Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1969/12/01 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA December 1, 1969 The regular meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California, was held on the above date beginning at 7 p.m. in the Council Chamber, Civic Center, 276 Guava Avenue, with the following members present: Rice, Macevicz, Stewart, Chandler, Adams, and Putnam. Absent: none. Also present: Director of Planning Warren, Associate Planner Lee, City Attorney Lindberg, and Assistant City Engineer Gesley. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Adams-Macevicz) Minutes of the meeting of November 17, 1969, as mailed. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING - 2800 Bonita Road - R-3 to C-N - W. L. Simmons Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the area in question, the adjacent land use and zoning. The applicant is requesting rezoning to C-N for a small neighborhood shopping center. The General Plan designates this area as high density residential--the property to the east is designated as visitor-commercial. The Commission may wish to consider a change in zone for that property immediately adjacent on the east, improved with the service station. This corner parcel bears the C-C classification which was applied to all property zoned C-l, at the time the new Zoning Ordinance was adopted. If included in this zone change, the applicant would have to apply for a conditional use permit since only one service station is permitted in a neighborhood-commercial shopping center. Site plan and architectural review are written into the C-N zone provisions. Director Warren then discussed the proposed architecture of the shopping center commenting that it will be the same as the service station and the apartments to the south. He added that the staff is recommending approval of this request. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Eugene York, 280 K Street, representing the applicant, stated the property was owned solely by Mr. W. Simmons of Escondido and had no connection whatsoever with the owner of the subdivision and the apartment complex. Two conditions were imposed by the former owner of this property to Mr. Simmons in acquiring this property: (1) the architecture of the development was to be compatible with that existing in the area; (2) the development must be designed in such a way as to be compatible as to traffic flow in relation to the proposed apartment project on that remaining va- cant land to the south for which the owner, Mr. Frank Ferreira, is presently designing plans and hopes to have under construction shortly after the first of the year. Mr. York reviewed the commercial and multiple-family zonings that have been on the property at one time, at a time when a convalescent facility was being planned. He added he made a market study and it revealed that this was a logical site for a center. There is definitely a need here for a convenience shopping center--the center will house only those stores that will fill a need for the residents in the area; there will be no real estate offices, insurance offices, etc., in the center as this adds nothing to the center. As to the service station, at this time they have no intention of putting one in--not until such time as the freeway opens in this -2- 12/1/69 vicinity, and this will be done by conditional use permit based upon the need at that time. Mr. Orrin West, Jr., 271 Eucalyptus Court, stated that his property is adjacent to this proposed development. At the time he purchased his home, he was assured by the owner that the vacant property to the east would be developed with a convalescent hospital with a residential forefront, underground parking and a garden behind it. None of this has come to pass. He questioned how the Commission could possibly approve a rezoning for such a small commercial center when they have 8 or l0 acres to the east already zoned commercial (west of Vista Hill Road). Mr. West added that everyone along Eucalyptus Court will be looking at the rear of the proposed development. The back of any shopping center contains trash containers, parking, etc. He reiterated that there is no need for this center since the residents are only five minutes away from the downtown shopping center, which is in dire need of support. Another factor is the traffic problem: there is already a tremendous traffic problem when they leave Sandalwood Drive and this proposed center will compound this problem. Mr. West then discussed the architecture which he felt was not compatible with anything in the Sweetwater Valley. Mr. York explained that at one time there was supposed to be a convalescent hospital here, but these plans have been abolished. He will stipulate here now that the architecture of the rear of these stores will be the very same as that on the front. Since they expect most of the business to come from the residents of the apartments, they feel traffic will not be compounded. It would be an injustice to put a convenience shopping center (one acre) in the middle of the 5 acre zoned commercial site to the east. Member Putnam questioned whether a fence is being proposed for the rear of this