Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1969/11/24 MINUTES OF A REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA November 24, 1969 The regular adjourned meeting of the City Planning Commission 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: Hyde, Rice, Stewart, Adams, Chandler and Macevicz. Absent (with previous notification): Member Putnam. Also present: Director of Planning Warren, Associate Planner Manganelli and Assistant City Engineer Gesley. Subdivision - Final Map - Kingswood Unit No. 2 Director of Planning Warren pointed out the location of Unit No. 2 of Kings- wood Subdivision, which is between First Avenue and Tobias Drive, 330 feet south of Quintard Street. This unit contains 84 lots: one being used for an existing single family dwelling; one lot (approximately 12,300 sq. ft.) to be used for a "tot park"; the remaining 82 lots to be developed with attached single-family dwellings, each lot exceeding the 3,500 sq. ft. mini- mum requirement. Mr. Warren also indicated a slight relocation of the "tot lot", and although this is reduced in size from the original proposal for 17,000 sq. ft., inves- tigation reveals that this lot will contain approximately the same amount of usable area inasmuch as an unusable slope was eliminated from the park by the relocation. This map conforms to the tentative map and the staff recommends approval subject to the conditions outlined by the Division of Engineering. Chairman Hyde questioned whether there are guidelines established governing the size of tot lots required in new developments and suggested that this matter be placed on a workshop agenda. MSUC (Chandler-Macevicz) Recommend to City Council the approval of the final map for Kingswood Subdivision Unit No. 2 subject to the following condition: The final map shall not be submitted for Council action until corrections are made to the map in accordance with the check sheets, all fees are paid and all necessary permits, bonds, agreements, reports, letters and improvement plans, as required by the City Engineer, have been delivered to the City. Consideration of remodeling of residence for office use at the southwest corner of H Street and Glover Avenue - Robert Farmer Director of Planning Warren reviewed the conditions required by the conditional use permit granted to permit the remodeling of an existing dwelling for office use. These conditions included Planning Commission approval of eleva- -2- 11/24/69 tions of all four sides of the structure, including color scheme and proposed signing. No rendering of the elevations has been submitted and the applicant was not present at the meeting. Member Adams expressed the opinion that approval should not be given until definite plans for the exterior remodeling have been furnished. MSUC (Stewart-Rice) Approval of the remodeling be delayed until the applicant has furnished a rendering of the proposed exterior design and finish of the building. PUBLIC HEARING - Prezoning - Property along the north side of Orange Avenue, approximately 600' west of Melrose Avenue from "A" to C-C (10.2 acres) and along the south side to R-3 (4.8 acres) - Princess Park Estates, Inc. Director of Planning Warren indicated on a plat the area for which prezoning is requested which adjoins a C-N zoned parcel of approximately 5 acres presently undeveloped except for a service station at one corner. The applicant desired a larger area for commercial development and had requested commercial zoning from the San Diego County Planning Commission. The Chula Vista Planning Department objected to this rezoning by the County and at their request the County Planning Commission continued the hearing until December and asked the applicant to contact the City of Chula Vista and discuss annexation. Mr. Warren pointed out the nearby interchange of the proposed 805 freeway and delineated the adjacent zoning and land use. He remarked that in an attempt to justify the need for additional commercial zoning, the applicant had been asked to present leases for stores, and two such leases had been provided: one for a super market and one for a variety store. Based on the plan submitted this would require some area in addition to that presently zoned C-N, although the total requirement is not presently determined. The Planning staff has expressed reservations about the R-3 zoning requested as the adjoining subdivision was developed with R-1 lots, and the density proposed might not be compatible with the surrounding area. Chairman Hyde asked the minimum and optimum size for a C-N Development. Planning Director Warren advised that the figure of 3 to 8 acres has been applied, but the City Attorney advises this is not a rigid figure and it can vary beyond that. Member Stewart questioned the possibility of applying a "P" Precise Plan Modifying District to the C-C Zone; he voiced his recommendation for apply- ing the Precise Plan if this area is prezoned C-C. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. -3- 11/24/69 Mr. Eugene Freeland, Attorney wi th Gray, Cary, Ames & Frye, representing Princess Park Estates, spoke concerning the leases for this shopping center. He pointed out that such a center normally has a variety store, food store and a drug store. The applicant has signed a lease with Alpha Beta for a food store totalling 23,200 sq. ft. of space. They are also committed to a lease with Sprouse Reitz, although there is not enough area available in the present C-N zoning. Negotions are pending with a drug store for 35,000 sq. ft., and they have had requests by a bank and an automobile lubrication center. He assured the Commission these leases would be forth- coming if the requested zoning is granted. Mr. Freeland contended that the topography of this property makes it advisable to develop it at one time. The request for R-3 zoning was made with several thoughts in