HomeMy WebLinkAbout1961-10-24; Planning Commission; MinutesMINUTES OF THE CARESBAD CITY PLANNING COMMIS31CN MEETING
October 24, 1961
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Chairman Grant. Present besides the Chairman were Commissioners Davis, Neiswender, and Jarvie.
Absent, Commissioners Kistler , Hughes and Ward,
Approval of Minutes of October 10, 1961. Chairman Grant requested that Page 4, paragraph 6 be changed to read as follows:
"Commissioner Davis stated that details involving purchase, setbacks, division of property, etc. , were not subjects to be discussed here with property owners. "
Chairman Grant also requested that paragraph 10 on Page 4 be changed to read as follows:
"It wa6 eplained to her that it would be an advantage. The school would want to have a fence installed on the south side of her property and it would be desirable for the City and also the property owners. 'I
Commissioner Hughes was present at 7:35 P.M.
Commissioner Neiswender requested that Page 6 under Old Business be changed
to read:
"The Cornmigee on Parks and Recreational areas in subdivisions, with Commission Neiswender as Chairman, and including Commissioners Davis and Ward, submitted a detailed preliminary report and due to its importance recommended that this
matter be put on the Agenda under "Old Business" for the ne* regular meeting of
the Planning Commission, on October 24, 1961. "
A motion was made by Commissioner Neiswender and seconded by Commissioner
Davis that the minutes of October 10 , 1961 be approved as amended. All ayes, two
absent, motion carried.
Written Communications
There were no written communications.
Oral Communications
There were no oral communications.
Progress report on Parks and Recreational areas in subdivisions.
Chairman Grant asked Commissioner Neiswender if the meaning of the word "subdivider" be defined, and discussed size of subdivisions. He wanted to know
if any citizen who has a small piece of property, and divides it inwf is expected to pay these fees mentioned in Resolution of Intention No. 23.
Commissioner Davis stated that the committee feels the Resolution of Intention 23 is very important and the City Attorney had looked it over and saw no objections to it.
There was a discussion on annexing land south of the city +a Batiquitos, to the
City of Carlsbad, as the land south of here is prime land with beautiful views and an almost unlimited development potential. A large increase in ppulation is expected within the next 20 years. Property owners south of the City should be
approached on annexation with idea that we have something to offer them. Carlsbad mst create a perspective, profitable atmosphere, with no obstacles in order to
get people to annex to and develop in our city. Builders must be able to meet
competitive prices with Oceanside and nearby cities.
Commissioner Jarvie stated that we should investigate the property south of the City limits.
Secretary stated that the wor ang, in Resolution of Intention No, 23 .has to be
exact, and was it the intent of the committee that Article IV, Section 416 be
mandatory or permissive ?
By common eonsent it was agrced that the section should be permissive.
Chairman Grant asked who would maintain the Parks after they are developed and
who would take care of the lawns and insurance, as he had had a call from a
developer about this.
The Secretary stated that once the city accepted a park site, the city would be
responsible.
Commissioner Hughes states that he is opposed to this plan because he feels it will discourage building and subdividers in Carlsbad, as it would be too much for them to pay, and Parks should be acquired and dweloped out of City funds from a planned capital improvement program.
Commissioner Davis stated that he thought the builders could allow for this added fee in their plans, and feels we need parks with more recreational facilities, as the Master Plan for Recreation is mostly on the beach, Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and prospects of the use of the Eucalyptus Grove. Most of the beach is under control of the State. There are times of the year when the beach is not so &tractive and the parks would be an attraction to the city. In older cities, many subdividers have foreseen and given thought to parks. Any public improvement
beneficial to the public will cost the people some money. Special funds could and
should be built up.
The Secretary reported that he had corresponded with other cities regarding their plans for parks and San Diego wrote they had no such plan. Lakewood does not have a provision as it was almost completely subdivided when the City became incorporated. El Cajon requires subdivider to contribute toward Parks and Recreational facilities, and is a provision in the subdivision ordinance that a filing fee of $15. per lot will be required on final subdivider maps. Of this $15., $5. is utilized for plan checking, and $10 goes to the general fund to be used for Recreational purposes. It should be noted that this payment does not go directly into any Recreation fund, but into the general fund, and then an amount is allocated from the general fund for Parks, equal to the amount paid by subdividers.
