HomeMy WebLinkAbout1963-03-18 PC MINS MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
March 18, 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 the Civic Center
with the following members present: Stevenson, Stewart, Weakland, Adams and Guyer.
Absent: Members Comstock and Willhite. Also present: Planning Director Fretz,
Assistant Planner Warren, City Attorney Duberg, City Engineer Cole and Principal
Engineer Harshman.
STATEMENT
The Secretary of the Commission hereby states that she did post within 24 hours of
adjournment, as provided by law, the order of the Commission for the adjourned meeting
of March 4, 1963.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
It was moved by Member Guyer, seconded by Member Weakland and unanimously carried that
the minutes of March 4, 1963 be approved, copies having been mailed to each member.
REZONING
PUBLIC HEARING (Cont'd) - Portion of Grout Annexation - Interim R-1 to Permanent R-1-B-12
Planning Director Fretz explained that, as yet, the principal property owner involved is
not prepared to make a presentation and wish another continuance.
Member Adams felt this should be the last continuance and that the property owner
should be informed that action will be taken at the next meeting.
It was moved by Member Adams , seconded by Member Weakland and unanimously carried that
the rezoning of a portion of Grout Annexation from interim R-1 to permanent R-1-B-12
be continued until the meeting of April 1 , 1963 at which time the Commission will take
action.
VARIANCES
PUBLIC HEARING - Bill A. Pappas - 669 Garrett Avenue - Setback
The application was read in which permission was requested for extending the roof
overhang on a portion of the south side of the dwelling to within two feet of the side
property line.
Assistant Planner Warren submitted a plot plan.
This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the hearing.
Mr . Bill Pappas , the applicant, explained the situation and spoke in favor of the
variance.
There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed.
-1-
r
Member Guyer commented that the 10 foot easement over the north side of this property
imposes a hardship on the lot. Mr. Stewart agreed and added that he felt one- foot
more on the overhang would not hurt the other property owner, and that the applicant
has justification here.
It was moved by Member Guyer and seconded by Member Adams that the variance be approved.
Further, that action be based on ,the following:
(1) The exceptional circumstances are that a 10 foot easement exists along the north
side lot line, forcing construction to be off-center.
(2) The easement deprives the applicant of the right to utilize the full buildable
area of the property.
(3) There were no objections from the neighbors.
The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Members Guyer, Stewart, Weakland , Stevenson and Adams
NOES: None
ABSENT: Members Comstock and Willhite
PUBLIC HEARING - George B. W. Manos - 172 First Avenue - Use
The application was read in which permission was requested to build six two-bedroom
apartment units (two-story) , in front of the existing house, an R-3 use in an R-2
zone. It was noted that 21 property owners signed the petition.
Assistant Planner Warren submitted a plot plan showing the proposed apartment building.
This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the hearing.
There being no comment, either for or against, the hearing was closed.
The Commission discussed the parking layout and the amount of spaces the applicant
will provide. It was generally felt that 7 spaces would be inadequate, even though
the ordinance would only require six spaces if the land was zoned R-3.
Member Weakland stated that apartments here would be out of place.
Vice-Chairman Stewart asked how much actual area is involved for the portion where
they plan %o,-.put the apartments. Director of Planning Fretz stated there would be
approximately 9450 square feet between the existing house and the street which would
mean each unit would have 1600 square feet.
Vice-Chairman Stewart said he felt this was overbuilding the area and that the
applicant should split his lot and put a duplex on the front which would be more in keepi
with the general area.
Member Adams agreed saying that this was not a regular R-3 area - it was R-2 and any-
thing the Commission proposed here should be on the basis that this was not a bona-
fide R-3 area.
Chairman Stevenson commented that this could be a precedent-setting event.
