Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1963-02-04 PC MINS MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA February 4, 1963 A 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, Weakland, 'Willhite, Adams and Guyer. . Absent: None. Also present: Director of Planning Fretz,and City Attorney Duberg. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Member Guyer, . seconded by Member Weakland and unanimously carried that the minutes of January 21 , 1963 be approved, copies having been .mailed. to..each member. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS PUBLIC HEARING :- Bonita BeT-Aire Subdivision - H. & S. Construction Company Sign and Tract Office The application was .read in which the H. & S. Construction Company, 1343 Highland Avenue, National City, developers of -the Bonita Bel-Aire Subdivision request per- mission to allow 'maintenance of a 3 feet by 50 feet sign and a tract office on sub- division property. Director of Planning Fretz submitted a plot plan explaining the location. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the hearing. Mr. Stephen Gassaway, President of the Sweetwater Valley Civic Association, stated that the Association is quite concerned with signs in the Valley, with three new sub- divisions going in, each one trying to draw attention to their subdivision. If this is the only sign on this subdivision, they will not protest it. Member Willhite asked about the signs now in the Valley advertising the Bonita Woods subdivision, and Mr. Gassaway said they had reached a mutual agreement with the developers concerning these signs - the signs are temporary in nature and small in size. , Chairman Stevenson asked the Planning Director if this sign was consistent in size with what was allowed in the past. Mr. Fretz said the only other sign equal in size to this one was the "Hilltop Estates" sign. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing ; was declared closed. Planning Director Fretz explained that the applicant had proposed to put the two signs which are now on the property, one belonging to the real estate agent, under the one application, but they weren't allowed to do this. Under the ordinance, they could erect a sign, under a conditional use permit, not to exceed 150 square feet in area, which this sign is; therefore, the second sign would have to come in under a use variance. Member Guyer commented that this was a very attractive sign and he could see nothing wrong with it. -1- It was moved by Member Guyer and seconded by Member Comstock that the conditional use permit for the sign and tract office be approved. That the use be granted for a period of one year or until all homes are sold. Further, that the findings are based on the following: (1) That the granting of the conditional use permit will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. (2) The characteristics of the use proposed are reasonably compatible with the type of use permitted in the surrounding areas. (3) The sign meets the specifications provided by the ordinance. . J The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Guyer, Stewart, Comstock, Weakland, Stevenson, Willhite and Adams NOES: None ABSENT: None VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING - Bonita Bel-Aire Subdivision - John C. Yavorsky - Use Variance The application was read in which the applicant requested permission to allow a 300- square foot sign to remain on property known as the Bonita Bel-Aire Subdivision. Director of Planning Fretz pointed out the location of the sign on the plot plan. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the hearing. Mr. Stephen Gassaway, President of the Sweetwater Valley Civic Association, said he hopes the first sign is adequate to draw attention to the subdivision, as the Associa- tion is formally protesting the second sign - Yavorsky Realtors'. Mr. Gassaway noted that each of the three subdivisions in the Valley have particular problems of advertis- ing their homes. The Bonita Bel-Aire sign was erected on the hilltop, and this might encourage the other developers to try to erect signs as high as they possibly could. The Association feels the one sign for Bonita Bel-Aire is sufficient. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Comstock felt they are going beyond the intent of the identification of a subdivision - this is the same thing you would have with any company, such as insurance companies , etc. , advertising their business. The Commission agreed and Member Stewart added that if the real estate agency wanted to advertise their business, they should have had their name printed ori the same sign as the subdivider 's. Member Willhite wondered if the agency could put a 150-square foot sign on the property; Mr. Fretz said they could not. Member Willhite then stated that the 150 square foot sign, in his opinion, was inadequate; that on most days , you cannot read the lettering on it. Mr. Fretz said he thought this was because the sign was silhouetted against a light sky background, not because of the sign 's letter size. -2- The Commission discussed the location of the signs and agreed the location was bad. Member Adams said he was definitely of the opinion that if the real estate agency wanted to advertise their business, they should have had their name listed on the' subdivision sign. It was moved by Member Adams and seconded by Member Guyer that the application for the use variance to permit a 300 square foot sign to remain on the Bonita Bel-Aire Sub- division be denied based on the following: 1 . It is not compatible with the concept of signs as contemplated in the ordinance. