Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1962-02-13; Planning Commission; Minutesr .. MINUTES CF THE CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 13, 1962 .e s The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M by Chairman Grant. Present besid the Chairman were Commissioners Davis, Neiswender, Kistler, Hughes, Jarvie and Ward. Approval of Minutes of January 23 , 1962. A motion was made by Commissioner Neiswender and seconded by Commissioner Hughes that the minutes of January 23, 1962 be approved as submitted. All ayes, motion carried. Written Communications: There were no written communications. Oral Communications: There were no oral communications. By unanimous consent of the Commission, it was agreed that this hearing be heard after item No. 7, the zone reclassification on property easterly of Pi0 Pic0 between Palm and Chinquapin. EEARING - VARIANCE - Request of Elmer Lamont and Verna 0. Geissinger for a reduction in required frontage from 60’ to 39’ in order to create a tot split on property located on the east side of Spruce between Forest and Yourell, being portion of lots 1 and 2 Cedar Hill Addition, Map No, 532 of the City of Carlsbad; and being parcel 7, book 156, page 6 of the Assessor’s Map of San Diego County. Notice of hearing was read. The Secretary certified as to publication of notice of hearing and the mailing of notices to property owners in the area. The Secretary then read the application setting forth the reasons for requesting the variance, There was one item of correspondence on this matter. Letter dated February 9 I962 from Bill Larson, 1405 Yourell protesting the variance and stating tht he does not wish to have the property values lowered in that area. VERNE GEISSINGER, 900 Adella, Coronado and 2370 Spruce Street, Carlsbad stated that he is the son of the applicants, and the reason they are asking for this type of lot split variance is to increase the property value. It would be better to have a lot with 80’ frontage to build a residence on, than to have two 59’ rots. It would also afford a better view as there is a two-story home across the street, and it would improve the value of the land rather than decrease it. He was granted a ’lot split awhile back, and these lots are adjacent to this property. Chairman Grant stated that the Geissinger home sets on the back of this lot and is a beautiful home overlooking the ocean, COMDR. GEISSINGER stated the 39’ frontage lot would be used as an entrance to the home in the rear portion of the parcel, and there is a ten foot wide driveway with the remainder of this entrance landscaped. -2- " There was i~o one present opposing this request. The Pulbic Hearing was cldsed at 8:14 P.M. Commissioner Jarvie stated that he did not think Mr. Larson under'stood the situation, as a house would not be built on the 39' frontage lot. 2. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. 3. That the variance granting the lot split with 39' frontage would not be creating a 39' buildable lot. 4. That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive general plan. The Chairman asked for a roll call vote. AYES: Commissioners Davis, Neiswender, Kistler, Grant, Hughes, Jarvie and Ward. NOES: None ABSENT: None Resolution No. 236 adopted. HEARING - RECLASSIFICATION Request of City Planning Commission by on of lntenaon NO. 46 to amend Ljrdin- %ha NO. y06u reclassrtymg'Fom Lone K-L to 'Zone K-5 ( 'mffrpre KesrdentlaLj on pm tyinpS3Pio Pic0 between F"F-7 a m an Magnolia, being portion of, Alles Avocado Acres Resubdivision, Block B, Map No. 2027, Book 204, Page 222, parcels 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6,and 1, 7 and B of the " - erty lying and Tamarack, Thrlm-Lands, Tract 236, parcels No. 2, 3, 4,aud 20, Book " -3- Assessor's Map of San Mego County. From R-1 to CI-lzoTLnT t'm -;;:le westerly 22- portion of Z cr_rm?ined, Hook 206. rage 050 of the ASSCssor's Map of San Diego County having a Line drawn paramwith and &sin5' perpendicular from the easteitF-wvco Wrive and 376' 4. southerly of Tamarack. The balance of tot 2 is to be R-3 excepting the 1U5' westerly and para1.M to the westerlyrmi;Zf-way of Adams keet which is t0 remain K -1. ___I) The Secretary certified as to publikation of notice Qf hearing and that notices had been sent to property owners in the area. The Secretary reviekred Resolution Of Intention No. 26 initiating this reclassification, and showed the property to be re- zoned on a map. There were no written communications on this matter. JACK KUBQTA, 3800 Skyline Road asked if this represented the first Commercia1 zone east of the Freeway? MAX EWALD, 3308 Bella Lane stated there is C zoning by Pirates Cove. The Secretary pointed outthere was C-2 zoning at the proposed shopping center on EL Camino Real. MRS. CECIL DUNNE, ,548 Tamarack asked if the Commission were having the C-1 zone hearing now See Insert 1 Page 10 Chairman Grant stated the C-1 and R-3 was being included in the zoning4 If Resolu- tion No. 26 is approved, the Geil hearing would automatically be approved. MRS. DUNNE stated that she is interested in the situation as it exists of today and not of tomorrOw. She stated that the parochial school that is going in on Tamarack would create more traffic at this intersection, and there would be more children walking to school on the