Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1968/11/18 MINUTES OF A REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA November 18, 1968 T~e regular adjourned meeting of the City Planning Commission was held on the above date beginning at 3:30 p.m. and 7 p.m. in the Council Chamber, Civic Center, 276 Guava Avenue, Chula Vista. Members present at the afternoon meeting were: Hyde, Stewart, York and Adams. Absent: Chandler and Rice. Members present at the evening meeting were: Hyde, York, Stewart, Chandler, Rice and Adams. Absent: None. Also present: Director of Planning Warren, Associate Planner Manganelli, Assistant Planner Lee (afternoon meeting), Junior Planner Liuag, and Assistant City Engineer Gesley. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (York-Adams) Approval of the minutes of November 4, 1968, as mailed to each member. 3:30 p.m. Discussion - Home Occupation,8 Prospect Court Assistant Planner Lee explained that a complaint was received from a Mrs. MacArthur residing at 21 Prospect Court concerning a machine shop being operated out of the garage of 8 Prospect Court, an R-1 area. A Home Occupation was issued to a Mr. Cecil Wright at this address in 1964 for experimental lathe work on go-carts. The staff contacted Mr. Wright in this regard, and he sent a letter to the department advising the staff that his equipment involves a 10" lathe and a millwright vertical milling machine. He does part-time work for a few industries in the area. Because the use has become a metal shop instead of what was originally granted, the staff feels this home occupation has outgrown its original use, and recommend it be discontinued. Mr. Cecil Wright explained the operation he is conducting entirely within his garage. The machines are movable and he can move them in such a way as to be able to park his car in the garage; it would be close, however. He added he has been doing this work now for about 1-1/2 years. To date this year, he has spent 520 hours in his shop. Supporting Mr. Wright regarding this business were his neighbors: Leonard Zang, 1314 Hilltop Drive, James Flynt, 18 Prospect Court, Mrs. Lawrence Gidney, 4 prospect Court. They declared the business was not a nuisance in the neighborhood; there was no distracting noise; as presently conducted the business operation did not bother them at all. Mr. Lee remarked that the complaintant stated that the garage doors are~open during the operation of this business and that this was annoying to her. Member York commented that the applicant's working hours in the garage amounted to an average of 11.4 hours a week which is not much. Member Adams felt it was difficult for one neighbor to complain about another, and in this light, the Commission should weigh this home occupation very care- fully. He personally feels it is out of place. -2- 11/18/68 The Commission discussed the purpose of a home occupation--that they must make sure that whatever goes into a residential area is a home occupation that does not destroy the character of the neighborhood. They also concurred that they must take special heed in watching the home occupations applying for one use and th n changing it to another. They agreed that because of the testimony of the neighbors, this particular business was not operating as a nuisance in this neighborhood. RESOLUTION No. 546 Resolution of the City Planning Con~ission Approving a MSUC (York-Stewart) Machine Shop Operation at 8 Prospect Court Conditions are as follows: 1. The hours for the operation of this business be limited to three hours in the evening. 2. T~e garage doors are to be closed at such time as work is being done on these machines. Subdivision - Tentative map of Southwestern College Estates, Unit No. 4 Mr. Kenneth Lee, Assistant Planner, stated that a letter was received by the staff from Allied Contractors, Inc., agreeing to a postponement of this matter to the next meeting. MSUC (York-Stewart) The tentative map of Southwestern College Estates, Unit No. 4, be postponed to the meeting of November 25, 1968. Subidivision - Tentative map of Rancho Vista Estates, Unit No. 4 Assistant Planner Lee submitted the tentative map of this Unit noting the subdivision lies south of Unit No. 2, approximately 380' north of Naples Street. The entire subdivision totals 55 acres with Unit No. 4 encompassing 11 single- family lots on 2-1/2 acres of land. Mr. Lee pointed out the loop street system which will be completed upon development of this Unit, and the adjacent area to the southwest presently under negotiation for purchase. The staff recommends approval of this tentative map subject to the conditions outlined by the Division of Engineering. Mr. Howard Gesley, Assistant City Engineer, stated their conditions are minor ones and the developer has no objection to them. Mrs. Charles Pearson, representing Mahy Construction Company and Vista Associates, 8939 La Mesa Boulevard, La Mesa, substantiated Mr. Gesley's statement; the developer had no objections to the conditions outlined. MSUC (Stewart-Adams) Recommend approval of the tentative map of Rancho Vista Estates, Unit No. 4, subject to the following conditions: 1. A cul-de-sac shall be constructed at the westerly terminus of Mariposa Circle, as per Resolution No. 4563 of the City Council of the City of Chula Vis ta. 2. A sewer manhole shall be constructed on Mariposa Circle at the westerly boundary of the subdivision. -3- 11/18/68 Subdivision - Tentative map of San Simeon Subdivision Assistant Planner Lee submitted the tentative map noting the location as the east side of Floyd Avenue bisected by East J Street. The subdivision will contain 86 single-family lots on 21 acres of land. Mr. Lee noted the street pattern which calls for the extension of Lori Lane and Berland