TOBY THORTON, Assistant City Engineer, stated that a lot split is the same as a subdivision only more congested. Those considering lot splitting should participate in this planning as they are creating small subdivisions and are not obligated to put any improvements in at present. He feels that a flat fee would be better. At present the fee for submitting a tentative subdivision map is $25. for each sub- -. .
division, plus $2. for each lot in subdivision and goes into general fund to process engineering factors . The second step i;hi a $50. base fee, plus $2. per lot for improvement plan checking by all departments. Third, there is a $15. fee for
final map plan checking and approval.
Chairman Grant stated that Bob Watson calied him and felt it would stymie builders in the city and they would build outside the city.
DON BRIGGS, JR. , 3571 Park Dr. , stated that while he did not hear the Parks and Recreations plan read, he was against it, and thinks it is preposterous. It
penalizes any land owner who wants to subdivide, and doesn't think it would be
feasible. It would be injurious to developers because lots adjacent to parks would not be desirable. There would be unequal taxation and not sufficient facilities.
They would need park directors and lenders would not want to loan money. He
didn't think many subdivisions would be large enough to have a suitable park, as
people would not want small parks. He suggested a fee on building permits
instead of subdividers .
Commissioner Jarvie stated that he thought that the developers had the wrong
impression, as there would probably be about 200 homes before a park would be set up. There was a discussion among commissioners and they referred the
matter back to the committee for further study and report.
New Business .
The City Engineer stated that he had received letter from Mr. Butters , owner of the property, who submitted map with the letter, requesting relocation of water
main proposal. Certain lots were excluded by Resolution approving Le Barr #2
because of 16'' water main running through them. Engineer contacted property
owners adjacent to proposed relocation and Mr. Johnson was here in person. The engineer then presented the commissioners with a plat showing a 20' public
opening between Yourell Avenue and Forest, utilizing the westerly 20' of the Johnson and Le Barr Estates #Z property. There are 3 owners in area of re-- location involved and they need access for maximum development of their properties in tW lresidential area. As there is extensive landscaping and retain- ing wall on the Hier property, it would be better to locate public opening on westerly line of Johnson and Le Barr properties. He suggested when and if the water main is relocated that it be on 20' public way. As there is some $2000. involved, there is a problem of financing. If this 20' opening is approved, the Johnson property would be suitable for 3 building sites. The north portion of Johnson property would have its rear property line against the cul-de-sac on the
west end of Butters Road.
Mr. Johnson prefers his access from the west side, if .divided; also access with LO' from his property and the remaining 10' from owners to the west. He agreed that his property is large enough but felt he should be reimbursed if his land is used. The Johnson property consists of one acre. Mr. Geissenger prefers his access from the east side and Mr. Hier wants it the way it is, as they are an older couple, and are not interested in a lot split.
FRA NKLIN JOHNSON, 1156 East Grand stated he first heard it was to go on east side. When he saw Mr. Rathbun he found it was to go on west side. The reason he bought the property was because it was isolated. He could have 3 large
lots and intends to retire shortly and make a nice place, He was shocked to find
that a road was planned there. Although he is not opposed to it, the fact it is all
on his property has some draw backs. He would like something worked out so he
would not have all of the burden. He would not mind if others shared in the Cost,
as property could be developed.
Chairman Grant asked if city can work something out to the satisfaction of all the property owners.
Nk. Thomton wanted informal opinion as to the feasibility of the proposed plan.
The Secretary asked if Mr. Johnson is interested in opening this up as a public street.
The City Engineer stated that he wants the water main in a pubtic way so they can
get at it. The street would also provide needed access for these property owners, If the water main is placed in easement, property owners could place landscaping over it, and there would be no access to it.
Chairman Grant requested this be put on the Agenda on November 14, under "Old Business", and see if we have any answers to it.
The City Engineer wanted to know if the engineering department should continue along with this proposal about estimates.
The owners have sold about all of Unit 1 of Le Barr Estates and are ready for
Unit 2.
New Business.
The Secretary reported the Fall luncheon and meeting of the San Diego County P lanning Congress to be held Monday, October 30 , 1961 in the Paracel Island Room of the Islandia Hotel, 1441 Quivera Road, Mission Bay, San Diego.
Adjournment:
By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
J. H. PRICE, Secretary