Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1959-05-18 PC MINS MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA., CALIFORNIA May 189 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 Centers with the following members present: Stevenson., Sparlings Calkins., Stewart,$ Harmstead., Adams and Guyer® Absent: none. Also present: City Attorney Kugler and Director of Planning Fretz, APPROVAL OF MUTES., It was: moved by Member Calkins., seconded by Member Sparling and unanimously carried that the minutes of the meeting of May 49 1959, be approved$ copies having been mailed to each member, COMMUNICATIONS A letter was read from Mrs. Ruth Scull requesting an extension of time on a variance ,ranted May 5s 19589 to allow dance instruction in her home at 912 Helix Avenue. The . variance expired on May 5., 1959. City Attorney Kugler stated that$ in his opinion., the Commission could not act upon the request because the variance had expired. The Conmission directed that Mrs. .Scull be informed accordingly. REZONING PUBLIC HEARING - Celia Hatz and William Wooters - West Side of Third., Between "K" and R-1 and M-1 to C-1 Director of Planning Fretz reviewed the request., stating that when the Commission denied a previous zone change application to Mr. .Wooters., they had requested that he contact other property owners on the west side of Third Avenue as to their wishes regarding commercial zoning. He stated that this application represents all the R-1 property fronting on Third and the M-1 property fronting on Third beginning 290 feet south of "K6'. Mr. Fretz presented a map showing land use and zoning in the area. This being the time and place as advertised,, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. Member Stevenson asked whether or not Chula Vista is getting too much commercial zoning in proportion to residential zoning. Director of Planning Fretz stated that there are several theories concerning the proper proportion of commercial to residential zoning and that Chula Vista will be in a position to determine the local situation when our field survey work is completed. Chairman Stewart stated that at the time the survey was made on "E" Street., Chula Vista was in a good position in this respect and that he feels the rezoning that has taken place since that time will be much more than off-set by the numerous annexations being developed residentially. Mrs. Maude Wells., 315 "L"., protested the zone change because of its possible effect on her property. A letter was read from Mr. Louis Weisman owning property on "K" Street., stating that the proposed rezoning will result in the rear of his property, which is zoned R-1, being surrounded by M-1 and C-1 zoning, Mr, Fretz stated that he feels this situation can be alleviated at the time the zoning pattern of the "Kt? Street frontage is studied. A letter was read from Mrs. Susie Robertson' owner of property within the area proposed for rezoning., approving the rezoning. There being no further comment, Chairman Stewart closed the hearing. RESOLUTION NO. 121 - Recommending to City Council the Rezoning from R-1 and M-1 to C-1 of Property on the West Side of Third, 290 Feet South of "K" to "Ltt Street Offered by Member Adams9 passed, adopted and approved., by the following vote, to-wits- AYES: o-wit:AYES: Members: Adams., Guyer., Stevenson., Sparling, Calkins' Stewart and Harmstead NOES: none ABSENT: none VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING - Warren F, Thomas - 0-1 Use in R-3 Zone - South Side of "H", Between Oaklawn and Woodlawn Chairman Stewart reviewed the matter., stating that the hearing had been continued from April 69 having been referred to the Safety Council for a recommendation, He then opened the hearing. A letter was read from the Safety Council recommending that (a) An ttEntrance Onlytt be provided on Woodlawn at the banjo. (b) Another access onto Oaklawn Avenue, at the extreme southeast corner of the property., to be wide enough so that it can be used for the dual purpose of entrance and exit during the peak traffic hours., at the discretion of the operators. (c) Sidewalks and curbs be installed where they do not exist around the property. Mr. Ralph Paxton, owner of apartments east of Oaklawn., spoke favoring the parking, stating there is a definite need for the parking lot in the area. There being no further comment, the hearing was closed. It was moved by Member Sparling that the variance be approved for a ten-year period as: applied for, with the condition that all redommendations of the Safety Council be adhered to. That the variance be based on the following findings of fact: (a) That off-street parking is badly needed in the area and (b) That it is not economically feasible to develop the property as R-3 at this time. Member Adams stated that he is unable to findany exceptional circumstances about the property that prevents its development as it is zoned. He feels that it is ideal for R-3 development. Member Harmstead asked whether the lack of off-street parking and the traffic situation could be considered as exceptional circumstances, and Member Adams stated that those conditions do not apply to the property itself. Mr. Thomas stated that all the neighbors agreed with his