Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1965/05/03 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA May 3, 1965 The regular meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California, was held at 7:00 P.M., in the Council Chamber at the Civic Center on the above date with the following members present: Stevenson, Stewart, Comstock, Johnson, Millar, Adams, and Guyer. Absent: None. Also present: Director of Planning Warren, Assistant Planner Terrell, City Attorney Lindberg, and Principal Engineer Harshman. Approval of Minutes Member Adams asked that the statement he made on page 4 of the m~nutes of April 19, 1965, concerning the setback reduction request for Warren Thomas, indicate that this apply to the side street only, and that he did not intend to oppose the 5 foot setback on I'H'~ Street. MSUC (Adams-Johnson) Minutes of April 19, 1965 be approved, with the correction re- quested by Member Adams. REZONII~GS PUBLIC HEARING: Security Title Insurance Company - North Side of "H" Street between Montgomery Freeway and Woodlawn Avenue R-3 to C-2 The application was read in which a request was made to rezone property located on the north side of "H" Street, east of Montgomery Freeway and adjacent to the rail- road tracks, from R-3 to C-2. Mr. Louis Tompkins, 2233 E1 Cajon Boulevard, San Diego, agent for Security Title Insurance Company, requested a continuance of this matter until the meeting of May 17, 1965. MSUC (Guyer-Stewart) Public hearing be continued until the meeting of May 17, 1965. PUBLIC HEARING: Property on Both Sides of Oxford Street~ East of Hilltop Drive - M-1 to R-1 Director of Planning Warren stated this was set for hearing by a Commission resolution which was initiated by the staff. It involves two parcels owned by the California Water and Telephone Company located on both sides of Oxford Street, east of Hilltop Drive. These parcels are surrounded on all sides by residential property. In order to insure that compatible development will take place in this area, rezoning to R-1 has been recommended by the staff. At the present time, there is a water tank on the northerly parcel and the Water Company has indicated they plan to construct one or two others on the southerly parcel. This is allowed with a conditi~al use permit, and the staff assumes that such requests would be approved when the Water Company applied for a permit. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Norman Beenfeldt, Division Engineer for the California Water and Telephone Company, related that the parcels were once a part of the Judson Reservoir land which consisted -1- of 140 acres; the Water Company retained these two parcels and sold off the rest of the land. Mr. Beenfeldt stated he would like some assurance that the Water Company will be able to locate their tanks on this property without any difficulty, whenever they are ready to do so. He stated their plans, at present, are to develop another ~nk on the northerly parcel and two or three on the southerly parcel. Having this land zoned M-1 precluded any need to come in for a conditional use permit. Chairman Stevenson felt the request was in order. He explained the need for the rezoning, stating that if it should change hands at any time in the future, industrial uses could come lnto this area. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Vice-Chairman Stewart remarked that he has never known an application to be denied the installation of water tanks in the City; that they are a necessity to the City. No one should oppose these facilities in an R-1 area. Director Warren indicated that it would be rather unusual for the Planning Commission to deny such a request. With a conditional use permit, limited restrictions as needed could be placed upon the development. Member Comstock remarked there was no problem here, since everyone is aware that all subdivisions need an adequate supply of water. However, in view of the fact that this Commission can not obligate future Planning Commissions, he would suggest a recommendation that every consideration be given to granting the Water Company a conditional use permit if and when they should desire to construct the tanks on these sites. RESOLUTION NO. 354 Resolution of the City Planning Commission Recommending MSUC (Comstock-Stewart) to City Council the Change of Zone for Property Located on the North Side of Oxford Street, East of Cuyamaca Aven~e and the South Side of Oxford Street, East of Hilltop Drive from M-1 to R-3 Findings of fact in support of said determination are as follows: (a) The rezoning of this property to single-family (R-l) will insure proper development in the event the property should ever change hands. (b) The Commission respectively requests favorable consideration be granted to the Water Company at any future time for a conditional use permit to construct water tanks on either of these two parcels. PUBLIC HEARING: Bonita Cove Annexation No. 2 - Prezonin~ to R-3-D & R-l-B-20 Director of Planning Warren stated this hearing was set by the Commission at the request of the developer. This property is being considered for annexation. As re- quested, it is an illegal annexation; however, Mr. Warren added, he received a call from the Local Agency Formation Commission and an attempt is being made to annex this property by modifying the request. Director Warren submitted a plot plan of the area noting the location, the proposed 805 Freeway, and the off-ramps. This will be a major interchange with Bonita Road and the Freeway. The property under consideration is 196 feet wide and contains approximately 6½ acres. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Frank Ferreira, the applicant, indicated on the plot plan the area he requests be prezoned R-3 and the area for R-l-B-20 zoning. He stated the prezoning was a reasonable request in view of the fact that the freeway will be coming in here, and it will not be affecting anyone in the immediate area. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Comstock commented that he was originally opposed to having this R-3 zoning in this area because of the high quality single-family homes that will be next to it. However, with the freeway coming in next to this, Member Comstock said he felt it would be good zoning practice to go along with the staff's recommendations prezoning the northerly parcel to R-3-D. Member Comstock suggested the "D" zone be placed on the southerly parcel also which is proposed for R-l-B-20 zoning. Mr. Ferreira stated he had no objection to this. RESOLUTION NO. 355 Resolution of the City Planning Commission Recommending MSUC (Comstock-Johnson) to City Council Prezoning for the Bonita Cove Annexation No. 2 Findings are as follows: (a) This would be a logical expansion of existing R-3-D zoning easterly to the proposed freeway right-of-way. (b) The proposed R-1-B-20-D zoning would afford compatible development with adjacent uses in the County. VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING: (Cont'd) John McLeod - East of Walnut Street~ South of San Diego Gas and Electric Company's Right-of-Way - Setback Reductions Director of Planning reviewed the matter stating this has been continued twice at the request of the applicant. The initial request was to use a portion of the San Diego Gas & Electric Company's right-of-way for parking, and for a reduction of setback from 15 feet to zero. The Commission asked the applicant to restudy his development, and submit new plans placing all of his required parking on his own property. The question now concerns Walnut Street - whether it was ever dedicated or vacated, etc. Director Warren added that the staff would ask that the matter be continued once more so that this problem could be worked out. MSUC (Comstock-Stewart) Public hearing be continued until the meeting of May 17, 1965, at which time the Commission will take action on the request. PUBLIC HEARING: Dr. and Mrs. Joseph Casey - 288 Del Mar Avenue - C-1 Use in R-3 Zone The application was read in which permission was requested to convert the house at 288 Del Mar Avenue to an Antique Shop. Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location and adjacent land use. He explained that the applicant had previously asked for a rezoning on this particular property which was denied by the Commis§ion; he is now requesting a use variance for the same use - an Antique Shop. By ordinance, the applicant is re- quired to provide five parking spaces for this operation. Member Johnson asked if this was possible in this particular situation. Director Warren stated it did not appear possible. -3- This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Dr. Joseph Casey, the applicant, explained he was turned down on his request for zone change because he was unaware of the method of obtaining it. He plans someday to remove this building and buy the property that fronts on Del Mar, having this property for apartment use. The house is approximately 40 years old, and has deteriorated more and has now become an eyesore. They plan to renovate the building, and his wife would operate an Antique Shop here. She does not plan to make this a full-time occupation; it will be a "part-time" operation. Member Comstock questioned whether the business will be done through buyers and dealers, etc. Dr. Casey stated it would not; his wife plans to buy her own antiques. Member Guyer questioned whether the applicant could provide the necessary parking spaces on his property. Dr. Casey stated he cannot see how he possibly could this. In answer to Member Millar's question, Dr. Casey stated they have no plans to enlarge the building; his wife feels the building will be adequate for her business. The Commission discussed the matter of signs. Dr. Casey stated that some type of sign will be put on the building so as to direct the people to this location. He remarked that they would be cooperative with any type of sign allowable for the area. Member Comstock commented that "F" Street is the commercial type of street and wondered whether the applicant would have any objection to having his sign facing "F" Street rather than Del Mar Avenue. The applicant stated he would welcome making this suggestion to anyone who could tell him how this could be accomplished. Chairman Stevenson asked if the applicant had given any consideration to renting one of the vacant stores on Third Avenue. Dr. Casey said they looked into this, but the cost of leasing one of these stores was extremely high, especially for the type of business his wife plans to operate. Mr. Frank Ferreira, 3715 Putter D~ive, spoke in favor of the request. He felt it would not affect the residential property to the north, since it was contiguous to commercial property. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Comstock remarked that an Antique Shop was not a heavily-traveled business and questioned the need for the additional parking spaces. Director Warren stated the staff has not made any recommendation on the parking, but by ordinance, a retail establishment must have a minimum of 4 parking spaces. Vice-Chairman Stewart said he couldn't help but feel this would be an intrusion of a commercial enterprise into a residential area. It is not acceptable as far as pro- viding parking spaces in this area since only one car can get in and out of there at one time. Mr. Stewart further stated that it would deter future development in this Member Comstock disagreed stating the Commission is talking about an interim use; not a long-term use. For one thing, he declared, the applicants will discover in time the building is too small for their operation and will be looking around for something larger. Further, the parcel is small and not sufficient for R-3 use. -4- Member Millar felt there would be no harm in granting this variance since a satis- factory apartment building could not be built on it, and anything done to the property as it now stands, would be an improvement. Member Guyer reminded the Commission that they must find exceptional circumstances here in order to grant this request; he could see none. Member Johnson indicated that parking was no problem; he could see where two or three spaces could be worked out. He would, however, like to see the restriction on the sign, and not have a sign facing Del Mar. Chairman Stevenson cautioned the Commission to be very careful not to set a precedent here. MSC (Stewart-Guyer) Variance be denied for the following reasons: 1. No justification as required by the Zoning Ordinance can be found. 