mind: The applicant is going to be asked to construct Orange Avenue as a major street and that will be quite expensive; in order to help bring a return from that cost, the request was made for R-3. The applicant does wish to make certain that the residential develop- ment would be compatible with adjoining residential development. Mr. Freeland pointed out, however, that the only contact wi th R-1 zoned property is to the east and those homes are 15 to 25 feet higher than the property for which R-3 is requested. Mr. Freeland brought out the fact that a study by the City of San Diego indicated that shopping centers should not be immediately adjacent to freeway interchanges; there should be a buffer between the freeway and the shopping center. This shopping center would be so located but would have access to two major streets. Mr. Freeland further pointed out that a population study revealed in excess of 20,000 people within one mile of this location, and also that there is considerable vacant land that will be developed for residential use in the future. Member Stewart remarked that the density requested in the application is quite high and asked if the applicant would consider a somewhat lower density in some type of multiple family development. Mr. Freeland indicated there are alternatives and the applicant would be happy to discuss them; they want the development to be compatible with the surrounding area. Their principal problem is a need for additional commer- cial area. Member Rice requested comments from the Engineering Division concerning the improvement of Orange Avenue. Assistant Engineer Gesley indicated it is the policy of the City to require the developer to grade the entire width and then to pave the width required for a standard residential street, and the City then pays for paving the excess width required for a major street. -4- 11/24/69 Director of Planning Warren acknowledged receipt of a petition bearing 239 signatures, representing 151 properties, which protested the prezoning request for the following reasons: 1. The surrounding area consists of single-family dwellings in the $20,000 to $30,000 bracket and multiple dwellings would detract from the general appearance of the neighborhood. 2. The denser population would add to the already overburdened elementary, junior high and high school in the area. 3. Traffic patterns would be extremely hazardous as there is only one access street in the area. 4. There is no land available in the area to build additional schools that would be required with the influx of children living in apartments. 5. Children attending Rohr School would have to pass through commercial properties thereby creating a dangerous situation. 6. With only one access street, fire hazards would be greatly increased. Mr. Seymour Paul, 258 Slate Street, reported that the nearby residents are not adverse to commercial zoning but would rather have C-N instead of C-C; they are, however, adverse to R-3 zoning for the reasons stated in the petition. He emphasized overcrowding in all three schools which serve the area. He also stated that when the homes were originally built and sold, the buyers were told the area for which R-3 zoning is requested was to be a park. Mr. Rodney G. Seiler, 271 Sandstone Street, pointed out his lot directly across the street from the shopping center, indicated he was not opposed to C-C zoning but did not like the R-3 and did not see any way that multiple family could be adjacent to single family homes and not be inconsistent. He pointed out that the traffic generated by an R-3 development would be excessive on the local streets of Sa~stone and Slate and this would be a hazard to small children crossing those streets to reach the school. Mr. Joseph H. Wilson, 1542 Marl Avenue, expressed opposition to R-3 zoning and felt R-1 development should be extended to the school area. No others wishing to speak, either for or against, the public hearing was declared closed. Member Adams commented that the argument used by the developer in asking for R-3 zoning due to the cost of improving Orange Avenue does not hold as it has been stated that improvement costs of a major street are shared by the City. Director of Planning Warren pointed out that for the extent of improvement along Orange Avenue which has gone in the lots developed have double frontage with access from the other street rather than from Orange Avenue. In effect this does increase the cost. -5- 11/24/69 The Commission discussed the extent of commercial zoning needed at this location and Member Rice cautioned that if it is not granted by the City part of the area may be developed commercially in the County. Chairman Hyde pointed out that some of the small shopping centers have not been too satisfactory; he did not object to some expansion at this location but questioned whether a change in character would be suitable for this area. He felt it could be expanded and still be C-N zoning. The Commission discussed applying the "P" Precise Plan Modifying District to the area to make sure it is all developed; the applicant expressed consent to that element. In discussing the request for R-3 zoning, Member Adams referred to the trend of mixing R-3 development with single family and felt that the topography of this area would make it a suitable place to mix it in. Director of Planning Warren pointed out that there are alternatives that could be pursued with the applicant for development of the residential area. The staff had considered the application as a request for straight R-3 zoning and felt that density was too high to be compatible or to conform to the General Plan. He raised the possibility of continuing the hearing to December 15, in an attempt to resolve some of the problems relative to the extension of Orange Avenue and future development. Mr. Freeland indicated the applicant's