HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1965/03/15 MINUTES OF A REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING
OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
March 15, 1965
The regular adjourned 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, Adams and Guyer.
Absent: None. Also present: Director of Planning Warren, Assistant Planner Terrell,
City Attorney Lindberg and Principal Engineer Harshman.
STATEMENT
The Secretary of the Commission hereby states that she did post within 24 hours of
adjournment, as provided by law, the order of the Commission for the adjourned meeting
of March 1, 1965.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MSUC (Comstock-Stewart) Minutes of March 1, 1965 be approved, as mailed.
Member Johnson abstained from voting because he was absent at the last meeting.
REZONINGS
PUBLIC HEARING: West Side of Fig Avenue between "H" Street and Shasta Street - R-2 to
C-1-D and Reduction in Setback -- 20 feet to 10 feet
Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location and adjacent
land use. He reviewed the matter stating the San Diego Trust & Savings Bank requested
rezoning on the third lot at the last meeting, and the Commission decided to hold a
hearing to consider rezoning the last lot on this block so that the entire block will
be rezoned C-1-D. Director Warren noted the location of the proposed block wall that
will be built by Sears Roebuck. Since the last meeting, the staff was informed that
the Bank now has an option to purchase this last lot. They have submitted a pre-
liminary plot plan, showing the proposed layout; however, detailed plans would have
to be submitted to the Commission for approval at a later date.
Vice-Chairman Stewart discussed the one-foot lot owned by the City at the end of
Shasta Street, and commented that any vacation of this strip would have to be done by
the Council.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Director Warren stated that the present hearing involves only the fourth lot.
Mr. Glen Rick, representing San Diego Trust & Savings Bank, stated the Bank now has
an option to buy this last lot on the Block. This will give the Bank ample parking
room, and with the requested reduction in setback on Fig Avenue to 10 feet, they will
be able to provide parallel parking on the west side of the Bank property with land-
scaping along Fig Avenue.
Mrs. Herman Blair, 538 Fig Avenue, questioned the future zoning of the rest of Fig
Avenue to "l" Street, and whether, with this commercial block in their area, they
would now be required to pay higher taxes.
-1-
Chairman Stevenson explained the present zoning (R-2) would remain until such time
as one of the property owners requested a zone change. As to the taxes, Mr. Stevenson
· explained this was not a function of the Commission; the Assessors have control over
this.
There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed.
Member Adams commented that now it would baa 1OO % improvement, since the Bank has
decided to take over that last lot.
Member Comstock discussed the closing of Shasta Street, west of Fig Avenue. He felt
Shasta should be closed off at this point since the street remains a residential
street and is not designed to take on commercial traffic. Member Adams agreed
declaring it would be a disaster if commercial zoning should run down Fig Avenue.
Member Johnson noted there was an access to the Bank at the end of Shasta Street and
wondered if it would hamper the Bank's plans any if Shasta Street were closed.
Director Warren stated the staff might make a recommendation that this be redesigned.
The staff would look into this and report to the Commission on it. Vice-Chairman
Stewart stated the records should show that a study will be made on this situation.
It was noted that the staff received two letters of protest - one from Mrs. Freida
Bucholtz, owner of property at 525 Fig Avenue, and Mr. and Mrs. Lauder Turp~n, 519 Fig
Avenue. The Commission discussed whether or not the letters should be read. City
Attorney Lindberg stated it would be up to the discretion of the Commission as to
whether or not they would like to hear the contents of the letters; however, they
should bear in mind that it is purely heresay testimony which cannot be challenged,
as compared to a person speaking from the floor, and which testimony the Commission
can challenge.
The Commission discussed the setback request. Chairman Stevenson felt the justifica-
tion for the setback was questionable since the Bank started out with two lots, and
now has four lots for their development. Vice-Chairman Stewart felt a 20 foot set-
back would be a hardship for the Bank; he favored a 15 foot setback. Member Comstock
felt this would be a fair amount; any greater amount would be an intrusion into the
residential zone.
RESOLUTION NO. 346 Resolution of the City Plaoning Commission Recommending
MSUC (Adams-Stewart) to the City Council the Change of Zone for Two Lots
Located 143.53 Feet South of "H" Street, West Side of
Fig Avenue.
