Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1968/10/07 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA October 7, 1968 The regular meeting of the City Planning Commission 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, Rice, Adams, Guyer. Absent: (with previous notif- ication) Member York. Also present, Director of Planning Warren, Assistant Planner Lee, Planning Draftsman Liuag, City Attorney Lindberg, Assistant City Engineer Gesley. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Guyer-Adams) Approval of the minutes of regular adjourned meeting of September 23, 1968 and special meeting of September 27 and 30, as mailed. PUBLIC HEARING: Rezoning - Property at the northwest corner of Palomar Street and Second Avenue - R-1 to R-3-B-2-D - Peter Aardema Director of Planning Warren presented a plot plan showing subject property and the surrounding zoning and land use, which includes considerable vacant land under County zoning. This property has been the subject of several requests for rezoning to R-3 in the past, but since the denial of those requests the County has approved R-3 zoning for property on Kennedy approximately 200 feet northwest of subject property. The staff believes this constitutes a change in circumstances which would warrant rezonin9 subject property as requested. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Alex Tucker, President of DeVille Development and Construction Company spoke in favor of the request and presented to the Commission four letters from owners of property in the area, presently zoned R-l, stating they had no objections to the change in zoning. He also presented drawings of the proposed apartment units. When questioned about the design of buildings, Mr. Aardema stated they would be two-story townhouses to be used as rental property. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. In discussion the Commission concurred that this rezoning is now logical and the R-3 zoning will be a buffer between commercial use and R-1 zoning. It is felt that Second Avenue should form the boundary of R-3 development and R-1 zoning should be retained east of Second Avenue. MSUC (Rice-Adams) Resolution of the City Planning Commission Recommending to the RESOLUTION NO. 540 City Council the Change of Zone for property at the northwest corner of Palomar Street and Second Avenue from R-1 to R-3-B-2-D. -2- 10/7/68 Findings be as follows: 1. The recent rezoning on Kennedy Street as discussed above. 2. R-1 zoning in an area which will eventually be zoned for multiple family uses in the County would impose an unnecessary hardship on this small section of City property within the quadrant in which it is located. 3. The 2000 sq. ft. density would be compatible with that which exists across Palomar Street. 4. The General Plan should be revised to accommodate this change in circumstances. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed chan~e in setbacks for portions of the 500 block of Glover Avenue and the 300 block of Mankato Street - Commission initiated Planning Director Warren stated this action was initiated to place the setbacks at this location in conformance with those proposed in the new Zoning Ordinance and it also conforms to setbacks granted by variance recently to certain properties on these streets. The public hearing was opened, but as there were no comments, for or against, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Stewart-Guyer) Recommend to City Council approval of change of setbacks on both sides of Glover in the 500 block from 30' and 20' to 15', RESOLUTION NO. 541 and change of setbacks on the north side of Mankato Street from Garrett Avenue to Glover Avenue from 15' to 10' and from Glover Avenue to FourthAvenue from 25' to 10'. Findings be as follows: 1. The reductions in setback will allow for setbacks which are more consistent with those established in the immediate area. 2. A 15' front setback is now recognized as a standard by the City for R-3 zoned areas not fronting on major streets. 3. Variances permitting reductions in front setback to 15' or exterior side setback to 10' have been approved for four different parcels within the area advertised. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit - Northwest corner "E" Street and Guava Avenue - Request for office use in an R-3 zone - La San Properties Inc. This request concerns vacant property which measures 86' X 170' wi th frontage on "E" Street and Guava Avenue. The proposed plan shows a 2,000 square foot office building and 8 offstreet parking spaces. The surrounding zoning is R-3 to the north, east and west, and R-1 to the south; uses include single family residences, duplexes and apartments. -3- 10/7/68 Planning Director Warren mentioned the numerous requests in the past for office use on "E" Street, all of which were denied. He also referred to a report by the consulting firm of Gordon Whitnall in 1957 which concluded that "E" Street between Fourth Avenue and Broadway was not suitable for commercial use. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mrs. Deichler, associated with Burgess Realty, representing La San Properties Inc., advised that they have contacted all of the property owners in Eucker's Subdivision No. 2 and that they have signed quit claims releasing their rights. These owners have expressed deep concern over the possibility of an apartment house on the property and have indicated they would prefer a professional building. Only one owner did not sign a quit claim and indicated they would if the professional office is approved. Mr. Vido Kovacevich, President of La San Properties, Inc., stated that a firm which they represent is desirous of establishing an insurance office at this location. There is ample room for parking spaces. The proposed building will have a brick face front with plate glass windows and will be an attractive addition to the neighborhood. The establishment of such an office will mean additional employees in the city and additional tax revenue for the City. There being no further comment, for or against, the hearing was declared closed. In discussion the Commission felt the denial of requests for commercial use on "E" Street between Fourth and Broadway were justified due to the heavy traffic on this major street, and the fact that such use would result in strip zoning, one lot deep along "E" Street. MSUC (Adams-Rice) Application for Conditional Use Permit by La San Properties Inc. for office use at the corner of Guava Avenue and "E" STREET be denied for the following reasons: 1. Professional or office use in this area is in conflict with the General Plan which designates other desirable areas for office use. 2. The use would represent the intrusion of office and commercial uses into an exclusively residential area. 3. Adequate commercial zoning or other areas suitable for rezoning exist within the city to allow for office construction. The applicant was advised of his right to appeal this decision to the City Council within 10 days. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance - Northwest corner "E" Street and Guava Avenue - Request for reduction in front yard setback from 25' to 10' along Guava Avenue and "E" Street - La San Properties Inc. This request applies to the use denied by the previous action. MSUC (Guyer-Rice) Application for variance be filed. -4- 10/7/68 PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit - 374 "H" Street - Request for a real estate office in an R-3 zone - Robert Farmer This request is for permission to remodel an existing single-family dwelling at the southwest corner of "H" Street and Glover Avenue for use as an office building on property measuring 95' X 100' with existing setbacks of 20' on both "H" Street and Glover Avenue. This stretch of "H" Street is presently zoned R-3 and developed with older single-family residences and some apartment buildings. A special report on the future zoning of "H" Street indicated this would be a logical place for the new C-O (commercial office) zone proposed in the new Zoning Ordinance. This remodeling is planned in two stages and in that regard Member Rice raised a question of the desirability or necessity of requiring a bond to insure the removal of the garage and patio. City Attorney Lindberg advised that a bond would not be necessary as failure to conform to the plan would mean the conditional use permit would be withdrawn. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Robert Farmer, the applicant, was present and indicated he has discussed the conditions proposed by the staff with Director Warren and he is agreeable with them. Member Rice asked the applicant if he felt he could take a building as old as the present structure and convert it into an attractive building for his use. Mr. Farmer said he felt this can be done, but when asked if he has plans available at this time, he replied that he does not have. Member Stewart asked that the Commission go on record as indicating that major remodeling of the structure will be required and that would include a modification of the roof outline to present a more pleasing appearance. MSUC (Guyer-Stewart) Approval of conditional use permit for a real estate office at 374 "H" Street in an R-3 zone with the following conditions imposed: (a) The parking area shall be developed in two stages, the first being a total of six offstreet parking spaces, two of which may be inside the garage. The second stage shall be completed within 12 months after the effective date of this permit and shall include: (1) Removal of the garage and patio. (2) A continuation of the 90° parking along the westerly property line (3 new spaces). (3) The addition of a 12' wide (minimum) driveway parallel to the south property line and a new curb cut onto Glover Avenue. Detailed plans of this phase to be submitted to the Planning staff six months prior to actual construction. -5- 10/7/68 (b) A preliminary landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted for staff approval prior to the issuance of any building permits, such plan shall incorporate the following: (1) The location of all existing trees and shrubs, noting approximate size. (2) Indicate proposed planting material. (3) Indicate treatment of parkway areas (recommend concrete on "H" Street). (4) Provide a 3' wi de planting strip along the westerly property line. (c) Elevations of all four sides of the structure, including color scheme and proposed signing shall be submitted for Planning Commission approval prior to issuance of a building permit. (d) Final landscaping plan and installation of material shall be completed prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. (e) Signs shall be in conformance with those to be adopted in the C-O zone. (f) No spinners, pennants, streamers or similar temporary outdoor display materials shall be permitted. 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 staff study conducted for the proposed zoning on "H" Street indicated C-O (commercial-office) use would best suit the area. The proposed use is in keeping with the proposed C-O uses. 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. Other conditional use permits have been granted in the area with no detrimental effect. c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the Code for such use. Development of subject site in conformance with the conditions proposed will assure compatibility with other uses in the area. 