Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1969/04/21 MINUTES OF A REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA April 21, 1969 The regular adjourned meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California, was held on the above date in the Council Chamber, Civic Center, 276 Guava Avenue, beginning at 7 p.m. with the following members present: Hyde, Macevicz, Stewart, Chandler, Rice, Adams, and Putnam. Absent: None. Also present: Associate Planner Manganelli, Assistant Planner Lee, Zoning Enforce- ment Officer Hodge, City Attorney Lindberg, and Assistant City Engineer Gesley. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Adams-Chandler) Minutes of the meeting of April 7, 1969, be approved as mailed. PUBLIC HEARING - Variance - 652 H Street - Reduction of setbacks: Front setback on H Street, 25' to 5' and rear yard, 15' to 0 - R. Luinstra Assistant Planner Lee submitted the plot plan noting the property in question, the adjacent land use and zoning. He stated that the lot measures 97' x 64' and the applicant is requesting a reduction in front yard setback to 5' on H Street and to 0 for the construction of a 2,000 sq. ft. office building. In 1964 this area was rezoned to C-2 and the Council established the commercial depth at 188 feet in order to provide an adequate depth for setbacks and parking purposes to develop this property with a commercial use. Mr. Lee added that the rezoning was not conditioned upon the filing of a subdivision map and, therefore, three small separate parcels exist. The applicant is now proposing to develop the one corner lot of this area. This leaves the two properties to the south to eventually develop with orientation to Jefferson Street. The staff believes that the Council's intent was valid--the three parcels should be developed concurrently to assure sound commercial develop- ment. The staff has recommended denial of the request based on the Council's action. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mrs. Marie Aland, realtor representing both the lessee and lessor, stated her clients would be penalized if they had to set back further than Dorman's building to the east (5 feet). Any development of the lots to the south could be attached to this particular building. This would be good planning. Mr. Ken Thomas, 507 Jefferson Street, owner of the land immediately adjacent to the south asked that the request be conditioned upon a block wall 6 feet high being built on the south property line and that no windows be put in on the south side of the building. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. -2- 4/21/69 Member Rice commented that by reducing the front yard setback to 5 feet, this property would have the same exposure as Dorman's to the east. It would be unrealistic to leave this property with a 25 foot setback and Dorman's with a 5 foot setback. The properties across Jefferson could remain at their existing setback and because of the street separating them it would have good exposure. Member Stewart commented that the Council's intent was that these three parcels would be developed as one parcel. To grant a zero setback in the rear of this property would intrude into the residential use adjacent. He felt the request should be denied, and he further hoped that the three properties would be developed as one piece. The Commission held a discussion on the existing setbacks and that proposed, and concurred that it would be poor planning to provide a variance for a parcel this small--the property would be overbuilt, and it would also be against the intent of the Council in establishing this commercial zoning. MSC (Stewart-Adams) Denial of the request based on the following reasons: 1. The setbacks established on H Street are reasonable for the commercial depth established along the street. 2. When zoning for commercial use was established on these properties, it was the intent that they would be concurrently developed as one project. 3. No exceptional circumstances were found pertaining to the property that would justify granting the variance. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Stewart, Adams, Chandler, Hyde, Rice, and Putnam NOES: Member Macevicz ABSENT: None The applicant was advised of his right to appeal this decision to the City Council within l0 days. PUBLIC HEARING - Variance - 738 Elder Avenue - Reduction of rear yard setback 20' to 16' - Leon J. Murray Associate Planner Manganelli submitted a plot plan noting the property in question. The lot measures 61' x 104'. The applicant wants to enclose an existing patio, and because of his deep setback, is requesting the reduction of 4 feet. The area he would have left would be more than the required minimum rear yard area. The staff is recommending approval of the request. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Roy Edwards, 3010 East 10th Street, National City, stated he was the building contractor for the applicant. He briefly discussed the proposal and the construc- tion commenting that it would be partially of block wall construction. -3- 4/21/69 There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. The Commission felt the request was a reasonable one. MSUC (Chandler-Putnam) Approval of the variance request. Findings be as follows: a. That the strict application of the zoning regulations or requirements would result in particular difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of the regulations. The primary intent of the 20 foot rear yard requirement is to provide a reasonable separation between neighborhood dwellings to afford the occupants "living space," light and air and a modicum of privacy. The distance between the neighboring rear dwelling and the proposed addition would be 40 feet, a distance which would insure such privacy. b. That there are exceptional circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use or development of the property that do not apply generally to other property in the same zone or neighborhood. The lot is only 104 feet deep making any addition inflexible by maintaining a 20 feet rear yard. c. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in such zone or neigh- borhood in which the property is located. Adequate open space remains in the rear yard since approximately 1452 sq. ft. would exist, when the lot would normally have 1220 sq. ft. (61' x 20'). d. That the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the General Plan. The General Plan would not be affected by this proposal. PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit - 511 Fourth Avenue - Use of property for parkin~ot in. 9onnection with bank facilit~ - Southland Savings & Loan Associate Planner Manganelli submitted a plot plan noting the area in question, the adjacent land use and zonings. The applicants are presently building a savings & loan building on the corner lot for which they must provide 15 spaces. They have now acquired the lot to the south and are requesting permission to use this property for additional parking for their business. In this way, they will be providing 33 spaces and have submitted plans for landscaping. Since this is a crucial corner, the staff is more than pleased with their proposed plan, and recommends approval. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. -4- 4/21/69 Mr. Larry Ruhle, manager of Southland Savings & Loan, stated they have a minimum of l0 employees, most of whom drive to work. With their original plan, these employees would have had to park on the street somewhere in the neighborhood; however, with the additional property, the employees can park in the lot, leaving the street parking for the residents of the neighborhood. Mr. Ruhle added that they are also proposing to make all the stalls l' wider. The Commission commended Mr. Ruhle on his plan. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. MSUC (Adams-Chandler) Approval of the variance request subject to the following conditions: 1. A landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted for staff approval. 2. The overall parking layout shall be coordinated with this lot subject to staff approval. 3. A 5 - 6' masonry wall shall be constructed along the southerly property line. 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. The additional off-street parking will help alleviate the need for curb parking. 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 injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. The reduction of any necessary curb parking adjacent to this intersection will improve the traffic safety for the area. c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the Code for such use. This will actually exceed the required number of parking spaces. 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 is not affected by this conditional use permit. -5- 4/21/69 PUBLIC HEARING: Amendment to Zonin~Ordinance - Modification of parkin~ require- ments in an R-1 zone. Associate Planner Man§anelli stated the staff has not had time to confer with the Director of Planning on this item, prior to his leaving town, and asked for a continuance to the meeting of May 5. MSUC (Stewart-Chandler) This item be continued to the meeting of May 5, 1969. Move-In - from 471 Hale Street to 102 E1Capitan Drive - Daniel Green Assistant Planner Lee circulated photos and a tentative elevation of the dwelling to be moved. He noted on a plot plan the specific area of the move-in. A parcel map has been filed for the lot split which would leave this particular lot just under 12,000 square feet. The garage will be underneath the building, and the existing garage attached to the house will be converted into a family roon. This will leave the actual living space of the house approximately 1500 sq. ft. Mr. Lee further explained that the applicant will be using the rear elevation of the house as his front elevation remodeling it slightly. The staff feels the plans are basically compatible and recommends approval. Member Stewart asked if the staff discussed the shake shingles for the roof with the applicant. Mr. Lee informed him that they did not; however, the Commission could make this a condition if they so chose. City Attorney Lindberg cautioned the Commission on making this condition--they must find that the existing roof would not be compatible with the neighborhood. Member Adams remarked that all of the homes in this area have the shake shingle roofs, and this particular home would not be compatible without it. Chairman Hyde agreed and suggested that the final approval of the architecture of the home be made subject to staff approval. They felt a better architectural treatment of the new front elevation should be accomplished. Associate Planner Manganelli commented that someone going into this area now and building a new home on this lot can construct any kind of roof he so chooses. Member Adams acknowledged this; however, he felt the Commission should make the house as compatible as they can with this neighborhood. MSUC (Chandler-Stewart) Approval of the move-in, in accordance with the standards delineated in Section 8.21 of the City Code, and subject to the following: 1. Architectural approval of the final plans to be approved by the Planning Staff. 