Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-08-11; Planning Commission; Minutes-- CITY OF CARJ--SBAD. MEETING: PLANNIrrti COMMISSION MEETING DATE : AUGUST 11, 1976 TIME: 7.:30 P.M. PLACE: COUNCIL CHAMBERS # CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called ROLL CALL Commissioner Nelson ab PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES to order at 7:30 P.M. sent. Minutes of July 28, 1976 - Approved. I Minutes of August 4, 1976 - Approved. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Case Nos. SP-14, ment Corp. Requl est and for CUP-122, Santa Anita Develop- approval of a drive-thru res- taurant and amendment to Specific Plan to incorporate site plan modifications. a) Case No. SP-l46(A) Supplement, Santa Anita Develop ment Corp. - Request for approval of architectural elevations for McDonald's Restaurant. Planning Director Donald Agatep told the Commission that the applicant in writing had asked that the above matters be continued to the meeting of August 25, 1976 s.0 that they might work out alternatives to the restaurant. A motion was made to continue to the August 25, 1976 meeting Case Nos. SP-l46(B), CUP-122 and SP-l46(A) New Case No. ZC-181, James B. Maguire - Request for Zone Change from R-1 to R-2. Assistant Planning Director Bud Plender advised the Commission that the subject property is located in an area of density transition, and that the transition from the existing single family character in this area. to a medium density residential area represents a pro- gression towards the fulfillment of the General Plan. William C. Esterline, 2025 Westwood Drive, Carlsbad said that he was present to represent the applicant and that he and his wife owned 4 of the property. They intend to build a duplex with 2,000 sq, ft (1,000 for each side with 2 bedrooms each). He also said that the applicant concurred with staff's recommendation and conditions. Pr es ent Absent Motion Ayes Absent Motion Ayes Abstain Absent Motion Ayes Abstain Absent X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X I L X X, X X X X CITY OF CAFLL.SBAD. MEETING: PLANNIlLrj COMMISSION MEETING DATE : AUGUST 11 , 1976 TIME: 7-:30 P.M. PLACE: COUNCIL CHAMBERS Page 2 Alvin Rose, 1060 Chestnut, Carlsbad stated that he did not see why there had to be spot zoning (the whole area is R-1 so why allow a duplex in the middle). Maria Fischer, 5806 West 74th St., Los Angeles, CA. said she owned property on Adams and stated that i.f the Planning Commission rezoned one lot, why not rezone the entire block? Winifred McMahen, 3551 Highland Drive, Carlsbad said that she didn't believe in spot zoning and wanted the town to remain in the concept of a village. Commissioner Watson asked the staff to address the question of spot zoning as it relates to density and the General Plan. Planning Director Agatep said that generally speaking, spot zoning was attributed to an act that a government entity takes to create a use that was not planned for and was out of character with the rest of the neighbor- hood. In this particular instance, he could understand why people might think this was spot zoning. The General Plan recommended that the ultimate development for the property fronting on Eureka and most parcels fronting on Chestnut to be developed in other than sin le family development. He told them that'the app 9 ication before them was a zoning request that would implement policy recommendation and in that context would not be interpreted as spot zoning. Commissioner Rombotis stated that he was concerned about the residential integrity of the housing and the neighblr- hood on Chestnut. There was then discussion by the Commission regarding the General Plan and that there had been much input from the citizens of Carlsbad and ttiat this zone change was consistant with the General Plan. A motion was made recommending approval of ZC-181 per Motion x the recommendations and conditions in the staff report. Ayes xxx X X '. 1 1 il 'i I' ill I 'i 1 Noes X Absent X Case Nos. PUD-2 and CT 76-'8, Ed Ebright - Request for approval of creation of a 6-lot condominium subdivision to accommodate 6 single-family detached homes. Assistant Planning Director Bud Plender gave the staff presentation stating that the Land Use Element of the General. Plan designated this area for 0-4 dwelling units per acre and. this project would have 4 units per acre. Public facilities are already available in this area, thus there are no reasons why this area should not be developed to its potential. The Commissioners then discussed whether or not this project should have a public or private street, whether ~ the sewer should be public or private, how parking woulj ~ be handled on this street with a cul-de-sac, who would maintain the private street and private sewer system, lighting for the private street, easements for the sewe-, and how drainage would be taken care of. Ed Ebright, 3147 Jefferson Street, Carlsbad said that he had worked with the Planning and Engineering Depts. and concurred with all conditions except Condition #24 which called for a public sewer with a 15 foot wide easement. Mr. Ebright then read two letters, one from Richard Osburn, Director of Building and Housing, the I I l~ ~ ! 1' !/I!! I! CITY OF CARSBAD - MEETING OF: PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: AUGUST 11 , 1976 TIME: 7:30 P.M. * PLACE: COUNCIL CHAMBERS Page 3 other from H.E. Brooke, Consultant, recommending the use of private sewers with private maintenance. Doug Harwood, 997 Eolus, Leucadiit, California said that ,he had property on Park Dr. and was really impress.ed wi the PUD in that it allows more utilization of property for housing. He also said that he liked the idea of smaller communities and was in favor of this type of project. Thom McMahen, 3551 Highland Drive, Carlsbad stated that he owned the home just north of the proposed con- struction'site and that no where along Chestnut and Magnolia was there more than R-1 housing. He felt that the proposed development would not be in conformance 'with th area. He also told the Commission about his problems with the City and his having to put in a private sewer after payi.ng the City an assessment fee. Mary Casler, 3843 Highland, Carlsbad stated that did not necessarily speak in opposition, but did a question. She said that it was her understand that a PUD would