Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1963-03-26; Planning Commission; MinutesI !CITY OF CARLSBAD I * 1 I 8 I I '., 'b -', %, b, ', b*' I '5, ", *%, 'b, '.,'x. t N a me '3, '\%. '*.,'\++, : of '.+a, '\ ',&IO ,\ 9, i I MInutes of: PLANNMG CGMMISSICN 3' \\*\'\ ',','. :Date of Meeting: March 26, 1963 I \ \'\ x" !Time of Meeting 7:30 P.M. Council Chambers :Place of Meeting: :"""""""""~"""""""""""""""""""""""""""":""~""."""~-~"."~~"~~~ : Member ~$$$,@&\, 8 I I *I I :ROLL CALL was answered by Commissioners Davis, :Grant, Ewaid, Palmer, Jarvie and Sonneman. Commis- Isioner Ward was Absent. Also present were City Attorney: ;Stuart C. Wilson, Planning Technician Uhland B, Melton i :and Secretary Frice. I ! * I I I ! [APPROVAL OF MINUTES: I i (a) Minutes of the regular adjourned meeting of I ;;;a; * ;I;:: !March 4, 1963. Since the Commissioners had not 1 It;:: jreceived cop€es of these minutes, Chairman Ewald waived I *:@;I ::VI; :approving them until they receive copies. I ii!!: I Davis ; ; jx! ; (b) Minutes of the regular meeting of March 12, 1963, i Grant : I {Xi ; ;: : : :xi : 1 : Palmer I :x ;x; : I i ~arvie i i ;xi i ! : Sonneman ix: :x! ! I I I :were approved as corrected. ; Ewald I i WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: ! I (a) Secretary Frice read in part a card thanking the :Commission for their consideration from Mrs. Sousa. I ! I I !ORAL CUMMUNIGATIONS: I I I I (a) There were no oral communications from the 1 I I I 1 I i audience. I (b) Six months report by Fla4ing Technician. i Chairman Ewald deferred the six months report of the i Planning Technician until later in the meeting, I I I I I I !TENTATIVE. SUBDIVISION MAP - OCEAN VIEW ESTATE$. I I i 1 I I !The Secretary certified to the mailing of notices to :adjacent property owners and then read the recommtnda- I jtions from the various departments and agencies. Secretary Frice read a letter dated March 12, 1963 from i ithe Wonda Brothers I Incorporated, 3544 Monroe ,, Csrlsba?, :opposing the tentative map of Carlsbad Investment Corpord- ition because the proposed ingress and egress would split itheir property causing great severance damage, take away: : land on which they have carnations planted, and because thb :proposed extension of Donna Drive would run through their: I I b I 1 b . :property rendering another large three acres of their land useless for their agricultural purposes. I I I I I I 1 . !Upon the Shairman's request Mr. Melton explained the ' 3, !location of the proposed tentative map to the Commission4rs. :Chairman Ewald asked the representative for the I * I I I I I * I 1 I Carlsbad Investment Corporation to speak. I i BOB WATSON, 2965 FlooseveR Ste ,Carlsbad, representing ; {the Carlsbad Investment Corporation stated Donna Drive fs :is an established street and now dead-ends on the Honda : :property. It would be reasonable to assume that a condi- i I tion of acceptance could be made pertinent to the ingress ; i and egress into the subdivision. It is doubtful that we can i ; use our property in Seacrest to solve this problem as it : : is costly and the surrounding property owners would be i against it. Openiug Donna would also help in getting water! i service to the Seacrest area as wall as the Carlsbad :Gardens Area. If Donna Drive were extended, there would, i be an access to this proposed subdivision. : Lowell A. Rathbun, City Engineer, stated that the sub- : i division as proposed would require the opening of Donna i Drive from one of two ends, meaning improvements wouid; I I I I t I I I I * I 1 4 1 * I I I I I ! ! I I 6 * I I I I I I I I * * I I I I I 1 I I t I I 4 I ? 1 i;: 1.: I ! would have to be put in Donna Drive. The filing would , , .: L require the City to enter into an action by way of "erninen4 i domain", This would be a matter for the City Council. : : The map could be referred directly to the Council, becausi filing of this map would depend on ingress and egress.He : : stated the plan ahown on the wall would be satisfactory; also a plan to continue Southerly down Seacrest connecting i to Donna Drive. He stated he had found no general I I i objections to the subdivision and explained that the drain-: : age has to go westerly and into existing Donna Drive to Carlsbad Gardens. It would require water to be supplied i : from both directions as it is supplied only from one 1 I I direction now. Property owners would have to supply : ! easements from the Reservoir and go down on a dedicated: I street or easement to connect with existing water system i : in Donna Drive. Donna Drive is presently designed to be i a through street from Chestnut to Basswood. Mr. Melton asked what the City does about land-locked i : property; if the City provides access to these lands or if : i they do this in certain cases