2. Shake shingles conforming to those prevalent in the neighborhood shall be used on the roof. -6- 4/21/69 - Request for waiver of underground electrical service - 319 East J Street - C. McMillin Assistant Planner Lee circulated a photograph of the construction stating that a request has been received by the developer for a waiver of underground utility serivce. Mr. Lee noted that there is a telephone pole on the southwest corner of the property which is presently serving the other residences on this street. Two letters are on file: one from the San Diego Gas & Electric Company and the other from Pacific Telephone both stating that services can be provided either underground or above-ground. The ordinance states that the Commission must find that undergrounding the service would be unreasonable and impractical before any waiver is granted. The staff recommends denial of the request based on the fact that no hardship has been shown and all new construction in the City observes this requirement without any undue hardship. The Commission agreed. MSUC (Adams-Putnam) Denial of the request. Resolution - Moratorium on Outdoor Advertisin~ Signs _ Associate Planner Manganelli explained that at the last Commission workshop meeting, they directed the staff to prepare a resolution to be sent to the City Council recommending a 180-day moratorium on billboards. In the meantime, the staff and the City Attorney are to prepare an ordinance which would regulate these outdoor advertising signs. The primary concern of the Commission was the main entrance to the City which is now cluttered with billboards, and soon the Division of Highways will be widening the freeway which will cause many of these billboards to be removed. City Attorney Lindberg stated that it was entirely appropriate for the City to take steps to prevent activities that would lie squarely in the face of the proposals that are being considered. Member Rice suggested a copy of this ordinance, when adopted by the Council, be sent to the County and City of San Diego asking them to consider the same steps. The Commission concurred. MSUC (Chandler-Rice) Resolution of the City Planning Commission Recommending to RESOLUTION NO. 567 the City Council a 180-day moratorium on Outdoor Advertising Signs in the City of Chula Vista MSUC (Rice-Adams) Recommend to the City Council that favorable consideration be given to sending this resolution after adoption to both the County and City of San Diego requesting they take similar action on the areas adjacent to the corporate limits of Chula Vista. -7- 4/21/69 Prezonin§ Map of Sweetwater Valley Associate Planner Manganelli stated this was not a public hearing--the hearing was closed at the last Commission meeting; this matter was before them for their determination as to whether or not the map prepared by the staff conforms to the Commission's recommendation. Mr. Manganelli submitted the map noting the areas that were deleted from the prezoning map. He remarked that three letters were received by the staff: one from Mr. Paul Rollin, owner of part of that area to the extreme east (north of San Miguel Road and directly north of Proctor Valley road in the Sunnyside region) asking to be deleted from the map; a letter from Mr. Richard Luinstra, owner of property directly south of Mr. Rollin's with the same request; and a letter from Mr. John Pettit, a member of the Sweetwater Valley Planning Committee commenting that the entire Sunnyside area should be left in the prezoning study. Member Adams questioned leaving the strips of land in bordering the Williams' Ranch. Member Rice commented that it was part of the subdivision map, and not up to the Commission to prezone it to a different classification. The Commission concurred that it should be left out. Chairman Hyde indicated that the Commission's original recommendation should be reiterated before the Council for this area. Chairman Hyde questioned the designations of the commercial zonings as delineated on the map. Mr. Manganelli explained the different categories. Member Rice, commenting on the Sunnyside area which was deleted from the map, stated it should have been left in the study area instead of listening to personal sentiments that interfere with good, sound planning practices. Member Stewart remarked that the old map will be on file and there is nothing to prevent the Commission from referring to it should any of these properties want to annex to the City. If they went ahead and prezoned it, it would be setting it up as a target for San Diego and National City to shoot at. Also, it would only tend to antagonize the residents of that region. TheCommission discussed the matter indicating that the people in the area did not fully understand the intent of the Commission in prezoning the area. MSUC (Adams-Stewart) Delete the remaining area in Sunnyside (north of San Miguel RESOLUTION NO. 568 Road, and directly north of Proctor Valley Road), and the two areas bordering the Williams' Ranch should be classified R-l-15. -8- 4/21/69 Architectural Approval - 776 Third Avenue - Christiana Apartments Mr. Ken Lee, Assistant Planner, submitted a plot plan noting the area in question which was rezoned from commercial to R-3-D. There are two parcels involved here: one parcel having a 30 foot wide access, and the other parcel to the south having a 25 foot access on to Third Avenue. The applicants are proposing to construct 38 units; the land area measures 55,000 square feet which brings the density to one unit per 1450 square feet of property. Mr. Lee explained the construction of the building which he indicated will be pre-fab with a composition roof, simulated wood siding and fiberglas exterior. He added that the entire construction of this first phase--lO unit building--will be constructed in 10 days. Member Stewart questioned the landscaping which he felt should be approved as each increment is built, and before granting them a building permit. Chairman Hyde asked about the exterior construction of the buildings which will face the northeast and northwest sides of the property. Mr. Roy