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Adams, Guyer, Stewart, Comstock, Weakland, Stevenson and Willhite NOES: None ABSENT: None PUBLIC HEARING - Anthony A. Charlton - 1032 Helix Avenue - Setback Reduction The application was read in which a reduction of side yard setback from 5 feet to zero to allow for construction of a patio was requested. It was noted that the appli - cation was signed by nine property owners . Director of Planning Fretz submitted a plot plan and told the Commission that the patio was constructed without a building permit. Chairman Stevenson questioned the height of the patio - Mr. Charlton said it was seven to eight feet. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the hearing. Mr. Anthony Charlton, the applicant, said , that the wind blows very strongly in the area of his patio, and his asthmatic child plays here and must be shielded from the wind. He further stated that witthe swimming pool , he has invested nearly $6000 in the patio. TT Member Comstock said he failed to see where the exceptional circumstances were, that the Commission must look to the ordinance as their guide, and therefore can not rightly grant this variance. Member Weakland disagreed saying the Commission shouldn' t penalize the applicant. He cited a similar case brought before the Commission which they denied; however , when the appeal went to the Council , the Council approved the application. Member Comstock stated the Commission was an advisory body to the Council and should act in this capacity. Vice-Chairman Stewart agreed, adding the Commission cannot . interpret the ordinance and read the minds of the City Council at the same time. He added that the two cases - the other one being Gilbert 's - were not identical because the other applicants started with a fireplace then went ahead and built the walls. He stated 500 square feet of space was sufficient for any child to play in and felt the applicant should abide by the ordinance and move his wall back. Member Weakland said the Commission should give some consideration to what it would cost the applicant to do this over. -3- Member Adams stated this was a very small job; all the applicant would have to do would be to move the supports back in line with the house. Mr. Charlton remarked that he had not violated the public safety or welfare and felt this constituted enough basis so that the Commission should grant him the variance. Vice-Chairman Stewart informed the applicant that he was not violating the intent of the ordinance, just the ordinance itself. Member Willhite questioned the material of the wall adjacent to the neighbors to the south. Mr. Fretz said it was a wood fence up to six feet, then the same material the roof was made of - baked enamel on aluminum. Member Willhite felt this would be relatively simple to change. Member Guyer agreed and asked for the staff 's comments. Planning Director Fretz said they had tried to discourage the applicant from applying because he had no exceptional circumstances here. Mr. Fretz said he felt- the 4 x 4 posts could be moved back to support the roof. It was moved by Member Adams and seconded by Member Comstock that the application for the variance requesting a reduction of side yard setback from five feet to zero to permit a patio to remain on property line be denied based on the fact that no excep- tional circumstances could be found that would justify granting-=the request. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Member Adams, Guyer, Stewart, Comstock, Weakland, Stevenson and Willhite, NOES: None ABSENT:None SUBDIVISIONS Princess View Unit No. 2 - Final Map Planning Director Fretz submitted the final map of Princess View Unit No. 2, and , explained that this subdivision will be a part of the City about the 10th or 11th_ of this month, and suggested that the approval be based on this condition. Member Comstock asked if this subdivision was coming in as R-1 and Mr. Fretz said it was. It was moved by Member Guyer, seconded by Member Adams and unanimously carried that the final map of the Princess View Unit No. 2 subdivision be approved and recommended to City Council subject to the following condition: 1 . That the subdivision be a part of the City before the final map is approved by the Council . MISCELLANEOUS Pet Clinics in C-1 Zones Planning Director Fretz told the Commission about a proposed pet clinic that was planned within the Bonita Village shopping center before the Village was annexed to the City. Dr. James T. Dowe, veterinarian, had his building plans checked and approved by the County. Since Dr. Dowe did not realize his property was being annexed by the City, he made no special effort to obtain his permit from the County. Our ordinance does not -4- allow a pet clinic in the C-1 zone as the County ordinance does; however, with the enclosed runways , sound-proofing and air-conditioning, Mr. Fretz pointed out that it would be the same as any doctor 's office. He asked that the ordinance be amended to include pet clinics in the C-1 zone and asked that this be set for public hearing. Member Comstock stated he felt this was dangerous ground, to change the ordinance to suit someone wanting something that is not in the ordinance. Member Willhite commented that we are a growing community and will be faced with this more than once. He strongly recommended a full hearing on the matter. Member Comstock asked