Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1964-07-06 PC MINS MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING 'OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA July 6, 1964 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista was held at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chamber at the Civic Center on the above date with the following members present: Stevenson, Stewart, Comstock, Johnson, Willhite, Adams and Guyer. Absent: None. Also Present: Director of Planning Warren, Junior Planner Lee and Principal Engineer Harshman. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Member Willhite nominated Chairman Stevenson as Chairman of the Commission. Member Stewart seconded. MSUC (Willhite - Stewart) Stevenson be Chairman of the Commission for the coming year. Member Guyer nominated Member Stewart as Vice-Chairman. Member Johnson seconded. MSUC (Guyer - Johnson) Stewart be Vice-Chairman of the Commission for the coming year. APPROVAL OF MINUTES _ Member Adams requested that the minutes be corrected as follows: 'Page 2 should be changed to read that Member Adams had stated that "some of the lots should be one acre - steeper slopes should be one acre, thus requiring less grading." Member Johnson requested that the minutes be corrected as follows: Page 3 (Llanos) Member Johnson asked that his comment be included - that he felt the applicant 20 L-�+�h­-Lnn_-Lca_n-t cnii 1 d rnrrcf_the V LO 19 PBt1 ,. ;l'.'.rA., 4�a L <i'- �tin:�c'�i� ��9$ °.A . �jh � �e�.�.�et°'.,,-,�ns tl��� 4,54r Y 4 F_')L !-l G x d F.�TI P3•.�J N.Iii:' g. a,R,• �s l�i.! a •� I��� `� L s a F .. S p p :•a.� � "crab +d --W-`�-',Y2 `��j 6�v'�Y.0 tt � �r t z'F'";�r1i '�d ;, :d'� 5 .C'rta`• 6 2dd��' , + N� L@ c `d,-,, �4a a y yF �. cur: in �a7) Ib27 * ¢Anl (�r�` li• ttt.ett -'tl iRv S��1»-jai { `a tof4 `"F :.�;:.7�� r 64 tn, io w aa MSUC (Stt..,,.as shown. Architectural Consideration of Three Dwellings - Bonita Verde Subdivision Planning Director Warren showed drawings of the three dwellings contemplated in this area. All single story, shake shingle roofs , wood, stucco and masonry walls. He stated that the dwelling would be compatible with architecture in the area. He suggested that landscaping approval be left to the discretion of the staff. Mr. Long appeared before the Commission and stated that the landscaping, as required, was restrictive and suggested that such landscaping be left up to the owner. Member Johnson stated that the ordinance spelled out the landscaping requirements. Member Comstock stated that he felt that landscaping should be a personal thing with the home owner, and recommended that such a change be made in the ordinance. Member Guyer agreed with Member Comstock. -1- MSC (Stewart_' Guyer) That the architecture of these dwellings is compatible with other dwellings in Bonita and that the plans be approved. Also, that landscape plans be approved by the Planning Department when the owners are ready to plant. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Stewart, Guyer, Comstock, Stevenson, Willhite and Adams NOES: Member Johnson ABSENT: None VARIANCES (Cont'd) Albert M. Baker, Southeast Corner "H" Street and Interstate #5 - C-2 Use in R-3 Zone Director Warren pointed out that the area in question is zoned R-3. He also dis- cussed the plot plan and the location of proposed signs. He presented the staff recommendations and discussed the proposed reduction in setback. Chairman Stevenson opened the public hearing. . Mr.. DeWitt A. Higgs, attorney for Mr. Baker, pointed out the problems involved in trying to develop this property as an R-3 zone. He stated that a complete and comprehensive traffic report had been submitted prior to the meeting for considera- tion and analysis by the Commission. Mr. James E. Redding, retired San Diego Traffic Engineer, was presented by Mr. Higgs and stated that, in his opinion, this was an ideal place for a gas station as it would be easily accessible to the freeway and would not cause any particular traffic problems in the area. It was pointed out that Mr. Baker had given the City an easement for drainage purposes at the time of the construction of the major drainage facility. No compensation was received by Mr. Baker at that time and the representatives seemed to feel that the variance would be some compensation. Mr. Redding recommended the granting of the variance. The, applicant indicated that Rohr officials contemplate no increase in traffic problems with a service station located here. Mr. H. Morgan, District Representative for Texaco, addressed the Commission and stated that Texaco was making a practice of leasing property close to freeways. He-stated that there would be an average of 10 to 15 cars per hour going into the station, and that he felt this would not cause any problem traffic-wise. Chairman Stevenson .remarked that there was a great deal of commercial property in the City and asked if Texaco had looked into any other properties. Mr. Morgan -stated that Texaco was anxious to locate next to a freeway as they felt that a great