Way, which presently end in stub streets. He discussed the area left open on the map which borders on Rice Canyon and which was left out because of the steep terrain. The Engineering Division has asked that the boundaries of the subdivision include these slopes. The staff feels special consideration should be given to the maintenance of these slopes. Mr. Lee then reviewed the conditions of approval. He discussed a matter of concern to the staff as to the question of varying the front setbacks in the area from 10' to 20' instead of keeping them uniformly at 15'; however, the subdivider has indicated he will have four different models, some will be two-story, and this will break up the monotony of having the same type house in a uniform pattern on a street, thus there is no need for the setback variation. Mr. Howard, Gesley, Assistant City Engineer, reviewed the conditions imposed by the Division of Engineering stating he discussed the steep area outside the subdivision with the developers. They are going to require the owners on the top of the slope to take care of the slopes until such time as the land on the bottom is developed. Member York asked if they intended to do this by way of a deed restriction. Director of Planning Warren questioned the legality of this, Mr. Stanford Shuman, representing the subdivider, stated they will adhere to the 15' setback breaking up the street by constructing four models. He discussed one of the conditions: Lot #52 having less than the minimum frontage. This concerned them because of the ultimate development to the east, they didn't want this dwelling sitting in the back yard of the house next door. Member York suggested the lot line of the property next door be changed to make up for some of this frontage. Mr. Shuman indicated his concern here was the placement of the house on the lot. The Commission discussed the maintenance of the slope and felt an agreement should be set up by the City Attorney to insure this being done. MSUC (York-Stewart) Recommend approval of the tentative map of San Simeon 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 shown on the tentative map located on the northern and eastern portions of lots. The plan shall include those areas outside of the subdivision boundary which relate to the subdivision grading. (A method of irrigation shall be shown.) -4- 11/18/68 2. A final landscaping plan shall be submitted and approved prior to the recordation of the final map. 3. An attempt shall be made to increase the frontage of Lot 52 to avoid an undesirable effect when the land to the east is developed. 4. The subdivider shall make provision in a manner acceptable to the City Attorney for permanent maintenance of any slopes outside any lots or the subdivision boundary. 5. A cul-de-sac shall be constructed at the east end of East "J" Street, as per Resolution No. 4563 of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista. 6. A drainage structure shall be constructed east of Lot 51 to handle drainage from Lots 46 to 59 and the necessary easement obtained. 7. A letter shall be obtained from the adjacent property owner east of the subdivision stating his willingness to accept a concentration of drainage upon his property. 8. Slope rights shall be provided upon adjacent properties at the ends of all stub streets. 9. The sewer alignment on the easterly end of East "J" Street shall be modified subject to the approval of the City Engineer or an additional manhole will be necessary. 10. The transition and/or reconstruction of the public improvements on the westerly end of East "J" Street shall be constructed subject to the approval of the City Engineer. Home Occupation The Com~ission held a brief discussion on the Home Occupation just approved. They agreed that this particular type of business was out of place in a residential area. Member Sewart discussed the many hobbies being conducted throughout the City that are a nuisance in so many neighborhoods, and these are being conducted without benefit of a City license. PUBLIC HEARING - Rezonin9 and Prezoning - Layton's Otay Lakes Road Annexation - from R-l-B-20 and R-l-B-12 to R-1 - Cameron Bros. Director of Planning Warren stated that the staff has received a request from a representative of the applicant requesting that this matter be deferred to the meeting of November 25 so that it may be heard at the same time the sub- division map will be considered. MSUC (York-Chandler) Public hearing on this matter be deferred to the meeting of November 25, 1968. -5- 11/18/68 PUBLIC HEARING - Variance - Property at southeast corner of Fourth Avenue and H Street - Request for a commercial use in an R-3 zone and reduction of setback on H Street from 20' to 5' Southland Savings & Loan Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location of the property in question, the adjacent land use, and zoning. The applicants are proposing to construct a savings and loan building on this property which is zoned R-3; the property actually involves three separate lots. The General Plan places this area in a high density classification and the staff feels this particular use would be appropriate here. It is a use allowed under the new proposed C-O zone which zoning will be placed in this particular area when the new zoning ordinance is adopted. Mr. Warren noted the location and size of the building on the plot plan and the proposed parking. He discussed the request for the reduction of setback along H Street to 5' for the parking but felt this could be accomplished by keeping within the 10' setback. The staff recommends approval subject to landscaping conditions and the improvement of the parkways. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Robert McGinnis, attorney for Southland Savings and Loan, passed around some pictures of their proposed building. He stated that this concern has been operating in Chula Vista since 1926. As for the reduction of setback on H Street to 5', this is the setback they have in La Jolla; however, they will go along with the 10' setback and the conditions as outlined by the Director. Director Warren requested that any proposed signs be in conformance with proposed C-O zone and subject to Planning staff approval. Mr. McGinnis stated this was agreeable. There being no further comments, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. The Commission discussed the request and concurred that it was a use that would be compatible in the area. MSUC (Adams-Stewart) Approval of the variance request subject to the following: 1. Plot plan revisions shall be subject to staff approval. 2. A landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted to the staff for approval. 3. Parkways shall be filled in with concrete with street trees provided. 4. Any signs shall conform to the regulations for the proposed new C-O zone as approved by the Planning Commission. -6- 11/18/68 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. It is contemplated that the C-O zone will ~ventually be applied to the area and the use and lO' setback conforms to this zone. Since this project is ready for construction, it would be an unnecessary hardship to withhold approval. 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 proposed use is very similar to office uses which may be permitted in the R-3 zone subject to conditional use permits and which exist directly across the street. 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. The area will not be adversely affected since this area is presently in the process of transition from single family dwellings to multiple family dwellings and office-type uses. d. That the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the General Plan. The General Plan will not be adversely affected by the approval of this request. PUBLIC HEARING - Variance - 972 Nolan WaS - Request for conversion of two- car ~ara~e to one and one-half car ~ara~e - John C. Holz Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location of the property and the construction of the garage conversion. He explained that the ordinance, adopted in 1963, requires a 400 square foot minimum garage or the maintenance of any existing garage or carport at its present size. The applicant's garage measures 388 square feet with a 72 square foot utility alcove. Building plans were approved for an enclosure of the utility area by extension of the wall 3-1/2' in the garage area; however, construction was started with the proposed enclosure extending 5' into the garage. Building Inspection stopped further construction on this project and the applicant has filed for a variance to permit this intrusion. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Steve Pickard, National Housing, the contractor, explained the proposed construction declaring that it does not interfere with the garage as originally designed. It was originally a one-and-one-half garage and it remains so. He stated it would be an abnormal hardship and would gain little if the Commission did not approve this applicant's request. The construction as proposed enhances the value of the house and gives the applicant more livable area. Mr. Pickard remarked that the mistake was made by his carpenters -7- 11/18/68 in picking up the old set of plans. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Rice stated he could see no justification in granting this variance. Member Adams commented that the garage was a tight squeeze before the remodeling began, and questioned a corner being taken out; it would make the area remaining impossible for the parking of a car. Mr. John Holz, the applicant, questioned the legality of some people storing packing boxes in their garages. Mr. Warren explained that in theory the garage has to be usable for two spaces, but that there is no way the staff can enforce this. MSUC (Adams-Rice) Denial of the request based on the following: 1. The garage, as originally constructed, provided sufficientarea to park two cars. No exceptional circumstBnces could be found that would justify granting this variance. The applicant was advised of his right to appeal this decision to the City Council within 10 days. PUBLIC HEARING - Variance - 556 J Street - Request to create lot with less than 50' of street frontage - Lloyd Neeley Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the lot in question. It is an existing lot containing 7150 square feet located on the south side of J Street at the terminus of Beech Avenue. The lot has no street frontage and the applicant is asking permission to build on this lot and use the 25' easement for access. The ordinance requires 50' on a dedicated street. Mr. Warren added that a variance was granted for this lot some years ago but has since expired. The staff recommends approval subject to the paving of the driveway and that the house set back 15' from the easement. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Lloyd Neeley, the applicant, discussed the existing driveway stating there is 20' of concrete paving there now. He would prefer to just have to extend the driveway to his proposed residence rather than to repave it according to the condition outlined by the Director. Mr. Wilson Schubert, stated he just bought the home to the east bordering on this easement and questioned his rights concerning this common drive. Mrs. Marie Aland, realtor, stated she is handling both these transactions and assured Mr. Schubert that the easement was to be used for ingress and egress only--no structure can be built upon it. She added that five or six years ago this was made a legal lot with a 15' easement; however, a recent escrow deal changed the easement to 25' to serve both these homes. -8- 11/18/68 Mrs. Charles Withrow stated she lives immediately north of this lot and asked if there was any way she could be assured of retaining her privacy, such as having the applicant build a 5' high fence between the properties. Chairman Hyde explained that ~his could not be made a condition of this variance; however, she could get together with the applicant and pay one-half the cost of a fence amd put it on the property line. There being no further comments, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member York questioned condition #1 requiring the paving of a minimum 12' wide driveway. Because of the existing 25' driveway already paved to the front of this lot, he suggested that a normal driveway, macadam or otherwise, be required to the garage from that point on. Director Warren agreed adding there was no point in having the drive go beyond the house. MSUC (Rice-York) Approval of variance subject to the following conditions: 1. The existing concrete drive shall be extended to the driveway into the garage of the proposed new dwelling. The specific location and termination of the additional paving shall be subject to the approval of the Planning staff. That portion of the drive located within the 25 foot wide easement shall be a minimum of 12 feet wide and paved with 2" of hot A.C. on a prepared decomposed granite base 4" in thickness (or less base as may be specified by the Division of Engineering). 2. The house shall set back a minimum of 15' from the easement. 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 property cannot be developed without easement access. 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 site was previously approved in 1962 for construction of a single- family dwelling but subject variance has expired. 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. The use is similar to the existing uses in the area. d. That the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the General Plan. The General Plan is not affected by this request. -9- 1t/18/68 PUBLIC HEARING - (Cont'd) - Variance - 733 Broadway - Request for reduction in required number of off-street parkin~ spaces - Max Weinstock Director of Planning Warren stated a request has been received from the attorney of the applicant requesting a continuance until the meeting of December 2, 1968. MSUC (Rice-Adams) Public hearing be continued to the meeting of December 2, 1968. PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit - 298 Broadwa~v - Request for self- service car wash in C-2 zone - William R. Na§er~ Jr. Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location of the property as a lO0' X 120' C-2 zoned parcel at the northwest corner of Broadway and F Street. The applicant is proposing to construct a six-bay self-service car wash; the building is to be constructed of metal with entrance to the bays off Broadway and Fourth Avenue. Mr. Warren then noted the adjacent trailer park which is a non-conforming use here but could cause some problems as to compatibility with this proposed use especially in regard to the noise. The staff asks that the Commission consider this use perhaps in tems of limiting the hours of operation and the stipulation of requiring a solid fence between the properties. Member Adams added that the final plans should be approved by the staff. Mr. Warren passed around a brochure showing a picture of the proposed building noting that it would be of bright colored metal for eye-catching appeal. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Richard Cole, Distributor for the P & M Chemical Company, explained the structure of the proposed building. He stated the color scheme can be more subdued than that appearing on the brochure which is red and white. He dis- cussed the hours of operation requesting that they be allowed to open at 7 a.m. in order to cater to the worker who needs to wash his car before he begins work. This operation will not have an attendant on duty. The Commission discussed the proposed hours of operation, the number of people who would ordinarily have need to wash their car at this hour of the morning, and the minimum noise involved that would not be a detriment to the adjacent trailer park. Member Rice questioned whether the applicant had a stone version of the proposed building. Mr. Cole stated they do, but the buildings made of metal are prefabricated, and less expensive to construct and maintain. There being no further comments, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Rice discussed the proposed building indicating that a more aesthetically pleasing building is what they want on Broadway. He remarked that the Commission would be remiss in their duties if they did not make some provision for this. He suggested that the words "and maintained" be added to condition #2 regarding the construction of a fence. -10- 11/18/68 Director Warren indicated that the staff will try to get wheel stops put in adjacent to the walls. The Commission discussed allowing these used only in industrial zones. They then discussed the lack of maintenance that may occur because of having no attendant on duty. Chairman Hyde asked if they could require a building with a different material other than that proposed as far as far as aesthetics go. Director Warren admitted this was an unattractive building, but he doubted whether they could enforce such a condition in a C-2 zone. Mr. Cole explained that the color scheme of the building could be changed and it could be dressed very attractively. Chairman Hyde declared that the Commission is the guardian for the community and if they fail to demand or require what they feel is reasonable, then they are remiss in their duties. He added that the Commission should not be forced to accept the minimum standard--it is manifestly unsatisfactory. He stated he opposes this proposed design and would only vote in approval if shown a rendering in great detail of the materials, etc. Member Adams noted one metal fabricated building (San Diego Country Club) they approved, which they could use as an example. Chairman Hyde agreed adding that the landscaping that was going to go in was even worse. MSUC (York-Adams) Approval of the conditional use permit request subject to the following conditions: 1. The hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. 