Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1963-09-23 PC MINS MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA September 23 , 1963 The adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista was held at 7:00 P.M. on the above date in the Council Chamber at Civic Center with the following members present: Stevenson, Stewart, Comstock, Johnson, Willhite and Guyer. Absent: Member Adams. Also present: Planning Director, Fretz, Assistant Plan- ner Warren, Junior Planner Lee and Principal Engineer Harshman. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Member Guyer requested that the statement he made on page 8 of the minutes of Septem- ber 4th be changed to read: 112. Since the County ordinance allows 2 stories or 35 feet in a C-1 zone, the height of 28 feet is not excessive.'' MSUC (Guyer - Comstock) Minutes of September 4, 1963 be approved, with the correction suggested by Member Guyer. REZONINGS PUBLIC HEARING - Earl Gifford , Bill Knapp, Bill Lee Application was read in which a request was made for a change in zone for property located between Second Avenue, Third Avenue, Quintard and Palomar Streets. The property is presently zoned interim R-1 . The applicants request rezoning to C-2-P for a depth of approximately 440 feet on Third Avenue and the remaining portion of the block to R-3. The applicants further request a reduction in building line from 25 feet to 5 feet in the commercial areas and 15 feet in the R-3 area with 10 foot sideyards on street frontage of corner lots. Junior Planner Lee submitted a plot plan explaining the proposed rezoning. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the public hearing. Mrs. A. Klinovsky, 275 Quintard Street and Mrs . Edson Stewart,t,259 Quintard Street, spoke in favor of the proposed plan, stating a small shopping center would be most desirable in this location as it would benefit the neighborhood. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Guyer asked about the five commercial lots. Mr. Earl Gifford, one of the sub- dividers of the project, explained they propose to put a service station in each corner lot of the parcel , and a small shopping center with other features , such as a clinic, in between, making this a community service center. All entrances to this project will be from Third Avenue; the parking will incorporate approximately three acres and will all be in front of the buildings. The Commission discussed the grading and Mr. Ring, the engineer, stated they plan to put in a retaining wall near Palomar Street because the grade goes up here. To Member Johnson's question regarding the surfacing, Mr. Ring said asphaltic surfacing was proposed. -1- Mr. Gifford then spoke of the proposed R-3 development and said this would consist of four-plexes; the lot sizes will generally be 90 x 77 feet. Member Comstock questioned the setbacks requested and was told this figure was given to them by the Planning Department. , Member Comstock then stated the commercial zone proposed would create a strip zoning, which they were trying to do away with in Chula Vista. He added though the 440 foot depth of commercial was good, the Commission should think of controlled access from Third Avenue. Member Comstock said he doesn't agree with the 15 foot setback as being sufficient in an R-3 zone; he favors a 25 foot setback. Chairman Stevenson commented that since the greater portion of this is in the County, strip zoning will be here, whether the Commission likes it or not. Vice-Chairman Stewart felt that since a neighborhood shopping center was being created here, what we normally term ''strip zoning'' would not apply here. Chairman Stevenson asked Junior Planner Lee if he had a chance to match this rezoning with the sketch plan; Mr. Lee said he hadn 't had a chance to study this , as yet. Vice-Chairman Stewart said he felt the Commission should very carefully study all rezonings; but, in this case, although much of Third Avenue is abundantly commercial , he felt there was not an abundant commercial zoning in this area. He added the location relating to the need should be the basis for this rezoning. RESOLUTION NO. 280 Resolution of the Planning Commission Recommending to (Guyer - Willhite) City Council the Change of Zone for Property at Second, Third Avenue, Quintard and Palomar Street from Interim R-1 to C-2-P and R-3 Further, that findings be based on the following: 1 . It constitutes good zoning practice. 2. Required for general welfare and convenience of public. Resolution of Intention to Set a Public Hearing - Charles Hazard Assistant Planner Warren submitted a plot plan explaining the location of this proposed rezoning and asked that this be set for hearing. RESOLUTION NO. 281 Resolution of Intention to Set a Public Hearing for (Stewart - Comstock) November 4, 1963 for Rezoning from R-3 to C-1-P for That Property Located 150 Feet East of Third Avenue on Madrona Street VARIANCES ff. W. and Ora J. Blackburn The application was read in which a request was made to construct a dwelling which will contain approximately 990 square feet on property located at 62 Del Mar.Avenue. Assistant Planner Warren submitted a plot plan showing the existing surrounding dwell- ings and the square footage of each. The Commission then discussed the possible extension of Chula Vista Street. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the public hearing. -2- Mr. E. Blackburn, the applicant, said he and his wife would be the only ones living here, and felt the 990 square feet was adequate for them. The quality of their house would be comparable with adjacent houses on Chula Vista Street and Del Mar Avenue. There being no further comment, either for or against, thehearing was declared closed. Vice-Chairman Stewart commented that, without seeing an area map, he felt a lot of property here would become land-locked. However, he maintained the house was compatible in this area; he has lived nearby for a great number of years and can state this positively. Assistant Planner Warren stated that the land behind this lot could better be served from Third Avenue. He added that many of the homes in this vicinity were two-bedroom homes :thus making this one compatible with the area. Chairman Stevenson said he felt this was the key note in this matter. Member Willhite said the Commission must find something to base their decision on, since this one will set a precedent. He commented that the front elevation was attrac- tive and that, according to the staff, the houses in the general neighborhood contain comparable square footage. He also stated that there are now some changes being studied for the minimum floor area ordinance. The purpose of setting up the ordinance in the first place was to maintain standards in Chula Vista. Mr. Willhite stated further that if they approve this variance, they must do it because it would upgrade Chula Vista. Chairman Stevenson asked for the staff comment. Assistant Planner Warren stated the 1300 square foot ordinance was directed to large tract developments, and he felt, as far as the floor area was concerned, variation in this area was such that no trend was establishec here. In answer to Chairman Stevenson's question, Mr. Blackburn said his home would be valued at $13 ,500.00 Member Willhite commented that the residential committee on the master plan had recommended that 1200 square feet be .the minimum for homes in Chula Vista, plus a two- car garage. Member Guyer said the ordinance calls for "exceptional circumstances ," and they must find this. Vice-Chairman Stewart, however, maintained the exceptional circumstances are to be found for the "property or the intended use thereof." Member Johnson asked if this could be deferred for further study. Chairman Stevenson asked Mr. Blackburn if this would present a problem to him. Mr. Blackburn answered that it would present an inconvenience. Member Comstock reminded the Commission that there was no opposition from any of the neighbors. MSC (Comstock - Stewart) The request to build a dwelling containing approximately 990 square feet on 62 Del Mar Avenue be approved. Findings be based on the following: 1 . Granting this variance is necessary for the preservation of the substantial property right of the applicant, based on the fact that the 1300 square foot emergency ordinance was not in effect at the time the applicants purchased this property. 2. Granting this variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or -3- injurious to the property or improvements in the district in which the property is located. 3. Commission takes cognizance of the fact that the development of the 990 square foot building, as planned by the applicants, is harmonious with the neighborhood. No objections were heard from the neighbors. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Comstock, Johnson, Stevenson, Willhite and Stewart Chairman Stevenson based his "Aye" vote on the fact that the house was compatible in this area, as cited by Vice-Chairman Stewart 's comments. NOES: Member Guyer. His vote is based on the fact that no exceptional circum- stances applying to the property involved were found to justify granting the variance. . ABSENT: Member Adams. SUBDIVISIONS Aletha Park - Tentative Map Assistant Planner Warren submitted the map and explained the location of the proposed subdivision. Mr. Warren spoke of the meeting which he had with the people concerned with this subdivision, their attorney and the subdividers. They came up with a solution - to extend Cedar Avenue to serve these property owners. In this way, the subdividers would still have 20 lots and the street would be extended. Mr. Warren submitted an overlay showing this change. Mr. William Harshman spoke of the half cul-de-sac, saying he would rather see this put in now, rather than a temporary cul-de=sac. Mr. Mel Troop, speaking for the developers , said he talked to the property owners involved and felt this was a good solution; it would give these property owners a value they didn't have before by eliminating their land-locked pieces of property. The subdivider will develop 20 lots within the original subdivision boundary leaving a one foot lot at the north end of Cedar Avenue. At the same time, adjacent property owners will appoint a trustee to act for them and will put forth the money needed to allow the subdivider to go ahead and develop the other 5 lots. Mr. Troop added that he felt it was very important that the 25 