Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1964-02-03 PC MINS MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA February 3 , '1964 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission. of Chula Vista was held at' 7:00 P,M. in the Council Chamber at Civic Center on the above date with the following members present: ; Stewart, Comstock, Johnson, Adams and Guyer. Absent: Stevenson and Willhite. Also present: Acting Planning Director Warren, Junior Planner Lee and Principal Engineer i Harshman. In the absence of Chairman Stevenson, Vice-Chairman Stewart presided over the meeting. APPROVAL, OF MINUTES MSUC (JoI hnson - Guyer) Minutes of January 20, 1964 be approved, as mailed. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING: Bear, Evans and Freeman, 496 Fifth Avenue The application was read in which a request was made for permission to use the existing dwelling on .496 Fifth Avenue for a professional office (Attorney and/or Medical Doctor) . Mr. Warren submitted a plot plan, noting the location, existing zoning and adjacent land uses. He suggested the parking be rearranged and that access be from the alley only, since this was a congested corner. Member Adams asked about the garage on the premises and Mr. Warren stated this should be removed. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Donald Freeman, 806 National Avenue, National City, one of the applicants , stated the existing dwelling will be remodeled in the interior to accommodate the offices. The exterior will not be changed. The Commission discussed the setbacks on the property and Mr. Warren stated the appli- cants can maintain the, existing setbacks , though they are non-conforming. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed.. Vice-Chairman Stewart felt a condition should be imposed requiring removal of the garage, and that suitable access be provided from the alley. Mr. Warren said that because of the intersection, the curb cut on Fifth Avenue should be removed. He would also recommend that any signs erected here be approved by the Planning Commission. The Commission discussed the need for a fence or wall on the west side of the property adjacent to the residential use and felt this should also be a condition. Member Comstock disagreed , stating eventually this entire block will be redeveloped and a limitation of this sort would be a hardship at some later date. Member Johnson, how- ever, felt a fence is needed to keep children out of the office parking area. -1- MSUC (Comstock - Adams) Conditional use permit be approved with the following con- ditions: 1 . A 6-foot wooden fence shall be erected along the west property line; the type to be approved by the Director of Planning. 2. The curb cut along Fifth Avenue shall be removed. 3. Garage on premises shall be removed. 4. Parking area shall be surfaced with asphaltic concrete and spaces (7) delineated. 5. Access shall be from the alley only. 6. Any signs shall be approved by the Planning Commission. Further, that findings be based on the following: 1 . Granting this conditional use permit will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare as damage and nuisance arising from noise, smoke, ofor, dust or vibration, hazard to persons and property from possible explosion, con- tamination or fire is not applicable here. 2. The characteristics of the use proposed are reasonably compatible with the types of use permitted in the surrounding area. Uses in the neighborhood have been con- sidered and it was determined that this site was well related to existing and proposed commercial development. VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING: Oscar L. Sims - 131 East Prospect Street - Setback Variance The application was read in which a request was made for a reduction in side- yard set- back from five feet to two feet to allow for the construction of a carport. -- Mr. Warren. submitted a plot plan explaining the location of the carport which was put up in violation of the building code. The carport is open on three sides and has an aluminum roof. The poles of this carport are 2 feet from the property line. The roof overhangs 9 inches. The house is 13 feet from the property line. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Oscar Sims , 131 E . Prospect Street, the applicant, claimed he was unaware of the fact that no building permit was issued for the construction. He assumed his contractor had taken care of this. He plans to enclose his garage and therefore needs the carport. He and his wife both work and each has a car. Since the driveway is so narrow, they were forced to park one car out on the road every night, and this encouraged vandalism. Their garage is now being used as a playroom and storage room, but a car can still be parked inside. Mr. Larry Bridgewater, 1370 Theresa Way, questioned if he could have the same reduction in. setback, if this variance was approved. There being no' further comment, either=for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Guyer asked how the applicant could conform to the ordinance. Mr. Warren stated his poles must be 5 feet from the property line; this would still allow him a 2 foot overhang. -2- Member Comstock felt the relocation of the carport at the rear of the house would solve the applicant's problem and would be keeping with the setback requirements. He added there were no exceptional circumstances here. Member Adams agreed, commenting further that a precedent would be established here if the Commission granted this variance. Member Johnson questioned whether these contractors were aware of the setback problems. Mr. Warren stated the staff had prepared a brochure delineating setback requirements and called in most of the contractors and gave them these requirements. A problem still exists with one or two of these contractors , however. MSUC (Adams - Guyer) Setback reduction be denied as no exceptional circumstances as re= quired by ordinance can be found on which to grant this variance. PUBLIC HEARING: Nickolas A. Kromydas - 782 Melrose Avenue - Setback Variance The application was read in which a request was made for a reduction in front yard set- back from 15 feet to 13 feet to allow certain dimensions in the construction of a bed- room to the existing dwelling at 782 Melrose Avenue. Mr. Warren submitted a plot plan, explaining the new room proposed would be 16 feet by 14 feet. He then discussed a floor plan of the house and the proposed room. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Nickolas Kromydas, the applicant, discussed his space needs and existing room sizes. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Comstock said he failed to see what the exceptional circumstances would be in this case unless the setback along Milan Avenue could be considered as excessive. Vice-Chairman Stewart mentioned this was a corner lot offering a choice of front yard and side yard. He added that the applicant was aware of his problem at the time of purchase. Member Adams agreed, commenting that Melrose Avenue maintains a spacious character with houses setting back further than 15 feet, and it would be too bad to deviate on a corner. MSUC (Guyer -. Adams) Request for reduction in front yard setback be denied as no ex- ceptional circumstances as required by ordinance can be found to justify granting the variance. PUBLIC HEARING; Donald K. McCredie and J. P. Peltier - 178 Third Avenue - Use Variance The application was read in which a request was made to use a portion of property at 178 Third Avenue for new car storage and for the construction of a commercial building. The application includes a request for reduction of front setbacks from 15 feet to 5 feet on Landis and Third Avenue to allow for more offstreet parking. Mr. Warren submitted a plot plan explaining the adjacent zoning and land uses. The applicants desire to use a portion of this area for new car storage and to construct a building in which to service new cars. A condition should be imposed to require a fence, between this and the residential areas. Mr. Jim Peltier, co-owner of Castle-Rambler,, and one of the applicants , explained that -3- the proposed building will be used for minor car repairs. There will be no fender or body work done on the premises. Mr. Peltier spoke of the expansion of this company in the six years they have been in operation here from one employee to 30. Member Guyer questioned whether there would be any access on Landis Street and Mr. Peltier said there would not; entrance would be from Third Avenue only. He further stated that he talked to the adjacent property owners and after explaining their request, was assured .there would be no opposition from them: Mr. Peltier stated they will put up whatever type fence the Commission recommends. Mrs. Jane Hubbard, owner of the mortuary adjacent to this business and Mr. T. J. Sessions, owner of the duplex at 173-175 Landis, stated they had no objections. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Adams stated 200 feet depth of commercial along Third Avenue was needed for this business , and could see no reason why it should set a precedent to encourage commercial further north along Third Avenue. He questioned however, reducing the setback on Landis Street in view of the residential use in the area. The other Members disagreed, as they felt the area from the property line to the fence would become a "catch-all" for trash and weeds and would never be maintained. Mr. Warren felt a condition should be imposed whereby the applicants would have to maintain landscaping between the fence and the sidewalk. The Commission discussed the setback on Third Avenue. Mr. Warren explained that in a -commercial zone, a 35 foot curb cut is allowed. Member Comstock felt they should be more restrictive on Third Avenue as to the setback because of .this difficulty to turn and the visibility. being restrictive to the south. He said they should .maintain the setback at 10 feet. Mr. Warren stated the staff would recommend this. Vice-Chairman Stewart felt the problem was the cars parking on the curb and would suggest they establish no parking here. The Commission concurred that the Traffic Engineer should be consulted on this. Mr. Warren submitted the following Planning recommendations: I. A decorative, 6-foot high wooden fence (type to be approved by the Director of Planning) shall be constructed along the west and north sides of the development. 2. The entire area shall be paved and customer parking spaces marked. 3. Area between the fence and sidewalk on Landis Avenue shall be landscaped and per- manently maintained. 4. Development shall take place as indicated on plot plan submitted. 5. Access shall be restricted to Third Avenue and this curb cut shall be widened according to recommendations of Traffic Engineer. MSUC (Guyer - Comstock) Variance be approved subject to the conditions of the Planning Director and that the front setbacks on Landis and Third Avenue be established at five feet. Further, that findings be based on the following: 1 . There are exceptional circumstances applicable to the property involved in that the depth of commercial zoning in this area is not adequate for efficient development; proper off-street parking cannot be provided. -4- 2. Granting this variance is necessary for the preservation of the substantial property right of the applicant - the applicants have an established business and they need more room to continue at this location. 3. Granting this variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property improvements in the zone in which this property is located as there was no objection from the adjacent property owners and a problem of congestion will be alleviated. PUBLIC HEARING: Ignacio Munquia - 1181 Trenton Avenue - Setback Reduction The Commission noted that the applicant was not present at the meeting and the Chair asked for a motion to postpone the hearing. MSUC (Comstock - Guyer) Public hearing be postponed until the meeting of February 17, 1964. PUBLIC' HEARING: Mrs. James Logan - 88 Hilltop Drive - Request to Split Lot and Build on Easement The application was read in which a request was made for permission to split property with 300 feet of frontage on Hilltop Drive into four lots and to serve the rear three lots with an easement to Hilltop Drive. The standard setbacks would be maintained. Mr. Warren submitted a plot plan explaining the location, adjacent land uses and zoning. The applicant wishes to split her property into four lots , each lot will be 66.67 x 120 feet. Mr. Warren stated, however, with this plan, the land to the south will be land- locked and therefore submitted another plan which the staff would recommend. This re- vised plan would split the property into 3 lots, and would create a half cul-de-sac plus an easement to the property on the south. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Marie Allen, agent for Paul Miller, Realtor, stated that the applicant would agree to the revision as suggested by Mr. Warren. Mr. David Lively, 81 Mitcher Street, stated he was the one who made the offer to purchase this property. He said he would prefer the revised plan, as presented "by the Planning Director, splitting the parcel into 3 lots instead of 4. His plans are to build a house --4 bedroom, and having 1650 square feet -- as soon as possible on one lot. The price of the home will be approximately $25,000, which is in keeping with the houses in that neighborhood. Mr. Lively then mentioned he would have a drainage problem coming down the easement. Mr. William A. Davis , 90 Hilltop Drive and owner of the parcel of land to the south, recommends the revised plan also. Speaking in opposition were: A. K. Traylor , 79 Vista Way, Earl Biggin, 86 Corte Maria , Lester Winchell , 25 "D'' Street, Edward Sanford, 89 Hilltop Drive, Lois Nelson, 48 Hill- top Drive and Fred Rose, 87 Vista Way. They stated as their reasons: devaluation of their property and the drainage problem for which some provision should be made in order to prevent flooding; the applicant 's proposal may complicate future subdivision in the area. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. The Commission discussed the drainage; Vice-Chairman Stewart felt. a condition should be imposed whereby the Engineering Department would work with the property owners. and insure proper drainage here. -5- Member Comstock commented on the first plan and the 30 foot easement saying that if the land to the north is to be developed along this same pattern, they could make a 60-foot street here and dedicate it to the City. He added this proposed easement should be improved to City street specifications. Mr. Warren discussed the future of this easement stating it will become either a cul-de-sac or a through street, and the City will not usually accept a half-street unless a 28-foot width of paving is provided. Although this proposal is logical based on possible future development, the property to the north is not now available. Mr. William Harshman, Principal Engineer, stated the policy of the department requires a 28-foot travel-way. There are, at present, no sewers available; they must wait for future development for this. Mr. Harshman 'stated that a one-half width street could be installed here to City standards , but would not be accepted by the City until a full street is available. Mr. Warren questioned the desirability of installing all improvements at this time. Vice-Chairman Stewart stated that the proposed development is such that monolithic curb and sidewalk and 20 feet of paving should be required at this time. MSUC (Adams - Comstock) Zone variance be granted subject to the following conditions: 1 . The lot shall be split and property developed according to the revised plan sub- mitted at the meeting by the Planning Director; this plan provides access to the lot south of applicant 's property. 2. Improvements on the entire easement shall be in accordance with specifications of the Engineering Department. 3. Drainage to be provided according to Engineering Department specifications. 4. Front yard is to face north and the. building line to be 15 feet. 5. Sidewalks shall be omitted on the north to south easement; curb, gutter to be installed. 6. ,A new variance will be required to build upon the rear of the property contiguous on the south, even though access has been provided. SUBDIVISIONS Weatherstone South - Tentative Map Mr. Warren submitted a map explaining this was part of the original Halecrest Sub- division and occupies land west of Floyd Avenue and south of "J" Street. There are 65 R-1 lots. Mr. Warren then submitted the recommendations of the Planning staff as follows: 1 . All slopes shall be planted in accordance with standard specifications of the Planning Department. 2. Wherever monolithic curb and sidewalks are used, the final map shall show an eight (8) foot tree planting easement adjacent to the front or side property line of all lots. 3. A minimum of 15 foot setbacks shall be shown of each lot. In the event of corner lots, one side of street frontage may have a minimum setback of 10 feet. Mr. William Harshmann presented the Engineering Department recommendations , as follows: -6- 1 . Provide offer of dedication for non-dedicated portion of "J" Street adjacent to the subdivision. This action may be either by separate deed or through revision of the subdivision boundary. 2. . Sewer easement adjacent to lots 43 and 62 shall be ten (10) feet in width. 3. The City Engineer shall determine drainage requirements following submission of further documents as he may specify. The proposed method of drainage is specifi- cally not approved. 4. Show standard width utility easements or provide letters of release by each of the various utility companies. 5. The subdivider shall submit satisfactory evidence of having obtained permission to do work upon adjacent properties. 6. The typical section of "J" Street shall show five foot width sidewalk. 7. Show jog in right-of-way width on Berland Way at point of connection to existing dedication. 8. Use of portions of existing sewers is subject to payment of connection fees per ordinances of the City of Chula Vista. 9. This property is subject to payment of area service charges for the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer. 10. Maximum manhole spacing shall be 400 feet. Mr. J. R. Shattuck, the developer, asked for an interpretation of the 15 foot setback on the cul-de-sac; he felt 10 feet would be more realistic. With 15 feet, he felt there would not be enough room left to build a house because the lots are too shallow. Mr. Shattuck also questioned the need for the 20 foot requirement from the sidewalk to the garage door as established by Planning Commission resolution. He has six "critical" lots , other than those on cul-de-sacs , on which he would request a 10-foot setback. I The Commission discussed the 20 foot requirement from sidewalk to garage door and Member Comstock said he would be willing to consider a reduction if the developer can show how he can park a car in the setback without having it stick out onto the sidewalk. Member Adams said he would have no objection to a 10-foot setback around the cul-de-sac since a 90 foot lot is quite shallow. Vice-Chairman Stewart agreed, however, he felt the 20-foot requirement should stay and the developer should turn his garage when 10 foot setbacks are used. Mr. Warren agreed, saying if there is a problem on these shallow lots , it is because of poor design and not the setback. He added there is also an aesthetic appeal in setting the house back so that a lawn can be put in. Vice-Chairman Stewart declared that he realizes a 20 foot requirement would impose a hardship because of the slopes on some of these lots; however', he felt it would besetting a precedent to grant this developer a lesser requirement. .. MSUC (Adams - Guyer) Tentative Map be approved subject to recommendations of the Planning Director and the Engineering Department with the following conditions to be added: 1 . Planning Department recommendation No. 3 changed to read as follows: A minimum of 15 foot setbacks shall be shown of each lot except those lots at the end of cul-de-sac! -7- which may have a minimum setback of 10 feet. In the event of corner lots , one side of street frontage may have a minimum setback of 10 feet. 2. In the event straight-in driveways are used , the distance between the garage door and street sidewalk shall be not less than 20 feet. MISCELLANEOUS Final Plans - Speedee Mart Center - Telegraph Canyon Road and "L" Street Mr. Warren explained this property has the supplemental "D'' zone attached; therefore, plans have to be approved by the Commission. The original plans involving more land and more buildings has been abandoned. Only a Speedee Mart is now proposed. Mr. Warren then submitted a map showing the location of the proposed market and noted the proposed freeway. The Speedee Mart will contain approximately 2200 square feet. Standard Oil Company will have a service station on the corner. Mr. Warren suggested the following recommendations: 1 . Parking area shall be surfaced and parking spaces marked. 2. Written permission to use the area owned by the Standard Oil Company for access to the Center shall be filed with the Planning Department. 3. The area east of the parking area shall be landscaped and permanently maintained. Plant materials shall be provided throughout the area for beautification. 4.. At least two (2) street trees shall be planted and maintained in this area. 5. Service area shall be screened from view. 6. Items 3 , 4 and 5 shall be approved by Director of Planning. Mr. Zigman, representing Casey Construction, spoke of the severe sewer problem and the amount of fill needed in this area. Because of this, they felt this location would be the best for the Speedee Mart and the eastern part to be used as the parking lot., Member Johnson felt the landscaping should be shown on the plans. Mr. Casey stated he would go along with the recommendations of the °lanning Director. MSUC (Guyer - Comstock) s::.:P:=''tans be approved subject to the recommendations of the Planning Director. Pet Clinic Sign - 4055 Bonita Road Or. Warren submitted a sketch of the proposed sign and discussed the location of this proposed sign. He explained this must have the approval of the Commission because of the architectural control imposed here. The Commission concurred that the sign .was suitable for the area. MSUC (Johnson - Guyer) Proposed Sign as submitted be approved. Appointment of Director and Alternate to San Diego County Planning Congress Mr. Warren commented that in all other cities , the two positions are held by members of the Commission, rather than having the Director of Planning appointed as one -8- MSUC (Comstock - Johnson) Member Guyer be appointed as Director and Member Adams be appointed as Alternate to the San Diego County Planning Congress. Short Course for Planning Commissioners A letter from the University of California was read in which it announced a Short Course for Planning Commissioners to be held in San Francisco May 7 and 8, 1964, in cooperation with the League of California Cities , the California Chapter of the American Institute of Planners and the County Supervisor 's Association. Mr. Warren stated that such a trip had not been discussed with the administration since he had not determined whether or not any Commissioners desired to attend. Members Stewart, Adams and Johnson expressed interest in attending. Vice-Chairman Stewart asked that this be pursued and brought before them again in another month. Adjournment MSUC (Comstock - Johnson) Meeting be adjourned to February 17, 1964. Meeting adjourned at 10: 15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jennie M. Fulasz Secretary