Findings be as follows:
1. Approval of change of zone from R-2 to C-l-D for Lots 1 and 2 located 143.53
feet south of "H;I Street, West Side of Fig Avenue, and reduction in setback along
Fig Avenue from 20 feet to 15 feet for the four lots in this block.
2. This is good zoning practice; this will unify the zoning of all four lots between
Shasta and "H" Streets. It will also give the Bank more room for proper site develop-
PUBLIC HEARING: Dr. and Mrs. Joseph Casey - Rear Portion of 288 Del Mar Avenue - R-3 to C-2
The application was read in which a request was made for a change of zone from R-3
to C-2 for property at the rear of 288 Del Mar Avenue. The existing dwelling on
the property will be used for an Antique Shop.
Director of Planning Warren stated the applicant wishes to change the request to C-1
zoning instead of C-2. Director Warren then submitted a plot plan noting the location,
adjacent land use and zoning of the area.
Vice-Chairman Stewart stated that the creation of a lot without street frontage has
been illegal since 1949 and wondered how this situation came about. D~rector Warren
remarked he could not explain how this particular situation happened; however, he
would check into it, if desired.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Dr. Joseph Casey, the applicant, explained the area was adjacent to his present
property and was valueless to everyone else except him. He would like the Commission
to consider this an annexation to his property. Since C-1 zoning would also cover
an Antique Shop, they would prefer this lesser zone.
It was noted that the staff received two letters in favor of the request: one from
Dr. and Mrs. Charles Henkelmann, owner of property adjacent to this request, and the
other from W. H. Eckhart, owner of property adjoining this property.
Member Adams asked that the contents of the letters be read. City Attorney Lindberg
stated the Commission could hear them if they wanted to, but they must bear in mind
that it cannot be subjected to any cross examination, and it is difficult to accept
it in this term. The Commission should not give it as much value as a personal
hearing.
Vice-Chairman Stewart agreed, remarking it was the decision at the League of California
Conference that the records should not be "cluttered Up'l with these letters; the
people should come in and testify and be cross-examined.
There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed.
Member Guyer said he felt that the access was not adequate to this property.
Chairman Stevenson felt it would be an intrusion into a residential area.
Vice-Chairman Stewart indicated an Antique Shop might not be objectionable, but the
rezoning to C-1 opens up all uses under this zone, like a plumbing shop, for instance.
The Residential character of this neighborhood, he felt, was such that it would not
be fair to the property owners in this area to rezone this. Member Adams agreed
declaring it would encourage commercial zoning to go further along Del Mar Avenue.
He is not in favor of it.
Vice-Chairman Stewart questioned whether an Antique Shop could come in under a con-
ditional use permit. Director Warren said the zoning ordinance does not provide for it.
Member Johnson said he would like to see this property utilized and asked if there
was some way in which this could be done. Director Warren indicated there was one
other way - a use variance; however, in the opinion of the City Attorney, this is
considered an abuse of discretion. If the Commission can justify a use variance, the
same should hold true of rezoning.
-3-
MSUC (Guyer-Adams) Rezoning be denied based on the following:
1. The proposed rezoning does not constitute good zoning practice, because it
would create a small C-1 area in an R-3 zone and would be an expansion of an
already improper zoning pattern.
2. It would allow an intrusion of commerclal use into the residential area.
PUBLIC HEARING: Portion of "G" Street between Broadway and Smith Avenue - C-1 to R-3
Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the area, the adjacent
zonings and land use. He reviewed the matter stating a property owner in the area
came in sometime ago and discussed rezoning his property. The staff felt it would
be a good time to study the area to determine a more proper zoning for the adjacent
lots. Although the area is zoned C-l, the staff noted that only 2 commercial uses
exist; the remainder is residential. "G" Street will be a collector street; there
is a one-half interchange which will be eliminated at Montgomery Freeway. The
volume of traffic could decrease in this area and therefore, lacks any reason to
create commercial here. The staff would recommend, therefore, that these several
lots, delineated on the plot plan, be rezoned from C-1 to R-3. Since the setbacks
in this area have been set up for commercial, the staff would recommend that a
15 foot setback be established on the north side of "G" Street, and 10 feet on the
south side of "G" Street, on this R-3 zoning.