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 granting of this conditional use permit is not in strict conformance with the adopted General Plan, but rather the newer Council policy for this area. -6- 10/7/68 PUBLIC HEARING: Variance - 126 Jefferson - Request for reduction of front yard setback from 25' to 15' - Etherton and Langemo This application, which applies to a 50' X 130' lot, requests a reduction of setback to 15' for the construction of five apartment units with eight offstreet parking spaces. Director of Planning Warren observed that all uses on this street, including one apartment building, now observe the 25' setback, but since it is zoned R-3, it can be assumed that when the new Zoning Ordinance is approved, the minimum setback will be set at 15'. Two letters of protest and petitions of protest containing 35 signatures representing 21 properties were received by the Planning Department. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Robert Etherton, applicant and owner of the property, affirmed that the proposed apartment will be an attractive improvement to the neighborhood as it will replace a house built in 1925. The reduction of setback will make it possible for all parking spaces to be located behind the building so the cars will not be seen from the street. Speaking in opposition to the variance were: Mr. Tom Devine, 147 Jefferson; Mr. Clarence Knight, 117 Jefferson; Mr. Louis Boselli, 109 Oaklawn; Mrs. Caroline Heisler, 133 Jefferson; Mrs. Margaret Schauer. Their objections were that all residences constructed since 1925 have observed the 25' setback and to reduce the setback at this time would be to obstruct the view of the residents nearby and also would change the appearance of the street. It was felt that although some of the homes are old the residents are not ready to have them torn down and they do not want the character of the neighborhood changed. There being no further comments, for or against, the public hearing was declared closed. In discussion the Co~nission expressed sympathy with the residents in wanting to re- tain the same setback they observe, but it was pointed out that this area has been zoned R-3 for many years and much of the property is at a stage that is ready for redevelopment. R-3 zoning allows for high density and usually means a higher price for the land; it also requires additional parking and it works a hardship when a developer attempts to put in an apartment and observe the setback imposed for R-I. Chairman Hyde pointed out that the City is in a period of change; a new Zoning Ordinance is in the process of development and, hopefully, approval by the City Council. Among the changes, front yard setbacks will be reduced to 15 foot depth, so while 25 foot setbacks exist in some parts of the City, once the new Ordinance is adopted the 15 foot setback will become the new standard. MSUC (Adams-Guyer) Application for variance at 126 Jefferson Avenue to reduce the front yard setback to 15' be approved with the following conditions: 1. The area between the curb and sidewalk shall be filled with concrete and existing tree shall be maintained. 2. The front setback area shall be landscaped and maintained at all times. -7- 10/7/68 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. A 15 foot setback is being contemplated in the City's proposed zoning Ordinance for multiple family use, a required 25' setback would represent an unnecessary hardship on this lot since a 5' parkway already separates the building from sidewalk and street. 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 25' setback was established many years ago when this area was developed with single-family homes, however, the use for all new structures in the area has been multiple units. 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. No apparent detriment to the area by the approval of this request is anticipated. This neighborhood will ultimately be redeveloped with R-3 uses which could utilize the same setback under new ordinance provisions. d. That the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the General Plan. The General Plan is not affected. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance - 1558 Marble Court - Request for reduction of front yard setback from 15' to ll' for parkin§ encroachment and approval of tandem parkin~ - Ahmet L. Kaya Director of Planning Warren displayed a plot plan of the residentially developed property pointing out that in a single-family zone there is a requirement for a two-car enclosed garage with a 15' setback. This proposal would provide for conver- sion of the present two-car garage into a game room and construction of a 14' X 38' carport over the existing driveway. The width of the carport would necessitate tandem parking which would project approximately 4' into the 15' front setback area. Additional construction of a swimming pool in the front yard would necessitate a 5' fence and self-closing gates placed across the driveway area, making access to the parking area difficult. Mr. Warren pointed out further disadvantages to placing the pool in the front yard in this case, This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Ahmet Kaya, applicant', expressed his opinion that he is meeting all intents of the ordinance of the City in providing offstreet parking. He felt that tandem parking would not be a problem in a single family residence. He indicated that less than l0 per cent of the residents of that street park their cars in the garages. He expressed a desire to improve his property and felt the proposed installation would be an improvement. He also ascertained he would be amply meeting the fence requirements by installing a 3' high retaining wall with a 3-1/2' chain link fence on top. -8- 10/7/68 Speaking against the granting of the variance