and subject to certain conditions, Items 1 thru 6. The chairman read correspondence regarding this application from Mrs. Marie L. Reese, 1005 Laguna Drive, who stated she saw no reason to deny this re- quest. ALEXANDER R. KNIGHT, 1310 Knowles Avenue, was in the audience and stated the Planning Department and st report covsred all the facts involved and he had nothi to add, unless there were questions from the Commissio MR. ROY W. FELKER, 1345 Buena Vista Circle, property owner in the general area (just North of the Resse pro ty) stated he was concerned what kind of building and for what use the lot split would be used. He hoped there would be no small building placed on these lots. MRS. BERNICE COOPER, 2831 Elmwood Street, stated she also wanted' to know what use was planned for this land and if the avocado trees now existing would be torn down. There were no more questions from the audience and none to speak in favor or opposition of the matter (Commissioner Gullett 'arrived at this time, 7:50 P.M.) In answer to th'e above questions, Mr. Knight replied i would be some 3 to 4 years before the property was corn developed, but that some of the trees would need to be removed. He proposed selling the existing house, but retaining the avocado groves behind it for some time y The future development of Cynthia Lane will determine some of his development plans and the pro erty could b puf to better use if the lot frontage app P ication i,s al lowed. Pr Ab - Mo Ab .AY ff 9 er- let t. COMMISSIONERS CITY OF CARISBAD COMMlSSlONERS -2- 4 os c, 33bi4@ ~\\~~~~ %%%%%Yi Also, he stated three(3) lots would be obtained for the lot split. proposed, all over the 7,500 sq. ft. minimum requirement, but the lot fronting on Knowles Avenue would only have a 55 ft. frontage. There were no more questions of the applicant and the public hearing was closed at 7:55 P.M. (Commiss1oner.Gullett was present at 7:50 P.b.1 The Commission discussion following covered the previously approved lot frontage variances in the area and Mr. Spano was asked if there was any reason why the 55-ft. lot should not or could not be designed according to city setback requirements, etc., to which Mr. Spano stated there were several means of designing ahouse for this particular lot and it did contain the minimum 7,503 sq.ft. requirement. Commissioner Palmateer stated that while no immediate plans for property development existed this request appeared valid if the owner wished to sell a portion of his property. The three substandard frontages in the immediate area were discusse-d and the potential for continuing this precident and incurring many more such requests for adjacent large parcel ownerships was covered. The difference between this lot split and a "panhandle" lot split was discussed; it was stated a variance is normally granted in the case of some hard- ship and there appeared no obvious hardship in this case. It was further stated the applicant had substantial property right, nor should property division be approacled as to densi'ty only, since the 3 lots to be created were over the legal size and with the extension of Cynthia Lane in the future the rear lots would have frontage and no panhandle lot would exist. The motion was duly made .to approve this appli'catio7Motion X for variance, and the reasons for approval and conditiols xx Nayes of approval were read. X xx Ayes Absent X PLANNING COUMISSION RESOLUTION ~0.672 - A Resolution of i7 wood Street and Gregory Drive, allowing the reduction on property located at 1310 Knowles Avenue, between Elm- the Carlsbad City Planning C.ommission granting a VarianZe X Abstained comprehensi've general plan of the City of Carlsbad. granting of such variance will not adversely affect the and.zone in which the property is located. (2) That the jurious to the property or improvements in such vic.i.nit~ be materially detrimental to the public welfare'or in- Reasons: (1)That the granting of such variance will not to the conditions.stipulated in staff report of 8-18-70: creat a lot split, for the following reasons,subject to required lot width from 60.00 feet to 55.00 feet, to by.other property in the same vicirrity and zone. and enjoyment of a substantial pro'perty right possessed (3) That such variance is necessary for the preservatio7 (b) RESOLUTION OF INTENTION NO.72 - Land Use Amendment NO. 2 for Agua Hedionda Lagoon densities. Mr. Olinghouse referred to the past Commission dis- cussions and requests for this area's needed density factor and ointed out the color coded wall exhibit, dep'icting t f: e area to be considered in this amendment. f A I CITY OF CARLSBAD COMMISSIONERS -3- Commission questions were invited if any remained at this time. Commissioner Palmateer stated considerable time had already,been involved in studying this areats density requirements and there appeared no reason to acre of dry land" as referred to in the resolution. of zone. Once affirmed by the auncil action, it of the City in approaching development applications. The controls now existing within the Land Use Element of the General Plan were discussed and Mr. Olinghouse stated these' were being studied in the department's project of revising the general plan. The City's.zone that would permit the densities now being considered here all require specific plans, which is a further .control of land use. near the Lagoon, which no mention had been made of in these discussions. MR. ALLAN 0. KELLY, 4675 El Cahino Real, stated the land 9avolved is already so valuable and the taxes for the City and for the area. This was clarified by Mr. Johnston wi:th the wall map. There were no others to speak In favor or agatnst thi;s matter and public hearing was closed at 8:15 P.M. X xxxxxx x 1. It is necessary for the public welfare. 