Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1958-05-13; Planning Commission; MinutesMINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF CARLsBAD CITY PLANNING CO"IS85oN May 13, 1958 . I* 2- 3 i. 4- The meeting was called to order at.7:35 P.M. by Chairman Baamgattner. Present besides tbs Chairman were Commissionerr Fennel, Saroie, SwirakY. Stringer and EbrigKi; 8180 present war@ Secretary Price and Phdq Consultant Gordon Whiinall. It was mowd by Comm. Strimr aad aeconded by COPM. SWirsw that the minutes of April 22, 1958 and April 29, 1958 be approved as submittad. mer&l euterprilres oast of the Freewayy. The Commisai~a aabd that the Later from Capt. John Ksder was read, wherein he objectd to pay Comw latter b. filed. HEARING ., Variancb I1 - W. D, Garrott. Notice of braring was road whemin €he agpticsaa rsquewa a front yara variance from 20' to 5'. side pard variance from 9.7' and rear yard set back from 11.5 to IO' Lot 41 of Qranoille Park. Tbe Cbsirman announced that Mrs. Garrett bad reqla&d an alternative variance and suggaafcd they both be conaiderod at M1 same time. Noace of baring was read on Variance #2, whrrein the applicant rCcquSrkd a front yard variance from 20' to 5', went side yard variance from 5.3' to lo' to 8'. 3' and rear yard set back from 11,5 to IO', "pd dad side pard variance from bttcr kern Clyde hwaey, dated.May k-0, 1958, obJe&ng to the cart 8i& yard variance baing leas than IO** as h. felt this variance would damage his propsl-. and farther it woald add to the traffic hacerd in that area. they stated they had examined the Garrett property and they bad 90 objections Mrs. Gartatt presented a petition signed by 19 property owners, wherein to the rerquestad variance being granted. They further requested that Rude's signature be stricken from the petitibn submitted by Mr. Vasquer; as he 110 longer ownsd pvoperty in this area, Letter eddrocaed to the Secretary 6f the Pbning CommKasion from Mr6. Waktter, dated IMEIy 6, 1958, stating Mrs. Garrett had brought her building plans by ami oxphired why die needed this variance and she saw no reason ./'' Why NXrL Garrett ShOUM not be gPWkd this VahCee MRS. GARRETT, requested that the first .petition submitted by Mr. Vasqu$a be ucstroyoa as r7 TOQB discriminating against her. Mr. vas que^ requested iibnr @tition eo romaiin as preocuted.~ Fa did not wish tpI. variance granted as ke intctalEo 00 add to hi5 building ad he would not bo able to build If W1.o were granted. Mr. wh€tnall e&icwad ki8 report with tho CommfssOon regarding this property. Mre. Gam& asked Mr. wbitnall on a corner lot doen the back yard have t9 be immediately opposik! the front yard. Mr. Whitdl sts$csd &cy had left enom ctaarsmnce than otber proparties in tha, vicinity. it did. Mrs. Ga~rett presented a new plot pLsn sad infarmod tbe Cornmiaaiw. 0. A. INNIS. 2590 Ocean Street, informed the Commission ho liwd three ~UEOS down on tne opposite side o€ the street; he realbed that certain variances should be granted, ami understood this was a very odd shaped lot, but Pelt the variances should be consistent. MR. ALBERT STEIN, 2469 Ocean, stated that Ocean Street is a 25' rtreet, and be would be shocked to think tnat anyone would build with a 5' Ed back on a comer lot. cOL. ATKINSON, of the Army and Navy Acadestated he had 6i-d Br. vasaue~.s mtition as ho waa concerned wi blind corner; thwe horn . ~~-. - . - he felt sa€- should be a determining €actor& been two accidents lately at that corner and since the Acadmy is concemed. Public hearing was declared closed at 8:12 PiM. Corn. Fenncrl informed the Commission he wiahed to abatain from all voting. Comm. Ebright stated hs felt considerable discussion had been given this matter and the Commisslon should act on it now; the majohty of the ri turas contained in Mrs. Garrett's petition lived apprdmat6ly two bloc E? from tbs property Ln question. Comm. Ebright moved that Rooolution No. 64, re: Application No. 1, and Resolution No. 65 re: Application No. ' 2, be adopted, denying the requested