Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1959-07-15 PC MINS MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA., CALIFORNIA June 15., 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., Calkins, Stewart, Harmstead., Adams and Guyer. Absent: none. Also present: City Attorney Kugler and Director of Planning Fretz. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was moved by Member Sparling' seconded by Member Calkins and unanimously carried that the minutes of the meeting of June 1, 1959, be approved., copies having been mailed to each member. REZONIPIG PUBLIC HEARING - -Precise R-1 and M-1 Zoning for Russell Haas Industrial Park Annexation Director of Planning Fretz submitted a map showing proposed precise R-1 and M-1 zoning for the Russell Haas Industrial Park Annexation and explained that it is the same as the interim zoning placed on the property by the City'Councila This being the time and place as: advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing, There being no comment., either for or against., the hearing was closed. RESOLUTION N0. 124 - Recommending Precise R-1 and M-1 Zoning for the Russell Haas Industrial Park Annexation Offered by Member Sparling, passed' adopted and approved by the following vote, to.--wit: AYES: Members Sparling, Calkins' Stewart, Harmstead., Adams., Guyer and Stevenson NOES: none ABSENT: none PUBLIC HEARING Interim R-3 and C-2 Zoning --Palomar Annexation -Director of Planning Fretz presented a map of the proposed annexation showing interim poniM as requested by property owners., and stated that it appears to be compatible with land use and zoning in-the area. This being the time and place as advertised., Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. A petition was submitted, signed by 37 property owners in the vicinity., protesting the proposed zoning. A petition was read., signed by 9 property owners within the annexation' concurring with the proposed zoning. Comments favoring the zoning because there is commercial and- industrial zoning across Palomar' and the property abuts a freeway and the area is not suitable for residential construction, were heard from Mr. Jessie Roeder,, 765 Palomar, George Trusty, E. J. Rohrer, 805 Palomar, and Jack Perkins, 771 Palomar, It was pointed out that many of those signing the petition protesting do not live in the immediate area affected. Comments protesting the pro- posed zoning were heard from Mrs. Joy Schauer, owner of property fronting on Palomar and Nir ' Paul Merfeld, 815 Ada Street. There being no further comment, the hearing was closeds RESOLUTION NO. 125 Recommending Interim R-3 and C-2 Zoning for Palomar Annexation Offered by Member Stevenson, passed, adopted and approved, by the following vote, to-Kit AYES: Members Stevenson, Sparling, Calkins, Stewart, Harmstead, Adams and Guyer NOES: none ABSENT: none REQUEST FOR REZONING --A. B. Ellington - West Side of 700 Block Ash Avenue - R-1 to R-3 It was moved by Member Calkins, seconded by Member Harmstead and unanimously carried that the matter be set for public hearing on July 6, 1959. VARIANCES: PUBLIC HEARING - W. D. Peebles - 714 Twin Oaks - R-2 Use in R-1 Zone The application was read requesting permission to construct a second dwelling unit on the R-1 lot, the existing dwelling having been constructed on the rear of the lot leaving considerable vacant area® Director of Planning Fretz presented a plot plan of the areas This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing, Communications protesting the granting of the variance wereread from Charles and Eva Roof; Charles B. Miller' 705 Twin Oaks; C. N. Nybo, 735 Del Mar; and Mrs. Esther McMahan, 733 Del Mar® Mrs. Marie.Aland spoke for the applicants, stating that the variance would allow the property to be developed to conform with others in the neighborhood and eliminate the unattractive lawn. She explained that the existing house on the rear"of the property is approximately 9 years old. Mr. Thermon C. Johns, 709 Twin Oaks, stated that he objects to an R-2 use but would be in favor of the property being developed with a single residence. Mrs® Aland stated that the house is too good to remove to allow construction of a single unit to the front of the lot. Protests were heard from Mr. Jasper Brandt, 717 Twin Oaks; Mrs. Brandt; Albert Willows, 240 "J" and Mrs. Esther McMahan, 733 Del Mar. It was moved by Member Sparling and seconded by Member Adams that the variance be denied for the reason that it is an R-1 area and that evidence has not been presented to the Commission indicating that the property suffers a hardship requiring a variance to insure a reasonable property right to the applicant, The motion carried by the following vote, to Tait: AYES: Members Sparling, Calkins, Stewart, Harmstead, Adams, Guyer and Stevenson NOES: none ASSENT: none - 2 PUBLIC HEARING Ben Rosanbalm 805 Riverlawn - (Southeast Corner Riverlawn & teKtt) C,.�-2 Use in RF3 Zone Mr. Rosa.nbalm's application was read requesting permission to construct a building two feet from the property line or_ t'Ktt Street to be used for repair of lawn equipment. Director of Planning Fretz presented a plot plan showing the proposed reduction of setback on "Ktt' from 25 feet to 2 feet and the proximity to other property lines and buildings and the commercial zoning on Broadway. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. A petition with 7 signatures was read., protesting the granting of the variance. Mrs. Rosanbalm stated that her disabled husband cannot work and that, if the variance is granted for repair of lawn equipment which he is able to do, they will be considerate of their neighbors. She stated that they would prefer to place the building 2 feet from property line but will build' observing the required 25 foot setback, if the variance is granted. There being no further comment, the hearing was closed. It was moved by Member Stevenson and seconded by Member Adams that the variance be. denied for the reason that evidence was not presented indicating unusual circumstances about the property which will require the granting of a variance to allow a sub- stantial property right. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Stevenson, Sparling, Calkins, Stewart., Harmstead, Adams and Guyer NOES: none ABSEATT:none PUBLIC HEARING - Ruth Scull � 912 Helix Avenue A C--2 Use in R-1 Zone Mrs. Scullos application was read requesting a renewal of an expired variance to a11ow hereto give dance instruction in her carport as a home occupation. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. Comments favoring the granting of the: variance were heard from Mrs. Constance Clement, 181 E. t'L"; Mr. Jack Smallwood., 88 E® t'I°; Mrs. Bernard Waggener, 911 Helix; Mrs. Reynolds, 87 E. tris' and Mrs. Lassiter., 739 Gretchen. An excerpt was read from the Planning Commission minutes when the variance was granted the first time. Member Adams questioned the presence of a hardship .which would give the Commission authority to grant such a variance, and s. Scull asked for clarification of the term. Mr.-. Scull stated that he feels. the dance instruction given by Mirs. Scull is a definite asset. to'the area and the children in the neighborhood would suffer a hardship if the variance: is not granted. There being no further comment, the hearing was closed. It was moved by Member Adams and seconded by Member Guyer that the variance be denied because there are no exceptional circumstances which would provide a basis for the Commission to grant a variance. The motion carried by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Members Adams, Guyer, Stevenson Sperling and Stewart. NOES: Members; Calkins and Harmstead ABSENT: none Director of Planning Fretz stated that the staff hopes to prepare an amendment' to the Zoning Ordinance which will allow for uses that may be classed as "home occupationst" PUBLIC HEARING Glenn Page - 122 Roosevelt - Reduction in Rear Yard Setback from 20 feet to 10 feet. The application was: read requesting a reduction in rear yard setback from 20 to 10 feet to allow construction of a bedroom and bathroom addition to the existing house. Mr. Fretz presented a plot plan of the property. and explained the request. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. Mr. Page stated that there is not room to add onto the house and the additional living area is needed. There being no further comment, Chairman Stewart closed the hearing. Mr. Fretz stated that the 6,350 sq•, ft. lot is a part of a subdivision approved before existing requirements for lot area in an R-1 zone. He stated that the lot is of a shape which is difficult to work with and, in his opinion, this is the kind of parcel of land that the ordinance provides a variance for: It was moved by Member Adams and seconded by Member _Stevenson that the variance be granted for reduction in rear yard setback from 20 to 10 feet for the purpose of a room and bath addition, based on the following findings of fact: 1. That the unusual shape of the lot creates a hardship by reducing usable lot area. 2. That the variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right in that the applicant cannot alter the house to fit his needs,. 3. It will not affect adjacent properties or the public welfare. The motion carried by the following vote, to merit: AYES: Members Adams, Guyer,- Stevenson' Sparling, Calkins, Stewart and Harmstead NOES: none ABSENT: none PUBLIC HEARING Harry and Edna Morrison - Rear of 70 "J" Sts Approval of Easement The application was read requesting permission to divide the property into three lots, providing two additional building sites to be served by an easement to "J". Director of Planning Fretz submitted a plot plan of the area showing the width of the easement and the area provided for maneuvering of automobiles and emergency vehicles:. He stated that the Fire Department approved the proposal. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. Mr. Morrison stated that he will do whatever the city feels is necessary if the variance is granted4 There being no further comment, the hearing wasp closed® � 4 It was moved by Member Sparling and seconded by Member Guyer that the variance be conditionally granted based on the fact that the R 1 land is completely landlocked and cannot be subdivided with street frontage. The following conditions were re-. quired: lo. That construction on the two new lots observe a 20 foot setback from the easement. 