that the planning staff make a study of this proposed use showing where they are allowed in other areas , probably San Diego. RESOLUTION NO. 259 Resolution of Intention of the Planning Commission to Set a Public Hearing for February 18, 1963 to Consider an Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance Allowing the Location of a Pet Clinic in the C-] Zone Offered by Member Comstock, seconded by Member Weakland, passed, approved and adopted by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Comstock, Weakland, Stevenson, Willhite, Adams , Guyer and Stewart NOES: None ABSENT: None Grout Annexation - Interim R-1 to R-1-B-12 Planning Director Fretz told the Commission that his attention was called to the fact that a portion of the Grout Annexation, belonging to Bob Tyson, was brought into the City as interim R-1 and has not been permanently zoned. Mr. Fretz stated the staff has studied the surrounding lot sizes and would suggest a public hearing to have this permanently zoned to R-1-B-12 (12,000 square feet minimum lots) which would be in keeping with the adjacent lot sizes. RESOLUTION NO. 260 Resolution of the Planning Commission to Call a Public Hearing on February 18, 1963 to Consider Permanent Zoning to R-1-13-12 for that Portion of the Grout Annexation Which Is Interim-Zoned R-1 Offered by Vice-Chairman Stewart, seconded by Member Comstock, passed , approved and ad6 pted by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Stewart, Comstock, Weakland, Stevenson, Willhite, Adams and Guyer NOES: None ABSENT: None Dinner Workshop Planning Director Fretz suggested the Commission members meet for a dinner meeting some- time this month. It was agreed by all the members that the night of the 14th would be best. Mr. Fretz said one of the planning consultants would be down on this day and would be their guest. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Member Weakland, seconded by Member Willhite and unani- mously carried that the meeting adjourn to February 18, 1963. Respectfully submitted, envie M. Fulasz, Secretary MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,- CALIFORNIA January 21 , 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, Adams and Guyer. Absent: Member Willhite. Also present: Planning Director Fretz, Assis- tant Planner Warren, City Attorney Duberg 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 January 7, 1963. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Member Guyer, seconded by Member Adams and unanimously carried that the minutes of January 7, 1963 be approved, copies having been mailed to each member. REZONING PUBLIC HEARING (Cont 'd) - Telegraph Canyon Road and "L" Street - Robinhood Homes, Inc. R-3 to C-1-P-D The application was read in which a zone change, from R-3 to C-1-P-D was requested to allow for a neighborhood shopping center. Director of Planning Fretz submitted a plot plan and reviewed the matter for the Commission, stating the application was amended to include the south one-half of the street that was vacated. Mr. Fretz pointed out that the nearest commercial zoning is over one mile. Member Adams asked the size of the lot and Mr. Fretz stated it was about 60,000 square feet, and added that this would be the second time the "D" zone would be imposed on a development. He explained that the applicant would have to submit his building plans for approval . Member Guyer asked about the traffic pattern. Planning Director Fretz stated there was a 100-foot right-of-way in both directions and a center divider on "L" Street; on the southwest side of Telegraph Canyon Road, there is a frontage road. Mr. Fretz explained the relationship of the proposed freeway to this location. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson reopened the hearing. Mr. Robert E. Casey, the applicant, said they had complied with all the engineering department 's recommendations of improvements; that in his opinion, the extreme high cost of these improvements plus the shape and location of the lot made it impractical to use if for any use other commercial . There being .no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Weakland suggested limiting it to the uses mentioned in the plan. Mr. Fretz thought there should be some statement in the records as to the concept of this as a neighborhood shopping center. City Attorney Duberg stated any use which is allowed in a C-1 zone would be allowed here. Vice-Chairman Stewart commented that with the "D'' zone, Mr. Casey would have to bring in his plot plan for Commission approval when he gets ready to build which would give a definite control on the construction and use of the buildings. The Commission discussed the traffic dividers and the limitations on the property. Vice-Chairman Stewart stated that he would not like to see a drive-in type restaurant put in here. Member Adams said the ordinance doesn't say a thing about a drive-in in a C-1 zone. Chairman Stevenson asked for the staff 's comments, and Mr. Fretz said that this portion of Telegraph Canyon Road was initially proposed as'scommercial in subdivision maps. He said the staff opposed the original commercial zoning because at that time, there appeared to be no way of preventing its extension along Telegraph Canyon Road as strip zoning. A layout was presented showing how the adjacent property could be developed residentially if this area is zoned commercial . He added that many planners now feel that the ultra small shopping center has a proper place in the total picture, but he said that he