Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1968/10/28 MINUTES OF A REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA October 28, 1968 The regular adjourned meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California was held on the above date at 7 p.m. in the Council Chamber, Civic Center, 276 Guava Avenue, with the following members present: Hyde, Stewart, Chandler, Rice, Adams, and Guyer. Absent: Member York. Also present: Director of Planning Warren, Associate Planner Manganelli, Planning Draftsman Liuag, and City Attorney Lindberg. PUBLIC HEARING - Prezoning - Property northeast of Otay Lakes Road approximately 1¼ miles south of Bonita Road from County A-l-8 to R-1 - Cameron Brothers Construction Company Director of Planning Warren explained that this matter must be readvertised for the Novemberl8 meeting. After the notices were sent out, it was discovered that the application should have included an additional 9 acres of property presently in the City and zoned R-l-B-20; therefore, the application should have been for prezoning and rezoning. Mr. Warren noted a letter from Mr. Cliff Burford, repre- senting the developers of this property, requesting that the Commissioners and developers meet at a workshop meeting prior to the meeting of November 4, 1968, to review the general concept design and grading of the proposed subdivision. Director Warren stated he would inform them of the meeting date. PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit: 246-250 F Street - Request for dental office in R-3 zone Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location of the proposed dental office. The applicant owns the existing medical office on the southeast corner of F Street and Del Mar Avenue. The site measures 45' x t25'; the existing building is located 15' from F Street and 10' from Del Mar Avenue using the south 47' for parking. The request is for the new facility to be con- structed on the existing parking lot. The applicant will then provide an additional 12 spaces at 246 F Street for both buildings. A letter was noted from the property owner to the east requesting that a solid masonry wall be constructed on the property line. Mr. Warren then read the conditions of approval as recommended by the staff. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Walters, 1227 Diamond Street, Pacific Beach, owner of the property at Twin Oaks and F Street, asked if the requested wall would be constructed on the property line. Mr. Warren indicated it would be on Dr. O'Neill's property. Mr. Joseph Pflimlin, 240 F Street, stated he wrote the letter requesting the solid wall to be built between his property and the proposed parking lot. He urged approval of this condition in order to give him and his family privacy. He indicated that there was some existing shrubbery on this property line, planted some 26 years ago, which would have to be removed. Mrs. Lucille Scott, residing on the east side of the Pflim~in property, asked that consideration be given to relocating the proposed building on F Street and having the parking lot on the Del Mar Avenue side. There being no further comments, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. The Commission discussed the request for a fence, and concluded that one should be constructed between the two properties. Member Stewart felt that a wooden fence would supply adequate privacy to the property owner on the east. To require the applicant to construct a solid masonry wall would be a hardship, since it is quite likely that the adjacent single-family use will soon be replaced. Member Adams remarked that the fence should be presentable on both sides. MSUC (Guyer-Stewart) Approval of the variance request subject to the following conditions: 1. A landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted for staff approval prior to the issuance of any building permit. The plan shall reflect: (a) All existing and proposed street trees. (b) Treatment of the parkway area along Del Mar (it shall either be turfed or paved with concrete). 2. Other changes relating to the access drive and parking lot shall be made as noted on the plot plan presented at the Planning Commission meeting and on file. 3. Building elevations of the new addition shall be submitted for staff approval together with any proposed signs. 4. The parking area adjacent to "F" Street shall be screened with a 4' high decora- tive wall subject to staff approval. 5. A 6' high fence shall be constructed on the easterly property line. The fence may be of wooden construction and shall be presentable on both sides. Findings be asofollows: 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 proposed use is an expansion of similar facilities located within the area. -2- 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 use is designed to eliminate any possible dangers to health, safety, or general welfare. c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the Codde for such use. The use will comply with all regulations and conditions required. 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 does not specifically delineate office use for the area, but rather points out the need for expansion and preservation of the professional use adjacent to the downtown area. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 435 H Street, 466 and 486 Fourth Avenue - Request for expansion of hospital in R-3 zone - BaS General Hospital Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the area of the proposed hospital addition and the plan showing Phase I and Phase II of the future expansion. Director Warren then reviewed the parking layout noting the subterranean parking proposed and the exits and parking spaces going out to Fourth Avenue. There will be an ingress and egress onto H Street. On December 19, 1967, on appeal to the City Council, the Council approved a 102-bed, 5-story addition to the 52 bed hospital. The hospital also proposed another phase which would accommodate an additional 100 beds in the second 5-story wing, known as Phase II. This Phase II consists of a five-story 96-bed wing with the possibility of accommodating an additional 32 beds perhaps in the "shelled-in" area of the five-story building. Mr. Warren then discussed the proposed parking which must be based on 1½ spaces for each bed as determined by the Council in their approval of Phase I. The proposed parking is based on the ultimate number of beds, and it is probable that financing, etc., will determine this final number. The applicant will be using subterranean parking to provide approximately 100 spaces, with the above-ground spaces proposed at 280. The staff is not opposed to this request if there is a condition that will insure that both adequate and proper parking will exist along with site control. Mr. Warren then reviewed the conditions of approval. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. William Bauer, attorney representing the applicants, stated that Bay General is generally in agreement with the conditions but questions the condition of under- grounding the utilities. They would like to see the utilities underground; however, they have a problem with the adjoining property (Casey's) having overhead service and a pole being placed between the properties just north of H Street. They feel the entire H Street frontage should go underground and the cost shared by all the property owners, and not just single Bay General Hospital out. As to the condition of concreting the parkway on Fourth Avenue, they would rather put in some form of landscaping here with an irrigation system. They feel this would be more pleasing. They are willing to live within the parking requirements set forth by the City Council, and are requesting approval of Phase II from the Commission. -3- Mr. Bauer briefly discussed their proposed parking and again spoke of the require- ment for underground utilities stating they had no indication, to this date, that the Big Apple will go underground with their service. He remarked that in Phase I they received approval to go underground with the services from the point of the existing pole on Casey's property, north. He talked to the City ATtorney this morning about a possible District being formed for this H Street frontage to require everyone to go underground, and the City Attorney was in agreement that this probably would be done. City Attorney Lindberg verified that he did discuss this with Mr. Bauer relative to the Phase I extension approval which was recently granted and which stated that the service lines would go underground, but that the distribution lines that were presently overhead would be allowed to remain. That particular aspect of the con- d$~ional use permit is a fairly well settled matter. As to the overall problem of undergrounding distribution lines on H Street, he discussed this with Director Warren and there is apparently some disagreement concerning this. Mr. Bauer declared that if the Big Apple shopping center puts in underground service, the hospital will also. Director Warren stated that the Big Apple has gone underground, and mainly, what they are concerned with is the frontage of Bay General Hospital. He indicated that the Commission would be remiss if they by-passed this and do not require the applicants to underground their utilities. Mr. Bauer maintained that as long as they can tie into the Big Apple cable, and not have to undergo this expense themselves, they would have no objection to this condition. Mr. Warren felt this was a detail to be worked out by the staff. The staff would have to go out and survey this property noting the lines which presently exist. Mr. Bauer remarked that the hospital was willing to carry out its burdem across the front of the property. Director Warren assured the Commission that the Big Apply shopping center will be undergrounding the utilities, adding that they may eventually end up with one pole on this block, but that he hoped Mr. Casey would eventually get rid of this one pole. There being no further comments, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Guyer asked about the applicant's preferral to landscaping the parkway instead of concreting it. Director Warren asked that this be left up to the staff - they may require some tree wells, etc., to be put into this space. Member Stewart discussed the traffic pattern in this area indicating that they should ask for a study of this before any action is taken in the matter. "H" Street and Fourth Avenue are two of the busiest streets in the City, and the difficulty is with the left turns that have to be made into this property. There are the two exits onto Fourth Avenue and two entrance ways onto H Street--this entire thing ~hould be made the subject of a study by the Traffic Engineer in coordination with the Police Depar~nent so that the Commission can then impose a condition based on their recommendation. -4- MSC (Stewart-Adams) Action on this matter be held up pending a study and recom- mendation from the Traffic Engineer in coordination with the Police Department regarding the traffic pattern in this area. If they deem it necessary, this matter could be referred to the Safety Commission. The report to be submitted to the Commission at their meeting of November 4, 1968, and be made a condition of the conditional use permit. City Attorney Lindberg discussed the concern over traffic ingress and egress on these two major streets, and commented that this is not unique in this particular situation. He explained that a study is now being conducted of the control of traffic movement and utilization of the parking lots which, in effect, have become public places and which they cannot, at the present time, provide with proper police control with the existing laws on the books. They are hopeful of coming back to the Council shortly with regulations as recommended by the Traffic Engineer and the Police Department. He indicated that Mr. Stewart's motion to impose this workable program on the granting of this permit is well-timed and there is an indication of the part of the hospital of an agreement in working with a resolution of this situation. Mr. Lindberg added that this same problem comes up with the parking areas throughout the city, and it is undfortunate that they do not have the tools with which to enforce this. They would like to see it made a condition of this parking situation, as well as anywhere else, that it be worked out and that it be flexible enough so that in the event of future changes in the traffic situation, they can make these things usable. It is to the advantage of the property owner to go along with this. Member Stewart claimed he wanted this report before he would be willing to take any action on this request. Mr. Lindberg stated that this recommendation could be made a condition of approval, and that no continuation was necessary because of it. Member Stewart disagreed. He felt the study discussed by the City Attorney will take some time and this shouldn't wait until that ordinance is completed. He added that th~study should be based on the ultimate parking spaces that will be needed for the overall expansion. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Stewart, Adams, Chandler, Hyde, Rice NOES: Member Guyer ABSENT: Member York PUBLIC HEARING: Variance - 435 H Street - Request for increase in permitted building height to five stories - BaS General Hospital Director of Planning Warren noted on the plot plan the location of the proposed hospital expansion designated as Phase II. It will be a five-story wing adjacent to Phase I approved by the City Council on December 19, 1967, also a five-story building. The proposed lot coverage for the hospital is 25% which is the maximum lot COverage allowed for high rise development. The staff recommends approval of this request subject to final plans being approved by the staff and the granting of the conditional use permit. -5- This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. William Bauer, attorney representing the applicants, stated that the Commission should be aware that the egress and ingress were approved on Phase I. He spoke against the continuation of the conditional use permit declaring that his clients were before the Commission tonight because they are interested in building a hospital and it was important to have Phase I and Phase II go together. It is unfortunate that this matter was continued for the parking study. He declared that they are against this continuance - that the details of the parking could have been worked out with the staff. The Chairman cautioned Mr. Bauer against speaking out on the last item - the question before them now is the variance. Mr. Bauer stated the variance request was a reasonable one and a proper one and the Commission should give it due consideration and not to continue it. There being no further comments, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. The Commission discussed the request commenting that they had no objections to it - that it was in keeping with Phase I and should be granted. MSUC (Adams-Rice) Variance request be approved subject to the final plans being approved by the staff and the approval of the conditional use permit: 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 ~ntent of the regulations. Limiting the height to three stories would eliminate much of the open space proposed. The increase in height allows for better setbacks and landscaped parking areas. 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 General Plan proposes high rise buildings in this area but at the present time, there is no provision within our ordinance to permit high rise. The variance application is the only method of accomplishing high rise buildings with adequate open space. 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 neighborhood in which the property is located. The buildings will observe ample setbacks and the grounds will be landscaped, with none of the other objectionable elements referred to in the ordinance being present. d. That the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the General Plan. The General Plan identifie~ a hospital on this site and shows expansion from the original area. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance - 733 Broadway - Request for reduction in required off-street parking spaces Max Weinstock Director of Planning Warren stated that a letter has been received from Mr. Weinstock asking for a continuance of this request to the meeting of November 18. He met with the applicant and discussed the documentation of the request. A gentleman from the audience stated he came to the meeting to speak on this matter. City Attorney Lindberg stated the hearing could be opened to hear this gentleman's testimony, and it would be preserved at the continued hearing; however, he may probably want to speak on the proponent's comments also. The gentleman reiterated that he wished to speak.~ ~ Director Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location of the proposed building, the adjacent land use and zoning. The applicant proposes to clear the site and build a new furniture store on it. They will provide nine parking spaces on the rear; the ordinance, as presently written, would require 17 off-street parking spaces based on one space per 600 square feet of floor area. The applicant states this is excessive and has therefore, filed for a variance. Mr. Warren noted two letters which were received in protest: Mr. and Mrs. Wood, 746 Ash Avenue, and Richard Platt, owner of property in the area. The Woods are requesting that a 6' high concrete block fence be constructed between their property and this commercial use. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Richard Platt, 3107 Mt. Miguel Drive, San Diego, owner of the property at 725 Broadway stated he was not opposed to the construction of the building but to the reduction of the number of parking spaces they wish to provide. Many customers invariably park in front of the stores, rather than in the rear, and by reducing these spaces, the customers for this furniture store will park in the first available space on Broadway which may be in front of his (Platt's) business establish- ment. In the long run, these other places will lose a certain amount of business. Mrs. Kateryna Grant, stating she leases the property at 725 Broadway, spoke in opposition to the inadequacy of the parking facilities. Mr. Pl. att referred to the notice he received maintaining that it did not explain enough - that the applicant would bemusing more parking on the street. He also claimed that the notice wasn't sent out to some of the other property owners on this street as they would be in protesting, also. Mr. Warren verified the fact that all property owners within 300 feet were notified, as required by ordinance, and a map is on file showing these locations. MSUC (Stewart-Adams) Public hearing on this matter be continued to the meeting of November 18, 1969. Resolution --Commending Wilbert T. Gte§son for work on Planning Commission MSUC (Stewart-Guyer) Offer the resolution commending Mr. Gregson for his work on the Planning Commission. -7- Director's Report Director Warren discussed the last meeting of the Sweetwater Valley Planning Committee held on October 24, 1968. By his appointment to the Planning Commission, Mr. Chandler relinquished his participation on this Committee. The prezoning plan was discussed at this meeting with each member present giving his views on it. Another meeting will be held on Thursday, October 31, at 4:45 p.m. at which time the staff will be presenting them with a slightly revised map. The City Council has delayed the report to them until December 17, and the Committee will try to make this deadline. New Positions in Planning Department Director Warren indicated that oral interviews will be held next week on the Junior Planner positions. Authorization has been given to hire, on a temporary basis, a Zoning Enforcement Officer. Workshop Meeting Director of Planning Warren asked if the Commission wished to have a workshop meeting on November ll, which is on a Monday and a holiday. The City Attorney advised against this date. Mr. Warren then indicated he will have a date set up and will inform the Commission on this at their meeting of November 4. San Diego County Planning Congress Meeting Notices were passed out to the members informing them of the next meeting of the San Diego County Planning Congress which will be held on November 22, 1968, at the Chula Vista Municipal Golf Course Restaurant. The Secretary was asked to call the members for their reservations. Adjournment MSUC (Stewart-Guyer) Meeting adjourn sine die. The next meeting will be held on November 4, 1968. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully yours,