HomeMy WebLinkAbout1963-02-18 PC MINS r
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
February 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, Comstock, Weakland, Will-
hite and Adams. Absent: Member Guyer. Also present: Planning Director Fretz,
Assistant Planner Warren and Principal Engineer Harshmann.
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 February 4, 1963.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Since the minutes of the last meeting had just been delivered, the Commission agreed
to postpone action on them until the next meeting.
REZONING
PUBLIC HEARING - Portion of Grout Annexation - Interim R-1 to Permanent R-1-13-12
Planning Director Fretz explained this hearing had been set by resolution of inten-
tion by the Planning Commission. He said that the staff had studied the adjacent
lot sizes and recommends 12,000 square foot lots.
This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the hearing.
Mr. Dennis Wittman, representing Great Savings and Loan Association of Los Angeles,
stated he submitted a tentative map last week. He said the owners had purchased
this property sometime ago with the thinking that they would have the 7000 square
foot lots, and Mr. Wittman added that the topography is such that they feel it would
be difficult from a sales standpoint to sell lots that are 12,000 square feet.
There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was closed.
Member Comstock said that about one and one-half years ago, the Commission decided
7000 square foot lots in this area was not good. Chairman Stevenson, however, stated
this was the property rezoned R-3 and not that portion beingconsidered tonight.
Member Willhite stated there are several 6000 square foot lots on Bonita Road and he
questioned the feasibility of larger lots immediately adjacent and to the rear of these
lots.
M6mber Comstock pointed out that nearby Rogan Road has 12,000 square foot lots, and
considering the topography, drainage, sewerage, etc. , it was more difficult to
develop than the land in question.
Member Weakland said he was under the impression that a bigger home should have a
bigger lot.-
-I-
Vice-Chairman Stewart stated ,that he didn '.t feel that a few (three or four) 6000
square foot lots should be a that
reason for 7000 square foot lots when on
two other sides, there are larger lots even up to one acre. He added that this
was interim zoning as R-1 and if the owner had merely inquired at the Planning Office,
he would have found this out. Mr. Stewart said he is strongly for the 12,000 square
foot lots.
Mr. Dennis Wittman asked for a continuance on this matter until the next Commission
meeting, at which time he will bring in another map showing a comparison between
the 7000 and the 12,000 square foot lots. He said the final layout would show
the usable areas.
Vice-Chairman Stewart asked if two plans would be brought in - one for 7000 square
foot lots and the other for 12,000 square foot lots. Mr. Wittman said he has
already submitted the one on the 7000 square foot lots, and if the Commission so
desires, he will submit one for the 12,000 square foot lots.
Chairman Stevenson said he was in favor of continuing the matter, even though they
were all inclined to favor the 12,000 square foot lots. Member Comstock questioned
the purpose of continuing the matter until the next meeting; he said the Great
Western Savings made a mistake which shouldn't concern the Commission - their problem
should be the question of permanent zoning.
Vice-Chairman Stewart agreed commenting that the Great Western Savings assumed the
land was zoned for 7000 square foot lots and developed their tentative map as such--
a set of circumstances which shouldn't concern the Commission.
Mr. Frank Ferreira, 3715 Putter Drive and owner of the property adjacent to the
east, spoke in favor of the rezoning.
Member Adams said the Commission has all the facts before them and should take action
on the matter tonight; especially since they did turn the 7000 square foot zoning
down once and committed themselves to larger lots in this area.
Planning Director Fretz explained that the staff has no objection to having this
continued so that more study can be given _the division of the land by the property
owner 's engineer.
Member Willhite reiterated the statement that the Commission had never discussed
zoning for this particular property. Planning Director .Fretz said this was correct,
but added that the interim classification should put the developers on guard, since
it is put on by the City preparatory to a permanent zone.
It was moved by Member Adams, seconded by Member Comstock and unanimously carried
that this matter be continued until the next meeting - March 4, 1963.
