Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1964-01-06 PC MINS MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING _ OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA January 6, 1964 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista was held at 7:00 P.M. at the above date in the Council Chamber at the Civic Center with the following members present: Stevenson, Stewart, Comstock, Johnson, Willhite, Adams and Guyer. ' Absent: None. Also present: Acting Planning Director Warren, City Attorney Duberg, Junior Planner Lee and Principal Engineer Harshman. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Guyer - Comstock) Minutes of December 16, 1963 be approved as mailed. VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING: Princess Park Estates , Inc. -- Jonathan Manor Annexation A letter was read from Mr. Ralph E. Spaid, Secretary-Treasurer of Princess Park Estates , Inc. , requesting a postponement until January 20, 1964 of their variance application for permission to construct houses containing less floor area than that required by ordinance. MSUC (Willhite - Adams) Public hearing be continued until January 20,. 1964. PUBLIC HEARING: Holiday Gardens Application was read in which a request was made for permission to erect an oversized sign on the rear of Lot 38 in the Holiday Gardens Subdivision (436 Colorado Avenue). The sign to be 44 feet wide, 12 feet high and 6 feet from the ground. Mr. Warren submitted a plot plan explaining the location of the proposed sign and the adjacent zoning of the area. This would be a permanent sign, located on R-3 property; if moved 2 feet west, he added, it would be legal for the applicants to erect the sign since the property is zoned M-1 . This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the public hearing. There being no comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Adams started the proposed sign is two or three times larger than he feels it needs to be. He -added it would be better for the applicants to have two smaller signs set at an angle. Since there are numerous applications for signs , Member Adams cautioned that it would set a bad precedent to allow this one to go through. Vice-Chairman Stewart said he was in full agreement with Member Adams , and felt the proximity of M-1 property factor to this area was not significant as far as granting this variance was concerned. Mr. Stewart stated he felt the applicants should be re- quired to conform to the ordinance. Member Johnson arrived at the meeting at this time. -1- The Commission discussed the established M-1 zoning adjacent to the property and the need of the applicant for the oversized sign. MSUC (Adams - Guyer) Variance be denied for the following reasons: 1 . It would set a bad precedent. 2. There is no justification for variance as required by ordinance. Member Johnson abstained from voting because he came in late. PUBLIC HEARING - Salvatore M. Albo - 555 Roosevelt Street The application was read in which a request was made for a reduction in front setback along Roosevelt Street from 20 feet to 7 feet and from 15 feet to 9 feet along Smith Avenue, to allow for proper offstreet parking for an apartment project. Mr. Warren submitted a plot plan explaining the applicant's property is zoned R-2, but' was granted a variance in May, 1958 to build nine units. At that time, the applicant had submitted a diagram showing his proposed parking; however, the Commissioners felt this was not adequate and although the variance was approved, the parking was not. Mr. Warren stated the applicant has now revised his parking and has submitted three different plans , only one of which, according to the staff, would work satisfactorily to i�, handle the traffic. This plan involves the reduction in setback. Vice-Chairman Stewart asked if the original minutes reflected the disapproval of the parking layout. The minutes pertaining to this matter of May".5, 1958 were read. From the minutes , it was determined that a variance had been granted with the con- dition that one offstreet parking space per unit could be provided without violating setback requirements. The Commission discussed the access to the alley and Vice-Chairman Stewart questioned the need for the 29 feet off the alley. Mr. Warren stated this was needed for maneu- verability, and was an engineering department requirement. Member Guyer asked what the distance was between the building and the property line. Mr. Warren stated it was 10 feet. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stevenson opened the public hearing. Mrs. Beulah M. Lane, 561 Roosevelt Street, spoke in basic opposition to the reduction in front setback, stating her property was right next to this proposed development. She felt it would create a blind corner on the street, making it hazardous. Member Johnson asked about the curb and sidewalk in relation to the "blind corner" mentioned by the lady opposing this variance. Mr. Warren assured him reduction would create no related problem. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Mr. Salvatore Albo, the applicant, explained that he originally proposed 36 feet for parking; however, he was informed that he needed 44 feet so is now submitting consider- ation, three proposals for parking. The 10 foot alley in back of the apartments would be open through to Roosevelt Street. -2- Chairman Stevenson said the proposed development would be an improvement in the area; however, he felt this was "overbuilding." Member Adams stated he was not in favor of the reduction in setback on Roosevelt Street as it would set a precedent in this area. Member Comstock stated the present plan does not conform to the original plan sub- mitted in 1958 by the applicant. Though a good plan basically, he felt the site was too small . He would like to see the number of units cut down or the size of the building. Member Comstock asked the Commission to draw a parallel between this parking and the Holiday Gardens layout which have four-plexes on 7900 square foot lots. Vice-Chairman Stewart asked how many units were proposed on the initial request for variance. Mr. Warren said the plot plan showed five units on top and four on the bottom. The zoning ordinance sets up a minimum of 1000 square feet for each dwelling unit. Mr. Warren added that the applicant is presently proposing 8 units. Member Willhite asked if the engineering department was adamant about the requirement for 44 feet and asked if there was some regulation covering this. Mr. Warren ex- plained that the engineering department has a set of standards which represent minimums. Every plan coming in is referred to them for approval of parking. For the applicant to provide adequate parking and still maintain his setbacks, he would have to re- design his building. Vice-Chairman Stewart said he felt the 10 foot side yard could be reduced to 5 feet and by shortening the building up somewhat would give the applicant more space for parking. He added that a lot of space is wasted here by having this alley and questioned the need for the side driveway, which he felt was losing a lot of ground. Mr. Stewart commented that the building should be redesigned and provide the parking on the first floor and let the second story extend over the parking layout. He added he was not in favor of reducing the front setback to less than 15 feet. Mr. Warren stated the staff feels there is room for change; however, if the Commission refers this back to the staff for further study, he would like to be assured that the applicant will compromise with the department somewhere along the way. Member Comstock said he had no objection to the reduction on Smith Avenue; he would go along with a 9 or 10 foot setback here. He felt the applicant could use a portion of the setback along Smith Avenue for parking. Mr. Albo informed the Commission that his loan has been. approved and now time is of importance to him. Member Comstock commented that he would like to see this matter continued and the traffic safety engineer consulted in reference to the "blind corner." MSUC (Guyer - Comstock) Hearing be continued until the meeting of January 20, 1964 at which time Mr. Albo should present a revised plan mutually satisfactory to the staff and the Commission, involving minimum setback reductions. SUBDIVISIONS Bonita Cove - Tentative Map -3- Mr. Warren explained this was a re-submission of an old subdivision map. The area lies south of Bonita Road , east of Hilltop Drive, and consists of 52 lots, the majority of which fall into the regular R-1 category, and the tier along the south edge of the subdivision will contain approximately 14,000 square foot lots. These lots will be reserved for custom-built homes. At present, Mr. Warren continued, there is an unusual zoning pattern existing here based on a map filed some time ago. The zoning ranges from R-1 , R-1-B-9, R-1-B-12 to R-1-B-15. The new plan consolidates this to the R-1 and R-1B-12 classification. Member- Willhite asked about the frontage on the cul-de-sac lots. Mr. Warren stated they vary from 35 to 40 and 50 feet. The size of the lots vary from 7000 to 9000 square feet. The subdivider plans to retain the natural contours of the rear lots, and these will average about 14,000 square feet. Mr. Warren then presented the staff 's recommendations as follows: 1 . That portion of the subdivision now in the County shall be annexed to the City of Chula Vista prior to approval of the final map. 2. All lot lines shall be adjusted to assure that proper setbacks of