Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1959-12-22; Planning Commission; MinutesMINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF CARLSBAD CITY PCANNING COMMISSION December 22, 1959 1- The meeting was called to order et 7:35 PoM, by Chairmen Stringer, Present besfdes the Chairman were Commissioners Zahler, Ward, Thomas and Jarvie, Absent Commissioner Netkao 2- Minutes of November 24, 1959. and December 8, 1959, It was mwed by Comm, Jarvie and seconded by Corn, T?omas.that the minutes of November 24, 1959, and December 8, 1959, be approved as submittedo 3 ayes, motion carried, 3- ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Tlere were no oral comnunlcationao 4o WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: There were no written communicationso 5- CONTINUED HEARING: %Jest of Archie Koyl for change of zone from R-1 to R-3 of mqerty located at the southwesterly intersection of Roosevelt St, and Magnolia Ave., described as Tax Assessor's OL Parzel 1, Page 133, Book 35* of the Tax Assessor's Map of - San Diego County, The Secretary read a letter from Miles Po Tolbert ,dated December 4, 1959, stating - that he was bot opposed to R-3 or CUM zoning, but he was opposed to ('spot zoning; that would landlock any large parcels of property which need to be developed, The Chairman reviewed what had transpired in this matter to date and stated that there had been some diszussion and maps presented for subdivisions in the area* but that the problem bePore the Commission at this time was a zone change, MR. DON HOLLY stated that he represented Mr. Koyl and that Mr, Koyl would like to altet his request to reduce the area to be rezoned to extend to a line 200' westerly and parallel to Roosevelt St,; that they would like to request a Resolu- tion of Intention be passed to rezone the adjoining property, (indicating on the map the parcels to be included) to which Mr. Dinius had no objection and that it would eliminate the R-1 island, He further stated that Mr, Koyl wants to get started with some units and his present plans would not interfere with any future development of the arean MR. DXNIUS stated that he is involved in the areab and felt that the proposal just nade Rid not overcome the objections that have been made against the rezoning; that he did not object to the rezoningJ but objected to any rezoning until all the .surrounding property was imluded; that PL a small portion were rezoned, St would open up the rea to othsr applicants in the area and minimize the chan::a of getting a plan for the whole armo The public hearing was closed at 7250 P,M, Considerable discussion was given thfa matter by the Comnfssion during which 3% was brought out that rezoning this area had been under discussion by the Commission at various times and that this was the first time an application for rezoning any part of the area had bem submitted; that the School Board had presented ne par- ticular Qbjectton to this rezcantng, but would like something a little more precise; and that there might be other ways in which this property could be rezoned to better advantage, \ d .. , It was moved by Comm, Zshler thaz Mr, Koyi's request for reclassification from R-1 to R-3 be granted for the area extending looo westerly of Roosevelt St, MR, KOYL stated that they could not use only 10Ceo MA. HOLLY stated that rezoning a strip of only 100' in width would not leave enough room for a street, Comm, Zahler withdrew his motion, It was then moved by Corn, Zahler and seconded by Corn, Ward that Resolution No, 141 be adopted denying the request of Mr, Koyl to rezone a portion of his property from R-1 to R-3 for the following reasons: 1, If the rezonins as requested were granted, it would only be piecemeal rezoning and could lead to further development which would landloek certain paro cels in the ares under consideration, 2, It is in the b3st interests of the City that no rezoning take place in this area until such time as an acceptable precise plan can be presented to the Commission and adopted 3y the City, The Chairman asked for ,a roll call vote, AYES:' Chairman StTinger, Comnissioners Zahler, Ward, Thomas and Jarvfs, NOES : None ABSENT: Commissioner Netke, Resolution No, 141 adoptede I MR, DINLUS stated that he had tried many times before and..had made a major effort t->to present an acceptable plan for the areaB but being an individual property owner he had bf?en unable to get the cooperation of the surroundtng property owners; howeve:?, when the City presented a precise plan for the property, he would certainly cooperate, 60 CONTINUED HEARIEG: Varlance teqwest for Herbert Edwards on Lots 53 and 54, Block A, .Ic.LI w?s Land Coo Addition in accordance with the Planning, Comnissianes Resolution of Intention NQ, 12, The Secretaxy reviewed what had transpired in this matter to date, He then read Notice of Hearing end certified as to the publication of Notice of Hearing and the mailing OP notices I:O property owners in the area, The Secretary then resd Resolution of Intention No, 12 and stated there was no written correspondence on this matter, MR, HAL BIERCE stated they had no objections to the variance but would like to ask if the extension o€ Gtand Ave. would be done according to the City's spe(e96io cat ions, The Secretary stated it would. The public hearing was closed aE 8:lS P,M, After some discussion by the Comission on this matter, it was moved by Comn, Jarvie and seconded by hnm, Zahler that Resolutiola