VARIANCES
PUBLIC HEARING - Wade E. Richardson - 101 East "J" Street - Setback Reduction
(Front yard - 20 feet to 10 feet and' Rear Yard - 20 feet to 5 feet)
The application was read in which Mr. Richardson proposes to construct •a garage,
with guest house above, on the rear of his lot. He is requesting reduction of front
yard setback from 20 to 10 feet and reduction of rear yard setback from 20 to 5 feet
to allow for this construction.
-2-
Assistant Planner Warren submitted a plot plan showing the location and the pro-
posed construction.
This being the time and- place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the hearing.
Those speaking in opposition were: Jack Harrelson, 693 Arthur Avenue, L. Ashcroft,
698 Arthur Avenue, Fred Childres, 686 Arthur Avenue and Mrs. Margaret Maguire,
131 East "J" Street, stating as their reasons: (1) This proposed guest house may,
at some later date, be used as a rental , (2) the adjacent property owners are trying
to get their 6-foot utility easement opened up as an alley in the rear of their
property and this proposed guest house would block this situation (3) this would be
the only house on "J" Street with this setback, and (4) no reason to grant setback
reduction, since he has plenty of room in the rear of his property to build this
garage.
Mr. Wade Richardson, the applicant, answered that his building would not affect the
easement whatsoever, since the San Diego Gas and Electric Company does not have
an easement on any part of his property. He added that the 40-foot space between
the house and the proposed building was reserved for a swimming pool . As to ever•.,
renting the guest house, Mr. Richardson commented that his mother-in-law would be
living here, and also, with two daughters in the family, eventually they would get
married and would like to use these sleeping quarters when they come home to visit.
Member Willhite questioned the possibility of this becoming a rental , and Mr. Fretz
pointed out that Mr. Richardson could not put in any kitchen facilities here; how-
ever, with modern electrical appliances, there is always the possibility that it
could be rented.
Member Comstock commented that the garage would set 10 feet from the property line
and this is not adequate to park a car without parking it on the public sidewalk.
Planning Director Fretz said he felt this was a good point; that the staff is opposed
to anyone parking in front of their garage and having the car stand 3 or 4 feet out
on the sidewalk.
Member Adams stated the applicant could build everything he wants to and still stay
within the required setback.
Member Comstock suggested reversing the swimming pool and the garage.
Vice-Chairman Stewart remarked that this corner lot contains approximately 9600 square
feet compared to the 7000 ,square foot adjacent lots; however, he feelssthat Mr. Ri-
chardson is trying to put too much on the property and finds no justification in
granting him two setback--.,;,reductions.
It was moved by Member Adams and seconded by Vice-Chairman Stewart that the setback
reductions be denied because (1) The variance is not necessary for the preservation
of the substantial property right, because the applicant has room on his lot to keep
within the setback lines, and (2) From the comments from the adjoining property
owners, the -proposed two-story building, which will be built out$ 10 feet in the street,
. would be detrimental to adjacent property.
The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Members Adams, Stewart, Weakland, Stevenson and Willhite
NOES: Member Comstock
ABSENT: Member Guyer
Member Comstock felt a new plot plan should be submitted.
-3-
SUBDIVISIONS
Accent Subdivision - Tentative Map
Planning Director Fretz pointed out the location of the subdivision and explained
that the approximate 300 acres is the major portion of the Jonathon Manor Annexa-
tion. Mr. Fretz said this area has many problems, due to the lack of street access,
no sewer (as it slopes to Otay Valley) and the proposed freeway divides the pro-
perty; therefore, it was difficult to make a positive presentation. He added the
application for zone change on this subdivision was received last week and has been
set for public hearing on March 4, 1963. The property to the north is owned by
United Enterprises, and the developers are working with them to obtain access to the
subdivision. Mr. Fretz said the staff would suggest that no action be taken tonight on
the subdivision but that conditions be worked out this following week and mailed to
each of the Commissioners so they will have a better understanding of the subdivision
at the next meeting.