narTow streets without sidewalks. She stated it would be spot zoning. Commissioner Hughes asked if the public hearing of Mr. Geil was closed and was informed that it was. ROBERT GARLAND, 3514 Highland Drive stated that he was registering a protest of this zoning because if it is zoned other than residential east of the Freeway, it might start a trend for neighborhood shopping centers. He stated that if that develops in the residential part of town, it would be a bad thing. He stated that it was true that most of the frontage on the freeway is owned by churches and the VFW but has a strong personal feeling against letting C zoning east of the Freeway as City has C zoning that is not being used. We stated there may be some aspect he is not familiar with and it may be that if a motel was built on this corner, it would be necessary to have a restaurant there also. Zoning should no* be done by precedent and feels it might create a precedent that might be harmful, Chairman Grant explained that the Travel Lodge is an establishment that does not have a restaurant, but other motels might come in that do have restaurants. -4 - LEONARD ROUND, 1144 Pine Street stated Chat it was an ideal corner for a commercial zone, and Tzmarack Avenue sh..)d.d be widened and should have sidewalkc It would attract business 90 C.arlsbad and would bring in more money. It would bring in motels and more residents, and the City should have wider streets. BILL ZEIDERFELT, 3750 Harding Street stated that he owns the Palms Vista Apartments and is in favor of this change of zone. He is very interested in this area and has invested a lot of money there. He stated the Senior Citizens' Villiage will be going in soon nearby and there will be more traffic and feels the streets will be improved. MR. KAY KALICKA, P. 0. Box 71 stated that he has improved about 75% of Tamarack and has worked it out with the engineering department as he has a lot of property on Tamarack. The more hotels and apartments the City has, the more people are attracted, as it is a recreational city. l3e has helped with widening the street east of Adams. Tamarack Avenue is a major street and will be widened. Planning requires planning ahead and not thinking of just today. Commissioner Jarvie stated it is better to have C zone in before residential homes are built, instead of waiting until they are built and then changing the zone. MR. MORTIMER BONDY, 1150 Pine Street stated that he feels the City should go ahead with this zoning if the Commission have the interest of Carlsbad at heart. MR. RICHARD PHARR, 956 Tamarack Avenue stated that as he has stated at three previous times that he is in favor of the zone change, and making Tamarack Avenue simular to Mission Valley in San Diego. He is in favor of changing this corner to C - 1 before residential homes are built. It is all in accordaxe with the Master Plan. Co-mmissioner Jarvie stated that the City has to look to the future and it is not spot zoning as there will be R-3 zoning between the R-1 and C -1. C'hairman Grant also stated that it was not considered to be spot zoning. JACK KUBOTA stated that he is opposed to having this corner zoned to C-l and if this is zoned because of its location being an off ramp from the freeway, then it is also feasible that the City would rezone the intersections off the freeway on Elm Avenue and Las Flores. MR. KALICKA/came to the defense of the Commission and seed that he had spent 15 years in City Pianning and has worked for about every major city on the West Coast. Planning is created to avoid getting into a hassle over the arrangement of property. It is a horrible thing, if after all the land is built up in fine homes, to find that it has been changed to commercial. That is one of the things that has changed the City's downtown business section and the problems they are now having, which is buying old houses up to make room for business. The fact that this land is vacant is better since it can be planned in advance. See Insert 2, page 10 MRS. DUNNE stated that she was not objecting to the R-3 zoning but to the corner which will be a thoroughfare. Lowell A. Rathbun, City Engineer, stated that Tamarack Avenue is planned as a major street with a minimum of 64' curb to curb width. There is room for further study on this. There will be a hearing on Tamarack from Highland to El Camino Re'al on February 27, 1962 before the Planning Commission, See Insert 3, pa e 10 LOWELL A. RATHBUN, speaking as a citizen stated that/spot zoning shou f d be considered as he does not see how the C-zone could be extended. MR. KALICKA stated that every community has a cluster of stores and buildings on. corners and the need and location are important. Industrial use on that corner would not be compatible to the surroundings, but it would not be spot zoning to zone one lot on the corner to C-1 . Commissioner Jarvie stated that he had worked for several hours on a committee at City Hall studying this, and they had studied the area thoroughIy and had con- sidered the need for users of the lagoon to have places to stay, and by zoning this corner the City could attract more tourists off the Freeway. Chairman Grant stated that he served on the Committee also and this corner would be a good attraction to tourists. The Texaco Service Station at Elm and 101 Freeway has been a good attraction for tourists. MR. EWALD stated that/spot zoning goes back two years ago. Property by the Freeway should have something to attract the people off this main artery. See insert 4, page 10 The Public Hearing was closed at 8:37 P.M. There was a discussion among the commissioners about setting a precedent for Commercial zoning east of the freeway, and Commissioner Neiswender also showed on the map the property to be zoned. A motion was made by Commissioner Neiswender and seconded by Commissioner Kistler that Resolution No. 235 be adopted recommending reclassification of this property from R -1 to R -3 and C -1 for the following reasons. 