variance?, on th. basis that from tha staff report the variance reqwbted is .in acceas of an otherwise eahblisbd pracadant, but that a the property and 51 on the west ride of tha property. Seconded by Comm. variance be granted to tha applicant allowing a sat back of 10' on tho front Of absent e Stringer. Five ayen, Comm. Fennel abstaining and Comm. Fmg0lmann 5- ' HEARING ., Variance - David E. Baird. Notice of hearing waa road, wherein the appucant reque5%ed a variance on the placement of a single family resi- dence. on a lot having unusual &ape and topography, said property bdng described as Lot #4. Terramar Unit #X. The Chairman requeated Mr. Whitnall to give a report. Mr. Whitnall informed the Commission he had inspected this property and that all of the lots in the area have variances except Lot 9. He pointed out that these Lots have deed ~eetrictiona which are more strict than public restrictions.. Many of the persons in the area have violated these deed restrictions and taerefore, he doubted if any violation would hold up in court. MR. DAVID BAIRD. stated he purcbased Lots 3 and 4 when he was in Europe and waa unawaze there were any deed restrictiionei they had tried to dcaip their howe plan to €it Lot $; the Health Officer informed them that the cesspool could not be placed on the west side of the property, and a5 a result it became necessary to relocate the proposed residence, hence the request €or this variance. Mr. Baird further stated he had contacted all of his immediate neighbors and they concurred with the proposed place- ment 0f the structure and felt it would be an aasd to the neighborhood. €&d+-pti~c%SiitXY3 property there was just OR^ house in the area which waa MRS. SCRITSMEIR, informed the Commission sh owned Lot 9, and wha Lot 7. The other houses were built ia accordaswe with Lot 7; when the closer than 59 on the side yards would cause a fire hazard. streets weye paved the curbing wa5 moved back; she felt anyone building MR. SCRITSMEIR stated the staff skould make correct measurmnunts on au set hegP ana side yards in the area. MR. BAIRD informed the Commission that whop they sur d his lot they &covered?hat Mr. Tyson'a hedge was on his (Mr. Bairdvproperty, and he waa not going to ask Mr. Tyson to remove his hedge. MRS. SCRITSMEIR, &atd that even though they lived on Lot 9 and cdd not see thin house if it were placed as propomad, she did not feel that an- should be given such a variance. She furtker stated that if this variance were granted they bo would obtain a variance and build an additional room: all of tho property owners in the neighborhood have between $30.000 and $40.000 invaded in their property and did not see why anyone could move in and put up anything. declared by the Chairman, The meeting reconvened at 9:fO P.M. The public hoaring was declared closod at 9:OO P.M. A short recess was After considerable discussion as to the plot lan and tlm shape of tha lot, Comm. Fennel moved that Resolution No. 6 i! be adopted, granting a variance on Lot 4. Terramar Unit 81 . as requested for the following reaeonm: 1. That it would not be detrimental to any of the other properties. 2. There were no objections made by adjacent property owners. 4. All of the front yards in the immediate neighborhood, with the 3, That said property is pie*ahaped. beach front property. 5, Lot 4 is concave lot occupying the middle of an arc of a 90' 6. The location of a house on the subject premises was largely ' exception of Lot 9, are substandard. bend in Shore hive. dictated by the insistence of the Health Officer that the septic tank and cesspool be located on the east side of the house. Seconded by Comm. Jarvic. Six ayes. Resolution No. 66 adopled. 