deal of business would be drawn from the motorists using these roads. The possibility of using a site located at "E" Street and the freeway was discussed, as it is already zoned commercial , and Mr. Redding declared that it was not as desirable as the "H" Street site due to certain landscape barriers. He stated that "L" Street had only limited access due to the complexity of the freeway interchange at that point. -2- Chairman Stevenson declared that there would have to be exceptional circumstances in order to grant the variance and that, so far, none had been shown. Mr. Higgs stated that, with the train traffic located so close by, it was infeasible to develop the property as R-3. Mr. Lefebbre, a Civil Engineer connected with Lander Development Company, stated that there is a .tendency in other communities to zone property next to freeways as C-4, to be developed as a service to tourists with facilities to serve their needs. Chairman Stevenson questioned whether this would be a 24-hour operation. Mr. Le- febbre stated that this could not be decided until the operation commenced and some criterion could be established. Mr. Lefebbre added that the area between the two access bridges would be coveredilightly so as to allow about three feet of dirt to be placed on the areas for planting. The bridges themselves would be highway-type to accommodate the heavy trucks necessary to deliver gasoline. He indicated that the area between the bridges would, after the drainage channel was covered, be about three feet lower than the grade of the street. The storm drain would not be covered beyond the west curb line. Mr. Lefebbre stated that the property was use- less unless the drainage channel was bridged. Mr. Louis Tompkins , Realtor, stated that this area was not acceptable for resi- dential use. As manager -of the duplexes on the north side of "H" Street, he stated that the traffic and railroad had been the cause of vacancies in that area. He felt that his property should be zoned commercial . There being no further comment either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Adams suggested that a study be made by the Commission in light of all that had been presented by Mr. Higgs and the various representatives who had appeared before the Commission. (Note: this paragraph to be taken -out--per correction of minutes 7/20/64) . Director Warren stated that although most of the area is used for R-3 and R-2, some thought might be given to rezoning the entire area. Vice-Chairman Stewart said he felt that variances of this kind were an abuse of the variance provision. He believes that the use should be in keeping with the master plan. Director Warren pointed out that the General Plan suggests commercial use along "E" Street but not on "H". Director Warren read the staff recommendations. Mr. Morgan said he had no objections to the recommendations but pointed out that the banjo sign is Texaco's trademark and would try to work out something that would satisfy everyone. Vice-Chairman Stewart -suggested the staff study the area at these interchanges to determine the proper zoning. He felt that granting this variance might establish a precedent. Member Willhite agreed that such a study should be made and that the only exceptional circumstance which had been presented was that the drainage ditch blocked access from "H" Street. Member Adams disagreed that the ditch constituted an exceptional circumstance; he stated that access might be from the East end of the property. Member Comstock pointed out that such access was not possible as only a portion of the parcel was involved in the variance request. Director Warren indicated on the master plan, the areas in question and said he felt that to grant this variance would create future . problems in all such areas adjacent to freeways. He pointed out that, inthe case of other freeways within the City, -3- provisions were being made for correct zoning at the interchanges. He felt that this particular area should remain high density use, and that there were no excep- tional circumstance which would permit the variance. Vice-Chairman Stewart commented that there was too much commercial , spot zoning. MSC (Johnson - Comstock) Since the General Plan allows for flexibility, that the. application of Mr. Baker for a zone variance be approved subject to the following recommendations: 1 . That a six foot high wooden fence or masonry wall be constructed along the southerly line of the property. 2. That any area between the front property line and setback line be landscaped as feasible. 3. That the front setback line be established as the southerly line of the drainage channel along "H" Street. 4. That signs shall be restricted to those shown on the plot plan, with the elimin- ation of the proposed "Banjo" sign at the northeast corner of the property. 5. That the entire parcel , excluding any landscaped areas, be surfaced in accordance with the zoning ordinance and any required parking spaces marked. 6. That any lighting shall be so planned as to prevent reflection on any residential development. 