Vice-Chairman Stewart expressed the opinion that if the applicant was granted his
-2-
r
request, the owners of the vacant lot next door and all other adjacent property
owners would have a perfect right to come in and ask for the same standards allowed
here. He repeated that it would be more in keeping with what is now in the neighbor-
hood to have the applicant split the lot and build a duplex here. Member Guyer
stated he agreed with Vice-Chairman Stewart 's remarks.
Mr. Manos, son of the applicant, told the Commission that they are planning to put a
retaining wall on the north property line.and commented that the neighborhood was '
populated with rentals. He declared that this section was completely run down because
of the school , the high wall adjoining the school and the neighbors not keeping up
their property.
Mr. Henry C. Goedecke, 162 First Avenue, spoke in opposition. He stated his home
sets down two levels from this proposed building, and as such, the people in the
apartments would be able to look directly into his home. He added that he resented
the fact that Mr. Manos considered this a down-graded area - he felt the neighborhood
was well kept-up.
Member Adams said he would go along with a one-story building here, perhaps with 3
units. He felt this would be a good compromise with what the applicant wants to do.
Vice-Chairman Stewart disagreed with this proposal saying this would put 4 units on
the property, and that everyone in the neighborhood would come and ask for the same
thing. Chairman Stevenson commented that 3 units - 1 story would take as much room
as the 6-units - 2 story.
The Commission discussed the exceptional circumstances here and Member Adams felt the
large size lot constituted the exceptional circumstance.
It was moved by Vice-Chairman Stewart and seconded by Member Weakland that the variance
as requested for the six-unit, two-story apartment be denied and that the applicant
be granted a variance to construct a duplex on the front yard area.
Further, that action be based on the following:
(1) The exceptional circumstances are that the applicant has approximately 10,000
square feet of undeveloped land.
(2) The variance is necessary for the preservation of the substantial property right
of the applicant because the lot is quite large.
(3) Granting this variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to the property improvements in the area because this appears to be
compatible with the surrounding area. Three units (a duplex and the single-family
dwelling) is not too much for this area.
The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Members Stewart, Weakland, Stevenson, Adams and Guyer
NOES: None
ABSENT: Members Willhite and Comstock
PUBLIC HEARING - Mrs. Harding C. Campbell - 318 "K" Street - Use
The application was read in which permission was requested to operate a steel manu-
facturing business, an M-1 use, on the property located at 318 "K" Street, zoned C-2-P.
-3-
Assistant Planner Warren submitted a plot plan noting the different businesses in
the area.
This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the public
hearing.
Mr. Creighton, a partner forming the corporation that wish to build the steel-fabri-
cating business here, explained the operation of the business.
Chairman Stevenson questioned the noise problem and Mr. Creighton declared there would
be no more noise than someone dropping ,a beam. Most of the work, he continued, would
be done outside and they would use the sheds on the property'. Only when and if the
business thrives will they construct more buildings.
Mrs. Harding Campbell , the applicant, explained that the men would do most of their
work on the area now occupied by the power saws, and this would entail no more noise
than that now made by the power saws.
Three letters of opposition were read from: Harold B. Starkey, Craig A. Starkey and
Warren and Celia Hatz, all owners of property adjacent to this area. They stated
as their objections: the M-1 zoning would jeopardize the present classification of
their property; the property should be built up, not downgraded; the property is too
close to the better residential areas in the City and the High School .
There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed.
Vice-Chairman Stewart commented that at the time the lumber company went in, the
people opposed this but the applicants stated they would take care of this and keep
it up which they have not done. . In this steel fabricating business , the workers
would be painting outdoors and the paint fumes and odors would drift around the
neighborhood. Mr. Stewart said he felt there were plenty of M-1 properties available
in the city that could be utilized for this business - in this particular location,
he was against granting the variance.
. Member Guyer agreed, stating there were no exceptional circumstances here, and Member
Adams said it would certainly downgrade the area further than what it is.
It was moved by Member Guyer and seconded by Vice-Chairman Stewart that the variance
be denied on the grounds that no exceptional circumstances were found that would
justify granting the request.