6- HEARING - Variance - Everett L. Miller. Notice of hearing wa13 read wjon in lot si- from 7,500 feet to 4,077 fedc, of a portion of Tract 7, Laguna Mesa. Mr. whitnall was asked to give a report on the request. He stated the property ia located at the end of Olive ]Drive; the building 0x1 the property is a frame building.; the garage is Located abed 6" from the property line srnd on 8hO adjoining property another gavage ia located so that the eaves of the garages overlap each other. The enclosed area of the lot is less than the required area but nothing would be gaiscd because the additional property would overhang. for lot8 in tMs area; it would be possible to acquire additional property, but that Dr. ALaxaadar was prene~t to represent the applicant. The Secretary informed tb Commission that the applicant was not present propc2ty in order to comply with the 7500 aq. faet required, but the only DR. ALEXANDER, etatcd ithe applicant was willing to purchase additional would not heelp the situation any. The applicant wants to install a bathroom property available would bo hanging over the embankmd and therefore and improve the praprty. -3- The Commission asked if this property showed on the tax roll as a split lot, and was informed that it did not. mission make a atuay to see if this was an illegal sale, Seconded by Comm. Comm. Ebright moved that the public hearing be closed and that the Corn-, Jarvie. All ayeso motion carried. 7- HEARING Reclassification - Albert E. &in. Notice of hearing wae read wherein the Planning Co*mtssion requested a hearing for reCbSciPiCatiOn of property described as the east half of 17.20( of Lot 31 and east half of Lot 32, Seaside Lands, said property beiag owned by AlberD E. Stain from Zona RIP to Zone C-2. The Chairman announced that the next echedulsd hearing pertdeed to re- classifica*;ion of properky in the same area and suggested thw be held simul- taneously. MR. STEIN stated he felt that time would be sassd if th. application of Mr, Reenan's ware dlscassed fir&. 8- HEARING - Reclassificrtion 0 John R. Keenan. Notice of hearing was read w%rein me appUca3t reguestea recsaosification from Zone R-P to Zone C-Z of property describ.zd as the northwest 54' of the northead 165..49 feet of Lot 31. Seaside Lands. the property to the east is used for commercial purposes and the property Mr. Whitnall was asked to give a report on %ha subject property.. He stated to the rear is commercial, which lef% an rem of R-P aoning. t-on the people who signed this petition were not opposed to the re- MR. KEENAN . informed the Commission that when Mrs. Keenan circulated its use: Be purchased this property for business use. and intended to con- zoning. but others were not opposed to the rezoning of the property but as to 5trud an attractive office building and pave the Lot which would certainly improve the property from its present status, The lot would only be used for the eale of used cars and no repairs woukl be&- on the location. He pointed out them has be0n a garage for repair of cars in the neighborhood for para, which has not been objectionable to the property OWPBPP. MRS. DETWLLLER. 2777 Roosavelt %re&, presented a letter from Mrs, properths being cuzsidsred for reclassificaeon; she has her home there. Hooscvelt street, stating she owned property between the two would be ppposed tc having any business located on bth sides of her property. and due to her ago desires to continue living in this home, therefore, she re.zoned R-P they &d not object, BO they felt doctors or dentists would not MRS. EIETWILLERt, informed the Commission that when the property was be objectionable, They had improved their home for a retirement home. Ske %it,the Cornmi:jsion shouLea consider the type of business being placed on tha p~opaopty, an3 5uggcotcd the COEslrd55iQn consider a buf€eer strip between the business area and residential area. LOUIS SCHMIDT, 2840 Roosevelt Street, stated that he Lived three doors kr~m the pzoperty &mag conaiderZ%Z%-f& the sann~f as Mrs. 13etwllhr. TEFF.~?