Mr. William Harshman, Principal Engineer noted the drainage channel in this area,
indicating the box culvert and the location where it backs up to an open ditch.
Mr. Harshman remarked this was private property, and the Engineering Department d~d
go in and tell this property owner that the drainage here was inadequate; however,
the property owner went ahead and constructed it anyway.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared opened.
Mr. Ralph Hendrix, 567 "G" Street, spoke in favor of the rezoning.
There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed.
Member Comstock favored the rezoning commenting it was quite worthwhile and needed
because of the lack of commercial development in the neighborhood.
RESOLU~ ON NO. 347 Resolution of the City Planning Commission Recommending
MSUC (Comstock-Stewart) to the City Council the Change of Zone and Setbacks for
Portions of "G" Street Between Broadway and Smith Avenue
1. The change of zone from C-1 to R-3 for property located along "G" Street between
Broadway and Smith Avenue: on the north side of "G" Street from a point 199 feet
east of Broadway for a distance of 250 feet; on the south side of "G" Street from a
point 215 feet east of Broadway for a distance of 150 feet. Also, that front set-
backs be established as follows: on the R-3 zoning - 15 feet on the north side of "G"
Street and l0 feet on the south side of 'IG'~ Street.
Findings be as follows:
1. The general character of this area lends itself to residential development, since
this use predominates.
2. The General Plan places this area in a high density residential classification and
calls for the elimination of strip commercial zoning along collector streets.
3. The partial interchange with Montgomery Freeway will be eliminated with the
future widening of the Freeway, which will tend to reduce the volume of traffic
along "G" Street.
4. The history of development of this area reveals that only sub-quality commercial
use, if any, will occur in this area.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING: North Park Mortgage Company~ 122 E. Oxford
Street - Sales Office and Si~ns
The application was read in which a request was made to use the garage of a dwelling
at 122 E. Oxford Street for a sales office and for permission to retain five signs
on the premises.
Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location of the house
being used as the sales office. There are four small signs out front with one
large one over the garage door. This use has been in existence for some time, and
the staff called it to their attention, requesting them to file a conditional use
permit.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Mr. Donald L. Cohn, the applicant, stated no one was living in the dwelling being
used as their sales office. He indicated the need for the sales office claiming
a large number of the homes in this subdivision were vacant.
Member Comstock remarked this was a case where the developers have had real diffi-
culty in selling the homes. He added he felt there was exceptional circumstances
here to grant this variance.
MSUC (Comstock-Guyer) Recommend approval of sales office and signs, as per plot
plan, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the permit be allowed for a period of one year.
2. That the garage be reconverted for vehicular use when the permit expires.
Further, findings be as follows:
1. That granting this conditional use permit will not be materially detrimental
to the public health, safety or welfare as delineated in the ordinance, since none
of the factors involved will be significantly present.
2. The characteristics of the use proposed will be reasonably compatible with the
type of uses in the area since only one home is involved and is located in an area
of several unsold and vacant homes.
VARIANCES
PUBLIC HEARING: Princess Park Estates~ Inc. - Princess Manor #7 - Reduction in Minimum
Floor Area of Dwellings
The application was read in which a request was made to construct 18 single-family
dwellings in Princess Manor #7 having the following minimum square footage: 2 bedroom
homes - 1006 square feet, and 3 bedroom homes - 1007 to 1280 square feet. Garages
to have 336 to 468 square feet.
Director of Planning Warren noted the location of the area on the map as the
extension of Rienstra Street and Melrose Avenue. He stated the developers propose
the following: 8 dwellings under 1200 square feet; 5 dwellings from 1200 to 1300
square feet; 1 dwelling from 1300 to 1400 square feet; and 4 dwellings over 1600
square feet. They are also asking for garage area reductions from 283 to 336 feet;
this could be a one-car garage, and if so, deserves special attention by the Commission.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Mr. Ralph Spaid, representing Princess Park Estates, spoke of the garages, stating it
was the same size that they used throughout their subdivision for the 2 bedroom
homes; it would be a one-car garage. Five homes will have this 336 squarefoot garage.
Member Comstock questioned the feasibility of changing this to the 400 square foot
requirement. Mr. Spaid declared it would be difficult to do so with the design of
the home they have, since the garage is attached to the house.
There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed.
