Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1960-10-03 PC MINS MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA. VISTAS CALIFORNIA October 3, 1960 A regular meeting of the Planning Corr�tnission of the City of Chula Vista was held at 7:00 P.M. on the above date in the Council Chamber at Civic Center with the following members present: Stevenson, Comstock, Weakland, Stewart' Harmstead and Adams. Absent: Member Guyer, Also present: Director of Planning Fretz and City Attorney Kugler. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was: moved by Member Harmstead, seconded by Member Adams and unanimously carried that the minutes of the meeting of September 19; 1960 be approved, copies having been mailed to each member. REZONING PUBLIC HEARING - A. B. Ellington - 173-175 "Ell Street - R-2 to R-3 The application was read requesting rezoning from R-2 to R-3 of property on the north side of "E" Street, between Second Avenue and MinotAvenue. A plot plan was presented showing property in relation to existing alley running north and south between Minot and Second Avenue. Planning Director Fretz reviewed action on a previous application for this area. He stated that the application had included the rear of all the pro- perty on both sides of the alley from "D" Street to "E" Street and it had been "denied without prejudice" until plans to widen and improve the alley as a street could be submitted for dedication. He stated that the owners have apparently been unable to get together as nothing has been submitted for dedication, This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. Member Comstock asked whether compaction reports are available on the property in view of the land being filled. Mr, Ellington stated that the fill was compacted and engineer's reports indicate 90% compaction. He stated that the property is made up of the rear of lots fronting on Second Avenue and has been redivided into two lots, each fronting on "E" Street. He added that he will reserve the area for construction of a cul-de-sac as shown on plot plan and as previously approved by the city for development of the alley. Mr. Francis Knisely, 184 Minot Avenue, questioned whether this lot should be rezoned without completion of plans for the dedication of the alley and rezoning of all the property along the alley. He believes this application should be denied on the same basis the previous one was denied. There being no further comment, the hearing was closed. Member Adams stated that he believes the reservation of land for a cul-de-sac will adequately provide for future development of the adjacent area. He stated that R-3 zoning would be reasonably compatible with the area and that the property is too deep to be developed economically with a duplex. RESOLUTION N0. 1.89 - Recommending to City Council Change of Zone From R-2 to R-3 of Property at Approximately 173-175 "Ell Street. Offered by Member Adams, passed, adopted and approved by the following vote, to Veit: AYES: Members Adams, Stevenson, Comstock, Weakland, Stewart and Harmstead NOES: None ABSENT: Member Guyer PUBLIC HEARING - Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Classifying Certain Uses as M-2, With Conditional Use Permit Planning Director Fretz reviewed the proposed amendment, explaining that primarily it will list junk yards- including automobile wrecking yards-and food packing plants as uses allowed in M-2 zones only with a conditional use permit. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. The Commission discussed the advisability of requiring rear yards in industrial zones, and questioned provisions in accessory uses allowed in the M-1 zone. Planning Director Fretz explained that he still is of the opinion that the entire ordinance should be rewritten rather than amended in piece-meal manner but that this amendment has been requested by the City Council. There being no further comment, the hearing was closed. RESOLUTION NO. 190 - Recommending to City Council Amendment of Zoning Ordinance Providing That Certain Uses Be Allowed in M-2 Zones Only With Conditional Use Permits. Offered by Member Harmstead, passed, adopted and approved, by the following vote.9 to Crit: AYES: . Members Harmstead, Adams, Stevenson, Comstock, Weakland and Stewart NOES: None ABSEI\1T: Member Guyer Zoning Of Huntington Annexation The Commission continued the matter to the next meeting for further study. Amendments to R-1 Zone Planning Director Fretz explained that the proposed amendments are not yet ready for the Planning Commission and the matter was continued to the next meeting. VARIANCES PUBLIC HEAR7NG' (cont.) D. E. and Katherine Schatz - 265 East Moss Street- Height Variance Chairman Stewart reopened the hearing and stated that the hearing had been continued for further study. Planning Director Fretz stated that the application requests per- mission to construct a five foot fence three feet inside the property line along Moss Street where the sidewalk is approximately three feet higher than the yard space. Member Comstock asked whether a six foot fence on the setback line wouldn't accomplish the same thing as the five foot fence proposed. Mr. Schatz stated that this would not look good because of the slope of the bank on the rear of the lot. Chairman Stewart stated that the outdoor living area is on the north portion of the rear yard - 2 and a six foot fence on the setback line would furnish privacy afforded by the five foot fence three feet inside property line. Member Adams stated that a precedent has already been established by denial of similar applications in the past. He stated that the situation for corner lots in newer subdivisions is better than in older areas because 10 foot setbacks were established along one of the two streets. There being no further comment, the hearing was closed. It was moved by Member Adams and seconded by Member' Stevenson. that the application for permission to construct a five foot fence three feet inside property line at 265 East Moss Street be denied for the reason that there are no exceptional circumstances about the property to justify the granting of a variance and it is contrary to the established policy of the Commission to grant a reduction of 10 foot sideyaxd. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Adams, Stevenson, Comstock, Weakland, Stewart and Harmstead NOES: - None ABSENT: Member Guyer PUBLIC HEARING - Gordon M. and Ruby Campbell - 685 Guava Avenue - Setback Reduction The application was read requesting reduction in rear yard setback from 20 to 18 feet for the purpose of constructing a single family dwelling. A plot plan was presented showing the depth of the lot being 70 feet and the width 110 feet. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. Planning Director Fretz explained that the required front and rear yards of the property take up an unusually large percentage of the lot area. There being no further comment, the hearing was closed. It was moved by Member Stevenson and seconded by Member Comstock that the application be approved and a reduction in rear yard setback from 20 to 18 feet for construction of a single family dwelling be approved. Further, that action be based on the following: 1. There are exceptional circumstances about the property in that it is very shallow and a large portion is taken up in setbacks, if the lot were of average shape--70 ft. wide, 110 feet deep--required setbacks would not comprise such a large percentage of the lot area. 2. The granting of the variance is necessary for preservation of a substantial property right in that setbacks take up more than 1/2 the lot area. 3. The granting of the variance will apparently have no detrimental effect on public welfare, health, and safety. The motion carried by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Members Stevenson, Comstock, Weakland, Stewart, Harmstead and Adams NOES: None ABSENT: Member Guyer - 3 JA PUBLIC HEARING, - Byron E. and Mary L. Bassham - 10 E. Sierra Way - Setback Reduction The application was read requesting a reduction in rear yard setback from 20 to 82 feet for construction of a bedroom family room addition to the house. A plot plan was presented showing location of proposed addition to the house. This being the time and place as advertised' Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. Mr. Bassham,spoke, stating that the adjacent lots on Sierra Way are developed so that the houses are considerably closer to the street than his house. He added that the lots to the rear are 3 to 32 feet higher than his lot; therefore, the reduction in rear yard setback should not interfere with his neighbors. Member Adams stated that he does not find that there are any exceptional circumstances about the property; in fact, except for the rear lot line not being parallel with the front, the lot appears to be standard in shape and is more than average in area. He stated that the fact that the house sets back further than the others on Sierra Way is not a hardship pertaining to the lot itself. Member Comstock stated that he feels it might be desirable that yard areas be by percentage of area rather than by measured distance. Chairman Stewart stated that because the rear and side lot lines do not meet at right angles, there may be a hardship in trying to locate accessory buildings. Member Adams stated that even considering this, only a maximum 5 foot reduction would be justified. There being no further comment, the hearing was closed. It was moved by Member Harmstead and seconded by Member Adams that the application requesting a reduction in rear yard setback from 20 to 82 feet at 10 East Sierra Way be denied on the basis that there are no exceptional circumstances or conditions about the property; the property is average in shape and greater in area than the average lot; and the fact that the house itself sets back further than the average house is not a hardship pertaining to the lot itself. The motion carried by the following vote, to wits AYES: Members Harmstead, Adams, Comstock and Stewart NOES: Members Stevenson and Weakland ABSENT: Member Guyer PUBLIC HEARING - Ralph's Superette, Inc. - 303 Hilltop Circle - Use and Setback Variance The application was submitted requesting permission to remodel and add to the existing store building at 303 Hilltop Circle, now a non-conforming use. A plot plan was sub- mitted showing location of existing and proposed buildings. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. Mr. Keith Atherton, speaking for the applicants, stated that the lot has 50,000 square feet and proposed construction will leave area for three to one parking. He stated that there will be a laundromat, cleaners, barber shop or beauty shop, Midget Market and restaurant in the remodeledbuilding, that tenants for the new building are still to be secured. Yx. Atherton stated that the area isn't actually a single-family residential area, with a fire station, elementary school administration building, junior high school and a high school nearby. Protests were heard from Mr. Frank McGrath, 75 East "J" Street; Mrs. James Ifiarsh, 681 Claire Avenue; Mrs. Doris Humerich, 694 Claire Avenue; .Mr, Charles Putman, 656 Claire Avenue; and Mrs. Clarence Birrell, 57 East "J" Street. Their comments were that the - 4 - store was needed when it was constructed because transportation was not available to shopping areas during the war; the city had previously denied commercial zoning; the shopping area would not be compatible with -the schools in the area as well as the residences and it would increase the traffic problem; the restaurant would be a hangout for teenagers. Letters protesting the variance were read from Mr. and Mrs. Aubarey Sullivan., 47 East "J" Street; Mr. and Mrs. James Marsh, 681 Claire Avenue; Mr. and Mrs. Clarence Birrell, 57 East "J" Street' Mr. and Mrs. Leroy Kratzer, 51 East "J" Street and Mr. V. M. Rollins, 685 Claire Avenue. A petition signed by 18 property owners was read' protesting the variance. Mr. Bill Doss., one of the owners of the property, spoke. He stated that there will be heavy traffic in the area because of the development to the east whether the shopping area goes in or not; the restaurant will be a hamburger and malt stand and will not sell liquor; and that they will comply with the Commission's requests for off-street parking. There being no further commentithe hearing was closed. Member Stevenson stated that he believes this is a parallel situation with a pre- viously denied request for change of zone at Hilltop and "J" Street and that it is not compatible with existing residential and school development. Member Harmstead stated that such rezoning will create a situation similar to that at Hilltop Drive and Naples Street, where the homesowners feel that the adjacent,shopping center has had a detrimental effect upon their properties. Member Adams stated that the schools and fire station are permitted R-1 uses' so such a proposal would be an intrusion into a residential area and would act as a precedent. for requests for commercial usage in similar parcels of land. Chairman Stewart stated that he doesn't believe the proposal offers sufficient off-street parking. Planning Director Fretz stated that Superintendent Rindone from the Sweetwater Union School District had indicated that a board meeting would not be held until after the hearing, but that in his personal opinion., such a development would result in a problem for the school district. It was moved by Member Stevenson and seconded by Member Harmstead that the application for a variance to allow commercial development of the parcel at 303 Hilltop Circle' now occupied by a non-conforming market be denied for the following reasons: 1. There are no exceptional circumstances 'about the property to justify the granting of a variance. 2. It would create additional traffic congestion. 3. The use is not compatible with school and residential use. 4. There is ample undeveloped commercial property at the present time. 5. It would establish a precedent. The motion carried by the following vote, to fait: AYES: Members Stevenson' Weakland' Stewart' Harmstead and Adams NOES: None ABSENT: Member Guyer - 5 - Member Comstock abstained from voting due to a conflict in interestse PUBLIC HEARING - Clarence E. Morris' Inc. - Oneida at Monterey - Use Variance The application was read requesting permission to develop the R-1 lot with a commercial building containing three shops. Planning Director Fretz submitted a R plot plan showing location of the proposed building and adjacent land use--fire station, water tanks and school for retarded children. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. Mr. Keith Atherton, speaking for Mr. Morris, stated that it is more than one mile to the nearest shopping center and that the residents need a neighborhood commercial area, with a small grocery store and other necessary uses. He believes the best use of the land is for commercial purposes considering the fire station, water tanks and school and that the high bank to the rear will act as a buffer for the Palomar School. Mr. Atherton stated that the building will be built on the rear of the property with the front devoted to off-street parking. Mr. Lawrence Kuebler stated that they believe the parking to be provided, while not 4 to 1, is adequate for the type of business proposed. Mr. Norman Peterson' 1230 Nolan Avenue and