Mr. M. B. Burkhead, 1559 Marble Court, voiced his objection to the location of a swimming pool in the front yard and could see no justification for placing it there instead of in the back. There being no other comment, for or against, the public hearing was declared closed. In discussion the Commission could fi nd no exceptional circumstances to justify granting this variance as the back yard is 45' in depth and could be utilized for the swimming pool; the point being that if the garage is to be converted for living space, a standard carport can be built in the front area and still observe setbacks, etc. They also felt the proposed arrangement would lead to parking on the street. MSUC (Rice-Adams) Request for variance at 1558 Marble Court for reduction of front yard setback and approval of tandem parking be denied for the following reasons: 1. The proposed pool could be constructed in the rear yard. 2. It is not likely that the proposed carport would be utilized for offstreet parking purposes and the proposed carport would encroach into the front yard setback. 3. No exceptional circumstances exist on the property to justify this variance. The applicant was advised of his right to appeal this decision to the City CounCil within l0 days. PUBLIC HEARING: 56 "J" Street - Request for permission to build on a 15' wide easement - Henry J. Waters Planning Director Warren displayed a plot plan showing the location of the property to be served by the easement pointing out there are three separate adjoining easements with a total width of 45 feet. He also enumerated two conditions as requirements for approval. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Henry J. Waters, applicant, commented that the easement is recorded, also that he has discussed the conditions with the Planning Director and they are acceptable to him. There being no further comment, for or against, the public hearing was declared closed. The Commission concurred that this is a logical method for developing this property and commented that the easement available was wider than that provided in most cases. MSUC (Guyer-Rice) Approval of variance for permission to build on a 15' wide ease- ment at 56 "J" Street subject to the following conditions: The house shall maintain a 20' setback from the easement and a minimum of two on-site surfaced guest parking spaces shall be accommodated on the lot in addition to the required two-car garage. -9- 10/7/68 Findings are as follows: a. That the strict application of the zoning regulations or requirements wou}d result in particular difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of the regulations. Strict application would require the property to be divided into long narrow lots. 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. Numerous lots in the area are served by this same easement or adjoining ease- ments. 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. Lot will conform to other parcels in the area. d. That the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the General Plan. The General Plan will not be affected by this change. Request for approval of signs for building within the new shopping center at tho northeast corner of Fifth Avenue and H Street in a C-1-D zone Assistant Planner Lee discussed the request for approval of signs at the Big Apple Shopping Center. He pointed out on drawings and plot plan the location of proposed buildings and of signs on the buildings. Located within the Big Apple building are a pharmacy and liquor store. These signs were discussed with the applicant and they have agreed on a uniform height of letters and on red background with white letters. The entrance sign for the Big Apple is to be l' X 5' with black letters on a white background, and the exit sign, same size with red letters on white background. On a separate building signs identifying "Cleaners" and "Shoe Repairing" are to be red and white, attached flush to the building and be non-flashing. All signs shall be plastic faced with interior lighting. It is requested that if approved by the Planning Commission any future signs which meet ~hese requirements may be approved by the staff. Mr. Julius Kahn, developer, asked for one exception to the above requirements and that would be for the "Shoe Repairing" sign to reverse the color scheme and use red letters on a white background. This modification was agreed to by the staff. -10- 10/7/68 MSUC (Stewart-Adams) That the signs for the Big Apple shopping center be approved as presented and as modified and that the staff be given authority to approve future requests for signs which meet these requirements. Request by American Oil Company for approval of temporary promotional signs at 666 "H" Street and 407 "E" Street ' Planning Director Warren commented that this request was brought before the Commission because these stations were established with certain conditions of restriction whereas some stations have no control. He expressed the opinion that if such signs are to be approved such approval should be given at the time the conditional use permit is granted rather than granting them on a temporary basis. Mr. Rice commented that it is commendable for this company to come to the Commission with a request for their desired advertising signs. Assistant Planner Lee pointed out that this request was the result of letters written to the company advising them they had signs that were illegal and notifying them to make correction. Planning Director Warren pointed out it was very difficult to control this as service stations throughout the city operate under varying conditions: some under a conditional use permit; some under the D Zone; and some with no restrictions. Mr. Doug Sutherland, local marketing representative for