existing buildings will be maintained on those lots presently fronting on Bonita Road. 3. An 8-foot easement for tree planting shall be provided adjacent to the front property line of all lots. 4. The zoning of this area shall be changed to conform to the proposed lot sizes; such rezoning to be based upon a final map of the subdivision. Mr. Warren explained that the subdivider desired a 5-foot setback be established along that portion of Bonhill Drive on the west side from the north line of the subdivision to Bonita Road. Member Adams questioned the street names , and suggested the subdivider not name the one street "Hilltop Drive" as it will ,never be connected with the present "Hilltop Drive. " Mr. Ferreira stated the street names were of no significance to him; he will go along with whatever the Commission desires. Member Comstock mentioned the variance problems that will be coming up because of the small street frontages on the cul-de-sacs. Residents here will be coming in for reduction of -setbacks to build patios , pools , etc. Member Comstock said he feels the lots are entirely too small for the area. He would like to see them at least 10,000 square feet, considering the larger and more expensive homes on Rogan Road to the west. The Commission discussed the zoning, and Mr. Warren informed them that they would be basically approving the zone pattern if they approved the map. Chairman Stevenson asked if there would be any problems if they continued this matter until they have the rezoning hearing. Mr. Ferreira explained that he has three loan companies involved in the transaction and may very well lose his option. Chairman Stevenson asked if the rezoning was turned down, what would happen to the subdivider 's business transaction. Mr. Ferreira stated, in that case, his money would -4- be returned. s Member Comstock declared the matter should be continued until the rezoning hearing. Chairman Stevenson agreed, commenting that the adjacent neighbors should have a chance to speak. Vice-Chairman Stewart stated that, at first, he felt the general policy toward land use in that area should be 10,000 square foot lots; however, since they had approved rezoning to R-3 adjacent to this subdivision and the fact that a Freeway interchange is nearby has a bearing on this case. Mr. Stewart added that this area is adjacent to a number of substandard lots along Bonita Road. The Commission discussed the odd-shaped lots and Vice-Chairman Stewart felt these were no problem as the cul-de-sac lots are the first lots to be sold in any subdivision. Mr. Stewart added that there are a very small percentage of people owning these lots who come in for a variance to allow additions. Mr. Warren spoke of the old map, remarking that it had a lot of merit as far as zoning concept was concerned, but was impractical for a subdivision of this size. Chairman Stevenson reiterated that he would like to see the rezoning hearing placed before approval of this tentative map. Mr. Ferreira explained the reason for the many-odd shaped lots saying he did this to maintain as much of the natural contour of the land as possible. He has segregated the large lots from the smaller lots with respect to the homes nearby. Member Adams questioned what would happen if the tentative map was approved and the rezoning denied. Vice-Chairman Stewart indicated that unless rezoning is approved, the map would be void. MSC (Guyer - Willhite) Tentative map be approved subject to the conditions outlined by the Planning Director and the Engineering Department, and also: 1 . A 5-foot building line shall be established on the west side of Bonhill Drive from the north line of the subdivision to Bonita Road. 2. Improvement of the proposed offsite street shall be installed coincident with the subdivision streets. The motion carried by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Members Guyer, Stewart, Johnson, Stevenson, Willhite and Adams NOES: Member Comstock ABSENT: None MISCELLANEOUS Bonita Verde Subdivision - Architectural Consideration of Proposed Residence A building plan of a proposed residence in the Bonita Verde Subdivision was presented by Mr. Walter Long for architectural consideration. Mr. Warren explained the home will be constructed on "Bonita Dunes Place. " It will be -5- of stone and stucco with a shake roof. Chairman Stevenson commented that it appeared to be compatible with the initial development the Commissioners had at an earlier meeting. Mr. Walter Long, the builder, said it would be a one-story house, 1950 square feet. Vice-Chairman Stewart asked for the staff 's comments. Mr. Warren said the staff recommends approval . MSUC (Stewart - Willhite) The plans be approved as submitted. Deferral of Public Improvements -- Hilltop Dri�ve and Bonita