lots be done at the same time. Mr. Schiff, attorney for the property owners , said he obtained a committment from the property owners that afternoon; the area will now be fully developed so that one will compliment the other. No problems are anticipated by the property owners. When asked by Vice-Chairman . Stewart, Mr. William Harshman, Principal Engineer, stated the engineering department would ask for a bond to be posted to guarantee the installation of improvements. Mr. Schiff commented that a cash bond, put up by the property owners , will be in escrow to cover the cost of this improvement. - 4 - Mr. Harshman said he recommended that a one-foot lot be provided at the north end of Cedar Avenue and Sierra Way, Member Comstock questioned the adjacent property owner 's parcels being divided into 5 parcels and asked if this didn't require a subdivision map. Mr. Harshman said this could be done as long as it was done by 5 owners. Mr. Roy Klema, engineer for the subdividers , said the street and the five lots could be included in their subdivision if the property owners appointed a trustee that could act for them and sign the map. If they could not do this , then the subdividers would dedicate the rest of the street so the City could make the improvements. MSUC (Willhite - Comstock) Tentative map be recommended for approval based on the following conditions: 1 . A one-foot lot be provided at the north end of Cedar Avenue and Sierra.Way. 2, Approval be based on the revision as suggested by the Assistant Planning Director. . Mr. George Fretz arrived at the meeting at this time. El Dorado Plaza - Tentative Map Assistant Planner Warren submitted a plot plan and explained the proposed zoning. He pointed out the R-3 zoning and said that if parking access were to be provided from the rear of the lots, the staff would recommend a 20=foot improved alley. The commercial zoning would extend to 440 foot depth from Third Avenue, Proposed rear access easement to R-3 lots would be one-way. Mr. Gifford stated that if the Commission restricted them to 20 foot alleys, it would be a financial hardship. They are planning to spend over th,srty million dollars on this project. One off-street parking space would be provided for each apartment; however, no carport or garage. The rear driveways would be permanent easements , Mr. George Fretz, Planning Director, stated that the City should be very careful about R-3 developments. He added that the staff would urge the Commission to impose larger lots and at least 20 foot alleys if rear access is used. Mr. Fretz said he doesn 't like the idea of a permanent easement over somebody's property to be used in backing up cars; it should be done right or not at all . He then asked the subdivider what problems they would have if they were asked to treat this as one large parcel and put in cul-de-sacs, Mr. G',ifford explained they proposed to have these lots as ''package deals'' so that they could sell them off easily. If they were to revise their plans, it would affect them money-wise and also the delay would be detrimental . Member Willhite stated it would be advantageous�.s, both to the subdivider and the City to have them revise their plans and put in a cluster-clan. Chairman Stevenson asked if there were any objections to this being held over until the next meeting - October 7. Mr. Gifford asked that the Commission approve this tonight and he will send in a revised map at a later date; the Commission declined. -5- The Commission discussed the setbacks and Member Comstock commented that the front yard setback of 15 feet could allow parking overhang on the sidewalks. MSUC (Stewart - Guyer) Postpone action on the map until meeting of October 7, 1963. . Assistant Planner Warcen explained that in arriving late, he failed to remind the Commission to recommend approval of the rezoning involved here, but that adoption of . the ordinance should be delayed until a final subdivision map of the area is approved. Member Guyer stated he would amend his motion to include this provision. Member Willhite seconded the motion; it passed unanimously. MISCELLANEOUS Findings on Planning Commission Appeal of Roy A. Cook The findings were read on the appeal of a zone change for property located at 706x, 706A, and 708 "F" Street from .M-1 to R-3 for a strip of land 61 x 706 feet. Member Comstock suggested that a statement be inserted in the findings pertaining to the recommendation made at the last meeting that a 'study be made of the entire area. Planning Director Fretz commented that. the corporation yard is proposed adjacent to this area. Mr. Ray Halpenny, owner of a trailer park near this location, spoke of a study he made of the area. He read excerpts from a letter he directed to the City Council . It concerned zoning of the corporation yard site. Member Comstock commented that the Industrial Subcommittee suggested that study be given to a long range plan to rezone the area between Broadway and 101 from "C" Street to Main Street in Otay; that restrictive commercial and industrial zoning be con- sidered in these changes. Mr. Comstock pointed out that there are 450 acres of tide- lands which are greatly restricted in use. MSUC (Comstock - Guyer) Findings be