Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1964-04-14; Planning Commission; Minutes<- i CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION i Minutes of: I ',, "., '1 '\ 't : Date of Meeting: April 14, 1964 ~"""""""~""""~"""~"""""""""""""""""""""";"-----"""---" : Member \% $38.~$? ""*"" 4 : ; ROLL CALL was answered by Commissioners Davis, I :;:::: Ward, Grant, Palmer Jarvie, Lamb and Sonneman. Als4 ; present were City Attorney Stuart C. Wilson and City i i Planner Uhland B . Melton. I I ii: 11; i APPROVAL OF MINUTES: ; '\, '.,.,, ", ',,',8 .. I I I I I I I ,' I , ',* ', ' I ', ', ', Time of Meeting: 7:30 P. M. i Name'b'.\\$ '*,"Q i : Place of Meetiug Council Chambers : of .+% "?d@.,qJ,*\@ *.,$$/ ; : I I ;;;&;: :::;:I I1 :::;:: :I:;;; I' I I::::; ? I :;;:;: I ::i:!i ; ;x: : ; I I Grant 3c; ;xi ; ; I : Palmer : : ;x: ; ; I Jar vie , :e I :x;x; ; ; I I ' : :x: i I i Sonneman I ! ; i :xi t I :::::: i (b) Minutes of the regular meeting of March 24 , 1964, ! Davis I : : ;xi ; : i were approved as submitted. Ward ; jx:x: ; : I i Grant ; 1 ;x: ' I I i Palmer ; ; : !x; i 1 I I ; Jarvie p i :xi : I I Lamb ' * !x: i : I ; Sonneman i ; ; ; :xi I I I 11::;: I :::;I; I I I p;;:; ;ll'l; 4:::; ;:;I+ :I::;: 1:: I I ,:;I:: I ;,;::: 4 :ii::: I' I :::::; I :;;!!I i!!;;: i:iii; 8 ;;;::: I ;:p! I I ::;;:; !;;I,l *;*:;: I I ;:;;:: : Trustees of the Church. I iii;!; I ;;':I; i MR. GEORGE HANCOCK complimented the committee and ::I;:: :I1 I: I::::; I their program. lI*:l; ::;I;l ; The public hearing was declared closed at 8:04 P. M. I I .:'*::: ':::;! I i; i After a brief discussion, a motion was made to adopt * I ::;;:I ; Resolution No. 349 as read except that the off-street * parking shall be 1 space for each 6 fixed seats instead of I :::;;; ; 5, for the following reasons: ::;:;: I I I ::;:;: :::i:: : 2. That it is desirable to have the church in the City i I::;:; i of Carlsbad. I : 3. That it will b am improvd and benefit the Cityi 1 4. That it does not conflict with the overall plan. I I 1 I i I 'I I (a) Minutes of the regular meeting of March 10, 1964, Davis : ;x! ; : I were approved as corrected. ; Ward ;: It I I I I I I* I ; Lamb I II I I I I I) I I I 4 I' I I I;'I:I I WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: ; Letter from Parks and Recreation Commission regarding : I Planning, Parks and DMJM. After a short discussion, i staff was advised to inform Park's Commission that the : : Planning Commission will coordinate their Planning of i:;;;: : Parks. Staff was also advised to arrange a meeting with ; ;::, i the City Council and DMJM. i ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: i (a) There were no oral communications from the I ::; i audience. I * I I i:;:;; I I I I I I I I '1I;l; I I t I l@'I;: ;: #I' i 1964. i PUBLIC HEARINGS: I :: 'I; I *::Il : (a) Continued - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - To per-: iiii!: mit the use of a church in an R-1 zone at the Northeast ; :::;;, 4: corner of Monroe and Chestnut. Applicant: Pilgrim * I * ! Congregational Church. I 1 :;ii:: : Secretary Grant read conditions that were in agreement :I::;: 'Io;*; (b) The City Planner reported on the action taken by i the Council on Flanning matters at the meeting of April 7, i I t I I I I 1 ? 1,~*:1 with the special committee and the church members. The Chairman asked if thedc were any comments from the! I I I I I ;::;I; :;:;;: I I I I expfessed appreciation of the Commission's support of i I 181 I I I I I I I I '81, I I * I I :;:;;; I 1. That there were no objections. I I I I 1 1 I I b ! I I -2- I ! The following resolction was presentr?d: 1;;*,1 Davis : :x$ ; ; i Plannin Commission Resolution No. 343. A KESOLUTIdjV Grant : ; :xi ; : AL UamRW ON PROPERTY Palmer i : ;x: ; ; : AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF CHESTNUT AND MON- Jarvie ; ;x: ; 1 i ROE:'STREETS, was adopted by title only and further rea4- Lamb i i :xi i i ing waived. : SonEeman: ; I :x: I ; Ward $ i :x: I ; 11 I mmd&G A COmBITfON I( I 1;:;:; :!!