only. i 4 I 8 I I I I I I I I S I The Chairman stated the Commtsaion has no control over i ::;;:I : this and that the Council would handle this matter. I I : By motion of the Commission. the Secretary was Grant ;xi ;x: i : I instructed to refer the tentative map of Ocean View to the I Ewald : Council with reference to ingress and egress for their ; Fahner : \%! ; : 1: i consideration, and then the Council return the map to the i Jarvie ;x: : ; : Commission with their recommendations. ; Sonneman : ; ; ;xi : "('i * I : Davis : :x:xi : i @I I * ;x; : : '* 11 I 1 I I f!lr!! The City Engineer stated he would have a formal report i of his recommendations for Ocean View befofe %he next i I meeting. He stated the matter of eminent domain will I have to be decided by the Council. I I I I I I i THEG, METZGER, 3590 Ridgecrest Drive, stated he { lived next to the lot in Seacrest owned by Carlsbad Invest-: ment Corporation and asked which map is going to be : presented to the Council. 4 t 1 , I 8 1 The Chairman informed Mr. Metzger the tentative map ; will be submitted to the Council. I 1 I I . ' I 'as;; '::;I; ::;(:I :::I:: ;:::I ,::I:: I I ;t1:*; i Mr. Walwick, Attorney-at-law, representing Honda Brosi , i inquired if this map was being sent to the Council without : i and then at some later date if it would be returned with ; : further instructions from the Council, and the Chairman 4 :i 1 stated that this is correct. recommendations from the Commission for their study i :;;::: 4; 4 b ::;::: 9 1 I l!~l!l i I PUBLIC, HEARING: i R-l-4,OOO sq. ft. (Water Front one-family residentiai t zone) - Resolution of -ention No. 38 of the Carlsbad i City Planning Commission to amend Crdinance No. : i 9060 to create an R-1-4,000 sq. ft. {Water front one- i family residential zone). I I 4 I I I I i The Secretary read the notice of hearing and certified as I : to proper publication of notice of hearing. The Secretary! i then reviewed Resolution of Intention No. 38 . I I I I I I I The Chairman asked if there were any protests on this : ! hearing from the audience. There being none, he declare3 1 the public hearing closed at B:25 P.M. ! I * t 4 . i A discussion on the definition of waterfront property I :::;Il 'i I !!!(!I ': followed. I I , * 1 I ! c I I '"e t'.' * I I 1 I I I I ', 8 '% ' ', '\ I 1 I I I *8 '%,8*, 't,'*, ', 1 I I 88 '\ ', 8 b, '%,"\ I I -3- '* ','%$$' i I Member $'$$,$~$'. : :""""""""""",""""""""""""""""""""""""""-~""*""""."" , -," #" i The City Attorney said this was a matter of interpretatio4 I::::: I::::' 1 and the Commission would have to stipulate expticitly the : @I1::; : definition of waterfront property to avoid misunderstand- I ::I::; : ings in the future. I ::::I; I :::;I; I ;::::: Commissioner Davis stated that he felt the R-A zone I I ;:;::: I::::' :;*I;; ;::I:: I : ;xi : : I I 1 \\ ', *, '\ I i I Name of '"'*.c". \, I t ',??,8,d8 '?* 1 I I I I I I : included many uses which the general public were not I i aware of. ; to the next meeting in order that a clear definition of i Grant :xi !x; : I i "waterfront property" can be made and deletions under ; Ewald i ;xi : : Section 504-A, subsection (d) under Interior Lots and i Falmer : ; !X: i i subsection (d) under Corner Lots and Reversed Corner : Jarvie i i :x: : : ; Lots could be made. i Sonneman; :+x: : ; i Chairman Ewald asked Donald Briggs , Jr. , if he had any: ::{::: i thing to contribute. 4 6 ;::I:: I *I I ; and Corona Del Mar areas and he would be happy to take t#m !:;;:I I Planning Technician or any interested Commissioners wi? 4;;;: I him to see what other beach cities have done concerning ; l:;lll i waterfront property. I l:!s!l I I I ;*:h* ::;E:: I I By motion of the Commission, this hearing was continuedi Davis I 11 1) I I I :::I:! *I I I q:::; t::;:; ;:!:I: I 1 :II::; 11 I I MR. BRIGGS stated he was planning on going to the Newpdrt I I - 1 I I A short recess was called at 8:50 P.M. The meeting I reconvened at 9:lO Pa M. I * I ! I I PUBLIC HEARING: I I I I PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Resolution of Intention I No, 40 of the Carlsbad City .Tanning Commission to amedd ! Grdinance No. 9060 Article 9, Section 900, Subsection ; ! (2) by adding the words "and motels", and Subsection (3) i : by deleting the words "motels" and adding the following: ; I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I & t I * I I "Hotels and motels may operate restaurants as an i I accessory to their normal operations. Hotels and i I motels, "On Sale" liquor establishments and other ; I appurtenant services designed primarily for the con- i - I venience of the guests and provided that all access ; I shall be from a lobby, patio, or court yard and no i I advertising shall be visible from the street. I' I I I I I The Secretary reviewed the Resolution of Intention and : certified as to publication of notice of hearing. He stated: there was no correspondence concerning this matter. I I I I I * i No one in the audience spoke in favor or in opposition of i ; the proposed amendment. i The Chairman declared the public hearing closed 9:12 P.q. : It was agreed that this Resolution of Intention No. 40 be i * 1. That it would encourage the tourist business in the! I City of Carlsbad and that it is not economically desirable i to operate a Large motel or hotel w€thout a cocktail lounge:. I I I * I * I * 8 I : adopted for the following reasons: I I b I I 1 I ! .. - I \- , 8' ! Name ', 1 1 .' 