request and that he cannot develop the property as R-3 right now because of the economic situation, there being 40-50% vacancy in, the apartment projects in the area. - 2 Member Calkins seconded Mr. Sparling's motion and it was carried by the following vote, to—,pit: AYES: Members: Sparling; Calkins., Harmstead, Guyer and Stevenson NOES: Members: Stewart and Adams ABSENT: none Members Stewart and Adams asked that the record show that they are not against a parking lot' as such$ in the area., but could not agree that the findings indicate a hardship which would require the granting of a variance, PUBLIC HEARING - Ralph and Lora Paxton - Rear of 144 Minot - R®3 Use in Rl-2 Zone Chairman Stewart reviewed the application which had been continued from May 5., stating that the Commission has asked the Fire Department for recommendations as to whether or not the property Mr. Paxton wishes to develop with a multiple dwelling unit' has adequate access with a 12 foot easement. He then re"opened the public hearing, A letter was: read from the Fire Department approving the easement if the 12 feet is maintained full width throughout its entire length' at roadway level. Director. of Planning Fretz presented a plot plan of the property involved and adjacent lots and alley. Chairman Stewart stated that he feels all the properties on Minot in this vicinity have the problem of large areas and asked whether it might indicate a need for a zone change. Mr. Paxton stated that he believes the neighbors would be in favor of a zone change and improvement of the alley, but are not in a financial position at this time. City Attorney Kugler stated that the 1911 Act does provide for a ten year period to pay for improvements and that if a majority of the adjacent property owners favor the improvement., something might be worked out. It was moved by Member Harmstead and seconded by Member Calkins that a variance be granted allowing the applicant to move a four-plex onto the property having access by a 12 foot easement to Minot and that the findings of fact are as follows: 1, That a variance is necessary to obtain full usage of the property. 2. The size of the property and surrounding terrain are suited to the multiple development. The motion failed to carry by the following vote., to-grit: AYES: Members: Calkins, Harmstead and Guyer NOES: Members:: Adams., Stswaptri Sparling and Stewart ABSENT: none elt3ah - s, you. ����� b-�-5J Chairman Stewart suggested that the applicant contact the owners of property within the area to determine their wishes for rezoning to R-3. PUBLIC HEARING w Gene 0. McMillin - 97 I'D" a Development of 3 Lots Fronting on Easement. The application was read and Director of Planning Fretz reviewed the application' stating that the applicant had moved a dwelling onto property with the understanding that a b.0 foot parcel, upon which the house fronted' had been dedicated by the city for street purposes. He stated that, because the city hadn't dedicated the strip' the house moved onto the property by Mre McMillin is in violation of the provision of the zoning ordinance requiring 50 foot street frontage per lot. He stated that Mr, McMillin has filed the application requesting permission to front this building on an easement and., in addition' to develop two other lots to front on this easement. This being the time and place as advertised., Chairman Stewart opened the hearing, The question was raised as to whether Mr. McMillin's property actually .fronts on an easement and it was indicated by Mr. Millin and Mr. Brown that an easement across Mr, Brown's lot does abut the property upon which the house was moved. Afar. McMillin stated that the easement is not recorded' but has been used for a number of years. City Attorney Kugler confirmed Mr. McMillints statement' that if a right-of�way has been used for five years by the public' then a prescriptive right is gained. Mr. Kugler stated that if the Commission is satisfied that this easement does abut the applicantts property, they may grant the variance. Mr. Brown stated he is willing to dedicate land for street purposes in order to open up the area north and to improve his property. The Commission directed that Mr. Fretz follow up the offer made by Mr. Brown for a 30 foot half"street. Comments were heard from Mr. William Collins' 83 N.tinot' Mrs, Helen Gregory' 68 Casselman Place and Mrs. Alma Jensen' 89 Minot' concerning desirability of a street in the area and the type of development proposed by Mr. McMillin. Mrs McMillin stated that, if he is granted permission to .develop the property' it will be as; R^1 with one house per 73000 square foot lot and with houses comparable to those in the area. Chairman Stewart questioned the desirability of allowing more than one house on the property having frontage on an easement. Director of Planning Fretz stated he feels any development of the property without street frontage, beyond the house that has been moved in, should be on the basis of a subdivision map being filed. Chairman Stewart suggested that Mr. McMillin put in writing his statement that he will construct public improvements if he is allowed to develop the property beyond the one house already there and that the Director of Planning take