+!I t I I I I ;Il;/ I I (b) RECLASSIFICATION - To consider a change from i : R-P to C-M on the East side of State Street between Beech and Laguna. Applicant; Robert A. Borden. I 1 I I I i The Secretary certified that the proper notice of public i I hearing was given in the paper, and read the application : ; and signature of those approving this application. ! I I I I t : There were no letters of communication on this. I The Chairman asked the applicant and any others in favor I i of this reclassification to speak. I I I I t ;i::i; I I I ;:;::: I:;;:, I I * I 1 I ROBERT A. BORDEN stated that he bought the property ! : 3 Or 4 months ago and made a complete study and believed: i this would be the best use of the property. The request I : for the 30' would allow parking between the shop and the ; i There were no persons present desiring to speak in oppo-i I sition to the proposed reclassification. I I : The public hearing was declared closed at 8:12 P. M. i The City Planner explained the location and the uses of th4 i property in the area. i After a short discussion, a motion was made to adopt I : Resolution No, 351 recommending reclassification of the office buildings in front on State St. I I I 1 I I 4 I 1 I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I above request for the following reasons: I I I I I t t 1. That the present use is not compatible with the uses i i in the vicinity in general. 8 I : 2. That there is a C-M use near the property in the i i same zone. : 3. That there were no objections. I i 4. That it would promote the general welfare of the i : community. I I : The following resolution was presented: Davis Ward I I I I I I I I I lanning Commission Resolution No. 351. A RESOLUTIGN Grant COMM&NITm~mL C'mGE OF ZONE ! R-P TO C-fi!? ON PROPERTY AT EAST SIDE OF STATE i STREET BETWEEN BEECH AND LAGUNA, was adopted : by title only and further reading waived. I I I I I I (c) VARIANCE - Reduction of front yard setback from ! : 20' to 5' on property on the North side of Normandy Lane I i between Garfield and Mountain View. Applicant: Eddie R4 : Vasques. I I ! The Secretary certified that notices of public hearing wer4 I sent to property owners in the area, and read the applica-i : tion. I I i Them were 3 letters in favor of this variance as they : area. i David Stoll , Captain Army and Navy Academy, Jr . Div .t, : Commandant I i W. C. Atkinson, President # : Robert A .KO% and Audry J. Kolb * 2480 Ocean St. I I I I t I I I I understood that similar variances had been granted in this! I I I I I I ! , 8 *,\',\*' I @ . t' I t I I 88 '*8 ', 8 8 ' I I ' , 8, ', '\ 8' I ',8 8, ' , 8. '* I (l/iem:pr $3$,.p.p.s, 1 , ,lw+ : :"-""",,"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""",""~ 1'1 I( : 5 letters opposing this 5' sz.t:lack as they felt thc setback I 1;;::; i should be the same . setback as the other buildings on .. L 841;;: i:::lb this street in order to give a more uniform appearance. :*ll;; I I 1;::;; 1. Hazel B. Robinson I ::;;:: ;;::I: :I::;: @l:ll4 ;;I:@@ :;;I;: I I ;!!;:; I I I I * -3 - I '8 ', ', ',, '8 '8 I I 1 I i pja me **,'*%, '.8'.$. I I ; of 'A!% ,,b84t89\ '* '%8 I )1#1' I I I I I I 2. Mr. and Mrs. Harvey R. Ling, 2424 Garfield 4 ::'I:: i 3. Clyde Downey, 2425 Mountain View Drive i tested as they felt tall buildings would dwasthe size of I : their small house. I i 5. W. D. Garrett and Lillian M. Garrett, 2382 Ocean St.: i John F. Doolan , 2445 Mountain View Drive wrote asking ! : that the City reconsider the widening of Normandy LaEe ai I the flow of traffic does not warrant this act acd would : cause harassment on their well being if the traffic is rnov{d I I :;:::! $1 4. John F. Doolan, 2445 Mountain View Drive also pro- {L: . - . I I I I I closer to their bedroom window. I I I I I I i The Chairman declared the hearing open and asked if the ! : applicant wished to speak. I I : MR. ED VASQUEZ stated that