1. That the granting of this zone reclassification from R-1 to R- 3 would act as a buffer strip between the R-l and C -1 zone. 2. That it would enable development to attract tourist traffic off the U. S. 101 Freeway into Carlsbad. 3. That such reclassificiation will not adversely affect the general plan. 4. That it would be the best usage of the Land and would be surrounding property. comprehensive compatible with 5. That it is advantageous to rezone before other development of surrounding property would make this zoning incompatible. The Chairman asked for a roll call vote. AYES: Commissioners Davis, Neiswender , Kistler, Grant, Hughes, Jarvie and Ward. NOES: None ABSENT: None Resolution No, 235 adopted, A short recess was called at 9:OO. Reconvened at 9:15 P.M. ,- 5- CONTINUATION - HEARING - Request of Eugene L. Geil for zone Reclassifica- tion from R-1 to C-1 The Secretary requested that in the interest of the applicant that this hearing be continued to March 13, 1962 as the previous hearing wiIl not get to the Council until March 6. MR. GEIE and MR. KALICKA stated that this met with their approval. TENTATIVE SUBDVISION MAP 0% GLENVIEW ESTATES. The Secretary certified to the mailing of notices to adjacent property owners and then read the recommendations from the various departments and agencies. The Secretary then read proposed Resolution No. 334 incorporating the recommendations of the departments and agencies as conditions for approving the tentative map. The City Engineer stated that the surface drainage should be to Magnolia instead of Tamarack in item No. 8 and the map No. in the Fhsolution should be 1681 instead of 1881. He also stated that if considered as submitted will have to have a cul-de-sac at some time in the future with a road to Tamarack. The Secretary reported that the owner of the property on the south of this subdivisior belongs to Hubert L. Anderson. MR. METCALF stated that a real estate agent had contacted Mr. Anderson and that Mr. Anderson did not want to sell this property as he wants it in a whole piece. He is a navy doctor and wishes to retire here and does not want to be squeezed in and wants no part of selling or subdividing. The Secretary stated that after the time and money was spent by the City to try to improve Jefferson Street and then the property owners failed to participate; the City Council had passed statement of policy that any engineering done for block precise planning and street openings would have to be done at the property owner’s own expense. The City would do the engineering but the benefiting property owners would have to pay to have it done, if the property owner wants a precise plan for block planning for local streets within a block. Chairman Grant asked if the property owners were to ask the Flanning Commission : to prepare a precise plan for block planning, if that would take care of this matter, and that perhaps the Council might reconsider changing their opinion on this subject. MR. DON HOLLY, 2499 State Street called the attention of the Commission to Lots 13 and 14, off of Magnolia where the entrance to the subdivision begins. It was the engineer’s intent that it would do away with a future lot split. The reason this lot, on the east side of the entrance, is not part of the subdivision is that Mr. Metcalf wishes to sell this lot before the subdivision is completed. The Secretary asked that the item regarding lots 13 and 14 be deleted. Mr. Toby Thornton, -4ssistant City Engineer stated that the engineering department does not approve a lot split until the Council approves the final map. There are two separate pieces of property involved and 27’ would be taken off the property on the east and 27’ off the property on the west to allow for an entrance to this subdivision. The Secretary asked if they could apply simultaneously for lot split for public right- of -way? Page 7 of this Minutes is missing. -8 - The Chairman asked for a roll call vote. AYES: Commissioners Davis, Neiswender, Kistler , Grant, Hughes, Jarvie and Ward. NOES: None ABSENT: None Resolution of Intention No. 27 adopted. (b) Report from Parks and Recreation committee. Commissioner Neiswender stated that he and Commissioners, Ward, Grant, Hughes and Jarvie met with the Parks and Recreation Commission at their regular meeting to discuss a program to obtain funds for the Parks and Recreation. On February 3, 1962/the Parks and Recreation Committee of the Planning Comrnis..