the matter up with the Council to determine whether or not they will consider dedicating the land for street purposes. There being no further comment, the hearing was closed, It was moved by Member Adams and seconded by Member Harmstead that Mr. McMillin be granted a variance from the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance that each lot have 50 foot frontage on a dedicated street, by allowing the lot upon which the house has been moved to front upon an easement to I'D" Street, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the lot comply with other area requirements of an R-1 zone. 2. That the easement to UVI Street be dedicated and surfaced, 3. At the time the 40 foot dedication adjoining the property on the west is dedicated for street purposes, curb, gutter and sidewalk be installed along the frontage of this lot. Further3 that the action be based on the fact that the property is land-locked and does not face on a dedicated street. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members: Adams' Guyer, Stevenson, Sparling, Calkins, Stewart and Harmstead. NOES: none ABSENT: none PUBLIC HEARING - Roger L. Lindamood� � 444-448 Del Mar Court - Reduction in Rear Yard Setback _ 4 The application was read requesting a reduction in rear yard setback from 15 .to 9 feet for the purpose of constructing additional units on the R-o-3 lot. Mr. Fretz presented a map of the property and adjacent areaso This being the time and place as advertised: Chairman Stewart opened the heari.nge Mr. Lindamood explained that.he can get the proposed buildings on the properties observing required setbacks: but feels that if the variance is granted: the development will be more desirable. The question- arose as to whether the off-street parking: as shown on the map: is located in such a manner as to be accessible. Chairman Stewart stated that he feels the city is running more and more into this type of problem and that required off-street parking should be located to encourage its use rather than to be so inaccessible that cars are left on the streets. Director of Planning Fretz stated that he is of the opinion that property developed as R®1 should be zoned as R®1 to stabilize property values. He stated that this particular property was designed for R-1 use and cannot be. developed properly as R�_3. There being no further comment: the hearing was closed. It wasmoved by Member Stevenson, seconded by Member Guyer and unanimously carried that the variance be denied for the reason that no unusual circumstances have been presented indicating a hardship, making a- variance necessary for preservation of a .property right. PUBLIC HEARING ® Nickolas Kromydas - 55"tE"" Street - Reduction in Front Yard Setback The application was read requesting a reduction in front yard setback from 25 to 15 feet for the purpose of constructing an addition to the existing garage. Mr. Fretz presented a plot plan -of the property and stated that the present entrance to the garage is on the east which requires a 900 turn to enter the garage. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. Mr, Kromydas submitted approval of the variance signed by six neighbors in addition to those who signed the original application. He stated that he has been unable to use the garage because of the location of the entrance and the retaining wall along his east property line. He proposes to add onto the garage and cut an entrance on the "E"' Street side so that he can drive right in from the street. Mr, A. B. Ell- ington, 185 Corte Maria, spoke favoring the variance. There being no further comment:. the hearing was closed. fi Member Adams stated that he does not.find evidence of a hardship about the property and feels that a new garage could be constructed at the rear, making the change in the new garage unnecessary. Director of Planning Fretz stated that the Commission has recognized the hardship placed on corner lots because of the two large setbacks and has attempted to alleviate this situation in new subdivisions by reducing the setback on one side. He stated that he feels the situation will be remedied by eliminating the '"building line"' provision in the zoning ordinance and that: until this is done: possibly the city should pick up some of the corner lots and reduce the setbacks on the side yard to lessen the hardship on corner properties. Chairman Stewart stated he feels corner lots in subdivisions should be wider than interior lots so that it will be possible to provide two setbacks. It was moved by Member Stevenson and seconded by Member Calkins that the reduction in setbaek 'from 25 to 15 feet be granted as requested: and that the action is based on � 5 � the following findings of fact: 1. The tremendous quantity of square footage lost due to the current required setbacks along dedicated streets. 