development. Director Warren noted that none was shown on the plot plan submitted. He added that the staff is not recommending approval of the plot plan at this time. The Commission will have an opportunity to review the detailed site plan for this development in the future. Mr. West declared that if the rezoning was approved, Mr. York can put any kind of a commercial development he wants in there. Member Stewart explained to Mr, West that this was impossible--Mr. York would have to submit plans for architectural and site plan approval over which the Commission has control. There being no further comments, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. The Commission discussed the architecture in this area. Member Putnam commented that he agrees with the staff's comments. With all the units in the existing apartments and the number of units proposed, he feels certain there will be enough support for this center. -3- 12/1/69 Acting Chairman Rice remarked that the proposed center may be a little premature at this point; however, if there isn't enough support for it now, there will be shortly when the other apartments go in. Member Chandler felt this development would be a better buffer for the area than the area to the east which will be a visitor-commercial center at the time the freeway comes in. He declared that no consideration for a service station should be given at this time for this proposed center, or in the near future. Member Stewart discussed the commercial zoning of that area to the east (west of Vista Drive) and concurred with the Commission that it was a logical area for C-V zoning. MSUC (Macevicz-Putnam) Resolution of the City Planning Commission Recommending RESOLUTION NO. 602 to the City Council the Change of Zone for that Property at 2800 Bonita Road from R-3 to C-N, with the following conditions: This rezoning is based upon the approval of a precise plan and will not become effective until the "P" Precise Plan is approved. No service station site will be considered for this site until after such time as the freeway is completed in this vicinity. Findings be as follows: a. The location of this proposed convenience shopping center away from the interchange is advantageous in that traffic at the interchange will not be adversely affected by the traffic generated by the center. b. A small neighborhood center would compliment a visitor-oriented development in its immediate vicinity. c. Placing of the minimal convenience shopping facilities proposed for the subject property on the adjacent commercially zoned parcel would serve to reduce its desirability for visitor-oriented or, for that matter, any other commercial develop- ment. MSUC (Macevicz-Adams) Resolution of the City Planning Commission Recommending RESOLUTION NO. 603 to the City Council the Change of Zone from C-C to C-N for the Property at the Southwest Corner of Bonita Glen Drive and Bonita Road Findings be as follows: a. This parcel, improved with a service station, is presently zoned C-C, which zone is reserved for large shopping areas. It was temporarily applied to all former C-1 zoned property upon adoption of the new zoning ordinance. b. Rezoning this lot to C-N will make a more uniform zoning pattern of the area since the property immediately adjacent has been requested for the C-N zone. c. Subject rezoning will place equal standards of signing and development on these adjacent parcels. -4- 12/1/69 Director of Planning Warren requested a directive from the Commission as to whether or not they desired to call a hearing to consider changing the zone for the 5-acre parcel to the east, presently zoned C-C-D to be changed to C-V, the visitor-commercial zone. MSUC (Stewart-Chandler) That property presently zoned C-C-D, west of Interstate 805 on the north and south sides be placed on notice that a public hearing will be called on January 5, 1970 to consider a change of zone to C-V. PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use permit - 789 E Street - Request to continue operation of auto wrecking yard , Street & Sons, Inc. Associate Planner Lee submitted a location map noting the property in question. He explained that the newly adopted zoning ordinance classifies all wrecking yards as non-conforming uses until such time as they obtain a conditional use permit. The applicant was advised by the staff to file this request for permit at this time because of the acreage being purchased by the State Division of Highways of this property in order to redesign the E Street interchange. Mr. Lee noted on the map the new proposed alignment. He submitted a picture of a chain link rustake fence which he stated will be erected by the applicant around this property, and added that E Street is one of the main entrances to the City and certainly a wrecking yard is not the best use to have on the main entrance. However, the construction of the interchange on E Street is scheduled to start in two years; therefore, the staff is recommending approval of this request for a period of 5 years after which time the Commission should review it for a further extension. Mr. Lee then reviewed the conditions of approval as recommended by the staff. Director of Planning Warren explained that there will be a number of changes taking place here over the next few years, and some of these conditions will have to be worked out with the applicant and the staff. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Paul Petersen, attorney for the applicant, stated they concurred with the recommendations of the staff. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Acting Chairman Rice questioned the durability of the type of fence proposed, especially for a wrecking yard. Director Warren commented that the fence most commonly used for this type of business--the corrugated metal fence is constantly being blown over by the wind. This particular fence seems to be more attractive and should be durable with proper maintenance. Acting Chairman Rice discussed condition #3 as it related to the 8' high fence. He suggested the word "fence" be inserted in the sentence reading: "The north fence shall be ...." MSUC (Adams-Chandler) Approval of a conditional use permit for the continued operation of a wrecking yard at 789 E Street, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Conditional Use Permit is granted for five years after which time said use will be reconsidered by the Planning Commission for a further extension of time based upon land use; maintenance of the site; freeway construction; and zoning. -5- 12/1/69 2. The entire site shall be enclosed with the proposed 8 foot high cyclone rustake fence. The north fence shall be excluded as long as the existing trees are maintained as is. Maintenace of the fence shall be reviewed on an annual basis. 3. Landscaping shall not be required until the completion of the interchange, after which the applicant shall coordinate a plan with the State Division of Highways. (Subject to staff review). 4. Offstreet parking for ten vehicles shall be provided adjacent to the frontage road at such time as the frontage road is completed. A plan must be submitted and approved by the staff, with all work completed no later than 120 days after comple- tion of the frontage road. Temporary parking shall be provided on-site during the construction period if the City Traffic Engineer determines a need because of traffic conditions. Findings be as follows: a. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well-being of the neighborhood or the community. Wrecking yards offer a needed service to the community and this location will offer a desirable site for at least five years, at which time a review will be required by the Planning Commission. b. That such use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or injuurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. No hazards are involved and the new fence will enchance the general aesthetic appearance of the area. c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the Code for such use. The use will comply with all regulations. d. That the granting of this conditional use will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Chula Vista or the adopted plan of any governmental agency. The General Plan will not be affected since a five year limitation is being placed on the use. Subdivision - Apollo Subdivision - Tentative Map (revised) Director of Planning Warren submitted a revised tentative map for the Apollo Subdivision. This subdivision is located on the south side of East Rienstra, with the westerly boundaries abutting the San Diego Gas & Electric right-of-way, and will comprise 40 single-family lots. Access will come from East Rienstra Street through a tri- angular piece of an adjoining parcel. Director Warren noted that eight of the lots will be 6,000 square feet and the other 32 will be in excess of 7,000 square feet. -6- 12/1/69 Mr. Warren then discussed the slope condition between lots 18-23 and 27-31 and stated that additional landscaping is being recommended for these areas. He noted the odd-shaped lot that will be left adjacent to the northeast corner of this area. He commented that, in approving a subdivision, the Commission must consider the effect it will have on adjacent land. Assistant City Engineer Gesley commented on that particular lot indicating that if the Commission will accept this lot as an acceptable lot, then approval of the map can be made. If they would not wish to issue a building permit for such a lot, then they should ask for a revision of this subdivision, as it relates to that lot. Mr. Don Westphall, Engineer for the project, representing Wittman Engineering Company, stated that they have owned this property for the last two years and during this time have tried unsuccessfully to work with the owner of the property to the north. He lives in New York and does not realize the problems being caused here. He admitted that the property being left here to the north of this subdivision and south of East Rienstra Street may be a problem. They are currently working with the property owner to the south as to the slope condition and there is no problem here. Mr. Westphall added that this will be an F.H.A. subdivision and the developers will have to meet these standards, as well as those of the staff. In answer to the Acting Chairman's inquiry, Mr. Westphall stated that he believes the property to