comply to the underlying zoning the zoning in this area was R-1 and R-;-10,000. she have and i ng Mr. Plender advised her that City Council Resolution No. 456 states that properties fronting on Highland must have minimum frontage of 75 feet and a minimum area of 10,000 sq. ft. Those lots to the east of the one fronting on Highland are zoned R-1-7500. He said all lots of the Planned Unit Development met the zoning requirements. Winifred McMahen, 3551 Highland Drive, Carlsbad spoke in opposition to the proposed project because she felt Highland was too narrow, no sidewalks, and very difficult to see children when backing out their own driveway. Felt Highland did not need this addi- tional traffic and that it did not conform to the area Commissioner Rombotis said that private sewers if built to City standards would not place an undue burden on the Homeowner.'s Association to maintain. Commissioner Jose said there was not sufficient parking on the private street, especially at the end of the cul-de-sac. Commi-ssion Watson said that he felt the applicant was premature in filing his applications and that more of the pro.blems discussed this evening should have been worked out prior to a public hearing. A motion was made recommending approval of CT 76-8 per the recommendation and conditions outlined in the- staff report deleting Condition #24 as written and add- ing a Condition #24 which would allow a private sewer and to also add a Condition #25 requiring ornamental street lighting on the private road. A motion was made recommending approval of PUD-2 per the recommendation and conditions ou,tlined in the staff report with Conditions #25 and #26 to be changed as listed above for CT 76-8. Case No. GPA-40, Pe R. Hadley - Re uest for approval ! of a 'General Plan A::idment from P-I 9 Planned Industria I to RRE (Extensive Regional Retail). ; -Planning Director Agatep stated that the applicant was out of the country and asked that this item be continued to the next regularly scheduled GPA hearing. \ h Motion Ayes Noes Absent Motion Ayes Noes Absent 1 X X X X CITY OF CAP”SRA0 .- MEETING OF: PL,\NNING DEPARTMENT DATE : AUGUST 11 , 1976 TIME: 7:30 P.M. PLACE: COUNCIL CHAMBERS Page 4 - - - A motion was made that GPA-40 be continued to the next X Absent and that it be renoticed at that time. xx x xxx Ayes regularly scheduled General Plan Amendment Hearing date ‘x Motion 9:30 P.M. to 9:40 P.M. - There was a ten minute break with all Commissioners present at 9:40 as were present at 9:30. NEW BUSINESS Agua Hedionda Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment, and Environmental Impact Report Commissioner Rombotis advised the Commission that he would abstain from voting regarding Agua Hedionda. and would not participate in the hearing of same. \ Planning Director Agatep then briefly outlined the intent of the Agua Hedionda Specific Plan and reminded the Commissioners that there would be a special public hearing on August 18, 1976 at 7:30 P.M. 1O:lO P.M. to 10:15 P.M. - There was a five minute breac with all Commissioners present at 10:15 as were present I! at 1O:lO. I i La Costa, Partial Master Plan Amendment, Report and I Recommendation Planning Director Donald Agatep gave the staff presen- tation stating that the City Council held a.Pub?ic-Hear- I l ing on the Proposed La Costa Master Plan Amendment on June 15, 1976. Prior to hearing the matter, the .Council considered adoption of the new Planned Community Zone. Therefore, certain elements of the Proposed La Costa Master Plan were not consistent with the new zone. Council Action directed Staff to return the Master Plan i to insure compliance with the new Planned Community Ordinance. The Council further directed Staff to pro- ceed with a partial Master Plan Amendment which would allow three areas to be processed independent of the total revision. The Partial Amendment involved the areas known a.s Santa Fe Knolls, Rancheros de la Costa, and a resubdivision of a portion of.La Costa Vale Unit No. 2. The City Council requested a Planning Commissiol report and recommendation on this Partial Amendment. I The Commission then discussed each of the three areas and their relationship to the the Planned Community Zone. The Commission spent a considerable amount of time reviewing La Costa Vale Unit No. 2 as its total concept had changed drasticaly and it was being proposed to be .a single family residential development with “0” side yard setbacks. The Commission was very concerned about the number of residences proposed per cul-de-sac and the lack of parking. ~ Mr. Fred Morey, Vice President, La Costa Land Company asked the Commission to approve this partial .amendment I since they had been working on the La Costa Master Plan for over 1% years and it still was not approved and i they are unable to proceed with any developments until it is approved. He felt it was unfortunate that the P-C Zone was adopted prior to the Master Plan being adopted. A motion was made to approve the partial amendment as Motion X it concerned Santa Fe Knolls and Rancheros de la Costa Ayes xx X X Xi but to delete La Costa Vale Unit No. 2 until the Com- Abstain X ‘I mission is provided with additional information from 1 the staff regarding compliance with the P-C Ordinance. I ! .. I ‘I I ~ i I Absent X j I DATE : AUGUST 11 , 1976 TIME: 7:30 P.M. PLACE: COUNCIL CHAMBERS Page 5 \ L Information Reports - The Planning Commission was ad- vised by Assistant Planning Director Plender that if they were interested in receiving information reports on subjects of interest to them to let the Planning Department know of these topics and the staff would prepare reports on same. Sign Violation Enforcement - A Minute Motion was made directing staff to notify the City Manager that the Planning Commission would like to have an enforcement program which would employ at least a part time enforce ment officer to enforce all zoning violations. Street Tree Requirements - This item was continued to a light Planning Commission Agenda or a Workshop shall be set up to discuss this item. , Work Program - 1976 - The Commissioners are to submit priority lists to the Planning Department by Tues, August 17, 1976, and this item will be placed on the August 25, 1976 Planning Commission Agenda. ADJOURMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M. Motion Ayes Absent \ \ ‘ \\.\\ L