The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Members Guyer, Stewart, Weakland, Stevenson and Adams
NOES: None
ABSENT: Members Willhite and Comstock
PUBLIC HEARING - Harry K. & Magdalen Osborn - 368 Hilltop Drive - Area and Easement
Mr. Wilson, attorney representing the applicants, asked for a continuance based on
the fact that a motion would take four votes to carry and there are only five Com-
missioners present this evening.
It was moved by Vice-Chairman Stewart, seconded by Member Adams and unanimously
carried that the public hearing be continued until the meeting of April 1 , 1963.
-4-
PUBLIC HEARING - William E. Davidson & Delwin E. Floodberg - 923 Myra Avenue - Setback
The application was read in which permission was requested for a reduction of rear
yard setback from 20 to 15 feet to allow for construction of a two-story addition
to the existing dwelling. It was noted that 22 property owners had signed the peti-
tion, and that Mr. Floodberg was the contractor for the applicants.
Assistant Planner Warren submitted a plot plan. The area is zoned R-1 and the lot
is a rectangle 99.5 foot deep by 70.5 feet wide.
This being the time and place as_advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the public
hearing.
Mr. Floodberg explained the plans for the addition and stated this all came about
because of a misunderstanding of the old ordinance. He said that with this proposed
addition, there would still be ample rear yard area and he pointed out that this
property is three feet lower than the property in back.
Chairman Stevenson commented that all the lots in this neighborhood are comparable
in size, and asked Mr. Floodberg what the exceptional circumstances pertaining to
the property were.
Mr. Floodberg said he felt it was the large lot; that most houses in Chula Vista
were about 150 feet deep, but that the Davidson 's had a lot of width but no depth.
He added that he felt Chula Vista should have an ordinance to cover shallow lots
so that property owners could upgrade their property and remodel without any trouble.
Member Guyer asked if the proposed addition could be moved to the south and comply
with the ordinance. Mr. Floodberg said it would not be feasible because of windows
and an existing slab. Vice-Chairman Stewart asked the contractor if he couldn 't
put in a window on the north side of the house - in this way, he could then move the
proposed addition to the north wall . Mr. Floodberg said it would be a matter of cost.
William E. Davidson, the applicant, stated they had numerous plans drawn up before
settling on these.
Vice-Chairman Stewart asked the applicant what he felt the hardship was pertaining
to his lot. Mr. Davidson said that if they cut off the five feet to comply with the
ordinance, it would knock out the upstairs clothes closet, but as he understands it,
there is no hardship as far as the lot is concerned.
It was moved by Member Adams and seconded by Member Guyer that the variance be denied
on the basis that no exceptional circumstances were found that would justify granting
the request.
The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Members Adams, Guyer, Stewart, Weakland and Stevenson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Members Willhite and Comstock
SUBDIVISIONS
Hilltop Chateau - Tentative Map
Planning Director Fretz said this should be continued until the meeting of April 1
along with the rezoning of the Grout Annexation.
-5-
Bonita Verde - Tentative Map
Planning Director Fretz explained the location and the details of the subdivision.
Mr. Fretz then read and explained the recommendations proposed by the Planning
Department.
Mr. William Harshman, Principal Engineer, then read the Engineering Department 's
recommendations.
Mr. W. Long, one of the subdividers, stated he objected to the following recommenda-
tions: (1) Improvement on Sweetwater Road. Mr. Long stated this would be the rear
yard of the homes and they propose to fence it. (2) Open concrete ditch - they are
proposing to put in as much as 32 to 4 feet of fill on some of the lots. Mr. Harsh-
man stated this would leave a dirt ditch plus a slope, and that would be a mainten-
ance problem for the City. He added that Engineering would recommend a simple line
channel , and the size depends on the grading plan. (3) The subdividers hope they
would not have to put in sidewalks. Vice-Chairman Stewart said he felt sidewalks.
were justified in view of the fact that the subdivider has provided only one access
road in the subdivision on which there will be quite a bit of traffic. Planning
Director Fretz felt that sidewalks on one side of the street or on Doral Drive only
would be sufficient.