7. All sales and displays shall be indoors and shall be limited to those items normally accessory to service station business. Outdoor displays will require specific staff or Commission approval . 8. An enclosed area with containers shall be provided for waste and trash. Further, that findings be as follows: 1 . The exceptional circumstance being that it is a freeway location and no other property has the problem' of a drainage ditch directly in front of it, thus . eliminating the possibility of developing the property for other uses. 2. There is a railroad running along the west side which makes it difficult to develop R-3 use at that location. 3. That the denial of the application would materially affect the welfare of the applicant and deprive him of use. 4. That the "banjo" sign be allowed if the setback is observed. Discussion: Member Adams stated that he could not see why this property could not be developed R-3; that the service station would be an intrusion of commercial into an R-3 . zone; that the exceptional circumstances which cite the drainage ditch did not enter into consideration for use of the property for R-3 use. Chairman Stevenson declared that this would represent intrusion into a residential area and spot zoning; that it would interfere with traffic at the interchange. It was suggested by. Members Adams and Vice-Chairman Stewart that a .study be made for rezoning of the area. Director Warren stated that it would be a month before such a -4- study could be brought before the Commission. The motion failed to carry by the following vote: AYES: Members Johnson, Comstock and Willhite NOES: Members Stewart, Stevenson, Adams and Guyer ABSENT: None Variance was denied. PUBLIC HEARING• Madalon Bagnell - 380 "K" Street - Request to Use Apartment Building in R-1 Zone for Nursery The application was read. Director Warren presented a slide of the area and pointed out that the applicant desires the variance to allow a nursery school in the lower floor of her apartment building. She was originally granted a variance to build 6 and 4-unit apartments. Parking is now provided in part of the proposed parking area. The upper apartments would continue to be used for residential purposes. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mrs. Bagnell , the applicant, stated she based her request for the variance on the fact that there is a great need for good nursery schools in this area, and this would benefit a great many working parents. She added that she would employ from 4 to 5 teachers and would take care of approximately 40 children. Parking would be prohibited within the fenced area during school hours. She said the operation would be carried out from about 7:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. A letter was read from Fire Marshal Smithey stating that certain conditions should be met before a variance was granted. Mrs. Bagnell agreed to all requirements as stated in the Marshal 's letter. Chairman Stevenson stated that if parking were permitted within the fenced area while school was in session, these cars could be construed as an attractive nuisance. He also remarked that the Commission would -have to find exceptional circumstances in order to grant the variance. Mr. Jesse Madden, 823 Fourth Avenue, objected to the variance on the grounds that his tenants would be disturbed by the noise of the children, and that the use was not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. Fallon, 827 Fourth Avenue, stated he does not like to see such semi-commercial uses entering the neighborhood. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. The Commission asked how many children were permitted to be cared for in a residential area. Director Warren stated that three were permitted without a variance. Vice- Chairman Stewart suggested that perhaps a conditional use permit would be more appli- cable in this case. Director Warren stated that the staff felt that such uses should be provided with a conditional use permit. Member Adams remarked that other nursery schools were in R-1 areas, and added that there were not too many objections. A letter from Mrs. Stella Giardina was read in which she objected to the granting of the variance. MSUC (Guyer - Stewart) Variance be denied; that no exceptional circumstances exist; that the use is not compatible with the neighborhood; no evidence was presented in- dicating a hardship within the meaning of the ordinance. - 5 _ The staff was requested to study the feasibility of allowing nursery schools in certain residential zones with a conditional use permit. + PUBLIC HEARING: Dr. and Mrs. Frank Spadafore - 5 Sierra Way - Reduction .of Setback from 20 to 10 feet. After the reading of the application, Director Warren presented a plot plan of the proposal . He pointed out that the setbacks at this intersection on Hilltop Drive are 10 feet on all other properties , with a 20 foot setback on East Sierra Way. The applicant has erected a fence within the 10 foot setback and is seeking a variance for a l0 foot setback. He noted