-' sion met with the Secretary at the foot of Hoover Street to stllrdy the land around the foot of Hoover Street and by Fox Landing for a park and swimming area. The Secretary had discussed this with Paul Ecke and he was most anxious to make possible the use of his land and for them to go ahead with their plan. See Insert 5, page 10 The Secretary p.repared a map showing the area planned for a park and bathing area. By a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously carried by the Carlsbad City Planning Commission at the regular meeting held February 13, 1962, it is recommended that the City Council take appropriate action to acquire by lease or purchase the following parcels of property in San Diego County Tax Assessor's Book West of Hoover 206, page 171, parcel 1 Joseph E. and Henrietta Stabile 14007 Morrison Street Sherman Oaks, California 206, page 171 , parcel 2 Warner and Mary Ecke 41 5 Huntly Drive Los Angeles 48, California 206, page 171, parcel 3 East of Hoover 206, page 172, parcel. 1 206, page 172, parcel 2 Wm. C. Dealy P, 0. Box463 Encinitas , Califarnia John Knife c/o Paul Ecke Saxony Road Encinitas , California Charles F. McCarver 209 Melrose Street Encinitas , California -9 - 206, page 172, parcel 3 Walter and auth Vogel c/o Faul Ecke Ssxony Road Encinitas , California 206, page 172, parceL 4 Oceanside -Carlsbad Sportsman's Club P. 0. Box 454 Oceanside, California It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that this property is ideally situated for development as a park and swimming area. The City h.as long needed additional park area and a bathing beach for purposes other than that which is available for surfing. It is further recommended that Hoover Street be improved to accomodate the proposed park, New Business. (a) Approval of the xquisition of walkway property from Forest #venue as an addition to the Buena Vista Elementary School Site. The Secretary explained that it wzs necesslry for the school to h2ve a letter of s.pprovd from the Planning Commission before the school can disburse the money for it. A motion was mAde by Commissioner Ward and seconded by Commissioner Neiswender that a letter be prepared by the Secretary .lpproving this matter. A11 ayes, motion carried. (b) Congress Director and his alternate. A, motion made by Commissioner Hughes and seconded by Commissioner Davis, appointing C.ommissioner Grant 3s Fhnning Congress Director and Commissioner Jarvie as the alterndte. 11 ayes, motion cdrried. (c) Letter to San Diego County Planning Commission requesting zoning of area outside City Limits of Carlsbad. The Secretary reported that he hsd a letter dlted February 9, 1962, to the Pl3nning Commission from the Wake Up And Let's Grow Committee, a committee appointed by the Mayor to survey future city boundaries, industrial site, and future planning of those areas not presently within the Csrlsbnd City Limits. which met February 1, 1962. They requested the Commission to advise the San Diego County Planning Commission that the area presently within the boundaries of the C :rlsbad Municipal Water District is under study for future planning of that area. Also that the Carlsbad Planning Commission would appreciate it if the County Planning Commission receives any applications for condi &ional use permits in this area * that the City be notified before the granting of any permits. The Secretary prepared a letter to be sent to the San Diego County Planning Commission with a carbon copy sent to Supervisor Robert Cozens. The Secretary reported that the reason for this is that anybody can put something in now and we cannot stop them. There was a discussion among the Commissioners regarding this matter. The Secretary stated that the wishes of the City would be given consideration by the County Planning Cornmission of any zoning in this area. - 10 - A motion was mdde by Commissioner Dsvis 2nd seconded by Commissioner Hughes that the letter from the Planning Commission requesting action from the San Diego County Planning Commission be Ipproved. 1\11 ayes, motion carried. Chlirman Grmt/st;sted thlt the Council is going forw2rd and making progress by directing the PLmning C,ommission. He also stated thd Commissioners Ward. Davis and he are to meet at the Encinas' Power Plant in Mr. Prouts office at nine on the following Friday . See Insert 6, page 10 There was a discussion regarding pan handling lots and it was requested that this be listc d on the Agenda for the next meeting Febru2ry 27, 1962 under Old Business. Mjournment . By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 10:50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, c .._ J: H. PRICE, Secretary J. -H. PRICE, Secretary Chairman Grant requested the following changes be made: INSERT 1, page 3, paragraph 7. Chairman Grant stated the C-1 and R-3 was being included in the zoning. If Resolution No. 26 is approved, the Geil Continued Hearing would be heard tonight after Item 7 on the agenda. INSERT 2, page 4, paragraph 10. MR. KALICKA stated that he had spent 15 years in INSERT 3, page 5, paragraph 1. LOWELL A. RATHBUN , speaking as a citizen stated thht this was spot zoning and spot zoning should be considered as such, as he does not see how the C-zone could be extended. INSERT 4, page 5, paragraph 5, MR. EWALD stated that property by the Freeway should have something to attract the people off this main artery. INSERT 5, page 8, paragraph 4. On February 3, 1962 members of the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Planning Commission met at the foot of Hoover Street