Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-04-08; Planning Commission; Minutes..' C 1 T Y OF CARLSBAD ' MEETING OF: CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION DATE : April 8, 1975 TIME: 7:30 P.M. PLACE : Coulnci 1 Chambers CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL Commissioners Dominguez, Fikes, Jose, L'Heureux, Watson, Wrench - APPROVAL OE' MINUTES AND RESOLUTIONS The minute; of March 25, 1975 were approved as submitted. Resolution No. 1.143 (Amendment to Title 21 - ZCA-66) .approved as submitted. R'esolut'ion No. 1144 (David and Olivia Maldonado) approved as submi tted. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS , Planning Director Don Agatep mentioned that written communi- cations all had a connection with items on the agenda and would be discussed at that'time. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued 1 a. Case No. V-248 - A1 bert J . and Jean Freiburg.er - Request * for approval of a Variance to reduce minimum street front- age from 60 ft. to 20 ft. for a' proposed panhandle lot on R-1 property located on the north side of Magnolia Avenue between Adams Street and Highland Drive. Assistant Planning Director Bud Plender gave staff presentation, explained graphics and recommendation of denial as outlined in the staff report. It was decided that public hearing would be reopened on this item. -Setbacks were discussed, particularly a rear yard setback to provide for a possible street. Specific Plan streets, or "paper streets" were talked about and thc fact that if a road system was going to be adopted, Dr. Frei burger would be ab1 e to develop his property in. any number of ways.' The City Engineer, Tim Flanagan, determined that there are maybe fifteen to twenty "paper streets'' in the City of Carlsbad; but most will probably never be built. Public hearing was opened. Albert J. Freiburger, applicant, stated that in staff's report regarding the development option of block bounded by Magnolia, Chestnut, Adams and Highland and the six property owners they conferred with, there was no contact made with the large property owners to the north. He stated he has contacted the large property owners personally and they have no objection to this Variance, nor does it interfere with any of their plans. There are still some people who wish to have large lots. i COMMISSIONERS ' Present Motion Ayes Mot i on Ayes Abstain Motion Ayes Absta i n .- .. # """ . " d." 4 m L .L.J . ,. L". I X X X X t L i CITY OF' CARLSBAD .i Page 2 - Planning Commission Meeting April 8, 1975, George Flanders., 3765 Yvette Way, stated he knows some property owner5 on Magnolia and they want larger lots, and there is no one in the immediate area that'has any posed as to whether he thinks he lives on one of the best planned blocks in the City, Mr. Flanders stated that there were twelve houses in the development and nine were still the original owners. He stated that from a homeowner's view, the block development was very desirable. -objection to this Variance. In answer to the question Jane Skotnicki, 3684 Adams Street, stated this was not goo1 planning at all and if Dr. Freiburger should change his mind and move out-in a couple of years the City would be left with a 26.,000 ft. lot that no one will want to pay taxes on or maintain. Mrs. Skotnicki suggested that the . Pl'anning Commission should start planning for some of thes situations before they occur. . Appointed Commissioner Ron Packard asked from the audience whether or not if the block was opened up through organized planning and a house built could a lot split still be accomplished, and it was determined there could be. Dr.. Freiburger spoke..again briefly stating that in referen. to the future- development of the block no one can see that far down the road. Dr. Freiburger was asked'by the Commission if he would consider a setback or some alternative acceptable to the Commission, since. there seemed to be corlsiderable concern regarding dividing this lot. into a grid system. Dr. Freiburger stated he would probably concur. with whatever staff would presen.t. Public hearing was closed. It was determined through questions ra-ised by the Commission that this Variance could not be conditioned on a specific plan street. . Some of( the Commission felt that there is going to be more and more pressure for develop- ment of these large residential blocks and the use of pan- handles is just not good planning in many instances. Conmissioners Watson and Dominguez felt the applicant had a right to develop his property the way he wanted .since it was not interfering with his neighbors and if the Gity wanted to mandate a street system through that block they have the option of doing so. The motion was made and a. tie vote followed to deny the application. It was moved and apprbved with a 5-1 vote to