that the house sets well back of the setback line, and that the a p p 1 icant would 1 ike to b u i I an above-ground swimming poolp This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the hearing. Dr. Spadafore, the applicant, stated that a 58 inch fence would be adequate as he intends to level the ground on which the pool will be placed. The pool will be 18 feet in diameter. There being no further comment, either for, or against, the hearing was declared closed. MSUC (Stewart- Willhite) That the location of the house on the lot, and the extreme side setback does create a hardship, and that the 10 foot setback would be compatible with setbacks in the area. That the ordinance be amended so that the setback .to the north be changed for compatibility with the rest of the area. This would not be detrimental , and there would be no problem with traffic visibility. MSUC (Stewart- Comstock) That the change in ordinance be brought back to the I Commission at the first meeting in August; both lots in question to be changed from 1 20 to 10 foot setbacks. PUBLIC HEARING: William O'Connell - 360 "H" Street - Reques't to build 10-foot high fence in setback. The application .was read. Director of Planning Warren presented a slide showing the location of the fence. Member Johnson asked whether there was an existing fence. Director Warren stated the applicant has erected a 10-foot high fence, 9-ill from the property line. This fence replaced an 8-foot high fence which had previously existed. The request is made to correct a violation. Member Johnson stated that if the variance were granted, the Building Division should check the structure of the fence. Director Warren stated that if the variance was granted, the applicant should be instructed to obtain a permit for the fence from the Building Division. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the hearing. Mr. William O'Connell , the applicant, stated the pool was the above-ground type with a wide railing around it. He had placed the.fence 92" from the property line to elim- inate the necessity of having to" remove the railing on the pool . He admitted that he had applied for the variance because a building inspector had noticed the violation and would obtain the necessary permit if the variance was granted. Mr. Paul Yeager, 414 "J" Street, stated he felt that the height of a fence should be entirely up to the property owner and should be based on the need for privacy and protection. -6- There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Comstock questioned that there were any exceptional circumstances on which to base the variance approval . Member Adams felt a bad precedent would be set if this variance was granted, and indicated that he felt no fence should be over 6 feet high. Chairman Stevenson asked whether it would be possible to put the fence on the setback line and he was told that this would be possible if made part of the existing structures , but would require approval of the Building Division. MSUC (Comstock - Guyer) The application for variance be denied in that no excep- tional circumstances exist, and that such variance is not required to preserve a substantial property right. _PUBLIC HEARING: Mesa Realty - "L" Street, Hilltop Drive and Rienstra Street - Offsite subdivision signs in R-1 zones. The application was read, and Director Warren presented a slide showing the proposed location of the signs , as follows: 3 foot by 5 foot signs would be at the,--..southeast corner of "L" Street and Hilltop Drive, at the southwest corner of Hilltop Drive and Palomar Street, and a 6 foot by -10 foot sign on the southeast corner of Hilltop Drive and Rienstra Street. No drawings of the signs were available. Member Stewart stated that he felt that if the subdividers distributed guide maps and advertised in the papers , no signs would be necessary, particularly in a resi- dential area. Because of the size of the Princess Manor Subdivision, the Commission had already granted them more signs than would normally be permitted. Member Comstock questioned the relationship to the signs within subdivisions. He felt that off-site and on-site signs should be considered separately. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Powell , Chula Vista, objected to the variance on the grounds that the size of the signs would degrade property. Mr. George Sanders , representing Mesa Realty, said that the 6 x 10 foot signs on Hilltop and Rienstra had been deleted. He stated he felt these signs were required because the subdivision is still out in the country and would be difficult to find without them. He pointed out that he received permission from the property owners involved to install these signs within the set- back and the permits were on file in the Planning Department. Member Johnson asked whether they were planning on additional signs. The applicant stated they were not. Vice-Chairman Stewart suggested that a research on the standards required by other cities on •subdivision ,signs might be a good idea; that such signs should be controlled with a