2. The applicant is denied an enjoyment of his property rights unless the variance is granted. The motion carried by the following vote., to i-it: AYES: Members: Stevenson., Sparling., Calkins., Stewart' Harmstead and Guyer NOES: Member Adams ABSENT: none PUBLIC HEARING - Vera Carrigan - 508 "K" - Division of Property into Substandard Lots. Chairman Stewart opened the hearing., stating that the application had been continued from the May ?nth meeting for submission of a new plot plan. Director of Planning Fretz presented the new plot plan., showing the four property cuts' three of which were substandard in area. Mr. Dale Gardner., speaking for the applicant' stated that the applicants will be in a financial position to remove the house' covering portions of lots 3 and 4., within five years after houses are developed on lots 1 and 2. There being no further comment' Chairman Stewart closed the hearing. It was moved by Member Sparling and seconded by Member Stevenson that the applicant be granted permission to divide her property into four lots., three of which will be substandard in area., subject to the following conditions: to Lots 1., 2 and 3., as shown on plot plan' to have 6,813 square feet in area., and have equal frontage on Fifth Avenue. 2. Lot 4 to have a minimum 7'000 square feet in area, 3. Lots 3 and 4 cannot be built upon until the eki,.sting house is removed or razed., so that the end result will be one house per lot® 4* That the applicant be granted four years in which to remove existing house and build upon lots 3 and 4. That the action be based on the following findings of fact: 1, The property is too large to maintain as R-1. 2. The resulting lots will be very near the required 7.,000 square feet. 3. The applicant will not be permitted to enjoy a substantial property right if the variance is not granted. The motion carried by the following vote' to kTit: AYES: Members: Sparling' Calkins., Stewart., Harmstead., Adams., Guyer and Stevenson NOES: none ABSENT: none 6 . . MYLO OCEAN VIEW ESTATES NO. 1 Final Map Director of Planning Fretz presented the final map of Mylo Ocean View Estates No. 1 and stated that the subdivider had been unable to get slope rights along the south side of Oneida, in order to develop a travel way greater than half width' as had been recommended by the Planning Commission on the tentative map. He stated that the subdivider proposes to shift Oneida Street to the north and thereby develop a 1 to 1 slope on the south. It was moved by Member Sparling., seconded by Member Calkins and unanimously carried that the final map be recommended to City Council subject to the following conditions: 1. That Oneida Street be realigned to the north so that the developer can control slope. 2. That Oneida Street terminate at Neptune Drive' because of the topography to the east, 3. Setbacks on Oneida be reduced from 15 to 10 feet. (No houses to front on Oneida.) 4, That a 1 foot lot be retained on the centerline of Oneida. 5. That all slopes conform to FHA standards in reference to planting and degree of slope. 6. That the grading plan be submitted to the Engineering Department and the Building Department, SETBACKS PUBLIC HEARING Change in Building Line from 10 to 5 Feet Along Landis Avenue Between PtEU and "F" Director of Planning Fretz gave the background of the hearing, initiated by the Planning Commission' stating that it had resulted from a request for reduction in setback and because the area is zoned C-2. This being the time and place as advertised' Chairman Stewart opened the public hearing to consider establishing a 5 foot building line along both sides of the 200 block of Landis Avenue. There being no comment., the hearing was closed. RESOLUTION NO. 122 - Recommending to City Council the Establishment of a 5 Foot Building Line Along Landis Avenue Between t'Et' and "F" Offered by Member Adams' passed' adopted and approved, by the following vote' to fait: AYES: Members: Adams, Guyer$ Stevenson' Sparling' Calkins., Stewart and Harmstead NOES: none ABSENT: none � 7R STREETS & HIGHWAYS Name Change -, Telegraph Canyon Road Director of Planning Fretz explained to the Commission that the City Engineer had reported the name Telegraph Canyon Road too long for the standard street sign and asked whether or not the Planning Commission would be in favor of recommending a street name change to the City Council. It was moved by Member Harmstead3 seconded by Member Adams and unanimously carried that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the name flTelegraph Canyon Road" be retained in the interest of preserving history of this part of the country. Member Harmstead said that the first telegraph line leading to the east was laid in Telegraph Canyon. ANNEXATIONS McCausland Annexation Director of Planning Fretz presented a map of the proposed McCausland Annexation., explaining that it is uninhabited territory. It was. moved by Member Sparlinga seconded by Member Calkins and unanimously carried that the Commission recommend acceptance of the annexation to the City Council$ MISCELLANEOUS- Proposed Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, The Commission again reviewed the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance submitted-by the Planning Director and discussed,its application in specific instances. It was moved by Member Harmstead3 seconded by Member Calkins and unanimously carried that the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance be set for public hearing before the Planning Commission on June 1p 1959 ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned' sine die. Respectfully submitted' Audre�St house Secretary