the reason for asking for i this variance is that the lots are small, 50' x 50', and in ; I order to build the apartments of this type it was necessari i to use every square foot that can be used, and it will be : I one of the nicest apartments in the City. The parking will! ; be below in the basement. He pointed out that similar : i variances have been granted in the past and the precedent I ; was set when the first apartment was built in the area wit! i a 7' setback and other variances in the area. He expects ; ; the apartment building to cost approximately $130 000. i i The Chairman asked if there were any persons present i : wishing to speak in opposition to this variance. 1 I i MRS. GARRETT, 2382 Ocean St. , statad that it is import!- ; ant to widen the street and the 5' setback would depreciate! i all of the property on the street. 1 HARVEY LANE, 2424 Garfield St. , stated that the variandes : on the other properties were there when the property was i in the County and did not know of any front yard variances: I that had been granted since the property was in the City. : There were no others present desiring to speak in opposi$ i tion. / MR. VASQUEZ I in rebuttal, stated that the entrance from! ; Normandy Lane would be a walkway and the cars would i I enter from Ocean Ave. He does not see any reason for I i widening of this street with the Engineering Dept. , and th<y ; were sf the opinion that the 2 1/2' would not do much to : i improve the street. I # : The public hearing was closed at 8:45 P. M. ; The City Planner explained the location of the property, I I I I I I I I I f I 1 # I I I I # I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 $ the location of the existing homes and the setbacks on : Normandy Lane. I I i After considerable discussion/it was recommended that ; I the hearing be continued and that the Engineering Depart- : i ment submit a report on the widening of Normandy Lane ; and the Building Inspection submiha rcport in regard to ; I lot coverage when these lots are combined. I ! 1 the public hearing was reoppened;: I I ! A short recess was called at P:%l. Reccmvaxd at 9:35 P.iM. I ! ! The City Attorney annotmced ihat Ccrnrnissioner Sonnerna4 asked to be excused from the rest cf',the meeting. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 ! (d) VARIANCE - Reduction of fronk yard setback from I 20' to 15' on Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8, Tentative Map Monroz i Park Subdivision. Applicant: Jay Lear Inc. The Secretary certified to notices of the public hearing : being sent to property owners in the area and read the i I I I I 1 application. There was no correspondence on this matter. I I The Chairman asked if the applicant was present and any i others in favor of this variance wished to speak. I I No one pent spoke for or against this variance. The public hearing was declared closed at 9:40 P. M. 1 I I I I I I I I I I The City Planner expkined the reasons for granting the 15' setbacks on the cul-de-sacs. I t I I After a short discussion, a motion was made to adopt i Resolution No, 353 approving the reduction in front yard ; setbacks for the foLLowing reasons: I t I I I. That the variance is proper and the fact they are i lots facing around a cul-de-sac makes them irregular lotq deserving special consideration. I I I I I I 2. That there were no objections. The following resolution was presented: Planning Commission Resolution No. 353. A RESOLUTIO$'? Grant : : ix: ; I t;rmARIANC&.'AT SOUTHWEST-Palmer i : :xi : ; ERLY CORNER OF CHESTNUT AND MONROE STREETS,: Jarvie I !xixi ; I1 was adopted by title only and further reading waived. : Lamb li'lil I I I I (e) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - To permit building i tennis courts in an R-3 zone on property on Mountan View! Drive and Carlibad Boulevard. Applicant: Army and Navv Academy I I The Secretary certified that notice of public hearing were i sent to property owners in the area and read the applica- : I tion signed by W. C Atkinson, Jr . 