agreement to a continuation. MSUC (Chandler-Rice) The public hearing concerning prezoning be reopened and continued to the meeting of December 15, 1969. PUBLIC HEARING - Rezoning - Properts at the northwest corner of Melrose and Orange Avenues from C-N to C-C - Princess Park Estates, Inc. Chairman Hyde pointed out that action on this application for rezoning should be predicated by the action which will be taken on the application for prezonin9 the adjacent area, which has been continued. MSUC (Rice-Adams) The public hearing for rezoning of property at the north- west corner of Melrose and Orange Avenues be continued to the meeting of December 15, 1969. PUBLIC HEARING - Consideration of amendment to Sections 33.509 and 33.511 of the Zoning Ordinance relating to setbacks for signs Director of Planning Warren explained that due to the suspension of sign regulations in the new Zoning Ordinance pending committee action, there are presently no provisions for overhanging signs on buildings constructed 5 feet or less from the front property line in the C-C and C-T zones. An amendment regulating this is needed until complete sign regulations are adopted. -6- 11/24/69 This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wished to speak, either for or against, and the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Adams-Macevicz) - Recommend to City Council adoption of Amendment to Sections 33.509, 33.511 and 33.901 of the Zoning Ordinance relating to setback and location of signs. Council Referral - Reconsideration of recommendation for C-N zoning at the northeast corner of Telegraph Can~on Road and Nacion Avenue Director of Planning Warren recalled for the Commission their action taken in recommending the rezoning of approximately 8 acres from R-1 to C-N. The City Council subsequently approved rezoning to R-3-T of approximately 30 acres located north of Telegraph Canyon Road, but by a 2 to 2 vote they failed to approve the rezoning to C-N. The matter was therefore referred back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration and report. The Commission may wish to strengthen their recommendation or modify it. Member Macevicz pointed out that this C-N zoning would be an expansion of the existing neighborhood shopping center fronting on Telegraph Canyon Road. He commented it is difficult to get into that center now and there is a need to enlarge it. The development of the R-3-T zoned property will increase this need. The Commission discussed the effect an enlarged shopping center would have on traffic conditions in the area. Chairman Hyde referred to a study being conducted by the Planning staff on land use at all interchanges of 805 in the City, and suggested that reconsideration on this zone change be delayed until that study has been completed. Member Stewart asserted that no new evidence concerning this request has been presented and he urged that a vote of the Commission be taken at this meeting. MSC (Stewart-Adams) After a review of the evidence presented at the public hearing it is the recommendation of the Planning Commission that the previous recommendation for rezoning to C-N be reaffirmed. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Stewart, Adams, Macevicz, Rice. NOES: Members Hyde and Chandler ABSENT: Member Putnam -7- 11/24/69 Written Communications Director of Planning Warren read a letter addressed to the Planning Commission from Mrs. Barbara Helm in which she outlined plans to relocate two large brick homes to be moved for the construction of inter- state freeway 805, and to use these homes as a counseling center and temporary residence of persons in need of help in working out various problems. She requested the assistance of the Planning Commission in securing an extension of time from the State Division of Highways in which to relocate these homes. Mrs. Barbara Helm, 216 Alvarado Drive, spoke further concerning her proposed plan and stated that since the original purchaser did not move these homes within the time limit set by the Highway Division, they had now given her only until December 5, 1969, to move the homes or present justification for an extension of time. She asked that the Commission approve the plan in concept and write to Mr. David Burns of the State Division of Highways requesting that she be given additional time during which to move these buildings. Director of Planning Warren pointed out there would be two safeguards in such a proposal: This use would require a conditional use permit and the relocation of the buildings would require architectural approval by the Planning Commission. MSUC (Rice-Stewart) The Planning Director be requested to make application to the State Division of Highways for a 90 day extension of time for removal of the buildings and to indicate the Commission is favorably inclined to the purpose for this request. Planning Director Warren read an announcement of a meeting of the Board of Directors of San Diego County Planning Congress to be held Wednesday, December 10, at 12 o'clock noon, at the Holiday Inn in downtown San Diego. The future of the Planning Congress will be the topic of discussion at this meeting. This is a subject of urgent concern in view of the past poor attendance at meetings of the Congress. Member Stewart indicated he would plan to attend this meeting. The Commission discussed scheduling a workshop meeting in December, in view of the fact that Monday, December 8, might be inconvenient for the members who would be returning from the Short Course in Planning to be held in San Francisco on December 5 and 6. The Commission was polled as to the most suitable date for the workshop meeting and it was set for Wednesday, December l0 at 6:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT MSUC (Rice-Adams) Meeting be adjourned. The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Helen Mapes,