Chairman Stevenson asked about the school bus transportation for the children and
whether the busswill drive into the subdivision. Mr. Long said they hadn 't, as yet,
checked into that.
Mr. Bob Florer, engineer for the subdividers, spoke of the flood study and stated
that many agencies require only a 50-year storm study rather than the 100-year
projections which they have provided in their report.
Vice-Chairman Stewart brought up the question of the subdividers selling off some
of the land, and the lack of control to assure the "floor elevations" suggested by
the study.
Planning Director Fretz stated that once the map is recorded, the City no longer
has any control over the conditions imposed except, of course, improvement guarantees.
He suggested that the elevations that are now referred to as "floor elevations"
should be changed to "pad elevations" and that possibly it would be sufficient to
give protection only on a 50-year storm basis rather than 100-year.
Mr. Long stated they are planning to sell off some of the property, and they are
agreeable to bringing all of the "house pad elevations" to one foot above the 50-year
storm flood elevation.
City Engineer Cole said the City 's primary concern here would be the streets; however,
they do recognize that, in the event of a flood, the City is -not held liable but
would have to assist in rescue work, etc. He added that he would like to confer
with the City Attorney to see what the City's position in the matter would be.
Mr. Florer commented that the streets would be about 3 feet lower than the homes.
Vice-Chairman Stewart suggested they change the wording from "subject to infrequent
flooding" to "subject to inundation."
Member Guyer asked if the City Engineer has any objection to the "50-year" flood
level and Mr. Cole said they have none.
The Commission then discussed the sidewalks. Mr. Fretz said he opposes sidewalks
-6-
in this type of area because pedestrian traffic does not warrant it, and in his
opinion, they adversely affect the character of rural type subdivisions.
Chairman Stevenson stated he was surprised to discover that the subdividers had not
even had a chance to see the proposed 'recommendations before the meeting, and would
suggest that, in the future, these recommendations be sent to the subdividers.
It was moved by Member Guyer, seconded by Vice-Chairman Stewart and unanimously
carried that the tentative map be approved subject to the conditions recommended
by the Planning and Engineering Departments except that the condition covering
flood protection shall read as follows:
"A grading plan shall be submitted as part of the improvement plan and shall show
"house pad" elevation for all lots a 'minimum of one foot above the flood level
expected on a 1150-year" storm. The exact notation to be placed on the final map
with reference to the possibility of inundation and erosion shall be determined by
the City Engineer upon receipt of improvement plan and report by Engineer of Work
with reference to "50-year" storm flood level ."
MISCELLANEOUS
Plans for Dr. Dowels Pet Clinic - C-1-P-D Zone
Planning Director Fretz said he talked to Mr. Jack Gardner and was told that
Dr. Dowe would bring his plans in tonight for Commission approval . However, since
he did not come, Mr. Fretz asked to have this held over until the next meeting.
Resolution to Rescind Planning Commission Resolution No. 97
Planning Director Fretz reviewed the Resolution (No. 97) which he said was made on
the recommendation of the Engineering Department on• September 16, 1957. This
resolution established that public improvements required by Ordinance No. 543 be
waived in the M-2 zone west of Montgomery. Freeway and that any such improvements
required by this Ordinance not waived, but not yet constructed, be waived.
In view of the present tidelands area improvements and the lack of grades in the
entire area , it is now recommended that this previous resolution be rescinded and
each property be considered on its own merit for the waiver of public improvements.
