Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1955-02-21 PC MINS MINUTES OF A REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Held Monday, February 21, 1955 The Chula Vista Planning Commission met in the Council Chamber at Civic Center at 7:30 P.M. on the above date with the following Members present: Mohr, Farris, Henninger, Young, Trook, Perrine, Raitt. Absent: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES :. The Secretary read an addition tothe minutes relative to the discussion on a street reservation requirement in Country Club Hills No: 2. It was moved by Member Trook, seconded by Member Perrine and unanimously`carried, that the minutes of the meeting of February 7, 1955 be approved as cor_rected,,.Icopies having been mailed to each member. ZONE VARIANCES Robert G. Dale, 316 "Gt' St., requested a Ot side yard to allow garages to be at= tached to dwellings. The matter was held over from the meeting of February 7th. It was moved by Member Farris, seconded by.Member Perrine and unanimously carried, that the variance be granted for the reasons' stateed in the application. REQUEST - Clarification of Denial of Zone Variance - T. R. Dines. Mrs. Dines appeared before the Commission to request an explanation of why the Commission felt that a• zone variance requested on December 6, 1954 by her and Mr. Dines should be denied. Chairman Mohr stated that. the denial was based on the fact that Elm Avenue is not a street, but an alley, and never can be widened; and the pro- posed lot line would run through the middle of a garage. ZCNE VARIANCE Gardner-Stafford Properties, 151.Fourth Ave., requested a variance to 'allow a mortuary and off-street parking area in an R-3 zone. The matter was held over from the meeting of February 7th. Member Perrine asked to be excused from any discussion or vote on the matter. Mr. Lowell Davies appeared before the Commission to represent the applicants and Mr. Robert F. Bennett appeared to represent the property owners protesting the variance. A very lengthy discussion followed, during which several property owners in the audience verbally protested the granting of the variance, and both Mr. Davies and Mr. Bennett presented petitions to the Chairman with signatures for and against the petition. It was moved by'Member Raitt, seconded by Member Trook, thatthe variance be denied for the reason that the property rights of property owners would be affected by the granting of the variance. The motion failed to carry by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Raitt, Trook, Mohr. NOES: Members Farris, Young, Henninger. ABSENT: None. NOT VOTING:, Member Perrine. Since the tie vote neither granted nor denied the variance, Chairman Mohr instructed the Secretary to prepare a letter to the City Council, giving the reason for the tie vote and requesting a decision on the variance. -1- STREET RESERVATION REQUIREMENT - Country Club Hills No. 2 - Mr. Corey. Mr. Corey appeared before the Commission on the above matter, which had been refer- red back to the Commission by the City Council. It was moved by Member Raitt, seconded by Member Young and unanimously carried, that a 25 ft. dedication for street purposes and a 10 ft. side setback on Lot 68, be approved. DISCUSSICN - Planning Commission Policy on Requests for 'Opinions. The Commission discussed the problem of persons coming before the Commission to request an opinion on whether or not a zone variance could be granted, before actually applying for a variance. It was the consensus of the members that a Planning Com mission Resolution be adopted prohibiting persons from requesting an opinion on zone variances, since, in the Commissionts' opinion, such a practice is unfair to property owners and lessees who take out .the required applications and pay the required $31..50 fee for a use variance. This, however, would not apply to persons requesting an in- terpretation of the Zoning Ordinance. It was moved by Member Perrine, seconded by Member Farris and unanimously carried, that the Secretary request the City Attorney to draw up Resolution No. 44, relative to the above. DISCUSSION - Changing Zone Variance Application Forms. A lengthy discussion ensued, centered on a proposed zone variance application form, . copies of which had been distributed to each member. Several recommendations and re- vidions were suggested, and it was decided to again discuss the matter at the meeting of March 21, 1955• A further discussion was- held on the interpretation of "unnecessary hardship" as set forth in Zoning Ordinance 398. It was moved by Member Raitt, seconded f` by Member Perrine and unanimously carried, that the.Planning Commission interprets Section 16(b) of Ordinance 398, pertaining to "Unnecessary Hardship", as meaning land or building use only, and not as personal financial hardship. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Member Young, seconded by Member Henninger and unanimously carried, that the�meetin ad3ou ; , sine die, Jeanz Steele,-Secretary