approve Y-248 and the findingk were such: 1. There are exceptional circumstances applicable to ' - the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same area since the subject pr6pert is extremely deep and relatively narrow and the only possible method for division is panhandle.lot division. I 2. The Variance is necessary for the preservation of a property right possessed by others in the same area, since other panhandle lot variances have been approved in the general area. 3. The granting of this Variance will not be detrimenta to the public welfare or injurious to property-in the vicinity, since there are no property owners Ayes Noes Motion Ayes Noes COMMISSIONERS c X X X X -2- f . . . . . ... . . , . . . .. . . . . " .. .' CITY OF' CARLSBAD Page 3 - Planning' Commission Meeting April 8, 1975 protesting this Variance and one neighbor has indicated his approval . .. :i . 4. Granting of this Variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan, since the lots being ereated are of lower density than might be allowed wjthin the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The mbtion was made with a condition to read "NO structure! shall 'be constructed that would preclude the future development of a 30 ft. half street on the northern portio1 or the possible division of one additional 7500-sq. ft. lot.". ................................ lb. Development Option of Block Bounded by Magnolia, Chestnut, Adams and Highland. Assistant Planning Director Bud Plender explained that thi! studv.was a result of the February 25, 1975.meetingy at which time the Commission directed staff to meet with property owners on this block to ascertain if there was interest in an interior street system or possibly work out an alternative-program with the applicant. Staff was also asked if it would be possible to present schematics to show the problem of developing large blockwithout an - adopted Street plan. The feasibility of Block A, Block B . and Block C were explained and the problems facing each. The consensus ot the six property owners in Block A who attended the special meeting is that they prefer the property remain the same as it is today, and perhaps even. . a rezoning which would require a lower residential density After determining the length of time staff felt. was necessary to confer with property owners in the area and formulate a.procedura1 plan, it was moved and unanimously' approved to recommend to the City Council: 1) a study on internal circulation for existing large 2) their priority should be a specific study for the residential blocks in the City; and block bounded by Highland Drive to the east, Magnolia to the south, Chestnut to the north and Adam to the west. Staff, working in conjunction with property owners, is to prepare a SDecific Plan Street Alian- ment study for- the Planning Commission's review & July 22, 1975. New 2. Case No. ZCA-67 - A rqcommendation that ZCA-67 be approved greenhouses, but also includes any building used for growing or raising of plants and animals. . Assistant Planning Director Bud Plender explained the. reasons' for wanting to exclude greenhouses from 'the building coverage requirement. The Commission discussed including animals in the zone code amendment. After determining there was no one in the audience wishing to speak on this item, it was moved and unanimously approved to recommend to City Council adoption of ZCA-67 as outline1 in Exhibit A, with the exception that the word "animals'J be deleted from the Resolution. """"""""""""""""""-"""""""""""" L_ \ which basically .deletes building coverage requirements for 3. Case No. ZC-153 and EIR 283 - John Mamaux, for Villiam Canning, C.W.C. Development - Request for certification of an EIR and approval of a preannexational Zone Change from " County E-1-A' to RD-M on a. 13.9 acre site located' on the -~-."" """"L. ".." * L ."._ """ -"":I " " . L .. COMMtSSiONERS Motion Ayes . .. Motion Ayes ""- I 1 _- A I L I F C. CITY 0 F' CARLSBAD Page 4 - Planning Commission Meeting April 8, 1975 east side of El Camino Real approximately 2500, ft. north 0' Alga Road. -The Environmental Impact Report was explained and it was pointed out the reason for the addendum to EIR 283 was the impactof the project on the Encina Water Pollution Plant and based on assumed maximum potentials of the General Plal Staff's recomnendation was to certify the EIR and deny the RD-M Zone as applied for and approve a P-C Zone, for reasons outlined in the staff report. El Camino Real bein! designated as a scenic highway and "Hispanic" development the area was discussed; inasmuch as these were two areas il which the staff felt the P-C Zone would be more effective. John Mamaux, agent for William Canning, applicant, stated .. that basically this application was started when Cal Pacif asked for a preannexational zone