RESOLUTION NO. 264 Planning Commission Resolution Rescinding Planning Commission
- Resolution No. 97 Establishing a Policy With Respect to
Exemption From Provisions of Ordinance No. 543 In That Area
West of Montgomery Freeway
Passed, approved and adopted by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Members Stewart, Weakland, Stevenson, Adams and Guyer
NOES: None
ABSENT: Members Comstock and Willhite
COMMUNICATIONS
Division of Engineering - Subdivision-Standards Committee
A letter from the Division of Engineering was read in which they propose that a
-7 -
committee be set up to propose new standards as related to new concepts in sub-
division development. Some of the problems would be the heavy grading, right-of-way
widths, travel-way widths, need for curbs , sewers , underground power and telephone
service, etc. It was suggested that the committee include a representative from:
Planning Commission, Planning Staff, Engineering Staff and Traffic Engineering.
Chairman Stevenson asked for the staff 's comments as pertaining to the master plan.
Planning Director Fretz stated that the adoption of street standards is not too
early to have. He added that if they could do this now, it would be a simple matter
to put them in the master plan. Mr. Fretz commented that he has asked the consultant
to draw up a preliminary draft of a new subdivision ordinance and the City would be
in a much better position when they get this.
In view of the fact that Vice-Chairman Stewart had served on the Transportation and
Highways Subcommittee, Mr. Fretz suggested that he be named to this committee.
Vice-Chairman Stewart said he would be happy to serve on this committee.
Dinner Meeting - Planning Commission
Because the last meeting had to be postponed, Mr. Fretz asked the Commissioners to
set another date for the study session. The consultant has expressed the wish to
meet with the Commission in order to make a presentation, and he will be down here
on the 28th and the 29th. The Commission discussed these dates and three of the
Commissioners stated they would be out of town; therefore, it was decided to let
this go until the first week of April at which time they will try to set a definite
date.
Proposed Sign Ordinance - James S. Duberg, City. Attorney
City Attorney Duberg read a proposed sign ordinance which he drafted pertaining to
trucks displaying large advertising signs parking on public rights-of-way.
It was moved by Vice-Chairman Stewart, seconded by Member Guyer and unanimously
carried that the proposed ordinance is acceptable.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Member Weakland, seconded by Member Adams and unanimously carried
that the meeting adjourn sine die.
Respectfully submitted,
aennie M. Fulasz
Secretary
r
w
Har ch 19, i.963
The Honerab l e Mayor and City Council
of the Citic of Chula Vista
Civic Center .
Chula Visa, Cali:rima
Regarding: Ao:q l to l;erda Stab i re i s l on Tentative Peep
`rise ten to t i ve trap of the Benito Verde Subdivision i s considered at the
i? Pani- inn Commission maet.iag of March 18.
The Cai-mi lssion reco5ini-ends approval of the tentative map subject to the
fo l l vw i ng con4 i&-mans:
1. A grading !clan shall by submitted as part of the iimproveidnt Plan and
shall shma "heuse pad" elevatlon for all lots a rOriinamia aF one foot
above s ha r l=# level expected on a 1654.1-year" storm. The enec t notation
to be O l aced on the final smap with reference to the possibility of in..
undo t ii ern and eros i cn shall be detarmi led by the Citi Engineer upon receipt
of i mprovemant Pian and report by Engineer of vork w i th re erance to 16:W-
year" 5torm flawJ level.
2. The subdivider shall provide wsr i t ten permission to construct slopes upon
adjacent property ushers suet: construction, is conte;u!plated or requived,
and grading shal i be done so that no st€arir water w9i i l be if'-pounded on
adjacent property.
UTIUTIES
3. All utilities Sha i l be underground except o l ectr i c trans orWrs oriel
telephone junction strvctures.
4. Provide suitable letter of release for rear yard cat's 1 i ty easeflelits
various utility c pznles.
5. Final Map Shall show a foot easement adjacent to each sire of all strew
right-of- sags for street tree ansl utility purposes, excepting Sweetwater Road.
0 N
arch 19, 1953
Honorable Mayor and City Council -2- Bcsilt-a Verde Subdivision
SEWS,S
The Subdivider shall deposit with the City all. fc-,.Ts requireOo by the County
for connection to t-he Spring Valley Outfall Sewer prior to filing of the
f i na I Imap.
