Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1960-02-09; Planning Commission; MinutesMINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING CMISSION February 9, 1960 1- The meeting was called to order at: 7:30 P.M. by Chairman Stringer, Present besides the Chairman were Comnissioners Netka, Zahler, Ward, Thomas, Miller an& Jarvie. Absent, none. 2- Minutes of January 26, 1960. It was moved by Conmissioner Thomas and seconded by Cmissioner Ward that the minutes of January 26, 1960, be approved as sLbmitted. Seven ayes, motion carried. 3- Oral Comnunicat ions: There were no oral comnunications~ 4- Written Comnunicationsr a, The Secretary read a letter dated February 9, 1966, from Dr. J. S. Jacobs, Secretary to the Board of the Carlsbad Union !%hool District, stating that the Board of Trustees of the Carlsbad Union School District would like to go on record as supporting the recomnendat ion that a requirement be made by the City Council that all future subdivisions must include the installation of side- walks on all through streets. By cmon consent of the Cammission, the letter was ordered filed. b. The Secretary read a letter dated February 3, 1960, from Mrs. Gladys Downey, 4170 Canyon Crest Rd., Altadena, Californiz. Mrs. Downey stated that they were the owners of a house located on the corner of Mountain View and Normandy Lane, number 2425 Mountain View, lot 40 Granville Park. She is concerned about the fact that her neighbors to the south have a different street address, and also, the people on the east side of the street. The street sign at the entrance is marked Ocean Ave. She wanted a clarification as to what the address for her house should be. The Secretary pointed out that it had been discussed previously that the name Mountain View be changed to Ocean Street, however no ordinance had been passed making the change. After discussion by the Camnission, it was decided that this matter be continued to a study meeting and discussed along with any other problems regarding street names and house numbering which the postoffice may have. 5- HEARING a Request of Finis Johnson et a1 for change of zone from R-1 to R-3 of property located north of Laguna between Buene Vista Gardens and Jefferson. Notice of hearing was read. The Secretary certified as to the publication of Notice of Hearing and the mailing of notfces to property owners in the area. The Secretary then read the application submitted by the owner setting forth the reasons for requesting the zone reclassification. The Secretqry read a letter from Minnie H. Jones stating that she waa in favor of the rezoning of this property. The Secretary stated that no written protests had been received up to the time of this hearing. The Secretary then explained that there are 3 parcels of land irxofved, which VDiIl4 be jcined and made a part of parcel 19, fronting on Lapna, whfich could noi: be subdivided due to the fact that the only access to a dedicated street is through parcel 19 which has frontage on Laguna. MR. ROBERT LOHR, 715 Buena Vista Circle, stated that he felt this would be "spot zoning*# since there is R-1 zoning on three sides of the property in question. Why not make the property fronting on Jafferson Street R-3 also. m MR. FINIS JOHNSON, stated that he had owned this property since 1937 and had been paying taxes on-it all this time; that on two previous occasions he and property owners to the north tried to develop the property as R-1, but the expenses of the improvements had been prohibitive. This land cannot be developed because it is landlocked, unless it is joined to property fronting on Laguna and rezoned to R-3. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:55 P.M. Commissioner Ward disqualified himself from the discussion as he lives in the area in question. After discussion with the Chairman, it was decided that Cmissioner Ward had no interests in the property, therefore he was qualified. During the ensuing discussion, Chairman Stringer stated that he felt the Comnission should establish a definite and uniform pattern of handling requests for zone changes to R-3 to be used in future cases. He pointed out that property owners in the potential R-3 areas are required by the Zoning Ordinance to submit with their request for rezoning a precise plan showing boundaries, design, dimensions of streets, alleys and other features pertinent to precise zoning. Also, they are required by Section 205 of the Subdivision Ordinance to provide,alleys at the rear of all lots to be used for multiple family purposss. If the Comnission allows property Owners to rezone to R-3 without any plan