Road A letter from Mr. Frederic E. Couture was read in which he requested the deferral of sidewalk along 136 feet of frontage on Hilltop Drive, and a lot split on his property. Mr. Warren explained that the lot split will be handled by the Planning Department as a routine thing. Member Comstock asked how far this property is from the end of Hilltop Drive. Mr. Warren said it would be several hundred feet. Mr. William Harshman, Principal Engineer, stated, in terms of the ordinance, in order to grant a deferral , the situation must be "extremely impractical" or "cause a de- fective condition." Such conditions do not apply here, so the Engineering Department recommends that the request be denied. Mr. Fred Couture, the applicant, spoke of the adjacent topography, claiming the land goes straight up, and on the other side of the street, it drops off considerably. Vice-Chairman Stewart asked if this request is for waiver or deferral . Mr. Couture indicated he desired only a deferral if future need would justify a walk here. He added that there were no sidewalks for 6 or 8 lots from his property. Member Adams declared sidewalks should be put in whenever possible. Mr. Harshman mentioned that the department has been invoking the 1911 Block Act wherever feasible. MSC (Adams - Stewart) Request for deferral of public improvement (sidewalk) be denied because no conditions could be found which would make it impractical to install the improvements at this time. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Adams , Stewart, Comstock, Johnson, Stevenson and Willhite NOES: Member Guyer ABSENT: None Architectural Consideration -- La Bonita Town and Country Apartments A letter was read from.Mr. Daniel Thomas, owner of the proposed apartments on Bonita Road asking that the roof material be changed from shake shingles to asphalt tile. A letter was then read from Fire Marshal Smithey recommending the change in roof material , since the proposed site is located in Fire Zone No. 2. The center building -6- designated "Recreation" is classified as a Group B public assembly occupancy and is required by the California Administrative Code, Title 19, to have a fire-resistive roof. Mr. Daniel Thomas, the applicant, submitted a sample of the type roof material he now proposes. He stated that the asphalt shingles cost about 50 cents a square foot more than the shake shingles. Use of these shingles will lower his fire insurance rates , also. Chairman Stevenson asked if the roof could be seen from Bonita Road. Mr. Thomas said it will be seen somewhat as the roof is pitched. Mr. Warren said this material will not take on the same appearance as a shake shingle roof. Approval of this type material may set a precedent that would do away with shake shingles in this area. Mr. Warren added that what the Fire Marshal says does not "prohibit" all types of shake shingles. Chairman Stevenson commented that the applicant is going overboard in terms of cost and uniformity and he could see nothing,-,,wrong with this change. Mr. Thomas stated the proposed shingles will have more squares per foot than asbestos ishingles usually have. Normally, they are 5 inches to the weather and these will be 10 inches to the weather so that they will look somewhat like shake shingles . Member Adams indicated that these shingles would not resemble shake shingles. MSUC (Stewart - Guyer) That a change in roof material from wooden shake shingles to the Carey Fire-Chex 325, Underwriter 's Laboratory Class A, asphalt tile shingles as submitted be approved. Member Comstock abstained from the hearing. COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Warren reviewed the contents of a letter sent from the San Diego County Planning Congress stating their annual meeting will take place on Friday, January 17, 1964 at the Ocean House. Mr. Harold Keen will be the guest speaker. His subject will be "A Newsman Looks at Planning. " Mr. Warren also announced a meeting of the Southern California Planning Congress to take place on Tuesday, January 9 in Burbank. The speaker for the evening will be. Simon Eisner, Planning Consultant. . Mr. Warren informed the Commissioners they would be called during the week for their reservations. TO Be Set for Public Hearing -- Rezoning - Bonita Cove Subdivision Mr. Warren reviewed the proposed rezoning of the Subdivision, stating the request was for R-1 and R-1-13-12 .from R-1 , R-1-13-9, R-1-B-12 and R-1-B-15. RESOLUTION NO. 298 Resolution of Intention to Set a Public Hearing for MSUC (Guyer - Willhite) January 20, 1964 to Consider R-1 and R-1-13-12 Rezoning for the Bonita Cove Subdivision ADJOURNMENT MSUC (Comstock - Stewart) Meeting adjourn to January 20, 1964. Meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, JJhnie M. Fulasz Secretary