7. Offsite sower easoo&,nt from subdivision boundary to Spring Valley Sanitation
Distvict trunk line shall be provided as �wall os all fieces5ary sewer ease-
mants withip. subdivision. All lots are to be sewared as directed by -?-.he
C 1 t Erg I neer.
Sewer si�sma shall be exterded to rhe s6bdivision boundary to serve adjacent
properties as dire'eted by the City Eiiqlneer.
'9. Adequate drainage easements and facilities shall he improved and dedicated
where necessary (to be., approved by City Engineer).
STREETS
10. The typical street section shall shave 2 inches of A. C. Pavwant an designed
base (41, minir.-mm, including prime and seal co—Ots; to be designed in accordance
with G. B. R, methods based an so' I tests sub.-mi teed by a I icensed Sol Is
Engineer and shall be as approved by 'the tity Engineer.)
11. Nintmum street grades shown shall require the installation of modified curb
having a gutter of oxtra width and/or height as approved by the City Engineer,
Standard Type IT-l" curb is permissible. for all grades of 0.5% or sere.
12. Svjeettmmter Road shall have '24'feet of pavirig south of center line, (to be
approved by County Road Depart.ruent and City Engineer.)
i3. Doral Drive right-cf-way width shall be 50 feet.and sildea.,alk shall be re-
quired.
Vk. Cul-de-sac curb radii shall be 40fee: with 50 foot property line radii .
1:;. The "knuckle" adjacent to Lots 25, 296 and 27 shall be warped in much the
Z�
same .ay as ca cul-de-sac. Minimum curb radius shal i be ' 5- feet.
16. An acceptable form of mutual pevmanent ease-ment for access to Lots 11 , 12
and 13 stall be provided ariTS' a cemmon driveway, a minimum of 22 feet in
width, shall be required to serve these lots.
17. Street nanies shall L4-- approved by Planning Department.
HISCELLANEWS
18. Setback, along Sweattmter Road shall be 25 feet.
19. A title report small be subraitted with the final wap shoveing the correct
status of 20 foot widening strip on the south side of Svpssetwster Road.
The above, conditions are based upon t-he revised tentati-ve map received by the
Planning Departrivant on March 7, 19163 and co-nstfltote arecarrairlaile-Lation that the
-Mercia 19, 1963
s€zt x b 1 i jor and i wb� isc c i �3a
Bonita Verde Subdivision
fo 9 i i:ig St;bpi t v i s i on, Orvd i E mce standards be suspended by the City Councii:
i, mo public utiiity easements meed be provided if the Mii tion 8s Stipulated
Is complied with.
p GPS s i dense 1 ks, shall be s}equ i red eXcePt OR DGF8 i Dr i=se.
34 Lots 11 arA 13 do not have f rc"tage C a public sheet except by essement.
jvsp tful l% ubmg tted
Gm9_o j eCef f�rete 6/"r of PI m i€g
cc: Enq� Qear i ng Department
iron-g Bros. Constr uCt ion Co.
March 18, 1963
BON9TA VERDE SUBDIVISiON
Proposed Planning Department Recwmandations:
1 . Final map shall sh aw 8 foot easement adjacent to all street
right-of-way for street tree and utility purposes.
2. All utilities shall be underground except electric transformers.
3,. Setback along Sijaetwater Road shall be. 25 feet.
4. Street names shal I be approved by Planning Department.
Above recominanda t i ogs based upon map received by Planning Department
on March 7, 1963.