for improvements, property owners in the potential R-3 zones could conceivably ask to be deleted from the potential R-3 area and then file an application for a zone change, thus not having to include any improvements. Commissioner Zahlet-moved, seconded by Conmissioner Thomas that Resolution No. 148 be adopted denying the request of Finis Johnson for a zone reclassification from R-1 to R-3 for the following reasons: 1. There should be a plan which takes care of the remaining long deep parcels of land on Jefferson Street all together, rather than on a piecemeal bas is. 2. Granting this reclassification would adversely affect the comprehensive general plan for the area. The Chainnan asked for a roll call vote. AYES: Chaimn Stringer, Comnissioners Netka, Zahler, Ward, Thomas, NOES: None ABSENT: None Miller and Jarvie. 6- HEARING - City Council's request to hold hearing to rezone easterly 200 ft. of Assessor's parcels 10 and 11, Book 35, Page 35, as per Resolution No. 627. Notice of hearing was read. The Secretary cerf.ifIied as to the publication of Notice of Hearing and the mailing of notices to property owners in the area. The Secretary then read a Memorandum from the City Council, dated January 21, 1960, stating that at the regular meeting of the City Council held on January 19, 1960, a hearing was held to consider the appeal of Mr. Archie Koyl for reclassification of certain property in the City of Carlsbad. The Council's findings were contrary to the findings of the Planning Commission, as in the opinion of the Council this proposed 1:-3 property would not be g*piecemealt* zoning due to the fact that the Council contemplates the rezoning of the easterly 200 ft. of Tax Assessor's Parcels 10 and 11 in Assessor's Map Book 35, Page 35 of San DOego County, to R-3 which would eliminate any piecemeal or spot zoning. The Council therefore requested that the Planning Commission reconsider Mr. Koyl's request for rezoning the easterly 200 ft. of his property from R-1 to R-3 at such time as the Council's Resolution of Intention No. 627 is cons idered. A writteil protest was read by the Secretary from Miles P. Tolbert, Owner of parcel 35-35-11 in the area in question, stating that he was apposed to a zone change on only a part of the property. He believes that the only solution is for an over-all zoning plan with properly laid out streets. DAVID R. DINIUS, one of the major propetty owners of the area, stated that he did not feel that any rezoning should be done until there is a provision made for streets, which would open up all the property, not just the frontage. He has discussed with the City Attorney the possibility of putting through a 1911 Act to get a street through& As the major property owner in that area, this is hts legal right. The Public Hearing was closed at 8:25 P.M. Considerable discussion followed the hearing, during which time the Commission stated that they hesitated to rezone a large area to R-3 without a definite plan which would include alleys, streets and other improvements. If Mr. Koyl were granted the zone reclassification, he would be free to go in on privately owned streets and develop the property without any restrictions on improve- ments. They felt the City would benefit if all the owners of the property in question would work out a plan together, rather than as individuals. MR. KOYL pointed out that FHA would impose certain restrictions on development of this property, and that the rezoning of this 200 feet would not in any way affect any future plans for a street extension or other development. Comm. Zahler made a motion that the hearing be continued on these three parcels of land due to the fact that of the three property owners in question, two have requested that it not be rezoned until there is a complete plan. Cmissioner Zahler withdrew his motion. It was moved by Comnissioner Netka, seconded by Commissioner Miller that Resolution No. 149 be adopted denying the request to rezone the easterly 200 feet of Assessorts parcels 10 and 11, Book 35, Page 35, for the following reasons: 1. If the zoning request were granted, it could lead to further develop- ment which would landlock certain parcels in the area under consideration. 2. It is in the best 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 by the City. The Chairman called for a roll call vote: AYES: Chairman Stringer, Commissioners Netka, Zahler, Ward, Thomas, NOES : None ABSENT: None Miller and Jarvie. 