Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1962-01-03 PC MINS MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA January 3 , 1962 An adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission 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: Comstock, Weakland, Stewart, Willhite and Adams. Absent: Members Stevenson and Guyer. Also present: Director of Planning Fretz and City Attorney Duberg. STATEMENT The Secretary of the Commission hereby states that she did post within 24 hours of adjournment, as provided by law, the order of the Commission for the adjourned meeting of January 3 , 1962. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Member Adams , seconded by Member Weakland and unanimously carried that the minutes of the meeting of December 18, 1961 be approved, copies having been mailed to each member. ZONING PUBLIC HEARING (cont.) ' - Starr Annexation - Interim R-,l-B-20 Zoning Chairman Stewart reopened the public hearing. City Attorney Duberg stated that a meeting has been arranged with himself, the Planning Director, Bill Starr and Mr. Luce, attorney for Mr. Starr, to discuss the zoning of this annexation. He stated that he was unaware that the hearing was set for this meeting when he talked with Mr. Luce and feels sure that if Mr. Luce had known, he would have requested that the hearing be continued until after the scheduled meeting on January 4th. Chairman Stewart stated that the item has been continued once and that he doesn't believe hearings should be continued without good reason. He stated that the owner must be aware that the Planning Commission has gone on record as approving annex- ation of the Sweetwater Valley area as presently zoned, Member Comstock stated that he doesn't believe the hearing should be continued again and that -the Com- mission is duty bound to hold hearings when they are advertised. Planning Director Fretz stated that in one way, it would be to the advantage of the owner if action is taken by the Commission at this meeting - the owner would be in a position to protest the annexation if he doesn't agree with the Commission 's recommendations. It was moved by Member Adams , seconded by Member Weakland and carried that the hearing be continued to January 15, 1962, at the request of Mr. Ed Luce, attorney for Bill Starr. Member Comstock voted "no". MISCELLANEOUS Clarification of Setback Variance - 509 "F'' Street - Clifford Dearmin �`- Planning Director Fretz stated that Mr. Dearmin was. granted a variance for re- duction in rear yard setback from 15 to 11 feet which allowed construction of a dwelling unit attached to an existing duplex by means of a carport. He stated that plans approved with the variance indicated a carport, 16 feet wide with a straight in driveway, for two parking spaces and an off-street parking space in the rear- yard;, but that the structure was built with only 14 feet 4 inches in the carport and the driveway in on an angle to avoid a tree, and that the third parking space is provided within the setback along Fifth Avenue. A letter was read from Mr. Dearmin requesting Commission approval of the parking facilities , stating that they feel they are adequate for required parking. Planning Director Fretz stated that he doesn 't feels that the Commission can take any action without another variance being filed. Chairman Stewart stated that the plans were approved with the variance and they should have been followed. He stated that he doesn't think the owner should be encouraged to apply for a variance from the parking requirements even though he is entitled to do so, because if approved, it would establish a bad precedent. Members Adams and Weakland agreed. Chairman Stewart suggested that the applicant be so informed. DISCUSSION ON LOT SPLIT PROCEDURE Planning Director Fretz explained that Mr. Mark Money has property at 676 Second Avenue which has 110 feet frontage and sufficient area to provide at least two building sites, and that Mr. Money wants to build a house on the front portion of this lot. He stated that it has been the practice to require lot splits to be recorded before a second house is built on an R-1 lot, but when Mr. Money contacted the County Recorder 's office, he was told they could not record a split in this manner, that they can only record a subdivision map, record of survey or a title transfer. Mr. Fretz stated that the staff hasn ' t been too concerned about having an ordinance to control lot splits in view of the fact that other ordinances give basically the same control--public improvements are required during development and zoning ordi- nance provisions control lot area requirements and minimum frontage on a dedicated street. Mr. Fretz stated that he feels a procedure should be worked out to provide adequate records of lot splits since they can no longer be recorded, by requiring the filing of a plat of the split and a certification that. all zoning requirements will be met with the Planning Department. Mr. James Patton and Mr. Charles Brown, representing the National City-Chula Vista Board of Realtors discussed the procedures for lot splits in San Diego City and County and stated that the realtors are interested in keeping the procedure for • Chula Vista as simple as possible. Mr. Brown stated they do not think a lot-split ordinance is necessary in Chula Vista because public improvements - one of the main reasons for the ordinance - are already required during development of property. Member Comstock asked whether there is some procedure whereby documents are filed with the County Recorder for the public record, but are not recorded. He stated that he understands this is a new procedure. Planning Director Fretz stated that he is not aware of any such procedure bu-t could check on it. ----The Commission discussed the procedure as outlined by the Planning Director and Chairman Stewart asked that the staff prepare a resolution outlining this procedure to be followed in the case of lot splits. 2 - Civic Center Study Planning Director Fretz stated that no further information has been obtained V regarding the ratio between parking, building and landscaping in connection with a civic center study, but that he has an appointment with a representative of the County Administrator 's office and will be brought up to date on the County's studies. Chairman Stewart asked that the matter be placed on the agenda for the next meeting. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Member Weakland, seconded by Member Adams and unanimously carried that the meeting adjourn to January 15, 1962. Respectfully submitted, Audrey Stonehouse Secretary