RECEIVED
�MAR 1 ) 1963
CHULA VISTA, OP11FORNIA
PLANINMIG C011.1111MISSIOI'N
t0atch 18, 1963
Planning Comm,.D.,ion
City of .Chula Vista: Re: Bonita Verde
z .4 i .. • Subdivision
Gentlemen:
--,Tree: Division.:6f: Engineering; makes ;tie following recommendations: . .
l I ), The entire property, as if now. exists is 'subject to
i nundat.( on per the' report. of Mr . Robert ' F, l over of ,the firm
of Lawrence, Fogg., . Florer and .Smith. The report further
;,y,pf, b, indi ' ates , the .effect-. of , floo.di ng, under .various conditions
_ "" of radin 'u on the site. Th'e. r:adin Ian ,as contemplated ,
.� t 9 9, p g. g p
on the ten-tative -map presumes that certain lot's sha-I I be
fi�, "sub j ect oto i nunda.t:i on".. and .others- "sub j ¢et :,to f requen.t
�' r' flooding du.e to bank: erosio:n.".. ` The e-xact terminology -to be
used 'and the exact 'areas ,to' -be- des ignated as . subject to
var.Ious forms of 'fFood ing shat I be -determined by the City.
Engineer upon submiss ) on ' of .the f inaT.,'map, grading plan and
i.mpr.oveme'nt planso
(2) ' The typical street . secti-o'n doe's .n.ot include sidewalk .
Th i s- i s. A n accord- wi th the .section .used i n Bon i to Be l —A i,re
and ) t is probable. that many subdividers ) n the future wiII
desl re to e I imi nate 's idewa I k . However, it' mus t be '.rea 1 i.zed
.that current.. ordinance requ:ires installation of -sidewalk.
.,NOTE: See letter f6 Commission re "Su.bdivision Standards
Committee".
The Division. of Engineering recommend's that s i dewa I k --be required
a.t least in' those - areas designated "s,ubject. to inund`ati-ona:nd
along Dosal Drive from Swe,'e.twater Road ' to Bermuda -Dunes Dr' ) ve.
=
. -If sidewalk is -to be exempted 'in any portion of- . the sub—
division., it is •suggested that the exemption be a .mafter of
record in whatever form may be specified by the City Attorney.
(3) The typical , street -section shall show 112. inches of A.C.
Pavement on designed base (4" mi.n, -) including prime and seal
coa t's.n
`4) . The fol Iowing. note. shad I . be added: "the structural
street sections -shaII , be designed i"n. ',ac:cordance 4vith C.B.R®
methods bas,¢d on soil tests submitted, by, a I i,censed.. Soi I s
Engineer and shall, .be as approved by the City Engineer.
(51 Cul —de—sac curb radius shat l - be- specified .as 40 feet . �(
Show property line radius (min 50 feet per Sec., 28 .3 ( j ) . _ 4
(61._ Curb heightsshallbe specified as six inches . unless
cif,herwi se des ignated by the Ci ty ..Engineer for purposes -of
drainage control .
(7) Sewage col 1 ¢eti0n - sys'tem is not s'how'n,& System :sha I
serve a I I lots . . Al I necessary i's.
. ( i..e.. to serve
Lots 1 1 , 12, and 13-) sha_1 I be prow ide-d.. .Offsite sewer
easement shall be provided ., Sewer system shall be extended
to the subdivision. boundary to—serve adjacent. pr'operties as
d i rected' by . the City 'Eng i neer . Sewers sha 1 I be of the size
and depth re,quired" by the City Engineer.
ry
-N
Bonita Verde Subidivision ;; — Recommendations
( 8 ) Improvements sha I 1 be installed upon Sweetwater Road to
provide safe and convenient ingress and egress to she subdivision
as a minimum requirement . Complete improvement adjacent to the
�.• ; " subdivision appears justified To this Division . Sweetwater
r Road improvements sha I I be as approved by the County Road
Department and the City Engineer . See item *27
(9) No provision is shown for the safe passage of storm water
from three existing culverts under Sweetwater Road, through
the subdivision . iiMinimal approvable improvement shall be an
open channel lined with portland cement concrete . Show drainage
easement .