2. That the easement as shown on plot plan be blacktopped. 3. That the easement be kept free at all times to allow emergency vehicles free access* 4. That construction on house on southerly lot be commenced within 190 days. Construction on second dwelling within two years. The motion carried by the. following vote,. to-wit: AYES: Membera Sparling' Guyer' Harmstead' Calkins, Stewart, Stevenson and Adams NOES: none A:B SENT: none PUBLIC HEARING Hobart Investment Company ® 115-131 Fourth Avenue - Sign Over - Maximum Height The application was read, requesting permission to construct a 6 foot sign within the front yard setback, 22 feet over the maximum allowed height. Director of Planning Fretz presented a plot plan showing location of proposed sign* This being the time and place as. advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing* Communications were read protesting the granting of the variance from. Mrs, R* J. Welton, 128 Fourth Avenue; Mr,. Charles Johnson, 134 Fourth Avenue; Mrs. Nora M* Fish, 117 Fourth Avenue and Mrs. W. J, Simmons, 356 -11D11 Street, Mrs. Smith, representing the applicants, presented an artist's rendering of the proposed sign, stating that the sign will not be larger in area than those allowed, but will be higher. She stated that the applicants feel that a 32 foot or 6 foot sign, built to face Fourth, cannot be seen until the motorist is directly in front of the property* There being no further comment, the hearing was closed. It was- moved by Members Adams and seconded by Member Guyer that the petition be denied on the basis that there are no exceptional circumstances to justify granting a variance. The motion carried by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Members Adams, Guyer, Stevenson and Stewart NOES: Members Harmstead and Calkins ABSTAINING: Member Sparling ABSENT: none PUBLIC HEARING - Jack Smallwood ® 88 East "I" - Reduction in Rear Setback to Zero The application was read requesting reduction in rear yard setback to zero feet to allow construction of an attached patio-carport, Mr. Fretz presented a plot plan showing location of house to property lines and the proposed structure. He stated that while the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance would allow a patio open s � � on two sides to be constructed within the required rear yard, the carport would not be permitted. This being the time and place as-advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. Mr. Smallwood stated that the large vacant side yard cannot be used for either a patio or carport because of the topography and house design. He stated that he would like to get his car off the street at night because of the increasing traffics but could park in the driveway and would withdraw the request to use the new structure as a carport. N?rs., Wintrow, 606 Claire, stated that the structure would abut her property line and that she is in favor of the variance. There being no further comment' the hearing was closed. It was moved by Member Stevenson and seconded by Member Sparling that the request for reduction in rear yard setback to zero be granted for construction of an att- ached patio, open on two sides, with the condition_ that it not be utilized as a carport. Further, that action be based on the fact that the property is a corner lot and the topography is such that a very large side yard cannot be used for the intended purpose. The motion carried by the following vote, to wit: AYES Members Stevenson, Sparling, Calkins' Stewart, Harmstead, Adams and Guyer NOES: none ABSENT: none MISCELLANEOUS Joint Meeting The Commission discussed the request of the City Council for a joint meeting for the purpose of discussing the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. The Commission requested that a meeting be set for Wednesday$ June 17th, if the date is agreeable with the Council Request for Zoning Study Mr. Jack Small asked whether the Planning Commission will consider zoning pattern in the Bay Manor Subdivision to determine whether it should be zoned R-3 rather than R-1. Chairman Stewart that there doesn't appear to be sufficient incentive for the Comm- ission to initiate zoning studies in that location prior to an over-all study which will be made for'master. planning but that any application for zone change' as provided in the .ordinance, will receive due consideration. 1959-60 Fiscal .Budget Director of Planning Fretz reviewed the departmental budget request for the coming year and the changessthat have been made by the City Council prior to adoption. He stated that services of a Planning Consultant have been deleted from the budget. 6 .� Ordinance for Swimming Pools Member Sparling stated that he feels the Commission should consider the feasibility of an ordinance controlling placement and fencing of swimming pools. After dis- cussing the desirability of such an ordinance and possible effect upon existing fencing requirements' the Commission requested the Planning Director and City Attorney to prepare a report for consideration. ADJOURNMENT It was: moved by Member Sparling, seconded by Member Guyer and unanimously carried that the meeting adjourn to 7:30 P.M.., June 179 1959. Respectfully submitted., Audrey Sto- house Secretary