2. It would be an intrusion into a residential area. 3. Parking requirements as specified in the ordinance cannot be met compounding an already existing problem caused by insuffic~ient off-street parking for adjacent 4. It would deter consolidation of these two substandard lots at some future time into one lot for multiple-family use, and general redevelopment of the area. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Stewart, Guyer, Stevenson, and Adams NOES: Members Comstock, Johnson, and Millar ABSENT: None PUBLIC HEARING: Jacob & Ruth Rouse - 156 Fourth Avenue - Reduction in Rear Yard Setback 15 feet to 5.5 feet The application was read in which a request was made for a reduction in rear yard setback from 15 feet to 5.5 feet for the purpose of constructing an addition to their home. Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot p~ n noting the location, and the pro- posed addition. He commented that there were several of these lots in the City containing less setbacks than that required by ordinance. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. dacob Rouse, the applicant, stated the addition will be replacing the patio he now has. Mr. Ray Evans, 2207 Thirtieth Street, San Diego, explained the proposed construction stating enough rear and side yard will still be left for normal use. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Member Comstock questioned the lot coverage. Director Warren commented thatit would probably be about one-third. Member Guyer spoke in favor of it stating it was a corner lot. Member Comstock said he felt the applicants have taken full advantage of this fact; there are two setbacks here being abused. Chairman Stevenson commented that the house on the left enjoys this same setback. Vice-Chairman Stewart said this was probably done before setbacks were established in this area. He added he felt the Commission should grant them their request, giving them some relief, due to their substandard lot. MSC (Guyer-Stewart) Variance be approved. Findings are as follows: 1. There are practical differences and unnecessary hardships within the meaning of the ordinance which would result in the strict compliance of the provisions of said ordinance. 2. There are exceptional circumstances and conditions applicable to the property herein involved or the intended use thereof that do not apply generally to property or class of uses in the same zone. The lot is exceptionally small. The area in which the applicant desires to build now contains a covered patio, and the action contemplated would be essentially in enclosing this area. The applicant does maintain a side yard greater than that normally observed. 3. Granting this variance is necessary for the preservation of the substantial property right of the applicant. Without this variance, the applicant has no room on which to expand his house. The house immediately to the rear on a com- ..parable size lot, because it is on an interior lot, can utilize more of his property than can this man on the corner lot. 4. Granting this variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property improvements in the zone or district in which this is located, since several such small homes do exist on small lots in the central part of the City, and very often, setbacks presently required for larger lots have not been observed. No objections from the neighbors. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Guyer, Stewart, Johnson, Stevenson, Millar, and Adams NOES: Member Comstock ABSENT: None PUBLIC HEARING: Shell Oil Company - Southwest Corner of "L" Street and Industrial Boulevard - Setback Reductions The application was read in which a request was made for reductions in setbacks for the purpose of installing a pump island and signs for the proposed service station. Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location, zoning, and adjacent land use. This is M-2 zoned property; setback on three sides of this property is 25 feet. Director Warren then noted the proposed location of signs and the requested setback reductions. He remarked the signs were the standard ones allowed for service stations with the exception of the sign proposed next to the free- way. Director Warren ~ndicated this whole interchange will be changed with the re- development of the freeway which is proposed by the year 1972. The only access to this station will be on Industrial Boulevard. Director Warren then asked that some '6- consideration be given for landscaping. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Ray Powell, representing Shell Oil Company, spoke of the landscaping proposed. They plan to have a planter on Industrial Boulevard and would have no objection to putting another one on the corner of "L~ Street. The conditions effecting this M-2 zoned property are unique. The property is bounded by three streets; however, access is from one street only. The entire property is fenced; no access from the off-ramp or the freeway. There is restricted visibility to this station to the north and south-bound traffics; visibility of the west-bound traffic is somewhat restricted also because of the power poles and the trees. The nearest property to this is the apartment complex which is several hundred yards away. The requested setback re- ductions are the same as other service stations in the City now enjoy. Mr. Powell then discussed the various signs proposed and their location. The vital one, he stated, is the modular sign. Most objections to the freeway signs are billboards and not the identification signs. Member Johnson questioned whether this sign would be prohibited by the State. Mr. Powell stated it would not. Member Comstock asked if any consideration was given to landscaping the property fronting on the freeway. Mr. Powell stated this would be a problem here; it would be their rear yard and this is entirely fenced. This is usually asphalted and is considered their "care-free" area. Member Comstock then questioned whether there would be a towing service. Mr. Powell indicated there would be, but there would not be any storing of wrecked cars on the property, except in an emergency measure. Director Warren suggested the Commission restrict the applicant to the signs re- quested in his application. Mr. Powell stated he had no objection to this. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Director Warren reviewed the conditions he would ask be imposed. Member Comstock felt the condition that no moving or flashing signs be allowed be waived in this particular instance, since it is in an industrial zone. Director Warren pointed out that the fact that this is in an M-2 zone should not make any difference; the staff does not recognize the need for a flashing or moving sign. Mr. Powell stated this sign was designed to give the freeway traffic more warning so they could pull off the freeway, get into the service station and back out again. A rotating sign, on the other hand, is designed for street traffic and not freeway traffic . Director Warren commented that in this particular case, the property being isolated so to speak, this sign would not present much of a problem; however, if every business along thoroughfares put up moving and flashing signs, it would confuse the driver. MSUC (Comstock-Millar) Variance be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That no other signs be allowed other than the Shell sign on the building. 2. That the corner containing the Shell CBR sign be landscaped in conformance with the strip along Industrial Boulevard. -7- Further, findings be as follows: 1. There are practical differences and unnecessary hardships within the meaning of the Ordinance that would result in the strict compliance of the provisions of the ordinance. 2. There are exceptional circumstances and conditions applicable to the property herein involved or the intended use thereof that do not apply generally to property or class of uses in the same zone. The 25 foot setback surrounding the property are considered excessive in locating signs and lighting for the service stations throughout the City. The building is in observance of the setbacks and to properly facilitate vehicular circulation, one pump ~sland must be located within the setback area. 3. Granting this variance is necessary for the preservation of the substantial property right of the applicant. Without this variance, the applicant is deprived of the right to display signs for service stations used throughout the City. 4. Granting this variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property improvements in the zone or districts in which said property is located. The signs would be in conformance with others allowed in the area. PUBLIC HEARING: Tri-County Construction Co~pan¥~-~onita Cove Subdivision - Reduction in Rear Yard Setbacks - 20 feet to 17 feet The application was read in which a request was made for a reduction in setback from 20 feet to 17 feet for Lots 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, and 38 in the Bonita Cove Subdivision, or inlieu thereof, to waive the requirement that the garage door be set back 20 feet from the sidewalk. Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location and a typical lot layout showing what the applicant is proposing. This being the t~me and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Frank Ferreira, the applicant, submitted a few paintings of the homes he proposes to build in this area. He stated he will have 10 different floor plans and 24 elevati~s in the subdivision. Three of these plans do not meet the requirement that the garage must observe a 20 foot setback. Mr. Ferreira stated his plans were drawn up before this ordinance went into effect and would ask Commission consideration of this fact. Most of the homes in this subdivision will have three car garages; these garages will be finished off - ceiling, walls, etc. Member Comstock questioned whether another space has been left on the property for pools. Mr. Ferreira noted the area on the side yard an owner could put a pool in, stating there was ample room here. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. MSUC (Stewart-Comstock) Variance be approved subject to the following: An attempt be made to site the houses on the property in a manner which will leave a side yard on one side available for living space. Further, findings be as follows: 1. There are practical differences and unnecessary hardships within the meaning of the ordinance which would result in the strict compliance of the provisions of said ordinance. 2. There are exceptional circumstances and conditions applicable to the property herein involved or the intended use thereof that do not apply generally to property or class of use in the same zone. The lots involved are shallower lots than those in most subdivisions, and the homes proposed for the lots are larger than those historically placed on this size lot. 3. Granting this variance is necessary for the preservation of the substantial property right of the applicant. Applicant indicates that he would be unable to use his present building plans if strict adherence to the Code provision is required; because of his wide lots, lot coverage would not be increased. 