8' ' : of : Member :""""""""""""""""~"~"""""*.."""""""""""*"~~"""-"" I i OLD BUSINESS: I I I (a) Height Limitations. I I I I I I Mr. Melton explained a map which delineated the proposejd : height limitation areas in purple. He explained in the. - i i purple area, 50' buildings could be built. I Commissioner Grant stated that this would only be the : beginning and that the Planning Commission could make I f deletions and additions as required later on. I I I I I I I I I I I 9 Commissioner Sonneman stated she had gone over the : areas in question again and that she felt too much area i i had been designated, and that some changes should be ; : made. ; Commissioner Davis stated he had been reading news - i i papers showing new buildings that were going up in various locations. He had paid particular attention to the: San Diego area and has found most of the buildings to be ! limited to two -stories, including apartment buildings and offices in the downtown areas. He felt perhaps more i : demand and evidence for height increase was needed I I before such a large zone as the one proposed was adopted; : We stated if an apartment building 50' tall were built on ; Ocean Avenue, it would create a parking problem. :*Mr. Melton stated according to the Ordinance, a 35' builbs..: i ing cannot be built on the ocean front right now. i Cornmissioner Grant disagreed that the Commission should -.! ; wait for evidence because he felt if it was properly pLann6d i ahead, there will be no problems in the future. However; : he agreed this should be carefully studied and perhaps the', i committee should review their proposal. I : Chairman Ewald agreed with Gommissioner Grant. He i i instructed the committee to go and look over the City i : again and to brirrg a revised proposed area in for conside$- : ation at the next meeting. I I I t I 8 I I I t I 1 I I I , I 1 I 8 I I I # * t * I I t I , I I I I I 1 8 I t (b) Lagoon Zoning. I After discussion, it was agreed the Lagoon Committee i i and Mr. Melton review the area between Fods Landing : : and the Shelter Cove development, and present their findibgs i to the Commission at the next meeting. i SIX MONTH'S REPOnT BY PLANNING TECHNICIAN: : Mr. Melton gave an oral report to the Commission. He noted that there was need for changes in the Zoning I I I Crdinance concerning industrial zoning; that a precise : plan of the ocean front property was needed, and that a i i better Farks and Recreation system should be developed.: : He also stated he had attended a Regional Planning Meetirig , i and that as a result of the meeting, he felt a smaller I district would be formed as Carlsbad is now within District 7 which is comprised of Los Angeles, Riverside,: : Orange and San Diego County. He informed the Commis-: i sion we are now a member of Urban Land, which sends I : magazines to each member each month regarding the ; i planning of all .areas in the United States. He then read ! : a memorandum which stated a cuhff date of 4:OO P. M.th4 i day of the meeting was now in effect. No correspondencei ! or business received after that time will be discussed : I until the next meeting. *With the consent of the Commission, Mr.. Melton asged * I I I I 1 I I I I t I I I t 1 8 that this paragraph be deleted. I t I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I I 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I 4 I 1 I I : I I I t 1 t I I I I I I 9 1 I I I I I I I I t 1 1 fi I 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8 I I $ I # t t I 1 I I I 4 I I I I I I I I : I I I I I I I I I I I I 4 I I I I I I I # I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I 1 I I 4 t b 6 I I * I I I : I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I -5- The Chairman thanked Mr. Melton for his report, The Commission instructed the Planning Technician to make written recommendations to the Commission when he found a change or revision was needed concerning plan- ning matters. NEW BUSINESS: ~~~~ ~ ~ ~. ~ There was no new business. ADJOURNMENT: By proper mbtion, the meeting was adjourned at 10:36 P. M. Respectfully submitted, UHLAND B. MELTON I Acting Secretary