2. A solid 6' high masonry wall shall be erected on the north and west sides of the property. 3. All signs shall be neither moving nor flashing and shall be subject to approval by the staff. 4. Concerning traffic circulation, the Traffic Engineer concurs with the staff that the following requirements be imposed: a. One-way traffic circulation be required on the property with the entrance on "F~' Street and the exit on Broadway. b. A double-faced sign be placed at the exit. On the street side of the sign would be printed "exit only" and on the interior side "no left turn." c. The curb cut on Broadway shall be reduced to 20'. d. The building shall be located 10' further west to allow more maneuvering and drying space in front of the building. 5. Planting and irrigation plans, which shall include the "F" Street parkway and street trees, shall be subject to the approval of the staff. 6. The property, except for the landscaped and building areas, shall be paved -11- 11/18/68 with 2" of asphaltic concrete over a base approved by the City Engineer. 7. The parkway area on B~oadway shall be filed in with concrete with two tree wells located thereon. 8. All lighting shall be directed away from adjacent property. 9. Building plans shall be submitted to the staff for approval. If they find any problems with justifying the proposed building, then it shall be resubmitted to the Planning Commission for approval. Masonry construction is desirable. 10. This conditional use permit is granted with the knowledge that the initial installation shall be not only as delineated but that it shall be permanently maintained in the condition as installed. 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. A car wash is a desirable adjunct to an automobile-oriented commercial area such as Broadway which is designated as thoroughfare commercial on the General Plan. 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 fence and hours of operation should reduce the use to a sufficient degree of inoffensiveness. c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the Code for such use. The conditions imposed and the applicable Ordinance requirements will insure compliance with the Code. 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 would not be adversely affected by the approval of this request. PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit - Property at the northeast corner of Fifth Avenue and H Street - Request for horticultural nursery as part of the Big Apple store - Julius Kahn Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location of the shopping center and the area of the plant nursery which is provided at the southeast corner of the building. The applicant proceeded to put in this nursery witilout a conditional use permit and is now requesting it. The staff visited the site and noticed material displayed outside. The applicant was advised of the conditions against this and has now moved the material to an -12- 11/18/68 enclosed building. The staff recommends approval of this request subject to the conditions as outlined under the C-1 zone. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. It was noted that the applicant was not present. Director Warren explained that he talked to him on the phone and advised him he didn't Nave to be present at the meeting for this hearing. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Adams stated he had no objection to the request provided they have a suitable building to store the fertilizer and other materials. Chairman Hyde took note of the fact that this use was established before a permit was approved. MSUC (Rice-Stewart) Approval of conditional use permit subject to the follow- ing conditions: All fertilizers shall be confined to the enclosed building. All displays and sales shall be confined to within the fenced area. 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 operation of a horticultural nursery is part of the normal retail store function. 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. There is no item proposed for use in this development which would be detrimental to anyone's health or welfare. c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the Code for such use. The use will comply with the restrictions placed on it. 