4. Granting this variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property improvements in the zone or district in which said property is located, since the houses are designed in such a way that a portion of the rear yard will exceed zoning requirements and an unusual dimension between homes will exist. SUBDIVISIONS Majestic Terrace - Tentative Map Director of Planning Warren submitted the map explaining that it involves 45 resi- dential lots, located south of Naples, east of Melrose and will be an extension of Nacion. The proposed Interstate 805 Freeway will be passing to the east. At present, Naples is a one-half street, and the natural drainage goes through a portion of this area. Nacion is projected as the freeway frontage road. Director Warren then discussed the jog between "B" Street and Nacion Avenue at Naples Street. As designed, it would present traffic problems in this area; therefore, Mr. Warren submitted a couple of revised plans realigning this jog, which the staff would suggest. Director Warren then discussed the area stating there are approximately 80 acres here which have remained vacant for several years due to several reasons. The only way in wh;ch this land could be developed feasibly would be for the separate owners to cooperate, since there would have to be a balanced cut and fill for most of this property. Director Warren then submitted the staff's recommendations. Mr. William Harshman, Principal Engineer, submitted the recommendations of the Engineering Division, explaining the need for the conditions. Member Comstock suggested this matter be held over until the next meeting, and all these things be worked out before that time. Director Warren discussed the proposed realignment of Nacion indicating there was a question as to who would do this - whether or not the City should participate in this. Mr. Jim Patten, representing the developers, stated they were not aware of the fact that they could run a street through that portion of the property that the State is acquiring. They did discuss moving the street from Naples east to get more depth to the lots. Mr. Patten further stated that if the alignment, as proposed by the staff, is adopted, they would be requiring a wider street than normal, and more fill dirt would have to be put in here than proposed. He indicated that the only way this right-of-way can be obtained is with City participation. Member Comstock remarked he was concerned about the lots on the west side of the freeway, since the people will be looking only at a 20 foot bank of the freeway. These are long, narrow lots, that are not too desirable. Director Warren commented on the number of owners in this area; the subdivision itself is broken up into 3 ownerships. He felt it would be difficult to get these people together; however, the staff could notify some of these property owners and explain this problem to them. Perhaps, in this way, they could induce some develop- ment in this area. The Commission concurred that the adjacent property owners should be notified of this development. MSUC (Comstock-Johnson) Matter be continued until the meeting of May i7, 1965, to allow the staff to contact adjacent property owners in an attempt to coordinate development of their property, and for the staff to discuss the proposed realignment of Nacion Avenue with the State Highway Division. Cont'd - Commercial Worm Garden - 320 Prospect Court Director of Planning Warren reviewed the matter whereby this was continued from the last meeting. The applicants are requesting permission to operate a commercial worm garden at 320 Prospect Court as a Home Occupation. The staff was directed to contact the adjacent property owners and the Health Department to get their opinions con- cerning this operation. The staff has not received any word from the Health Depart- ment, although they did call and indicated theymight attend this meeting. A letter from Mr. and Mrs. Robert L. Ballard, 316 Prospect Court was read, in which they favored the operation. Director Warren said it appears to the staff that it might be reasonable to grant this permit for a temporary time. Member Comstock suggested a one year period. Member Adams disagreed, stating a Home Occupation must be carried on within a home as noted in the zoning ordinance. This occupation will certainly produce odors and the breeding of flies, and it does not meet the requirements as specified in the ordinance. Director Warren said this was true; however, nothing can prevent the applicant from having a yard full of worms if he so desires; the only reason he came in for a Home Occupation was to get a business license in order to sell these worms. City Attorney Lindberg stated the Home Occupation definition is intended to maintain the occupation in a home or accessory building. The intent of the Home Occupation is to prevent any visible change from the home character. Mr. Taylor, one of the applicants, explained the nature of theoccupation declaring there would be no odor; he further stated there were several such enterprises now in the City, operating illegally. Member Comstock questioned whether this occupation could legally be classified as "farming and truck gardening" under the R-1 zone. He could raise his worms on this property but would have to sell them elsewhere. -10- Director Warren stated the staff would look into this, if the Commission so directs. Chairman Stevenson explained to the applicant the opinion of the City Attorney, stating the Commission had no authority to act on this Home Occupation. He asked that the applicant contact the Planning Department in regards to whether this could be termed as "farm gardening" in this R-1 zone. MSUC (Guyer-Stewart) The request be filed, and the staff be directed to pursue the matter further with the applicant. ADJOURNMENT MSUC (Comstock-Stewart) Meeting be adjourned to May 17, 1965. Meeting adjourned at 10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, .? dennie M. Fulasz Secretary -11-