~infc,rmed $be Commission she fcit Mrs. Buhl's property MRS. KEENAN, aeked where Mrs. Mwfller would propose a buffet strip. shot~id be ,the buffer sWp. - Comm. Ebright stated that the iype of business does not enter into thi8 request for reclassification. The law does not albow tha Commission to make restrictions on reclaasifications; the physical coditiopII1 should be considered, and felt that weight should be given to the protests of the property owners adjoining. Eventually commercial will crowd out reddenHal. and he did not feel it was good planning lo spot zone - it should be co&iguous. tho pi&ure of thie area. Comm. Fennel etabd he had been very close to the Comm.. Yarrie pointed out; that the Buy and Save Market had certainly changad Datwillors for years and did not wish them to be hurt, but you cannot stop ownerahips of other properties should be considered in Ohia matter. progress, or you cannot prevent those pe9pla from the use of their land; MR. STEIN. stated the reason he did not want his application beard fir& because hc1 did the etatamont previously made (that Be would withdraw his requeet if Mrs. not want Mr. Koenanrs application jaopardised. Bocawe of Buhl protestad) that he would have to wiOhdra% his application, He folt that thing could be worked out. if &e four property owners involved could get together that perhaps Some*. MRS. KEENAN. shted that if curbe and sidewalks were rdqufrcd they would be wtrrrng to put them in. the applicants, Comm. Stringer stated he felt the physical aspacts should be considered by Comm. Ebright moved that these hearings be deferred until the ne& regular meeting., in order for the proparty ownets to meet. Seconded by Comm. Skbger. Six ayes, 1 absent. Mr. WhitnaU Wormed the property owners he would be glad to meet with them if they wished. Mr. Stein stated they vrould hold a meeting between themselves and report to Mr. Price. Comm. Swirsky was excused at 11:OO P.M. .. 9- Carlsbad Union School District r A report in regards to the nw pro- posed building eite for a new sch s prepared\and submitted to the Com- mission for OWir approval. By c the, report and ordered the Secretary to forward the lettor to the school on consent the Commission approved district. IO- City Attorney report - WM; Fait request for street names. Letter from lb. Fair waa presented to the C street names set aside. Ccmm. Ebright stated that subdivisions have ommisexon whereiu he raquas/;ed certain is not required. Mr. Fair asked if there was a record of aurveya he stated dedicated sta%ets and ham a recorded map, and in private property 8 map that he knew street names had been given to privata aubdivioions in oaes cities. After-consicle.rable discussion, Comm. Jaroio moved that Mr, ~W.r be atlowed to set aside certain names for his trailer park, Seconirod E? Swiraky and Engelmailla absent. Comm. Stringer. Four ayan, Comm. Ebright voting no. ad Commiesioners . .. diecusm tho procedure for thls redevelopment plan. If the procoduro is agreeable then call a meeting of the property owners from Ekn A-e to Chiquapin on Pi0 Pic0 Drive and discuss what a rodevelopmsat plan involves. By common consent the matter was deferred until Mr. WMtnall could meet with the proparty owners, and a meeting could be held between the Council, City Manager and the Commission. recommkdattons and to stab-thefr objections. if any, as to morhrsrie.- being placed in an R43 Zone or proposed R-3 sonor Comm, Fennel stated it was his understanding at the time the Commission recommended this amendment that a conditional use permit would have to'& grantad in any 50aa and dtd not restrict mortuaries to any eone. Tha Commission clari- fied tbis misunderstandfag. It was felt by thc Cornmireion that if the mattar was to be reconsidered that it should be deferred until the meeting of May 2'3, 1958. ~. ~~ *or 'the Commission's approval. Comm. EbrigM moved that tb. drawing for the proposed entrance Gate for &acrest Estates subdivision be approved. and that it be submitted to the Council for their approval. Seconded by Swirsky and Engelmann absent. Comm. Jarvie. Four ayes, Comm. Stringer votkrg no. Commissioners Seconded by Comm. Jarvie; The motion was withdrawn. Comm. Ebriglxt moved that all meetings be adjourned at 1O:OO P.M. By proper motion ths meeting was adjourned at 11:40 P.M. Respecttully pubmittad. , PRICE. Secrotary a