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 use. -13- 11/18/68 Discussion of signs for the Bonita Plaza Shopping Center Director of Planning Warren explained that "Discount Cleaners" located within this shopping center is requesting approval of their sign. The sign measures 3' x 8', plastic faced interior lighted, and the colors are red, white, and blue. Mr. Warren discussed the problems consistently occurring in this shop- ping center in regard to the signs. A precedent was set two or three years ago when the Commission approved a sign for a realtor: an interior lighted rectangular sign and cut-out letter signs have subsequently been approved. The staff finds that administration of the signs in this Center has become quite a problem, and so have placed the issue on this agenda and invited the tenants in the shopping center to attend this meeting. Many of the signs have been installed without benefit of a building permit. Director Warren then passed around some pictures taken of the existing signs in this area and commented on the window signs. The Commission agreed that the cut-out letter signs are better than the box- type signs. Mr. Robert Helmuth, 6696 Avienda, La Jolla, owner of the shopping center, declared that he advises all the tenants when th~move in about the sign conditions and the type of sign approved by the Commission. He discussed the problems he encounters in the area, and felt the signs presently existing are uniform to the extent that they are all on the parapet, they do not project over it, and are all less than the 50 square feet allowed. In commercial property, the owner has a lease with the tenants in that the property owner has control over the signs on the outside but not on the inside. In this respect, he has no control over the window signs displayed by his tenants. The Conm~ission discussed the window signs in some detail agreeing that they were distasteful and out of place in this shopping center. They felt they should have more control over these window signs. As to the box type signs, this was approved by them, although no uniform color scheme was ever adopted. Mr. Teague, owner of the self-service laundry, defended the need for his signs. He admitted his window signs were distasteful, but they were temporary signs, even though they have been up for one year. Mr. Teague declared he would take out these signs and conform to any standards set up by the Commission, if the other tenants do the same. Mr. Osgood, owner of the Continental Cleaners(Discount Clean~$), explained that his sign is the standard one used throughout this business. The Commission discussed the color scheme of this sign and felt a more subdued color scheme would be better for this sign. Member Stewart pointed out that the Commission has gone beyond the point of no return in approving the other signs in the center with their colors. All they can hope to do now is to get the signs to be uniform from the bottom of the parapet as suggested by Member Adams. -14- 11/18/68 MSC (Adams-York) Discount Cleaners Laundry sign be approved, with the stipulation that the sign be relocated 6' from the bottom of the parapet in order to have uniformity throughout the Center. The motion passed by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Adams, York, Stewart, Chandler NOES: Hyde and Rice ABSENT: None Chairman Hyde strongly felt the Commission should not be put in the position of having to compromise, and they should not do it. They should take a stand on these "after the fact approvals"; it is the only way to curb this practice. Discussion ensued on the window signs in the Center. The Commission requested the staff to get together with Mr. Helmuth and make up a criteria in this regard and submit it to the Commission for their approval. Appointment to Sweetwater ValleS Planning Committee MSUC (Stewart-Chandler) Appointment of Ken Wood to replace George Chandler on the Sweetwater Valley Planning Committee. Vice-Chairman Chairman Hyde noted the letter of resignation from William Guyer (Vice-Chairman), and asked for nominations to replace him as Vice-Chairman. MSUC (York-Stewart) Nominate Leslie Rice for Vice-Chairman of the Commission. Harbor StudS Chairman Hyde suggested the staff get in touch with the Port Authority and go over the Master Plan of the harbor noting any proposed changes, as it effects Chula Vista. If possible, it would be a good idea to have a representative of the Port Authority come to the Commission meeting and discuss the map with them. Director Warren remarked that Admiral Davis indicated he could come to a daytime meeting. The Commission discussed the harbor development wondering how much say they would have in any of the Port District's decisions. They felt they should be made aware of any changes in the plan, and that this should be done as soon as possible before the District's plans become concrete. Member Adams suggested ~ob Campbell, the City's representative, be asked to appear at this meeting. Mr. Warren stated that the staff does have a master plan map of the harbor area. Member York felt the Commission should study this map at a workshop session before inviting the Port District people to appear at a Commission meeting. It was decided that the Commission would discuss this map immediately following next Monday night's meeting (November 25), after which time the staff is to -15- 11/18/68 extend an invitation to Bob Campbell, Admiral Davis, and any other representative of the Port District to appear at a Commission meeting to discuss the map. Staff Workload Chairman Hyde asked the staff to submit a detailed report to the Commission outlining particular projects that are outstanding and the amount of time necessary to fulfill them. Director Warren indicated he would have this ready for the January 6 meeting. Extension of Time - Guava and E Street An extension of time was requested on the variance granted for a reduction of setback on the northwest corner of Guava and E Street. MSUC (York-Stewart) A one-~ear extension of time be granted on the variance. December Meetings Director Warren discussed the fact that the 23rd of December falls so close to the holidays and part of his staff will be on vacation. He asked if this meeting date could instead be changed to December 9 which would still give the Commission three meetings for this month. MSUC (York-Stewart) The meetings for December set for December 2, 16 and 23, be changed to December 2, 9, and 16. ADJOURNMENT MSUC (Rice-Chandler) Meeting be adjourned to the meeting of November 25, 1968. The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted,