Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1959-08-24 PC MINS MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA' CALIFORNIA . August 244 1959 An adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the' City of Chula Vista was held on the above date.at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chamber at Civic Center,-,with the following members present: Stevenson, Sparling, Stewart, Harmstead, Adams and Guyer. Absent: Member Weakland. Also present: City Attorney Kugler and Junior- Civil Engineer Hughes. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was moved by Member Sparling, seconded by Member Guyer and unanimously carried that the minutes of the meeting of August 10, 1959 be approved, copies having been mailed to each member. REZONING PUBLIC HEARING - "H" Street, West of Broadway - Rezoning from R-3 to C-2 (continued) Chairman Stewart reviewed the matter, stating that the hearing had been continued 'from the August 10th meeting for the purpose of clarification of the south boundary of the area proposed for rezoning and to give an opportunity to the owners of the Mayfair Market to make their wishes known regarding rezoning for their property. Chairman Stewart reopened the hearing. Mr. James Huffman, 521 Oaklawn, presented a petition signed by 28 persons opposing the rezoning. He stated that theyrare not opposed to rezoning on the north side of "H", but feel that rezoning on the south would lower their property value and increase the existing traffic problem. Mrs. Mildred Pressler, 522 Jefferson, protested the granting of the zone change, stating that if they desire to put medical offices on the south side, as indicated, they may do so with a conditional use permit, and not require a zone change to C-2. Mr. George Stone, 652 "H", spoke favoring the rezoning, stating that, in his opinion, the existing traffic problem would be aggravated by the city's plans for the Vista Square area, in any event, and that he feels traffic would not be increased on Jefferson and Oaklawn because of the rezoning. Mr. Elmer Sorenson, speaking for the Jadson Corporation, owners of a portion of property on the north side of "H", stated that he agrees that the traffic situation will be aggravated by the proposed commercial area at Vista Square, whether or not the subject property is re- zoned. He stated that the developers of the proposed rezoning will provide off-street parking to eliminate a part of the existing problem, if the area is rezoned. Mr. Sorenson stated that if the rezoning is denied, it will place a hardship on the owners because it is not practical to further develop the area with multiple units. Mr. John Morgan, owner of property on the north side, spoke favoring the rezoning. Mr. Main, 480 Broadway, owner of a trailer park included with the area proposed for rezoning, stated that if the area is rezoned, he intends to remove the trailer park and construct facilities for a convalescent home and medical offices. He stated that he will provide off-street parking which will have access to both Broadway and 11H" Street. Chairman Stewart stated that he feels the proposal constitutes strip zoning and app- roximately 50% of the area is already developed residentially. He feels that commercial zoning on the south side of 6H11 would be an intrusion in a residential area, He stated that PH" Street carries a large volume of traffic and that.,- in his opinion, any commercial development will',aggravate the existing parking .and traffic problem. Chairman Stewart noted that during the past several months, a number #f large parce3.s of land have been-rezoned to commercial and.* a great portion of these are vacant. He stated that he feels the Commission must consider not just the gain to be realized by property owners, but also whether additional commercial property is needed. Member Adams stated that he feels the north and south .side of UH11 Street., for 600 feet west from Broadway should be considered for C-2 zoning but that it would be out of line to cormnerejUly zone any property further west, He stated that he feels there is adequate commercial development on Broadway to serve the needs of residents of the area and that the existing residential pattern should not be intruded upon by additional commercial zoning. Mr. Sorenson stated that the applicants had discussed the request for rezoning with .the Planning Director before filing but had been unable to discuss it further after the continuance from the last meeting and that the Commission's indications at the last meeting were that they were not opposed to commercial zoning on the north side of 11H1'. He stated that Chula Vista has definitely established strip zoning and that this application would tend to deepen an existing commercial area. Mr, Sorenson further stated that. the land is contiguous to the Vista Square area and proper de- velopment, with provision for off-street parking, will be beneficial.. He stated that Jadson Corporation had constructed a large apartment development which the- city needed and now they wish to supplement their holdings with the commercial area. Ms, John Morgan stated that he had purchased his property on RHK Street several years ago after indications from the then City Planner that commercial zoning would be desirable. The representative-of .the owner. of the Mayfair. Market property -spoke .favoring the rezoning, Mr, Jack Anderson, owner of Jadson Corporation, stated that there are no residential property owners on PH" opposed to the "rezoning and he cannot understand why the Commission is against it when the people are not. He stated that. he feels the opposition. to it might be .caused by the proposed C-2 zoning of the city property., and that the Commission's arguments against rezoning of the subject property are not proper* Member Adams stated that the area is developed residentially-the Vistan Apartments on the north, apartments and duplexes'on the south--and the vacant land is zoned for multiple residential. units. He stated that he is not fighting the rezoning but that the Commission represents all. the citizens of Chula Vista and that they must see that good planning is done.- He stated that these are 'the reasons for his stand. There being no further comment., the hearing was closed. It was moved by Member Adams and seconded ,by Member Stevenson that the application for rezoning from R-3 to C-2 of property on the north and south side of "H1' Street, as described in the application, be denied. The motion carried by the following vote., to wit: AYES: Members Adams., Guyer' Stevenson and Stewart NOES: Member.Sparling - ABSENT: Member Weakland ABSTAIN-.Member Harmstead 2 •• Member Adams stated that he feels. Cpl. zoning for the-Mayfair Market property and for the trailer park frontage on the north side of "H" should be considered, It was moved by Member Adams, seconded by Member Guyer and unanimously carried that the previous motion be rescinded. It was moved by Member Adams and seconded by Member Stevenson that the property included in the application east of a line approximately 600 feet west of Broadway, and which is the west boundary of trailer park property, be -rezoned from R-3 to C-2 and the property west of this line remain R-3, Further, that the action be based on the fact that it is good zoning practice. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Adams, Guyer, Stevenson, Stewart, Harmstead NOES: Member Sparling ABSENT: 'Member Weakland RESOLUTION NO. 131 - Recommending to City Council Rezoning From R-3 to C-2 of a Portion of the North and South Sides of "H"1 Street, West of Broadway Offered by Member Adams, passed, adopted and approved by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Members Adams, Guyer, Stevenson, Stewart and Harmstead NOESr Member Sparling ABSENT: Member Weakland It was moved by Member Harmstead, seconded by Member Adams and, unanimously carried that a hearing be set for September 144th for consideration of C-2 zoning for the Mayfair Market property. PUBLIC HEARING - Vista Square Area - Rezoning from R-2 to C-2 (continued) Chairman Stewart reviewed the action of the previous Planning .Commission meeting and stated that the•Commi.ssion had subsequently met with the City Council to get information as to plans for development, He stated that the property had been let for bid at the appraised value and that the bid will be awarded to the persons submitting the most satisfactory plans for development. Comments were heard from Mr. Walker of Fig Avenue; Mr, Louis Kaiser., 455 "I" Street;. Mr, J. C. Thompson, 525 Fig Avenue and Mr. Dale Lawson, 701 Fifth Avenue, to the effect that the area east of Fifth Avenue should not be zoned C-2, existing residential properties should remain as such, and whether a buffer of some sort should be created between proposed shopping center and residential property on Fig and on the south side of "I"' Street, Chairman Stewart reviewed the history of the determination for commercial zoning for the area, stating that the City Council desires the area to be developed as a shopping center for several reasons. It is felt that a commercial shopping center would do much to broaden the tax base and if a shopping center is not developed in Chula Vista, one will be developed in the county, south of Chula Vista. He stated that a committee was appointed several. years ago to study and recommend what, in their opinion, would be the best and highest. use of the land for the benefit of the city and that a private consultant was hired to make a study of the area with.respect to a shopping center. These studies and an appraisal of the property indicated to the city that the land is too expensive for a park or similar use. He stated that the city is studying the matter of .a park in the eastern section of the citye Mr. Stewart explained that several committees, the Chamber of Commerce and other groups-who had studied the matter, concurred that a shopping center appears to be the most beneficial use for the city. It. was explained that bids, including plans for development of the land, would be opened the first of September. Member Sparling stated that he feels property owners fronting on Fig Avenue are entitled to a buffer between .their° properties and the shopping centero Member Adams stated that the Commission could recommend to Council that development plans include, if possible, some sort of buffer along east and south boundaries of the area. RESOLUTION NO. 132 - Recommending to City Council the Rezoning of Vista Square Area From R-2 to C-2 Offered by Member Guyer, passed, adopted and approved by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Members Guyer, Stevenson,. Sparling, Stewart, Harmstead and Adams NOES: none ABSENT:. Member Weakland SUBDIVISIONS Seaview Estates No. 4 - Final Map The final map of Seaview Estates No® 4 was submitted and Junior Civil Engineer Hughes reviewed recommendations of the Engineering Department. It was noted that all conditions of the tentative map were incorporated in the final map. It was moved by Member Sparling9 seconded.by Member Harmstead and unanimously carried that' the final map-of Seaview Estates No,, l4.be approved and recommended to the City Council subject to the following conditions: I* The subdivision boundary of Unit #4 be moved. east so as to include the full width of Ocala Street. _ 2. . A sewer easement be provided across lot 257- to serve further development south by gravity flog. Robinhood No'* 5 o Tentative Map _ Mr. Hughes reviewed the tentative map. of .Robinhood No. 5 and stated that even though the right-of-way of the proposed freeway. is shorn across the: subdivision, it has not been designed to provide for its development: He stated that the Engineering Department believes. a revised map should be submitted with. a new design so that eventual construction of the freeway will not interfere with circulation of local traffic nor with lot layouto Mr. George Owens and Mr. Milton Friedman, speaking for the subdividers, Casey Constr- uction