Chairman Stevenson asked about the status of the new ordinance. Director Warren
stated the City Council would consider this at their next meeting. The Commission's
recommendation on this would require: 1200 square feet for 3 bedroom homes; 1300
square feet for 4 bedroom homes or more. Mr. Warren added that the staff feels there
is justification for this variance because of its relation to greater Princess Manor
subdivision. As to the garages, there was some misunderstanding on the part of the
staff when the original variance cam e in - they were granted one and one and one-half
garages; the staff feels it should have been two-car garages.
Vice-Chairman Stewart commented that the fact that the homes out here do not have
basements that could be used for storage purposes, many homes use their garages in-
stead. He stated he was opposed to reducing the size of the garages to anything
less than 400 square feet.
Member Adams agreed stating the Commission would be setting a precedent if they did.
Member Comstock remarked that the developers were caught between two fires; they
were granted approval of a 1½ car garage in their previous subdivision and now have
gone ahead and designed the same type for this unit. Member Comstock added that he
felt they should be granted approval of these garages for this particular subdivision
since it will be only five; however, the Commission should restrict this in the future.
Director Warren indicated it must have been an oversight on the part of the staff in
not pointing out to the Commission the fact that the developers were proposing these
small garages in their large subdivision; had the staff been aware of it at the time,
they would have protested it.
The Commission discussed this element concluding that it was an oversight on the
part of the Commission as well. Chairman Stevenson indicated he was highly in favor
of the two-car garage, and felt the Commission should take action on this basis.
MSUC (Stewart-Adams) Variance be approved to construct 18 single-family dwellings
having a minimum floor area of 1006 to 1280 square feet; however, garages must be
two-car garages and have a minimum of 400 square feet.
Further, findings be as follows:
1. There are practical differences and unnecessary hardships within the meaning of
-6-
Ordinance No. 398 as amended which would result in the strict compliance of the
provisions of said ordinance. Character of the area is established. The intent
of the ordinance is to upgrade residential areas, but compliance would result in
over-building this area.
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 ~n the same zone. The size of homes in the surrounding area are
equal to or smaller than the proposed homes here.
3. Granting this variance is necessary for the preservation of the substantial
property right of the applicant. Applicant should have the right to build a house
comparable to those in the surrounding area.
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. The homes proposed will be compatible with existing homes in
the area.
PUBLIC HEARING: Princess Park Estates~ Inc. - Princess Manor #8 - Reduction in
Minimum Floor Area of Dwellings
Since the application was identical to that of #7 (previous hearing) Director of
Planning Warren requested the reading be waived. He then noted the location of the
proposed subdivision as being south of Rienstra Street and Castle Park High School
and adjacent to the San Diego Gas & Electric Company's right-of-way. The tentative
map has been approved by the Planning Commission. The proposal is for two to five
bedroom homes - 43 single-family homes are proposed. Director Warren noted the
number of homes that would be constructed below the standard approved by the Plan-
ning Commission and sent to the City Council.
Director Warren added that he felt somewhere along the llne, the Commission should
apply the "sliding scale"; it could have been done using the Freeway as a dividing
point; however, smaller homes have since been approved for both sides of this Free-
way. Because of its relation to the existing homes, the fact that they are in the
immediate area would probably be justification for granting this variance.
Vice-Chairman Stewart declared he was in full agreement with the "sliding scale".
He stated this subdivision was not part of the original subdivision for which the
Commission granted the developers relief from the ordinance. If the Commission
goes ahead and grants approval of the variance for this Unit, then they must do so
to all subdividers coming in in the future requesting the same thing.
Member Adams agreed adding that the 1300 square foot ordinance was considered as
too strict for this development; however, with the "sliding scaleTM it gives the
developer much more flexibility in his construction.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Mr. Ralph Spaid, representing Princess Park Estates, Inc., felt they should be
granted the variance stating they understood the new ordinance to be just a "yard-
stick" and that some variance would be required. This Unit #8 is adjacent to the
properties they have built on. Mr. Spaid noted the area of the Unit #8 declaring
-- it would be a hardship on the developers if they did not get the variance. Right
now, there is a definite market for a 3 bedroom home around 1115 square feet.
-7-
Mr. Spaid continued stating the lots in Unit #8 are wider than those in Unit #7
and they could put in the 2-car garages without too much effort.
Vice-Chairman Stewart questioned the size of the bedrooms proposed. Mr. Spaid noted
the smallest size would be approximately 9 by 11; the others would average about
10 by 13. He added that every dollar makes a difference in this business, and in-
creasing the homes by 200 square feet would be a hardship for them. It is rather
difficult to get people to qualify now, he added.
There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing wis declared
closed.
Chairman Stevenson felt the Commission would be creating a problem if they broke the
"sliding scale" standard in this case.
MSUC (Stewart-dohnson) Approval of variance to construct the following: 2 bedroom
homes having a minimum of 1000 square feet and 3 bedroom homes having a minimum of
1200 square feet, and four bedroom homes having a minimum of 1300 square feet.
Garages must be two-car garages and have a minimum of 400 square feet.
Further, findings be as follows:
1. There are practical differences and unnecessary hardships within the meaning of
Ordinance No. 398 as amended 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. A new ordinance has been approved by the Planning
Commlssion allowing home sizes in accordance with a sliding scale. The homes
approved conform to this scale. No justification exists for reduction in an already
minimum garage size.
3. Granting this variance is necessary for the preservation of the substantial
property right of the applicant. Applicant should have the right to build a house
comparable to those in the surrounding area, yet the area is separated enough to warrant
adherence to the proposed sliding scale.
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. The homes proposed will be compatible with existing homes in the area and
will promote the intent of the existing ordinance. The new ordinance was drawn after
considerable study by various groups and committees recommending 1000 square feet for
two bedrooms, 1200 square feet for 3 bedrooms and 1300 square feet minimum for 4 bed-
rooms or mere.
MISCELLANEOUS
Request by V. E. Partridge for Access to City Street in Bonita Bel-Aire Subdivision
Director of Planning Warren said this request was first sent to the Chief Adminis=
tratlve Officer and referred to the staff. The applicant is asking for permission
to have an access to County Property from a stub street in the Bonita Bel-Aire sub-
division. Final action on this matter will have to be taken by the C~ty Council.
There is a question of the feasibility of granting them access from Camino del Cerro
Grande. In re-studying this area, some thought was given that perhaps the stub street
-8-
should have been in a different location. Director Warren added that the applicant
wishes to develop his parcel of land with two home sites. One requirement the
staff would make would be to have the sewer extended to the end of this property.
Director Warren questioned whether the Commission wished to go on record as favoring
dedication of the one-foot strip at the end of the stub street in order to give these
people the access they are requesting.
Member Comstock discussed the possibility of another street coming from the south
and north serving this area better than having to put a street in from the top in
order to serve these four acres; he felt this might not be feasible. The Commission
then discussed alternative methods of access.
Vice-Chairman Stewart remarked that there were a number of stub streets in sub-
divisions throughout the City, and wondered if it was good practice to annex one lot
in order to give them access to one street. He felt this would be setting a precedent.
Director Warren commented that it has been difficult to come up with a recommendation;
he wouldn't however, ordinarily recommend annexation of just one parcel such as this
one.
Mr. William Harshman, Principal Engineer, stated the applicants would have to annex
to the City in order to get sewer. Director Warren commented that the applicants
wish to build four houses here, and it should be noted that they can have septic
tanks and develop in the County.
Mr. Harshman remarked that engineering standards change with the times; that the
basic concept of Bonita Bel-Aire is wrong; it involved heavy grading that should
never have been permitted. Mr. Harshman commented that it was his opinion that
the City was badly in need of new standards whereby they could encourage development
on steep terrains, such as this one, and perhaps propose a one-way street as a
solution. At the time, this stub street in Bonita Bel-Aire seemed like a good
idea; however, now it does not.
The Commission discussed the 30 foot bank and the type of development that could
occur here. Director Warren commented that this type of terrain is such that it will
be developed only after all desirable lots have been used up.
Member Comstock declared the City should be given a right-of-way through this
property. If, after 10 or 15 years, the right-of-way is not needed, then it could
be returned to the owner.
Mr. Vernon Partridge, the applicant, stated that due to the terrain, having to
reserve even a one-way street would take away his most desirable building site -
that of building on top of the hill.
MSUC (Comstock-Guyer) Permit access from Calle Mesita and reserve a right-of-way
through the center of the parcel going in a north to south direction, such right-of-
way width and location to be determined by the staff. Also, that a bond, lien, or
cash deposit be posted, the amount to be determined by the Engineering Department,
for the future improvements; such improvements to be installed 30 days after written
notice from the Engineering Department.
Discussion - Proposed Ordinance Allowln~ Directional Signs and Subdivision Sales and
Display Areas
Director Warren reviewed the proposed ordinance submitted for Commission discussion
'9-
at the last meeting. At that time, the Commission felt the matter of signs and
sales offices could be administered by the staff rather than come to the Commission.
Also, a provision has been put in for on-site signs displayed primarily on week-ends
for "open house" etc., situations. The proposed ordinance is being kept simple, since
the new zoning ordinance will completely change this.
Member Comstock spoke of the signs ~n R-1 zones which he felt were completely out of
line. He said he would be in favor of dropping the home occupation clause altogether.
The Commission concluded that this change should come at a later time along with
others.
A letter from Donald Jacquot was read in which he advised a special clause be pro-
posed whereby a developer, upon completion of a new apartment house, would be per-
mitted to maintain a sign for a period of six months thus filling up some of the
vacancies.
Vice-Chairman Stewart asked if the staff has had a chance to check what other cities
were doing in similar situations. Director Warren said they had not. Mr. Stewart
suggested they contact other c~ties, perhaps by phone and check to see what they are
doing about this situation. He is against th~s proposal, stating enough advertise-
ment ~s given to these projects by newspaper, radio and television.
Director Warren commented that the staff does try to keep a constant check with other
cities to see whether we are being equitable with ou~ rules. As a staff, and in
trying to keep the City beautiful, Mr. Warren stated he cannot say he was in favor
of any directional signs at all, but realizes that the needs seem to exist. Allowing
small signs where they are needed to indicate a turn, etc., is not too harmful.
Member Adams commented on provision #7 in the proposed ordinance and the wording
"or rent"; he felt this should be eliminated since these signs would stay up in-
definitely. Director Warren stated the staff would eliminate this.
The Commission then discussed signage areas, double-faced signs, and "V"-shaped
signs. Director Warren explained the provision whereby a "V"-shaped or double-faced
would mean the same s~gnage area on both s~des of the sign.
RESOLUTION NO. 348 Resolution of the City Planning Commission Stating Their
MSUC (Comstock-Adams) Intent to Call a Public Hearing for April 5, 1965 to
Consider Amending Sections 33.10 and 33.11 of the City
Code Relating to Signs and Advertising Displays in R-1
Zones
Review of House Plans for Dwelling in Bonita Verde Subdivision
Director of Planning Warren submitted the plans for the proposed dwelling stating it
will be on Lot 35, 3575 Yerba Lane, in the Bonita Verde Subdivision.
Director Warren stated it would contain approximately 1700 square feet, single-story,
shake shingle roof with wood and masonry exterior construction. He added the staff
would recommend approval of the plans; it will be compatible to the other homes built
in this area. Landscaping plans have not been submitted with the building plans.
MSC (Comstock-Stewart) Approval of plans for dwelling on Lot 35 in Bonita Verde
_ Subdivision.
-10-
The motion carried by the following vote to-wit:
AYES: Members Comstock, Stewart, Stevenson, Adams and Guyer
NOES: Member Johnson (No landscaping plans were submitted.)
ABSENT: None
Meetin~ to Review Zonin~ Ordinance
Director of Planning Warren polled the Commissioners as to whether Thursday, April 1,
would be a good night for them to meet with the Consultants for a second review of
the new proposed Zoning Ordinance.
It was the concensus of opinion that this would be agreeable. Chairman Stevenson
suggested the staff and the Commissioners try to meet once before the meeting with
the Consultants. Director Warren said he would try to arrange this.
Resignation of Member Willhite
Chairman Stevenson read a letter from Ross M. Willhite, dated March 8, 1965, sub-
mitting his resignation as a Member of the City Planning Commission.
MSUC (Stewart-Comstock) A resolution, prepared by the City Attorney, be sent to
Mr. Willhite expressing the Commission's appreciation of his service.
ADJOURNMENT
MSUC (Comstock-Johnson) Meeting be adjourned sine die. Meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jennie M. Fulasz
Secretary