still feels that the Speedee Mart or Midget Market should be the initial tenant in a four or five acre neighborhood shopping center. Mr. Fretz further stated that the City Council had imposed excessive costs on the developer as to the improve- ments on adjacent land use and dedication which puts the City on the defensive to some extent. Chairman Stevenson questioned whether the main building would be built against the homes if the area to the north is subdivided. Vice-Chairman Stewart said he felt it would not due to the difference in elevation and the horizontal distance needed for slope. RESOLUTION NO. 257 - Recommending to City Council the Change of Zone from R-3 to C-1-P-D for the Triangular Shaped Lot on the North Side of Telegraph Canyon Road at "L" Street for the Robinhood Homes, Inc. Offered by Member Guyer, seconded by Member Comstock, passed, approved and adopted by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Guyer, Stewart, Comstock, Weakland, Stevenson and Adams NOES: None ABSENT: Member Willhite That the findings be based on the following: (1) The shopping center would be an asset to the area. (2) Good use for a difficult parcel of land. (3) The nearest shopping area is over a mile away. (4) The location of this site in close proximity to the proposed freeway and the street development adjacent to the proposed shopping center contribute to making this good zoning practice. -2- PUBLIC HEARING - Both sides of Broadway, from "C" to Moss Street - C-2 to C-2-P A letter from the Chamber of Commerce was read in which they endorsed the zone change proposed by the Broadway Association for all of Broadway from C-2 to C-2-P. Planning Director Fretz submitted a map showing the entire length of Broadway which the staff had divided into three categories: (1) the vacant land (2) property al- ready developed and complying with offstreet requirements of the ordinance and (3) property already developed and not complying with the offstreet requirements. Eight percent (8 %) do not comply with the "P" zone and 22 % of the land is vacant. Mr. Fretz pointed out the property that could be developed with the "P" zone on the vacant land. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the hearing. Mr. Craig Starkey, Manager of the First Federal Savings and Loan Association, Mr. Ray Halpenny, representing the Broadway Association and Mr. Jack Yagamata , also representing the Broadway Association spoke in favor of the rezoning. They stated this would help make the Broadway shopping district one of the finest in the area: Mr. Halpenny said they would like to see some provision made in the ordinance whereby businesses that require a minimal amount of capital investment for buildings , such as nurseries , used car lots , etc. be required to provide offstreet parking. He said their group also feels that there should be some requirement for handling large transport needed for certain businesses , such as furniture stores. He further stated that the one to one ratio interpretation as administered now should be more clearly defined by ordinance. Chairman Stevenson questioned the possibility of a C-1 use coming into the area of C-2 zoning - would this use be obligated to put in offstreet parking. Mr.. Fretz said they would have to meet this requirement. Member Adams commented that parking could not be used efficiently unless it is marked and suggested the ordinance should provide for this also. Planning Director Fretz noted there was one written objection to the rezoning - a letter from Arthur and Nora Spencer, owners of the property at the southwest corner of Broadway and "J" S-treets. He said they gave no reasons for objecting. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Comstock remarked that it was very unusual not to have any opposition to a rezoning as extensive as this. Vice-Chairman Stewart suggested that the staff do some research on the suggestions pointed out by Mr. Halpenny. Chairman Stevenson praised the organizations, such as the Broadway Association, Women's Clubs, etc. , for making such recommendations as the one acted on tonight. He suggested that after this rezoning has been approved , the City Council send a note of thanks to the Broadway Assoc=i.ation for their efforts. RESOLUTION NO. 258 - Recommending to City Council Change of Zone from C-2 to C-2-P for Both Sides of Broadway from "C" to Moss Street -3- Offered by Member Adams , seconded by Member Guyer, passed , approved and adopted by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Adams , Guyer, Stewart, Comstock, Weakland and Stevenson NOES: None ABSENT: Member Willhite That the findings be based on the following: (1) Good zoning practice. (2) Urgent need for offstreet parking along Broadway is even more- important than in most shopping areas because practically 100 % of the shoppers come by vehicle. (3) There is a necessity for parking for commercial establishments. TO BE SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING - Greg Rogers School Annexation - Interim R-1 to Per- manent R-1 Planning Director Fretz explained that this item was put on the agenda by mistake. He would like this held over until there will be more interim zonings , at which time, perhaps every six months , they will be put on the agenda and heard at one time, thus saving the cost of legal ads. SUBDIVISIONS Princess Palomar - Tentative Map Planning Director Fretz explained the tentative map; its location - between Hilltop Drive and Second Avenue and Oxford Street and Quintard Street; the irregular boundaries and the many problems as the staff envisioned them. He then made the following recommendations: (1) All streets adjacent to the subdivision shall be annexed full width prior to approval of the final map to facilitate city inspection of improvements. (2) Provide revised lot lines on Lots 50 and 52, or move cul-de-sac west - new lot' arrangement shall be approved by Planning and Engineering Departments. (3) All slopes shall be planted according to City of San Diego standard specifications for erosion control . Mr. William Harshman, Principal Engineer, then reviewed the conditions that the engineering department recommends , as follows: (1) The southerly half of Palomar Street between First and Second Avenue shall be improved with 32 feet of pavement. (2) Hilltop Drive shall be improved with 32 feet of pavement and-monolithic curb and sidewalk. (3) Realign First Avenue and warp from 70 feet at south subdivision boundary to 60 feet at north li-ne of Lot 51 . Improved section shall be 40 feet from curb to curb. -4- (4) Dedicate and improve street in approximate location of Lot 83 to provide access to unsubdivided parcel to the north, adjusting adjacent lot pattern accordingly. This condition to be waived if satisfactory evidence can be produced to show that adjacent land use will not require this access. To be approved by the Planning Department. - (5) Revise typical sections to show monolithic sidewalk in all cases and provide overhang easement for utilities wherever necessary. (6) Sewage collection system shall be designed to fit into the ultimate gravity system to serve Montgomery Sanitation District and adjacent portions of Chula Vista. (7) 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. (8) Subdivider shallprovide easement or other acceptable evidence of ownership from San Diego County to the City for those sewer lines not within the City. (9) Subdivider shall obtain all permits required by San Diego County. (10) Relocate proposed pump station to Second Avenue and Quintard Street with force main extending from Quintard to Oxford Street. A letter from Willis H. Miller, Director of Planning for San Diego County was read listing several recommendations. Mr. Fretz reviewed these recommendations and stated that those considered valid by the staff were covered in the above conditions. He emphasized that Palomar between Second and Tobias is completely unimproved even though a right-of-way does exist - the same pertains to Tobias. Member Comstock suggested the road at the northwest corner ending in a cul-de-sac be extended down to the road at the south, and asked the Planning Director 's opinion on this. Mr. Fretz said this was considered but not recommended because of two factors: (1) there is a grade differential of 25 to 30 feet and (2) the attractive- ness of a secluded street pattern. Mr. Chuck Pearson, Engineer from Wittman Engineering, told the Commission that the developers have tried unsuccessfully to purchase the privately-owned land within the subdivision; however, one parcel is owned by the Mormon Church and they hope someday to build a church here. Member Comstock felt the Commission shouldn' t hurry the proceedings along especially ' since there were about twenty (20) recommendations. _Mr. Chuck Pearson stated the property was in escrow and would expI-re on the 23rd - this wa.s the third time it has been in escrow, and pending the approval of this tentative map, the owner emphasized that it would be the last time. Member Comstock said it was asking too much to comprehend all of the changes recommended in one night - they should have a postponement to study them. Member Adams questioned whether the Commission would understand it any better on a revised tentative since most of the changes are not changes that can be made on the map. . -5- Chairman Stevenson commented that on all these subdivision maps , the Commission must rely on the recommendations of the Planning Director and the Engineering Department since they have studied it completely. Planning Director Fretz said he felt there were not too many recommendations; that the Commission had approved maps with more recommendations than those presented tonight. However, he suggested some improvement be given Palomar to provide minimum access. Member Adams thought the engineer should make a recommendation to make Palomar passable and tell the Commission what should be done. Principal Engineer Harshman told the Commission that the City made the subdivider of the Suburban Heights Subdivision build an offsite street in the County - (Hilltop Drive from Oxford Street to Palomar) . Mr.. Ralph Spaid, the developer, asked that the matter not be held over for two weeks. He said they were in agreement with all of the recommendations suggested tonight. It is going to be a $200,000 development and the escrow is contingent upon the Commission's acceptance of the tentative map. It was moved by Vice-Chairman Stewart and seconded by Member Guyer that the tentative map of the Princess Palomar Subdivision be recommended for approval subject to the engineering department and the staff's recommendations a-m4.with the condition that -- Palomar Street be improved as to street paving full width from Tobias Street to Hilltop Drive, excepting sidewalk on the south portion adjacent to land unsubdivided. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Stewart, Weakland, Stevenson, Adams and Guyer NOES: Member Comstock ABSENT: Member Willhite 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