1 I There were no written communications on this matter. The Chairman asked if the applicant wished to speak. MAJOR W. C. ATKINSON, JR. I Vice -President of the ANA, stated that he thought ihe application was self- explanatory. There were no persons present wishing to speak in opposition. The public hearing was declared closed at 9:48 P. M. The City Planner explained the location and plans for the : tennis courts and widening of the street,and of a street I ::;I,: vacation in the area. After due consideration, a motion 'was made to adopt Resolution No. 354 granting the reqcest for a condition.al use permit, and that the conditional use perrn<.t shall be I ili;:: granted in compliance with thc plan submitted by $he I t :;;:]: applicant, for the following reasons: I I I I I I I 8 I I I I 4 I I I I I I 1 1 I 1 * I I I 1 I ::;:;: :;;!:! I I !:;::I 1::;;: # 1 ::;&:I I I :::;:: ]::::I I 1;:I;l I ::;::: I I !::!:i ;::::; ::;::: I I I I :!;;:: ::: 6 :e :::I:? I 1. That it is simply a logical extension of the use of the 2. That there were no objections. applicant's physical education facilities. I I ! l!!l!l I The following resolution was presented: I I I ;:;:;; 1 I I Davis ::: : ; :x; :I: i : lannin&Commission Resolution No. 354. A RESOLUTION Ward i ; :x; 11 : ; AN GA COmONAL USE PkRm ON PROPERTiY Grant :xi :x: i : i AT EASTERLY SIDE OF MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE BETWEEN Falmeri ; :xi i f I adopted by title only and further reading waived. I I Lamb i i ;xi i I I l#;lo I ::!I:: CARLSBAD BOULEVARD AND OCEAN STREET, was Jarvie : ixjx: I 1 I I I I 1 : OLD BUSINESS: ! I I (a) Resolution of Intention No. 45 - Eureka Place be- I tween Basswood and Chestnut - Zone change from R-1 to : : R-3. ! I I I I : The Secretary certified that 12 letters were sent out to i property owners of the intention of the Planning Commissilon : to rezone their property to R-3 and read the comments on: i their replies. I I I I I I I I * The City Planner presented a map and explained the i different possibilities that the resolution,bf intention could ; cover. I I I I I I I After considerable discussion, a motion was made to : Davis : adopt Resolution of Intention No. 45 to include the entiee ; Ward block between Eureka Place , Adams * Basswood and Chest - Grant : nut Avenue. The motion did not carry. Palmer I : Jarvie I I I I I I I Lamb I I ; After further discussion, a motion was made to adopt i Davis : Resolution of Intention No. 45 to reclassify the property Ward i fronting on the Easterly side of Eureka Place between ; Grant ; Basswood and Chestnut according to the map prepared by Palmer i the City Planner I being Exhibit "All; and that it be ~~liiadul.qd Jarvie ; for public hearing and notices of public hearing be mailed ; Lamb i to all property owners within 300' as well as being publisGed : in the paper. i (b) Re solution of Hention No. 46 - Garfield between : i Cherry and Acacia - Reclassification from R-2 to R -3. i i The City Flanner reported that there were 4 property i : owners notified ofthis intention and 3 in the middle of the i block were opposed, and the property owner on the corner! i of Garfield and Acacia was in favor of this reclassificatio4. Davis : After a short discussion, a motion was made that this : Grant ; the property owners involved. : Jarvie I I I I I I I I I I I 8 I I ; Ward resolution of intention be abandoned in view of the poll of ; Palmer I I I I I Lamb I I The Chairman gave a report on the County Planning Con - I ; gress meeting he attended at Valley Ho in San Diego and i i explained the topics that will be discussed at the meetings; ; this year. I I 1 1 . I I : ADJOURNMENT: 1 * I * By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 10:47 P.M. t I I * b b I I I I I I 1 1 : Respectfully submitted, I I I I I I : Recording Secretary I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I * I !