Vice-Chairman Stewart questioned whether the City would accept a tentative map be-
fore arrangements were made for sewers. Mr. Fretz said that this will undoubtedly
begone of the conditions , but that a portion of this subdivision could be pumped to
the north.
Mr. Charles Crull , engineer for the subdivision, stated that they had worked with
the freeway engineers for the last six months and have accepted their design and
criteria on what they would need. They have also worked with engineering for a
sewer line on Main Street from this area to the Metropolitan Sewer. At the present
time, they are asking for an interim agreement with the City to sewer to Melrose
Avenue, then eventually sewer to Main Street.
Whittingham Heights Subdivision - Tentative Map
Planning Director Fretz submitted a map and pointed out the location of the Whit-
tingham subdivision. Mr. Fretz then listed the following recommendations from the
engineering and planning staff:
1 . Approval of the tentative map should be conditioned upon Lot "A" having been
dedicated.
2. Cul-de-sac property line radius is shown as 42 feet. Revise to show 45 foot
radius.
3. Show typical section for cul-de-sac.
4. Work to be done shall include modification of existing improvements upon the
west side of Date Avenue as required to construct Orange Street.
5. Full width improvements shall be installed upon Lot "A" of Chula Vista Manor.
6. The Division of Engineering recommends that complete dedication and improve-
ments be required as a condition of the approval of the map.
7. No lot grading is proposed. It is recommended that the subdivider be required
to perform any lot grading which is necessary to prevent ponding upon the site.
8. Engineer of work shall prepare improvement plans based upon designs on file in
the office of the City Engineer.
-4-
9. Street name to be changed to Sea Vale,
10. Setbacks should be uniformly 15 feet.
It was moved by Vice-Chairman Stewart, seconded by Member Adams and unanimously carried
that the tentative map of the Whittingham Subdivision be recommended for approval sub-
ject to the ten conditions,
Princess Palomar - Revised Tentative Map
Planning Director Fretz presented the revised map of Princess Palomar, reviewing the
location of the subdivision. He pointed out that Lot 48 is only 55 feet deep and with
the setbacks, would leave only 20 feet left for a house. Mr. Fretz recommended that
the cul-de-sac be centered rather than offset which would make this lot deeper.
He then presented the following engineering and planning staff recommendations:
1 . Center cul-de-sac.
2. Provide overhang easement for utilities.
3. The southerly half of Palomar -Street between First and Second Avenue shall be
improved with 32 feet of pavement.
4. Sewage collection system shall be designed to fit into the ultimate gravity
system to' serve Montgomery Sanitation District and adjacent portions of Chula Vista.
5. Subdivider shall post with the City an amount estimated by the City Engineer to
cover the costs which shall ultimately be required for connection to the Future
Montgomery Sanitation District collection system.
6. All slopes shall be planted according to City of San Diego standard specifications
for erosion control .
7. Provide storm drainage easement from southwest corner of the subdivision to Second
Avenue. Improvement plan to be approved by City Engineer.
Member Comstock asked about the lot at the east end of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Fretz
said this lot, 150 x 210 feet in size, did not belong to the subdivision, that it was
under separate ownership.
It was moved by Vice-Chairman Stewart, seconded by Member Willhite and unanimously
carried that the revised tentative map of Princess Palomar be recommended for approval
subject to the seven conditions outlined by the Planning Director.
MISCELLANEOUS
PUBLIC HEARING - Amendment to Zoning Ordinance - Pet Clinics in C-1 Zone
Planning Director Fretz reviewed the matter explaining that this was an amendment to
the zoning ordinance allowing pet clinics (animal hospitals) in the C-1 zone. At the
present time, our ordinance allows them only in the M-1 zone. The amendment would
stipulate that the pet clinic must be completely enclosed, sound-proof and not involve
any open-air runways.
-5- ,
This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the hearing.
Dr. James Dowe, veterinarian, Chula Vista, told of his plans for the pet hospital .