7- CONTINUED HEARING - Reconsideration of Koyl rezone request. The reconsideration of the request for rezoning of the Koyl property was discussed along with the other two parcels in item 6 of the agenda. It was moved by Commissioner Ward and seconded by Commissioner Netka that the Secretary send a memorandum to the City Council stating that there was no change in their previous decision to deny Mr. Koyl's request for reclassifi- cation for the following reasons: 1. The Comnission feels that their original stand on the matter was well taken and they see no difference in the disposition of the property now and when the original hearing was held, as there is still no over-all plan for this area. 2. There is a committee of the Planning. Commission working on an over- all plan for the area. Seven ayes, motion carried. 8- Report of Committee on industrial zoning. Commissioner Thomas, as Chairman of this Committee, reported that the Cananittee met with Mr. Thornton of the Engineering Department; Mr. Arnie Stringer, Chairman of the Planning Commission;and Mr. Harry Price, Secretary of the Planning Cmissicm,to discuss ti plan for re-zoning all land parcels located between Chestnut and Tamarack Avenue, and Roosevelt Street and the A.T. & S.F. Railway right-of-way, owned by Mr. David Dinius, Mr. Archie Koyl and Mr. Tolbert . They felt that because of the land-locked nature of some of this property there should be a general plan agreed upon to develop the entire area. They recom- mended the following courses of action: 1. Mr. Dinius circulate a petition through the Zngineering Department requesting a new street be constructed between Chestnut & Tamarack (extension of Tyler). The Committee understands that a 1911 Act can be introduced to force the other property owners to agree to the new proposed street. 2. After this street has been authorized azJ for all practical purposes completed, the Planning Commission will institute a zone change for the entire area 9- Report of Committee on Sidewalks in Subdivisions. The Secretary read the recmendation of the Committee on Sidewalks in Subdivisions that the Subdivision Ordinance not be changed relative to side- walks, but that the City Council make a statement of policy requiring side- walks in all subdivisions on the recmendation of the City Engineer and the Planning Commission. The Secretary then sumnarized a memorandum dated January 29, 1960, from Mr. Thornton of the Engineering Department stating that upon checking into the requirements of surrounding cities with regard to sidewalks in subdivisions, it was found that San Diego, Escondido and Oceanside all have requirements similar to our own. The Engineering Department recommended that the existing Subdivision Ordinance not be changed with regard to sidewalk requirements and that the City Planning Commission require sidewalks upon the recommendation of the Engineering Department in its iZesolution of Approval of a subdivision. Discussion was given the matter, after which Commissioner Netka moved and Commissioner Jamie seconded that a memorandum be sent to the City Council requesting than to establish a policy requiring sidewalks in all subdivisions upon the recomnendation of the Engineering Department and that they adhere to this policy. Seven ayes, motion carried. After further discussion Conmissioner Zahler moved and Commissioner Netka seconded that the above motion be amended by including in the memorandum that those subdivisions with lots of 90 foot frontage or more be excepted from the sidewalk requirement. Seven ayes, motion carried. Added discussion was given to this after which Commissioner Miller moved, seconded by Conmissioner Zahler that the motion just passed be reconsidered. Seven ayes, motion carried. Commissioner Netka then moved, seconded by Commissioner Ward, that a memorandum be sent to the Council asking them to adhere to a policy of requiring sidewalks in all subdivisions upon the recommendation of the Engineering Department. All ayes, motion carried. After some discussion by the Commission, it was moved by Cammissioner Zahler and seconded by Conmissioner Netka that Kesolution of Intention No. 14 be adopted to consider a recommendation to the City Council that Ordinance No. 9060, Article 5, Section 507 be amended to read: (2)”Lots required to have a minimum lot area between 10,000 square feet to, but not including 15,000 square feet, 75 feet.” (3) “liots required to have 15,000 square feet or more, 90 feet.“ The Chairman asked for a roll call vote: AYES: Chairman Stringer, Connnissioners Netka, Zahler, Ward, Thomas, NOES : None ABSENT: None Miller and Jarvie. -5- Resolution of Intention No, 14 adopted. 10- By proper motion of the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 1O:OO P.M. Respectfully submitted, Secretary