the north will be suitable for R-1 development except for the parcel on the corner. Member Macevicz questioned whether the sprinkler system would be for the individual lot slopes or one unit for the complete slope. Director Warren stated this was an F.H.A. requirement imposed on the developer--individual sprinklers for each lot. MSUC (Putnam-Chandler) Approval of the revised tentative map, subject to the following conditions: 1. A preliminary landscaping plan shall be submitted to the staff by the subdivider prior to the submission of a final map. Said plan shall encompass all of the slopes between lots 18 through 23, 27 through 31, and at the rear of lots 9 through 16. The plan shall be coordinated with the City's landscape architect with special attention given to locating heavier plantings (shrubs and trees) near the top of bank and an irrigation system acceptable to the City. 2. Final landscaping plans shall be approved prior to recordation of the final map. 3. A plot plan showing the proposed development of lot 27 shall be approved by the planning staff prior to the submission of a final map. Retaining walls shall be built where necessary to maintain 15 feet of level ground adjacent to the proposed dwelling. 4. The developer shall acquire the right-of-way to provide access for Street "A" to East Rienstra Street. The developer shall pay all costs connected with the acquisition of the right-of-way. -7- 12/1/69 5. The developer shall provide access to the drainage easement along the easterly subdivision boundary so that City forces can maintain said drainage easement and drainage facilities. This access shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 6. Offsite street improvements will be required on East Rienstra Street. 7. The construction of a closed pipe transition structure will be required to connect the 84" pipe to the three 54" R.C.P. A cleanout will be required in "B" Street for the 84" storm drain. Approval of remodelin~ plans for office buildin~ at the southwest corner of H Street and Glover Avenue Director of Planning Warren submitted the elevation and remodeling plans for the office building at the southwest corner of H Street and Glover Avenue for Robert Farmer. He noted the landscaping shown on the plan and stated that the staff will be requiring a detailed landscaping plan. Mr. Warren then pointed out the details of the remodeling and the color scheme proposed. Acting Chairman Rice said he felt more could have been done with this structure, that he is not excited over these plans; however, he realizes that perhaps not too much can be done with it. If they allow the applicant to make this minimal amount of work, he can well let it go for the next 20 years. This structure is on H Street and H Street is one of the main entrances to the City. Member Adams felt that if they allowed the applicant to remodel in the most economical way, he would, no doubt, in time replace the structure. Mr. Robert Farmer, 63 L Street, declared that his remodeling plans will be a great improvement over what is there now, and will meet his needs for 5 to 7 years. He will agree to the landscaping proposed by the staff, if reasonable. He will have other tenants in this building--people that will be associated with him, such as in the real estate and allied businesses. The Commission inquired as to the proposed signs. Mr. Warren stated that this will be subject to staff approval, in accordance with the C-O zone. Member Stewart discussed the sprinkler system for the landscaping and suggested one of the conditions of approval be that the sprinkler system be brought up to standard. MSC (Chandler-Putnam) Approval of the remodeling plans subject to the follow- ing conditions: The remodeling will be subject to detailed site plan and architectural approval by the staff. A sprinkler system for the landscaped areas shall be shown on the landscaping plans. -8- 12/1/69 The motion passed by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Chandler, Putnam, Rice, Stewart, Adams NOES: Member Macevicz ABSENT: None Written Communications Director of Planning Warren referred to a letter sent to the City Council, a copy to the Commission, from Will T. Hyde, stating his resignation from the Commission to accept the position of Mayor. At the present time, Mr. Rice will be the Acting Chairman, and the next agenda will have the election of a Chairman and Vice-Chairman. Member Stewart asked that an appropriate letter be sent to Mr. Hyde commending him on his services on the Commission. The Commission unanimously seconded this motion. Workshop Meetin~ Director Warren stated the next workshop meeting will be a dinner meeting and will be held on December 10. The Commission will be sent a notifica- tion of this meeting. Oral Communications Mayor Hyde addressed the Commission stating it was with mixed feelings that he resigned from the Commission to accept the position of Mayor. His very best wishes go to all on the Commission. ADJOURNMENT MSUC (Chandler-Stewart) Meeting be adjourned to the workshop meeting of December 10, 1969, and the next regular meeting of December 15, 1969. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, dennie ~. Fulasz ~" Secretary