No, 142 be adopted granting the variances as described in Resolution of Intention No, 12 for the following reasons s 1, This is beach front property and, due to the topographic conditions, this variance is necesssry in order that the land can be put to its best end highest useo 2, Granting this variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive general plan or be detrimental to the property and improvements in the vicinity, 3, There were no 3ral or written protests by the surrounding property ownerso The Secretary stated that, for the purpose of the record, he would like to call the Cormissfon's attention to the fact that in granting this variance €or redueo tion of lot area from 1200 sqoft, to 700 sq,ft,, it was possible that the Conanission might be setting a preczdent as there is quite a bit of property along Oeean St, that will be developed along this same line, After more discussion by the Comission, Corn, Zahler slated, that with the consent of Corn, Jarvie, the motion be amended to include the provision that any future requests for reductfon in lot area from 1200 sqofte to 700 sqofto be limited to the west side of Ocean St6 as this is valuable beach front property, is on a bluff, and can stand more concentration than other areas fn the cityo Cm, Jarvie consented to this amendment, The Chairman asked for a roll call voteo AYES: Chairman Stringer, Commissioners Zahler, Yard, Thomas and Jarvieo NOES : None ABSENT: Commissioner Netka, Resolution No, 142 adopted, 7- CONTINUED HEARIFZs Variance request-of Elden L,, and Jeaneete V, Roudebush far reduction of required frontage from 60' to 58,29* in order -.I to allow a. lot split, Notice of hearing was read, The Seereeary certified as to the publieation of - Notice of Hearing and the mefl fng of notices to p~operty owners- in the areao The Secretary then reed the application submitted by the okner setting forth the reasons for requesting the variance, There was no written correspondence, No one present desired to make any comment, The publie hearing was rlased at 8:25 P,M. Some discussion was given this matter by the Commission during which the Secretary pointed out that this was one of those lots that was too large for one lot but with not quite enough frontage for 2 lots; and that other lots in the same area had been resubdivided and hzld fionecages similar to that requested by Roudebush, le was then moved by Corn, Jarvie and seconded by Corn, Ward that Resolution No,. 143 be adopted granting the variance as requested by EIden L, and Jeanette V, Roudebush for reduction of required frontage from 60' to 58,29* in order to allow a lot split, for the following reasons: 1, The lot is too large for one lot and the variance requested is very small, being just over leo 2, Granting this variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive general plan or be detrimental to the property and improvements in the vicinity, as other lots in the area have been resubdivided, 3, There were no oral or written protests by the surrounding property ownersc The Chairman asked for a roll call vote? AYES: Chairman Stringer, Commissioners Zahler, Ward, Thomas and Jarvie, NOES: None, ABSENT: Commissioner Netka, Resolution No, 143 adoptedo 8- HEARING - Variance: &guest of M, So Humphries for reduction in lot area from 6.03 Alles Avocado Acres, Resubdivision, located on the northeast corner of Mamolia Ave. and Harding St, to allow a lot spllto - Notice of hearing wasyeadd The Secretary certified as to the publication of Notice of Hearing and the mailing of notices to property owners in the area, The Secretary then read the application submitted by the owner setting forth the reasons for requesting the variance, There was no written correspondence, The Secretary then stated that this is an R-2 zone and that 4 variances for similar lot splits in this section have been granted by the Commission, MR. HUMPHRiES stated that most of the lots on streets ending on the Freeway have been split and built me The public hearing was closed at 8:35 P.M, After some discussion by the Ccmnission on this matter, it was moved by Cornp Zahler and seconded by Comm, Thomas that Resolution No, 144 be adopted granting the variance as requested by M, So Humphries for reduction of lot area from 6,000 sqo ft, to 5,545 sqobc, in order to allow a lot saptit for the following reasons : lo Similar variances have been granted in this area so this variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive general plan or be detrimentel to the property and improvements in tha vicinityo put to ies best economleal useo' 2, This is an R-2 Zone and granting this variance will allow the land to be 3, There were no oral or written protests,, The Chairman asked for a roll call voteo AYES: Chairman Stringer, Cotmissioners Zahler, Ward, Thomas and Jarvie? NOES: None, ABSENT: Comissioner Netka., Resolution No, 1W. adopted, HEARING 0 Notice of Var i ance,: hearing wa HEARING Variance: R&pest of Claude De and Viola J, Milftorn €or reduction of - front yard set back from 20S to 12O OR a portion sf Tracs - 213 and 21ga Thm Land$. located on the south side of Pine -2" Ave, between Lincoln St, end the A,T, & S.F, Ryo Notice of hearing was r?ado The Secretary certified as to the publication of .Is Repest of Claude De and Viola J, Milftorn for reduction of - front yard set back from 20S to 12O OR a portion sf Tracs - 213 and 21ga Thm Land$. located on the south side of Pine -2" Ave, between Lincoln St, end the A,T, & S.F, Ryo s r?ado The Secretary certified as to the publication of Notice of Hearing and tLe mailing of notices to property owners in the areao The Secretary then read the application submitted by the owner setting forth the reasons for requesting the variance, and the names and addresses of surrounding property owners who had signed the application stating that they did not object to the variance, The Secretary then stated that when the owner had obtained his build- Qng permit, the plat ha3 shown the building at the proper set back, but after the foundation and slab had been poured it was discovered that the measurements had been made from a chain link Eence, which it was assumed was on the property line; that the County Ordinance had required buildings be set back 50' from the center of the street, and the 2 duplexes across the street were only 10' from the property line; and that this was not the result of an tntentional error on the part of the ownera He further stated that as soon as the mistake was discovered, the con? struction of the house was immediately stopped and no work had been done since? The Chairman stated that i€ the Planning Commission could do anything to prevent these errors, they would be happy to do soo MR. C, R, THORNTON. Assistant City Engineer, .s.tated that a guaranteed survey would be the only way to prevent errors of this kind, * MR. MILLIORN stated that it was his brother-in-law who had complained about the set back, although he has 2 duplexes built 10' from the property line; that his neighbor had told him his place had been surveyed and he had taken his neighbor's word for it; that he has over $1,000 in the house which he can't afford to loseo MR, WUTSKY, of Guaranteed Homes, stated that they have the contract €or this house and had been told Pine was a 60e street; that it was not a matter of a survey but the difference between an 80' and 609 street; that he should have checked %t out, but as soon as he found there was a mistake he had stopped the work; that if Pine were an important street, or a through street, he could see the necessity €or 8 wide street but, under the circumstances, he would like to see the variance granted, The public hearing was closed at 8:SO PA After some discussion by the Commission on this matter, it was mved by Corn, Jarvie and seconded by Corn, Ward that Resolution No, 145 be adopted granting the variance as requested by Claude D, and Viola J, Xilliorn for reduction of front yard set back from 20' to 12' for the following reasons: 1, Not to grant this vsriance would create a hardship for the ownero 2, Other houses in the vjcinfty have a front yard set back of only lo', so granting this variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive general plan or be detrimental to the property and improvements Bn the areao the result of unintentional human errors, 3, The Commission has granted similar variances when mistakes were made as The Chairman asked for e roll call vote. AYES: Chairman Stringer, Commissioners Zahler, Ward, Thomas and Jarvie, NOES : None ,, ABSENT: Commissioner Netka, Resolution No, 145 adopted, 10- TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP-OF LEBAR ESTATES, UHIT NO, 1, The Secretary submitted the tentative subdivision map of Lebar Estates, Unit No, 1, to the Commission for their review together with a map showing how the entire subdivision is planned for future development, The Secretary then stated that this property waa originally owned by Carl Lough and was recently rezoned from R-A-10 to Ral-.loSo He then reed the recommendations of the various departments and pro- posed Resolution No, 143, stating that when this resolution was prepared nothing had been heard from the Telephone co, or the Gas and Electric Co,; that the reports from the utility companies were now in and that they propose to place the poles kn the street; that he .9nd the City Engineer had discussed the matter and, inas- much as the utility companies had seen only the map of Unit No, 1, it was the opinion of the Engineer that if they got together with the utility companies and presented the map of the subdivision as it is eventually planned, that the utility companies would consider placing the poles on the rear property lineso MR. MOORE, representing Stetson, Strauss 6 Dresselhaus, Inc., stated that he had noticed the utility compnies would rather not use the easements at the rear of the property in that sectioa, but if it was the Commission's wish, they would certainly include easements on th.2 rear of the lots for that purposeo MR, COTTER, owner of Lebar Estates, stated it was Immaterial to him, Considerable discussion was given this matter by the Commission, during which it was determined that the present sewer facjlitfes could accommodate chese lots and the existing buildings removed, It was then moved by Comno Jarvie and seconded by Comm, Zahler that Resolution No, 140 be adopted recommending to the City Council that the tentatlve map of Lebar Estates, Unit No, 1, be approved, and that the Commission go on record as recommending that the utility poles be placed st the rear property lines, The Chairman asked for -3 roll Call voteo AYES: Chairman St.ringer, Commissioners ZahPer, Ward, Thomas and Jarvie, NOES : None ABSENT: Commissioner Metka, Resolution No, 140 adopted, 11- ADlOUKNMENT. By proper motion, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P,M, Respectfully submitted, .To \X" PRICE, Secretary