2. The i i I- CITY OF -4- CARLSBAD COMMISSIOE .". t' JERS sent to the Commission for their information. This.re view was now complete and the Planning Director recomm ded approval of the report by the Commission, to be fo warded to the Council for action to approve as Suppler No. 1 to the Housing Element and this would then becor City policy re mobile home park developments in,the future. Certain questions as to the status of the 4 parks already app,roved by the City in 1969 and their time limitation of, one(1) year were asked and Mr. Olinghous stated one park (Rancho Agua Hedionda, East of El Cami Rlel and South of Hwy 78) had elapsed their time in Ju 1970 on the conditional use permit. However, their remains some 2, 280 approved spaces still covered by active CUP'S and their exact status is undetermined -- however, there have been no building permits issued to date for actual construction of these parks. He added the reports recommendations re future developments should stand even thoughthe statistics have changed since the one development has lapsed, but this could b updated on a yearly basis as new figures became avail- able as a means of comparison. Also, the City policy, if this report becomes an amendment, would be discusse with the future applicants for CUP for mobile home par Commissioner Palmateer congrlaulated the departmen on the extensive research as reflected in its report and recognized that many other cities, particular-lfy in California, are now faced with a similar problem in their approach to mobile home park development. He fe further that some of the points as to taxes and servic by the City, as covered in the report, are currently being experienced by this city; also, those parks al- ready approved are examples of the "urban sprawl'' and its accompanying problems to be experienced by the Cit The public hearing was opened for audience participati at this time. MR. ALLAN 0. KELLY, 4675 El Camino Real , stated he appreciated the City's problems regarding mobfle home park development, as some of these were problems he wa currently experiencing in the development of a piece.c his property. He bri.efly discussed plans for about a 200-space park on his portion of that 92 acres under a CUP at this time. There were no others present to spea in favor or opposition of this matter and the hearing was closed. A motion was duly made and seconded to adopt Plann Commission Resolution No. 673, recommending this amend for Mobile Home Parks as Supplemenf No. 1 to the Ctty Council, for the reasons given below: PLANNING COMMISSiON RESOLUTtON NO1673 - A Resolution o the City of Carlsbad recommendtng to the City Counci'l an Amendment to the Housing Element of the General Pla (Council Resolution No.1689) by adding Supplement No. regarding Mobile Homes Parks, identified by title only and, approved for the foll.owing reasons: 1. It is necessary for the public welfare. 2. The addition of t Supplement regarding 'Mobile Homes Parks is essential f the General Plan to be comprehensive and effective. rt ! 'I 1 '9 ' !n t Mot ?on Ayes Absent r L. n, COMMISSIONERS CITY OF CARLSBAD NEW BUSINESS: None. OLD BUSINESS: (a) RESOLUTION NO. 657 - Amending Ord. #9060, Conditio Use Permits - returned from Council and revised by department. Mr. Olinghouse briefed the Commission on this most recent revi,sion of the formerly prepared resolution to the Council, -.having been returned for additional contr and additional uses to be added. The department had prepared a list of those items added or changed in any way, to avoid going through each section individually and these were briefed as to their reasons in each cas Discussion was'invited and Commissioner Hermsen questi the "Time Limitation" clause as to the wording requfri a one (1) year completion under the CUP. After consi able discussion of the need to avoid interpretations under this clause, it was decided to leave the one-yea completion date as proposed, inasmuch as additional ti can be extended if necessary. It was further decided that under the CUP application, the Planning Departmen can best determine the time clause and after obtaining this information from the applicant, can include same in the staff report backgro'und information. It was.generally understood and agreed that these proposed revisions were improvements on the original resolution and the motion was made to send the regular approval memorandum-to the Council for their further action on this item. (b) RESOLUTl0.NS OF INTENTtON NOS. 71 F. 74 - To set pub hearing date of September 22, 1970 for Garfield Change of Zone and Land Use Amendment No. 1 for the general area, as prepared by the Planning Department. The action requested in these two resolutions was briefly discussed following several continuances for specific actions by the department in preparing these matters for public hearing. A plot plan showing all those properties to be rezoned and a copy of the map for Land Use Amendment No. 1 were on hand, with a larg wall map displayed and color coded as to responses on the area polling. It was agreed these items were now ready for public hearing and the motion was duly made to set public hearing date for Resolution of Intention No. 74 and.for Resolution of tnbention No. 71, respect RESOLUTION OF INTENTION NO. 71 - A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of,Carlsbad declartng its intention to consider Adoption of Land Use Amend; ment No. 1, an amendment to the Land Use Element of th General Plan, West of the A.T.&S.F. Railroad, between Buena Vista Lagoon and Agua Hedionda Lagoon, with noti Df public hearing to be published according to law. RESOLUTION OF INTENTION NO. 74 - A Resolution of the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission declaring its int tion to hold a public hearing on September 22, 1970, t consider recommending to the City Council a Reclassifi tion in Zone on Certain Propetties in the City of CArl bad from R-1, R-2 or R-3 to RD-M (Residential Density- Multiple)Zone, with notice of public hearing to be pub lished accordincl to law. -5- Mot Ton Ayes Absent tC : Ilotion#l \yes \bsent Fely. 1- / CITY OF CARLSBAD (c) Continued ttems Attachment - Planning Director re- ports: There were no questions regarding the target dates and continuation items covered in this attachmen COMMITTEE REPORTS: None. ADJOURNMENT: The motion was property made and approv unanimously by voice vote approval to adjourn the meet at 8:57 P.M. Respectfully submitteAd, [ COMMISSIONERS 1 Motion 1g Ayes Absent \ a g @ x