Member Comstock questioned him as to the construction of the kennels; Dr. Dowe ex-
plained the 'interior walls would be concrete;, plus an outside`wall .
Ther':e being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared
closed.
RESOLUTION NO. 261 - Resolution of the Planning Commission Recommending to City
Council an Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance Allowing Pet
Clinics in C-1 Zones.
Offered by Member. Willhite, seconded by Member Weakland, passed, approved and adored
by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Members Willhite, Adams, Stewart, Comstock, Weakland and Stevenson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Member Guyer
Report of Findings on Anthony Charlton Appeal
The findings were read: the applicant requested a reduction of side yard setback
from 5 feet to zero to allow for the construction- of a patio which was built without
a building permit.
Member Comstock pointed out that the exceptional circumstances that Mr. Charlton had
enumerated were personal matters, not matters applicable to the property itself.
Vice-Chairman Stewart stated that the findings should show that the Commission con-
curred it would not be an undue hardship for the applicant to move the patio roof
supports to the legal setbacks.
It was moved by Member Comstock, seconded by Vice-Chairman Stewart and unanimously
carried that the findings be approved as read, with the addition: "It would not be
an undue hardship to move the patio roof supports to the legal setbacks."
COMMUNICATIONS
County of San Diego - Planning Department
Planning Director Fretz explained that the state planning office is dividing the
state into "regional planning districts"', and that a meeting is to be held in San
Diego on March 21 , 1963 to discuss the proposed regional designations. Mr. Fretz
said they are considering San Diego and Los Angeles Metropolitan area as one district.
Vice-Chairman Stewart asked if there would be any reason why this would be an advantage
to us rather than a disadvantage. Mr. Fretz said he felt we would be "lost" if this
area is included in with the Los Angeles area, and stated that Camp Pendleton, it
would seem, would be a perfect boundary between the two areas.
Mr. Fretz then read the letter from Dr. Willis Miller, Secretary to the San Diego
County Planning Commission, along with an enclosed letter opposing the regional
districts proposed. Mr. Fretz said he plans to attend this meeting, and with the
Commission's approval , will protest the proposed districts. The Commission agreed
this should be done.
-6-
Kenneth Hornaday - Castle Princess Subdivision
A letter from Mr. Kenneth Hornaday was read; this was a copy of the letter he sent
to the California State Realty Board concerning misrepresentation on the part of the
subdividers of the Castle Princess Subdivision. As a homeowner in this subdivision,
Mr. Hornaday complained about servicing discrepancies in the homes, and of obtaining
items which were advertised in their brochures which were not delivered.
The Commission concurred that this should be sent to the City Attorney for any possible
action.
T'.ai1er Park - Bonita Valley
Planning Director Fretz said he had a meeting with Mr. Steve Gassaway, President of the
Sweetwater Valley Civic Association, in which Mr. Gassaway asked Mr. Fretz to write a
letter of protest to the Board of Supervisors, County Planning Commission, on the pro-
posed trailer park on Bonita Road. Since this was not in the City, Mr. Fretz told him
he would be glad to do this on his -own, but' felt it would be more effective if the
letter were to come from the Commission.
Member Comstock asked if this was encompassed in the study area of our master plan,
and Mr. Fretz said it was.
Member Willhite stated the Commission should object strongly to this, and added he
would like to see this whole area come into the City.
. Mr. Fretz said we are making good headway in the Valley, and when given t'h'e opportunity,
should show the residents what stand �he City takes on these issues. He added that
this proposed trailer park would not have to come to 'the City for their sewers; since
the City did not reserve this area; San Diego picked it up.
It was moved by Vice-Chairman Stewart, seconded by Member Adams and unanimously
carried that a letter of protest be sent to the County Planning Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Member Weakland , seconded by Member Comstock and unanimously carried
that the meeting adjourn sine" die.
Respectfully submitted,
Jennie M. Fulasz
Secretary