conditional use permit. A letter was read from C. E. Norcross, 895 Hilltop Drive, objecting to' the installation of the signs. He felt such signs would detract from the neighborhood character. Mr. Crook appeared before the Commission as an interested citizen, and pointed out that the City maps do not locate Rienstra Street; that there is no street sign placed at the subdivision site; that Hilltop Drive, at the intersection of Rienstra, is a dirt road. Member Stewart indicated that street signs would- be ordered and placed by the Engineering Department. -7- Mr. Paul Yeager, 414 "J" Street, stated the Commission would be creating two commercial zones in the area if they approved the request for variance. Mr. Stanley J. Pochodowicz, 10 E. Palomar Drive, declared he felt this subdivision should be advertised on the freeways , etc. , and that the realtor could provide prospective buyers with small location maps. Mr. Sanders remarked that such signs would assist prospective buyers in finding the subdivision, and that if this was made easier, the community as a whole would benefit by the increased tax base, etc. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Comstock pointed out that every weekend, it was possible to see "Open House" signs erected within the public right of way. Vice-Chairman Stewart felt the problem in this respect was the failure to enforce ordinances which regulate the erection of signs in this fashion, and that such enforcement was outside the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission. Director Warren stated that there might be a need for some regulations in regard to off-street signs. He suggested that a provision for signs with a Conditional Use-Permit may be the answer. He also pointed out that zone variances are granted only where there were exceptional circumstances applicable to the property in question which would create an unnecessary hardship unless zoning relief were given. MSUC (Guyer - Stewart) That the request be denied since there are no exceptional circumstances; such use would not be compatible with the area; no evidence was presented indicating a hardship within the meaning of the ordinance. SUBDIVISIONS Cindy Park No. 3 - Tentative Map Director Warren presented the map and stated that the application for annexation is now being processed. He pointed out that there are twenty single-family lots involved, and that this is a routine subdivision. He presented the staff recom- mendations and pointed out that slope planting has become a significant problem. Principal Engineer Harshman stated that he felt that slope planting should be required, to be maintained by the subdivider until occupancy of the houses. Member Willhite stated that he felt there might be a problem of watering such plantings until sold. Principal Engineer Harshman answered that a minimal amount of watering would be required, and if this planting and maintenance were to be a condition of approval , it would serve to eliminate the erosion of slopes. MSUC (Comstock - Johnson) Tentative map of Cindy Park #3 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1 . All slopes shall be graded and planted in accordance with standard specifications on file in the Planning Department. A bond sufficient to cover the cost of same shall be deposited with the City. Subject grading and planting shall be completed prior to final inspection of any dwelling within the subdivision by the Building Inspector. The slope plantings on any unsold or unoccupied lots shall be maintained by the subdivider in whatever way is necessary to insure proper growth until all lots are sold. 2. Easements shall be granted on all lots to allow a minimum of ten (10) feet from the inside edge of the sidewalk for street tree planting. -8- 3. Dixon Street =shall be changed to Dixon -Way. 4. Provision -for a temporary cul-de-sac shall be made at the northerly terminus of Dixon Way. A one-foot lot shall be created at the northerly end of Dixon Way. 5. Street -sections shall be revised per recommendations of the City Engineer as shown upon ,the Engineering check copy of the subject map on file in the Division of Engineering. 6. Detailed methods of drainage control shall be subject to the City Engineer 's approval.. 7. This property. is subject to assessment by the Montgomery Sanitation District -, for construction .of certain sewer facilities within said district. In 4Taddition, the area is subject to pro-rata costs to eliminate the existing pump station on Second Avenue north,of Quintard. 