Bracken, representing Christiana Apartments, stated the back of the buildings will be treated the same as the front: they will have window boxes and the same design around the windows, will have the same 2' x 14' railing separating the first floor from the second floor and the back part of the roof will have the same 235 lb. asphalt shingle, so it looks very much the same in the back as in the front. The difference in the front will be the stairways and entrance. Only the walls are shop-made; these are the same type as the J L J apartments. Mr. Bracken went on to explain the actual materials used. He added that they are going ahead with this first 10-unit building because they have their own money to do this; they are now negotiating for the loan for the other phases of their development. They are willing to meet all requirements of the Commission, as to landscaping, parking, etc., so that nothing will hinder further development of this project. MSUC (Putnam-Rice) Architectural approval of the site and building plans for the Christiana apartment complex, subject to the following conditions: 1. Final landscaping plans and all proposed signs shall be submitted to the Planning staff for approval prior to the electrical inspection. 2. Landscaping plans for each increment of the building phases shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of a building permit for that particular increment. 3. Final architectural plans shall be approved by the Planning Director for the northeast and northwest elevations of the proposed buildings prior to the issuance of a building permit for those buildings. Resolution - Parkin9 Table Revision and Inclusion of Pavin9 Standards Mr. Kenneth Lee, Assistant Planner, explained that the staff has been working with the present parking table for the last five years; this set the minimum parking space width at 8'6". During this time, the staff has m~de a study of these stand- ards and now recommends that the minimum stall for a 30° parking or less could be decreased to 8'0" minimum width. If the stalls are in excess of 60°, then the required width would be 9'0", while the 30o-60° stall would remain at 8~'. The staff has subsequently added another provision covering compact parking spaces which would be 7~' x 15'. -9- 4/21/69 Mr. Lee then noted the different cities in the County and the width of their parkin9 stalls. Paving standards are also included in this resolution--one point is the requirement of 4" of decomposed granite before asphalt is put in--these standards were recommended by the Engineering Division. The Commission discussed the proposed width of the stalls and concurred that the chart and paving standards were acceptable. MSUC (Stewart-Chandler) Resolution of the City Planning Commission Rescinding RESOLUTION NO. 569 Resolution No. 302 and Establishing a Parking Table Revision and Inclusion of Paving Standards Letter from Mr. John Pettit This letter was noted under the Commission's consideration of the prezoning plan for the Sweetwater Valley. MSUC (Stewart-Adams) Letter be filed without action. Prezonin~ for portion of Casey_~s First Avenue Annexation Mr. Paul Manganelli, Associate Planner, stated that an area of land belonging to the San Diego Gas & Electric Company was not included in the prezoning request for Casey's First Avenue Annexation since it was added to the annexation subsequent to the prezoning. The staff recommends that it be set for hearing for considera- tion of the R-3-B-3-D or more restrictive zoning, which is the zoning the remainder of the annexation was assigned. MSUC (Stewart-Rice) Set for public hearing for May 19, 1969, that portion of the Casey annexation belonging to the San Diego Gas & Electric Company. Prezonin9 for Fourth Avenue and L Street Assistant Planner Kenneth Lee submitted a plot plan noting the area in question as the southwest corner of Fourth Avenue and L Street. This will be on the Commission agenda of May 5, 1969. A request for annexation is also pending. Even though the staff has not received all the signatures of the property owners on the block, they are requesting that the entire block be set for prezoning to R-3, and that the setback be advertised at 20 feet. MSUC (Rice-Stewart) Approval of setting the entire block for prezoning to R-3, and the setback at 20 feet. Workshop Meeting City Attorney Lindberg suggested the Commission meet at a workshop session to discuss the establishment of a Civic Center zone with architectural control. He felt they should be looking into this in view of the fact that the Civic Center is now being planned. MSUC (Rice-Stewart) Staff be directed to set up a workshop meeting to discuss this matter. -10- 4/21/69 Billboards on H Street Member Macevicz questioned the legality of the new billboards on Interstate 5 and H Street. Mr. Manganelli stated they were erected legally; it is an industrial zone in which such signs are permitted and the staff had no choice but to approve it. This is one of the reasons the staff recommended the resolution previously on the agenda. Ma,vor's Committee on Land Use Chairman Hyde mentioned that the Mayor is recommending that a citizens' commit- tee be set up to investigate land use in the City. City Attorney Lindberg explained that it was not a committee to investigate land use, but to do an inventory of open space available in the C~ty with the view point of checking it out for purposes of acquisition or trade in trying to secure sites for parks, etc. Mr. Manganelli remarked that all recommendations of this citizens' committee should automatically come to the Planning Commission. ADJOURNMENT MSUC (Rice-Chandler) Meeting be adjourned to the next meeting of April 28, 1969. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ie M. '~' Secretary