American .Oil Company asked permission to make a few comments. He presented to the Commission pictures taken this date of signs used by other stations in the City. He ascertained that American Oil Company has a standard program for advertising with signs available to their dealers. He further stated their signs are dated and would be removed at the stipulated date. It was the concensus of the Commission that over-advertising becomes offensive and that the stations most attractive to many people are those which present an open area uncluttered by signs. The Commission feels, however, they cannot restrict one station from advertising methods permitted without control at another station, and the solution to the problem possibly lies in a more rigid sign ordinance which would apply equally to all stations. MSC (Stewart-Guyer) Approval be granted to the request by American Oil Company for temporary promotional signs at 666 "H" Street and 407 "E" Street to expire on January 31, 1969. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Members Stewart, Guyer, Rice and Adams. NOES: Member Hyde ABSENT: Member York -11- 10/7/68 Consideration of proposed vacation of utility easement on lot at the northeast corner of Second Avenue and "I" Street The Division of Engineering received an application requesting vacation of a 6' easement on the north property line for Lot 9 of Covanillo Tract #1. Since the easement was offered to the City for dedication on the original subdivision, vaca- tion action must be approved by the Planning Commission. The Engineering Division recommends approval. HSUC (Guyer-Rice) Approval of request for Vacation of utility easement on lot at the northeast corner of Second Avenue and "I" Street. City Council referral - Proposed amendment to the R-2 zone regulations Director of Planning Warren suggested that discussion of this amendment be deferred to the meeting of October 21. MSUC (Stewart-Guyer) Deferral of reconsideration of proposed amendment to the R-2 zone regulations to the meeting of October 21, 1968. City Council referral - Proposed rezoning of the southeast corner of Hilltop Driw and Telegraph Canyon Road Planning Director Warren presented a plot plan pointing out the property which the Commission recommended rezoning to R-3-B-3-D. The City Council has requested reconsideration of this proposed zoning. Mr. Warren commented that nothing new was brought out at the Council hearing that had not been presented at the Commission hearing, and he could see no reason for changing the Commission's recommendation as this property would not be developed under the R-1 zone. A petition presented at the City Council meeting requested that the City purchase this property for park use along with that on the north side of Telegraph Canyon Road; however, establishing a park that is divided by a major street would necessi- tate constructing a tunnel for pedestrian traffic from one side to the other. Planning Director Warren recommended that the Commission reiterate their recommenda- tion for R-3-B-3-D zoning and strengthen their report to the City Council. In discussion the Commission could find no other logical zoning or development for this property due to the topography and the drainage problem and they concurred with the suggestion of the Planning Director. MSUC (Stewart-Rice) Reiterate the previous recommendation for rezoning to R-3-B-3-D the property at the southeast corner of Hilltop Drive and Telegraph Canyon Road, and strengthen reasons for this recommendation. -12- 10/7/68 Written Con~unications Planning Director Warren reported that a letter received from San Diego Gas & Electric Company delineated a request for a waiver of the requirement for installing underground utility service at 216 Sea Vale and 126 Jefferson. Both of these locations have overhead electric lines located along the back lot lines; neither property has a pole located to render underground service without the customer crossing adjacent property to take underground service. Mr. Warren indicated it may be appropriate to waive the requirement for underground service when the service comes from the rear. MSUC (Adams-Stewart) Approval of the request for waiver of the requirement for underground electric service at 216 Sea Vale and 126 Jefferson. iqember Rice reported that he has a letter from the County Planning Congress regarding a luncheon meeting on Wednesda~v, October 30, at King's Inn, Mission Valley. The letter requests that all directors or their alternates attend this luncheon to discuss the proposal by the La Mesa Planning Commission that the San Diego Planning Congress be abolished. They would like each director or designated alternate to be at the meeting and convey the feelings of their city about the Planning Congress. Member Rice also reminded the Commission that Wilbert Gregson had been the alternate and since he has submitted his resignation from the Commission an alternate should be elected to serve the remainder of the year. MSUC (Adams-Guyer) Appointment of Member Stewart to serve as alternate on the San Diego Planning Congress. Member Rice indicated he would not be able to attend the October 30 luncheon meeting and Member Stewart was asked to be in attendance. The Commission discussed the function of the Planning Congress and concurred it is a good organization but needs support from the City of San Diego. MSUC (Adams-Guyer) That the Chula Vista delegate attend the meeting and speak in favor of continuing the San Diego Planning Congress. ADJOURNMENT MSUC (Guyer-Stewart) Meeting be adjourned to the meeting of October 21, 1968 at 3:30 p.m. for a joint meeting with the City Council. The meeting adjourned at 10:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Helen Mapes Acting Secretary