Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1956-06-25 PC MINS SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Held - June 25, 1956 A special meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista - continuing a public hearing on the proposed off-street parking ordinance - was held in the Council Chambers of Civic Center at 7:30 P.M. with the following members present: Shamrell, Menzel, Young, Crossley and Burford. Absent: Members Raitt and Hesse. Also Present: City Planner Scherer.' Vice Chairman Young presided over the meeting, opened the public hearing, explained the purpose and ask for comments from the interested parties. Persons making protests and comments on the proposed-ordinance were as follows: Elmer Sorrenson - Representing the Chamber of Commerce \ Ray Ponsor - Parking Committee of the Downtown Third Avenue Association Dr. Robert Griffin - property owner on Third Avenue Walter Davis - speaking as an individual David Phair - President, Downtown Third Avenue Association James Logan -- property owner on Third Avenue Ronnie Young - property owner on Broadway and representing Broadway Association. Joseph Rindone, Jr. - representing Sweetwater Union schools. Charles Brown - representing the National City-Chula Vista Board of Realtors William Drew - property owner on Third Avenue H. J. Erwin - property owner on Third Avenue May Burns - realtor on Third Avenue There were a few protests' to the number of spaces required for certain businesses. Mr. Brown, representing the Realty Board stated that the enforcing of the ordinance should force the development of some of the-vacant land in business areas. Most of the protests seemed to stem from the feeling that the Third Avenue business district should be" eliminated from the ordinance, in some manner; as the general feeling was that they could not obtain parking space as required by the ordinance. Mr. Ponsor, Chairman of the ,Par king Committee of the Third Avenue Downtown Association, stated that that group is working on a plan to alleviate the parking problem on Third Avenue. Mr. Young of the Broadway Association and owner of property on Broadway, stated that the Broadway Association is in favor of the ordinance as they want to prevent the congestion of that area. They feel that by providing parking, and keeping traffic moving on Broad- way, they will keep their present business and attract more. They realize that the Third Avenue district has a bid problem and that they do not wish this ordinance to develop into a squabble between the two associations. Chairman Young asked the following groups if theywould make a further study of the pro- posed ordinance and bring to the next meeting their ideas on aly changes or additions, and that if they were of the opinion that the Third Avenue- business district should be eliminated, to state what they think the boundaries should. be and why. -1- Chamber of Commerce Downtown Association Broadway Association Realty Board Schools He directed that the City Planner get an opinion from the City Attorney as to whether the city could legally exclude any portion of the city from the conditions of an ord- inance, and if so, what manner of so doing should be followed. They also requested an opinion as to whether or not an existing property would have to comply with the parking ordinance if they were to be destroyed of fire, earthquake', etc., and then rebuilt. Member Young thanked the persons present for their interest in the"°problem. Member Young declared the public hearing continued until July 16, 1956, at 8:00 P.M. ADJOURNMENT: It was moved by Member Crossley, seconded by Member j'lenzel_ and unanimously carried that the meeting adjourn sine die. Respectfully submitted, Audrey St nehouse Secretary as SUPPLEMENT TO MINUTES OF MEETING OF JUNE 25, 1956 Mr. Elmer Sorrenson, representing' the Chamber of Commerce stated that-the Chamber is still in the middle. -,.neither approving or opposing .the proposed- ordinance., that they had-not come 'up with anything to offer to the Commission. Member Burford asked whether the Third Avenue Association protested the- enactment of the ordinance or were they against: any o,ff=street parking ordinance. hir. Ray Ponsor, ' Chairman of.-the-Parking' Committee of the Third Avenue Downtown Association, stated that they didnM object to the ordinance itself, but they'f elt that the Third avenue business district should be_excluded, .as 98% of- it is built up and it would be discriminatory to the remaining- 2%.' 'He stated they felt an off-street park- ,ing ordinance is not needed as they.were unable to find any city in Southern California with a parking ordinance. Chairman.Young; stated -that- to,the coritrary, out of 43 cities contacted, 42 returned copies of their parking ordinances,*.