approved, with the suggested addition, and forwarded to the City Council . Floyd Avenue Street Name Change Planning Director Fretz reviewed the matter saying it was held over at the request of the Commission in order that the Fire and Police Department could be consulted. Mr. Fretz said he talked to both and was told it would create confusion. Based on this , the staff would recommend that the street name not be changed. Mrs. James Deal , 660 Floyd Avenue, summarized the situation as far as the people living on this street were concerned. She indicated that street signs , at this inter- section, were inadequate. The Commission discussed the street signs , and Member Com- stock suggested that the engineering department look into this situation and put a sign at the end of this street and another at the end of "J" Street, showing the block numbers. The Commission then discussed the possibility of Floyd Avenue going through to the north. Mr. Fretz said there was no possibility of this. Member Johnson asked if it could extend in the other direction. Mr. Fretz said this could be a possibility; how- ever, the original layout of Halecrest did not envision this. Floyd Avenue cannot be extended to the east because the topography descends abruptly. -6- Vice-Chairman Stewart said he could sympathize with Mrs. Deal to have this name changed; however, he wondered what they would tell the next group of people who did not like the name of their street and asked to have it changed. He added that the street name was put in here before any of the homes were sold. Member Johnson asked if there was any way of getting reimbursed for the street sign, should a new one be put in. Mrs. Deal said the neighbors would be willing to put up the money for this. MSC (Comstock - Stewart) Street name change be denied based on the recommendation of the Police and Fire Departments and the lack of basic justification. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Comstock, Stevenson, Guyer and Stewart NOES: Members Johnson and Willhite ABSENT: Member Adams Architectural Consideration of T. V. Sign _Bonita Valley Shopping Center Assistant Planner Warren explained that the City 's building inspector found three signs, illegally installed, at this location. The owner was contacted and is now asking permission to leave these signs here. Chairman- Stevenson asked if the signs conform to the ordinance, size-wise; Mr. Lee said they do. Mr. Mingo, the owner of the Television store stated the neon sign in front of the shop is the same one he had at his other location: 686 Broadway. The sign is auto- matically controlled, turning on at sunset and off at sunrise. It was approved by the manager of the shopping center. Mr. Mingo further asked that the 4 x 8 foot plywood sign which he has attached to his shop be to remain. The other sign is posted on the tree in front of the building. MSUC (Willhite - Comstock) Approval of the neon sign of the Television Store in the Bonita Valley Shopping Center. The other two signs must be removed. COMMUNICATIONS A letter from the Fire Chief was read in which he stated that a study made of the new and large apartment buildings in the City show that little consideration was given to access for fire fighting equipment to portions of these buildings. He asked that an amendment to the City Code be drawn up specifying that, if in the construction of two or more dwelling units on any one lot, the distance from the existing City curb line to any part of the building exceeds 150 feet, a paved driveway, having a minimum width of 16 feet, shall be provided to accommodate fire fighting equipment. The driveway shall be located in such a manner that the maximum distance from the driveway to any part of the building shall not exceed 150 feet. Vertical clearance shall be 10 foot minimum. Member Comstock suggested that the 20 foot front yard setback from the garage door to the property line be changed to 25 feet, and that an amendment be proposed for this and heard at the same time as the driveway amendment. Planning Director Fretz said this would be difficult to do as you would have to change -7- all the setbacks 'in the City; this should really be approached from an overall new ordinance. He added it would not be feasible to do it at this time. Vice-Chairman Stewart commented that when you get into expensive R-3 property, the front yard setback has to be modified a little. Member Willhite suggested that the amendment not state that the driveway must be approved by the Fire Chief or his authorized representative, as he was not in agree- ment that this man should be the sole judge of who is to put in a 16-foot driveway. Mr. Fretz commented, that as he understands it, they just want to be sure they can get within 150 feet of the building. Mr. Ken Lee stated that all plans for R-3 development automatically -t-e- to the Fire Marshal : for a routine check. RESOLUTION NO. 282 Resolution of the Planning C6m6ilasion of Their (Stewart - Willhite) Intention to Set a Public Hearing for October 7, 1963 to Consider an Amendment to Section 33.32 of Chapter 33 of the City Code. ADJOURNMENT MSUC (Willhite - Guyer) Meeting adjourn sine die. Respectfully submitted, Jennie M. Fulasz Secretary