8. This area must be. annexed to the City of Chula Vista prior to action on the .final map by the City Council . (Cont'd)' La Bonita Estates - Tentative Map (see below) REZONING: PUBLIC HEARING: (Cont'd) J & P Construction Co. , Inc. - South of Allen School Lane, West of Otay Lakes Road - R-1-A to R-1-B-20 Director Warren stated that 'the subdivider has requested that the above two items be continued to the next -meeting on July 20, 1964. MSUC (Comstock = Johnson) Two items be continued until the meeting ,of July 20, 1964. MISCELLANEOUS Request to Rename .a Portion of Previous "E" Street. Director Warren -stated that a request from property owners on "E". Street to rename a portion of the old "E" Street had been presented to the Council which referred it to the Planning Commission for recommendation. The Planning and Engineering staffs felt such a name would be confusing and .recommended that the Commission choose from one of the following: Bonita Court, Valley View Court and Mountain View Court. It was agred .by the .Commission that naming the street "E" Street Lane would be confusing, MSUC (Stewart - Adams) The name "Valley View Court" be recommended to the City Council for subject portion of "E" Street. Report -of Findings on Appeal of Jay Pugh -- Billiard Parlor, The findings were read, and Member Adams requested the following statement appear in the record after item #2: "Granting this variance would set a precedent for the establishment of billiard parlors in residential areas." MSC (Stewart- Comstock) That the findings be approved, with the addition suggested by Member Adams , and the recommendation of the Commission be forwarded to the Council . The motion carried by the following vote., to-wit: -9- AYES: Members Stewart, Comstock, Johnson, Stevenson, Willhite and Adams NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Member Guyer ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Mrs. Madalon Bagnell asked the Commission to reconsider her request for zone variance for the purpose of establishing a nursery school in her apartments. She stated that more than 75 % of the lot next to hers is commercial . Vice-Chairman Stewart suggested that she appeal to the Council or see the Planning Director for a possible course of action. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: A letter was read from Daniel Thomas requesting an extension of time for the in- stallation of public improvements along Bonita Road in front of h.is La Bonita Town and Country Apartments. Director Warren pointed out that several property owners in the vicinity were interested in creating a 1911 Act Assessment District to provide for concurrent installation of complete street improvements in this area. The request for authorization to circu- late the petition was to be presented to the Council for action at the meeting of July 7th. Principal Engineer Harshman -stated that there were some problems in the area due to the existence of an old water line. He recommended approval subject to the formation of, or rejection of, an Assessment District. In the event that the Assessment . District was not created, bonds to cover the installation of the improvements would be required of Mr. Thomas, who, upon thirty days notice, would then proceed with the installation of the required curb, gutter, etc. MSC (Stewart - Guyer) That the request be approved, subject to the conditions recom- mended by the Engineering Division. If the Assessment District is not created, bonds must be posted and upon thirty days notice, improvements must be installed. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Stewart, Guyer, Johnson, Stevenson, Willhite and Adams NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Member Comstock Letter from Chula Vista School District A letter from the Chula Vista School District was read in which they requested the approval of the purchase of .476 acres in the Princess Manor Subdivision as part of a school site. Director Warren indicated on a map the location of the land proposed to be purchased by the School District. There being little discussion on the proposed purchase, it was unanimously agreed that approval be granted. MSUC (Stewart - Guyer) That the request be approved. -10- Ci"'t'i'zens`' C'ommittee's` Chairman Stevenson remarked that the citizens who had assisted in the preparation of the Master Plan had never been thanked for their services and suggested that letters be written to them. Director Warren suggested that this be held in abeyance until everything had been resolved. He pointed out that the Master Plan report would probably be delivered by the end of the week. He also stated that the report would still require approval . by the Commission and that the Council must still approve both the report and map. Commercial and R-3 Zoning Chairman Stevenson also remarked that commercial'wal R-3 zoning was getting out of hand. He questioned whether or not some language on Page 19, Section 33.26 of the Zoning Ordinance should be changed. Member Comstock questioned the advisability of eliminating certain items of the zoning ordinance. He also suggested that a transition type of zoning might act as a buffer zone. Director Warren stated that it might be wise to create a business and professional zone which would apply in particular situations. Member Stewart stated that it might be possible to use some of the language used in thereby making a zeta--Mase more, restrictive. ADJOURNMENT MSUC (Comstock - Willhite) Meeting be adjourned to July 20, 1964. Respectfully submitted, /L��Cts /�• e��_e..e%t�.Cp'� Pauline M. Leicht Acting Secretary