( 10) Minimum street grades shown shall require i-he installation
of modified curb having a. gutter of extra width as approved by
the City Engineer . Standard Type "G" curb is permissible for
all grades of 0.50 or more.
( II ) Lots 11 and 13 have no frontage upon a public street and
have insufficient depth per Section 28 .3 ( i ) of the Code. An
acceptable form .of mutual permanent easement for access to lois
II , 12 and 13 shall be provided #
( 12) Areas designated "dra:inage" shall be dedicated to public
use where necessary. Those so dedicated shall be improved as
determined by the City Engineer .
( 13 ) Street widths shall , be adjusted in accordance with Com—
mission determination regarding installation of sidewalks and
as approved by the City Engineer .
x ( 14) Show utility easements at rear of each lot or provide
suitable letter of release from various utility companies .
( 15 ) Lot grading shall be done in succi fashion as to not
impound storm wa_te.rs on adjacent ° property. The subdivider
shallprovide written permission to construct slopes upon
adjacent property where- such construction is contemplated or
required .
( 16) The Subdivider shall deposit with the City all fees
required b•y .the County for connection to the Spring Valley
Outfall Sewer prior. to iling of the -final map:
( 17 ) The "Pnuck I e" at t he intersection of Desert Inn ',Jay
and Bermuda Dunes Drive shall be warped in much the same way
as a cul —de—sac . Minimum curb radius. sha I I be 45 feet .
( 18 ) Lots 11 , 12; and 13 shall be served by a common driveway
a minimum of 22 feet wide.
( 19) A one foot lot shall be provided along Sweetwater Road
as required to limit access to said Road .
�- 2
Bmn.ifa Verde Subdivision Recommendations
i .
(20) Panhandle IOfs . in Boni fa Bel —Aire subdivision were re—
F" quired to have an :access Iof ,_1'east 30 .feet in width..- The subject
VA, map provides twenty' feet .- ' T.h'is matter is raised only in fh-;.e I
.Ey ' s.
infer'esf_-of uni.fo.rmity of policy. U� •`�` „
(21 ) Show nearest .water 'suppl'y a.nd name of su lyin
pp g agency.
(22) Show: bu i Id i ng s-etback' l i nes . 0
(.23) Show existing City - Li'mif Line. � j -
( 24) County. Asse,ssorls leap 591 -22 indicates a twenty foot
widening on the South side. of Sweetwater Road. ' The , subj e'cf .
map shows this twenty foo.f' strip as a portion of -various
1ofs , , Lot sizes or sha-pes' may .be„adversely effected in
correcting this error
(-25 ) Subdivider shall. submit a legal descr-iption of the
area to be'- subdivided.
(26.) Al] comments herein are relative to that map Marked
°T.Exhibif A” in the'. files of .fhe City. Engineer, received 317163 .
( 27) Minimum recommended improvement along complete subdivision
frontages 24 feet of. paving' south of centerline.
. (28 ) A sfatemenr .shat I be placed on the title sheet" of the
final map indicating ( a ) that the ' subdivisio-n is . within the
Sweetwater Ri.ver. flood plain., ( b.) that certain specified lots
are to be filled to an elevation one• foof above the flood level
of a one—hundred year storm: , ( e) that such filled lots are
subject ' to isolatio•n and eros.ion..' .• "
(29) If should be noted thaf -even though the subdivider in—
dicafes floor elevations on lots - I - 16, 46, and, 47, which are
- .p'resumably .one foot above the flood Ieve ( of a . hundred-year .
storm, once the subd i v i s-i on map i s ::f i h¢d, :the City ""has no
control over the . actual flooreI ¢..va":tion,s....constructed..
Respectfully submitted
RECEIVED . Lane F. Cole
' C'
y Eng i•neer
................
ay...........
` 3 —
AAR 1963
CHULA NISTA; CALIFORNIA:
PL��Pdi�llitlG CC���:�1SSICia . . :. -