change -and staff asked thl the subject thirteen acres be annexed in accordance with . City's adopted.annexation policy requiring consolidation 0' properties and elimination of County islands. ' . Applicant was asked if the P-C Zone was acceptabl,e,, and tht applicant stated it was. It'was moved and unanimously approved to certify EIR-283 am presented and .including the addendum to the EIR. . City Engineer, Tim Flanagan, was asked about the sewer system and he explained that in his opinion either Leucadi Water District or Carlsbad had the capacity and the capability of hand1 ing this project;' however, there was . some.doubt as ta whose responsibility it would be to provii service. Basically, all roads south and one north of Alga Road are serviced by Leucadia Water District. Planning Director, Don Agatep, explained to the Commission that services would be available concurrent with need and whether it might be Leucadia Water District or Carlsbad wa not pertinent. ............................... A ten-minute recess was called at 1O:lO P.M. """""""""""""""""""""""""~-~""""- Mr. Biondo was asked to explain what the Comnission's . . position should be on Public Fa-cilities in this case, and he explained that the issue was really whether the Comis- sion had sufficient information at this time to certify if public facilities were available. It was explained that if not the Commission could take the position of denial or continuance because public facilities are not guaranteed. * Mr. Mamaux spoke' again saying he would rather have a denial than a continuance; he felt he could appeal a denial and a continuance would be a waste of time. The'motion was-made to deny the Zone Change appl9cation without prejudice and unanimously approved. for the reason that there was not suffici-ent evidence that public fac- ilities will be available. UNFINISHED BUSIflESS 4. Case No. V-246 - Walter Gierszowisc - The original request was for approval of a Variance from Section 21.10.080(3) of the Municipal Code which would allow the creation of a panhandle lot to be created on property zoned R-1-15,000 and addressed as 4145 Sunnyhill Drive. The P1 anning I f n. 9 in n ic at f 2 s' a ti! S s Motion Ayes .. .. Motion Ayes " "C" COMMISSIONERS ' 1 CITY OF Page 5 - Planning' Commission Meeting April 8, 1975 COMMISSIONERS ' Commission denied the application. City Council granted applicant's appeal of this decision and the item is being returned to the Planning Commission. Planning Director Don Agatep explained that the City Counci had granted the applicant's appeal after the Planning Commis.sion had denied the Variance. The Commission now has 45 days to get a report back to the City Council. , After heciding that their original position of denial had not changed, the Commission moved and unanimously approved the recommendation of denial to City Council. However, as a part of the motion, it was decided that if the City Council should grant the Variance, the four conditions stated in the staff's report dated November 12, 19.74 should i . be. made a part of their approval. """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""- 5.. Case No. ZCA-65 - A recommendation that ZCA-65 be approved providing for the "Q" Qualified Development Bverlay Zone. Assistant Planning Director Bud Plender explained that this Exhibit C as Dresented was a culmination of all changes suggested by ihe- Commission; and, in answer to a queition raised, assured the Commissioners that Page Four of the Exhibit had been given approval by the City Attorney. - It was mo.ved and approved with a 5-1 vote to recommend to City Counci 1 adoption of ZCA-65 as presented by. staff and shown as. Exhibit' C. I NEW BUSINESS I None INFORMATION ITEMS 6. Workshop -.Planned Unit Development Ordinance Amendment. The Commission decided that since the hour was late they really did not want to get into the workshop on-Planned Unit Development 0rd.inance Amendment. The Comnission con- sidered various alternatives to handling the extra workload Vhich will be coming up.. It was unanimously agreed to hold a workshop meeting at 7:30 P.M. on Tuesday,-April 15 for the purpose of holding the workshop on this ordinance amend- ment and also a review of upcoming projects being brought before the Commission. - ,The Commissioners were remihded of their requirement to file a Disclosure of Economi'c Interest statement during the month of April , 1975. . A letter dated March 31, 1,975 from Kim Packard referring to poo access roads.and addressed to the Commission was discussed and it was noted that the City Engineer and the Planning Commissiol Secretary would respond. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:OO P.M. to Tuesday, April 15, 1975 at 7:30 P.M. -I 6" +(", .1, """"-.I""- .""."""""U"-l."" - 'A s Motion Ayes Motion Ayes Noes . .. Motion Ayes "" I_".".