Company, stated that they do not feel they should be required to provide right- of'-way for the freeway, sacrificing. lots, when.the exact location has not been deter- mined, nor monies,appropriated- by the State. It was noted that a tentative map had been filed and action is being. requested for the reason that easements for water lines are needed through the area to serve subdivisions under construction further south. Before the easements can be given, street locations will need to be determined and grading done. Chairman Stewart stated that the city has received assurance from the State Division of Highways that the 'right-of-way location now being used for planning purposes in this and adjacent subdivisions is acceptable. He stated that the city is not asking that the subdivider leave vacant the area needed for freeway purposes' only to design the subdivision so that when the freeway is constructed' it will not interfere with the design of streets and lots in the subdivision adjacent to the freeway. It was moved by Member Sparling' seconded by Member Harmstead and unanimously carried that action be deferred and a revised map be submitted designed to allow for the eventual construction of the freeway on an alignment indicated by the Planning Director and Engineering Department, Further., .that the Planning Commission will hold itself available for a special meeting to consider the revised map when the Planning Director and Engineering Department are ready with.recommendations® STREETS AND HIGHWAYS Exemption from Construction of Public Improvements - 1152 Trenton Avenue m B. Q. Elms A letter was read from Mr, B. Q, Elms asking that he be exempt from constructing public improvements at his property on,1152 Trenton Avenue, during construction of a dwelling. AA letter was read from the. Erigineering Department reporting. that there are no engineering problems making construction.of required public improvements impractical. It was moved by Member Adams, seconded by Member .Sparling and unanimously carried that the request for exemption from construction of public improvements at 1152 Trenton Avenue be denied for. the reason that the installation is not impractical and will not create a defective or dangerous condition to the property. Building Line in Newly Zoned Commercial'Areas . It was reported that the building lines on streets 'in recently rezoned commercial areas were not changed to .conform to other commercial areas and property owners are running into difficulty :in their plans for development® It was moved by Member Sparling., seconded by-Member Guyer and unanimously carried that a public. hearing be set on September 28th for consideration of establishing a five foot building line on streets in recently. zoned commercial areas, as per list read e. . 'tH" Street Extension East of'Hilltop Chairman Stewart reviewed the matter., stating :that a subdivision map 'has been filed with the county for property north of. .Pardee-Phillips Subdivision.,'and' east of Hilltop Avenue, and that the map does not allow for '1H" Street east of Hilltop. He stated that Mr. C. C. Alley had requested the.,city to determine whether or not,provision for 11Ht1 Street, as shown on the Master Street Plan, will be required'0 Comments opposing the extension of "H" were heard from Mr. C. A. Butler' 199 " re HW-8tet and Mr. J, H. Malloy, 499 "H" Street' because'-of its affect- on.their properties, ' .Mrs, H. G. Cook, owner of'property north of 11H11 Street extended, asked if the Chula Vista `School District's desires were known. Mr. Swanson, from the County Planning Department, stated that the county will cooperate with Chula 'Vista's desires on provision for "H" Street in the subdivision in question, if. the city indicates whether it wishes to follow the master street plan, He stated that -it. could be handled in two ways, one being to require that the right of way be' "reserved for street purposes"., the other way being to actually require the dedication. Chairman Stewart -stated that the street.is shown on the master street plan and must be required unless the plan is- amended--. .:The .Planning Commission may recommend amend- ment to the .Council if,` as-a result of a hearing., they concur that advantages of a street will not be sufficient.to warrant the costs of acquisition and improvement that most likely will be borne by the city® He stated that consideration must be given to the fact that the land is entirely in the county and unless the area is annexed, Chula Vista will not be in a position to acquire the right-of-way. It was moved by Member Sparling, seconded by Member Harmstead and unanimously carried that a hearing be set on September 28th for consideration of amendment to the master street plan to exclude "H" Street east of Hilltop. The Commission directed that a study be made by the Planning Director and Engineering Department as to the desirability of a street to serve an area being proposed for a city park and to provide access for the area near the proposed freeway. COMMUNICATIONS Proposed Annexation Mr, C. C. Alley, representing owners of approximately x.00 acres near Main Street in Otay, stated that they are interested in annexing to the city if the question of sewage disposal can be resolved. He stated that the cost of connecting to the city's fac- ilities is too high to be borne by the property owners. He asked whether the city would accept septic tanks and cesspools for residential development in this area. Mr. Alley stated that percolation tests would be made if the city indicated a willingness to accept septic tanks. The Commission asked that the Engineering Department make a study on the feasibility of the area being served by existing or supplemental sewer facilities and to check with the county on percolation tests made in Woodlawn Park which might give some indication as to percolation in the area in questions _ .ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned, sine die. Respectfully submitted, Audrey onehouse Secret