- He read _a. list of-,the names of the cities operating under parking ordinances. He further -stated that'it has been felt for some time that an .off-street parking ordinance is desperately needed so _ fiat the entire city will not.ge' t into- the-shape -that- the Third Avenue . business district is in. Dr. Robert Griffin, PROPERTY owner at 259-Third -Avenue., states that he feels that the bueiness: district._oiii�.Third.Avenue could be" eliminated as he had been on the San Diego Planning Commission when their parking ordinance was in the making and -that they eliminated their downtown district. Mr. Scherer explained that they had done so by.means 'of forming a separate zone or district -and_having the ordinance apply to all other zones.. He further stated that the Commission, in preparing -the proposed:%ordinance, had tried to pattern after ordinances of.cities of similar size,. Mr.Walter Davis, speaking a s in individual stated that he is opposed to an off-street, parking._ordinance for the district bounded by Seaonde Avenue, 11G" Street, Fourth Avenue and "D" Street.. 4 1 Chairman_ Young stated that he feels that Third Avenue ar_d .Broadway has just as much to offer as South Bay Plaza except parking, so that it puts the prob- lem on the merchants to .provide- this parking. He 'stated-that it has been obvious that too much business is going to South Bay Plaza from this area. Mr. Walter Davis stated "yes" = "so provide the old library building e as a site for the parking lot. Member Young read to the group the figures of a parking meter survey as obtained from the Finance Department, which shows an average of :;2.14 return per month per meter. Mr. David Phair; and Mr. James Logan, property owner at 277 Third Avenue, stated that t hey.felt it would-be unfair to force a man to purchase enough land for 4 or 5 parking spaces, at an exorbitant pri ce, and then watch.them stand empty, because of the location. i!ember Young read a letter from the Broadway Association stating that they are in _favor of the proposed ordinance, ' with possibly a few minor changes, that they know they need it to protect their own businesses. Mr. Ronnie Young, 434 10" Street, stated he was at the meeting to repre- sent the Broadway Association. He stated he wishes to state that the Broadway Associa- tion did not wish their backing of the ordinance to develop into a squabble between the 2 business associations. The reason they are endorsing the parking ordinance was for the reason that they felt they wanted it applied to their area. This would be a protection to them as all new businesses would have to provide parking and it would keep businesson Broadway by offering parking, and that it would keep them from becoming congested as Third Avenue is. They realize t'rlat Third Avenue has_a problem and that perhap s it is unreasonable for them to have to provide parking and that the Broadway Association will try to work with the Third Avenue Association, if possible, in attempting to solve problems. Member Menzel, asked if the Third Avenue Association has anything in mind to alleviate their own parking problem if they should be eliminated from the ordinance. Ray Ponsor stated that they are working now on plans to help solve this problem, but that they are not formulated enough for publication. 1 Mr. Joseph Rindone&Jr., -representing the. schools, raised a question. about the.-nuiab& of spaces called for for' schools. Member Young asked if Mr. Rindone would study.the ordinance and the school's peculiar situation and suggest a figure felt to be more equitable. Hr. David Phair stated that- for-'Mr.' Raitt's benefit for the records he wishes to say that 7 members of the Board -of Directors and 4 members of the parking committee were present. Charle s E. Brown, representing the Realty Board stated they were neither for or against this particular ordinance, but felt the apathy of. people who should-be interested -was bad. , He s tated he.felt that the- proposedparkingordinance would. force the development of land now vacant, ' as thepassing of the zoning ordinance in_1949., brought about more development* He. stated he felt that.if:any district 'is -eliminated from the ordinance, the boundaries should be very .carefully studied, as only an area almost completely developed should be excluded,' not an area with. room for complying with the ordinance.' Mr. WilliamDrew, stated'that Church and Landis should be, included -in any exemption because'their lots are -not deep enough to provide land for.parking. Other-people contributing to the meeting, with comments similar to other comments outlined above, were H...J. Erwin,' owner of pr.operty ,at 279 Third Avenue and May Burns, 'realtor on-Third Avenue.