Mr. Harry Hope, 1234 Nolan Avenue, asked what uses would occupy the building and whether other uses could be substituted after approval was given. Mr. Atherton explained that the building will house the Midget Market, a barber shop or laundromat and a dry cleaning shop. Chairman Stewart ex- plained that if approval is given, the building will have to be occupied by the uses approved with the variance. Planning Director Fretz submitted a map showing a pro- posed and existing shopping area in the southeast part of the city and the area these centers are expected to serve. He stated that, as recognized by the staff when a previous request for commercial zoning on Naples was denied, there is a need for a shopping area in this general section, but that he feels it should be located at Palomar Street, just east or west of the proposed freeway. He stated that he doesn't object to the relationship of the proposed commercial use to surrounding land use. He stated that as the area continues to grow, another shopping area would be needed as this site cannot be expanded and there is less than one-half acre. There being no further comment, the hearing was closed. Member Adams stated that he feels it is not good planning to have small commercial lots scattered in residential areas and that if this were approved, another appli- cation would be submitted for the property on Naples, previously denied. He stated that he feels the city should locate the centers where they are needed and of the size needed. Member Harmstead agreed and added that the property owners were aware of location of shopping facilities when they purchased and that being a mile from nearest shopping area is not" an acute problem. Member Weakland stated that he believes the proposed use is more compatible with the water tanks, school and fire station than a single family dwelling would be. Member Stevenson stated that the developer should have considered a shopping area when he designed the subdivision rather than use aleft over" property for a small shopping area. It was moved by Member Stevenson and seconded by Member Adams, that the request for variance for a shopping area on the south side of Oneida at Monterey be denied for the following reasons: _ 6 _ 1. There are no exceptional circumstances about the property to justify the granting of a variance. 2. It would increase traffic congestion. Streets in the area were designed for residential development, not for the commercial traffic that would result from proposed commercial development. 3. The use is not compatible with residential and school use in the vicinity. 4. It would establish a precedent, The motion carried by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Members Stevenson., Comstock, Weakland, Stewart, Harmstead and Adams NOES: None ABSENT: Member Guyer SETBACKS PUBLIC HEARING - Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Establishing 5 Foot Building Lines in Commercial Areas Planning Director Fretz submitted a map showing areas in commercial zones where the setbacks are now 25 feet or greater and explained that the Commission..had called a public hearing to consider changing these setbacks to 5 feet. This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman Stewart opened the hearing. There being no comment., the hearing was closed. Member Adams stated that he feels that a 5 foot setback is appropriate and should be standardized in commercial areas. He believes that a zero setback is a mistake. RESOLUTION NO. 191 - Recommending to City Council That 5 Foot Building Lines Be Established in Commercial Zones As Described Offered by Member Adams, passed., adopted and approved by the following vote., to fait: AYES: Members Adams, Stevenson, Comstock., Weakland, Stewart and Harms'tead NOES: None ABSENT: Member Guyer MISCELLANEOUS Approval of E221pment fbr'62ome Occupation - Frank Bryant - 613 Elm Avenue The application for a home occupation was read, requesting permission to use small tumblers, a buffing bar, drill presses and a shell grinder for the manufacture of fishing lures. Mr, Bryant stated that the equipment is used only occasionally and is run on a 1/4 horse power motor; that the tumblers are used by most rock hounds and the tumblers as well as the presses are operated very slowly. He stated that it will be a mail order business and. if it expands., as hoped, he will operate the business in the appropriate zone. - 7 - RESOLUTION NO. 192 A Approving Mechanical Equipment for Use in Home Occupation Offered by Member Stevenson' passed, adopted and approved by the following vote' to=wit: AYES: Members Stevenson, Comstock, Weakland, Stewart' Harmstead and Adams NOES: none ABSENT: Member Guyer City Attorney Kugler stated that in the future the Commissioners should show their findings as to why the mechanical equipment is not objectionable' i.e. no greater interference than other equipment used in a home' no more noise9 etc. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Member Adams, seconded by Member Weakland and unanimously carried that the meeting adjourn to October 17, 1960. Respectfully submitted' bl _ Audrey Stehouse Secretary