HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1965/02/01 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA
February 1, 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, Johnson, Willhite, Adams, and
Guyer. Absent: Member Comstock. Also present: Planning Director Warren, Assistant
Planner Terrell, Junior Planner Lee, City Attorney Lindberg, and Principal Engineer
Harshman.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MSUC (Guyer-Johnson) Minutes of January 18, 1965, be approved, as mailed.
Member Johnson commented on Condition No. 4 regarding variance granted to
Mr. F. L. Whittington: "only golf carts be allowed access to Del Mar Avenue."
Member Johnson felt the words "and smaller vehicles" should be added to this statement.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS:
PUBLIC HEARING: American Oil Company - Telegraph Canyon Road and "L" Street - Service Station in C-1-D Zone
Service Station in C-1-D Zone
The application was read in which a request was made to construct a service station
on property located at the northeast corner of Telegraph Canyon Road and "L" Street.
Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan discussing zoning and adjacent
uses. The property is zoned C-1-D which means it has the architectural control;
because of this, the staff asked that landscaping be submitted with the plans. The
applicant has proposed one-gallon size junipers - the staff would suggest the five-
gallon size. Director Warren added that he would also suggest the applicant use
some olive trees, perhaps in planter boxes.
Director Warren then discussed the signs proposed. He reminded the Commission that
the "D" zone allows a maximum of 50 square feet of sign area; they are requesting
much more, which matter will be handled by their variance.
The Commission discussed whether or not the variance should be heard at this time,
and decided to take the two matters separately. The City Attorney stated they could
hear both at the same time, considering the testimony in different lights for the
two matters. Both h~arings were advertised for tonight's meeting and no specific
time was d~signated.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Mr. d. Pugh, Attorney for the American Oil Company, stated this station w~ll be
similar to the one they have on the corner of Fourth and "E" Street.
Member dohnson, commenting on the fact that the station was in a 'ID" zone, asked
Mr. Pugh if any consideration was given to altering the plans for the station so it
would conform to the buildings in the area. Mr. Pugh said they had not since this
building represents their corporation image.
-1-
There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed.
Director Warren suggested a few conditions the staff would recommend, if approved.
He commented again on the landscaping and asked that the applicant be required to
meet with the staff for final approval of the landscaping.
Mr. Pugh questioned the condition that outside sales and displays be restricted to
an area beneath a canopy. He remarked that stations of this type will have tire
sales, etc., which they would like to display in the open. Director Warren declared
their other station, on the corner of Fourth and "E" Street, was typical of most
stations in that they now have a multitude of signs that have not been approved,
soft drinks, and other items for sale not directly related to a service station.
This is becoming a problem of traffic vision as well as aesthetics. Director Warren
reminded the applicant that this proposed station will be in a residential area.
Chairman Stevenson asked if this same provision can be handled with all stations.
Director Warren answered it will be a provision in the new ordinance and this
particular condition has been imposed on the last five or six stations approved by
the Commission - that only items normally incidental to service station business
be sold.
MSUC (Adams-Willhite) Conditional Use Permit for service station be approved, subject
to the following conditions:
1. That no moving or flashing signs be allowed, and that any lighting be designed to
reflect away from any adjacent residential property.
2. That a detailed landscape plan, to include five-gallon sized shrubs and olive
trees, be submitted to the staff for approval.
3. That any outside sales or displays be restricted to an area beneath the canopy
and that all items sold on the site be items normally incidental to service
station business.
Further, that findings be as follows:
i. That granting the conditional use permit will not be materially detrimental to the
public health, safety or welfare. The factors involved as delineated in the
ordinance will not be significantly present here.
2. The characteristics of the use proposed are reasonably compatible with the types
of use permitted in the surrounding area. Adjacent uses will be commercial; this
site is at the intersection of a frontage road and a prime arterial, as well as
adjacent to an interchange with a freeway.
VARIANCE
PUBLIC HEARING: American Oil Company - Telegraph Canyon Road & "L" Street - Reduction
in Front Setback and Increase in Sign Area
The application was read in which a request was made for a reduction in front yard
setback from 15 feet to 5 feet and for an increase in sign area to 181.3 square feet
for property located at the northeast corner of Telegraph Canyon Road and "L" Street.
Director Warren submitted a plot plan. He reminded the Commission this was in a "D"
zone and although the staff is not proposing that they be held to the maximum 50
square footage for signs, some thought should be given to limiting the number they
propose. Director Warren noted that the identification sign will be 51.8 square
feet; "As You Travel" sign - 9 square feet; the Building Letters and Building Emblem
112 square feet; 2 portable price signs - 8.5 square feet. Director Warren said he
felt there was no need for these price signs; for instance, since every gas station
in the area, unless an independent, will generally have the same price for their gas.
He added that he felt these stations should give some consideration to having two
plans for their stations: one for the residential area and the other for the commercial
areas.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Mr. J. Pugh, Attorney for the American Oil Company, explained the reduction for the
setback was for the canopy overhang. Because they want to allow for access for
parking for the shopping facilities to the rear, they are proposing to place their
build~ng closer to the street than normal. Mr. Pugh remarked that the Director's
opinion concerning the signs was a good one; they actually can get along without
these "sandwich" signs and are will~ng to take them out, if the Commission so desires.
The other signs will be the same as those now at their other station at Fourth and
'~E" Street.
There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed.
Member Willhlte questioned the space left between tH canopy poles and the sidewalk
and wondered if this was enough room for a car to park, considering that doors on
both s~des of the car could be open at the same time. This could cause a problem,
whereby the people pulling up for gas would have to use the public right-of-way also.
Director Warren felt there was sufficient space here ~ 15 feet, from edge of pumps to
the sidewalk.
Member Johnson remar~d he had some doubts about the total number of square feet for
the proposed signs. The applicant has stated he would eliminate the ':sandwich" signs
which is 8.5 square feet - this still leaves a total of 172.8 square feet of signage
a rea.
Member Adams commented that the restrictions were put on because of the station being
in a residential area; the sign on the building and the sign on the pole isn't too
bad, Member Adams continued, but it shouldn't go any further than that.
Vice-Chairman Stewart declared the Commission shouldn't compare this particular
station with those that are completely surrounded by residential; this proposed
station will be adjacent to an interchange on a freeway. Mr. Stewart felt these
people were entitled to some relief because of this.
Mr. Warren commented that the new zoning ordinance will be more restrictive on signs,
but will be based on frontage up to a certain maximum.
Member Johnson claimed the Commission must find an exceptional circumstance in
approving the sign area over 50 square feet.
Member Adams remarked that any oil company planning to put a station in a residential
area shouldn't expect to have it lighted up and covered with signs as would a station
on a main commercial street. They must expect certain restrictions.
Chairman Stevenson felt the fault lies in the present zoning ordinance in terms of
signs. He added it was inconceivable to him how the Commission could be more re-
strictive on the signs that the applicant now has.
-3-
Member dohnson mentioned the relationship to the freeway being elevated over Tele-
graph Canyon Road by about 20 feet or so, and the interchange.
Mr. Gene Ripley, Area Engineer for American Oil, said this was true; there is actually
a 17 foot high elevation here, and the company must rely on billboards along the free-
way for further advertisement.
MSC (Stewart-Adams) Reduction in front yard setback from 15 feet to 5 feet and an
increase in sign area to 172.8 square feet be approved, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Signs are restricted to the identification or pedestal sign - 51.8 sq.ft. "As You Travel': sign - 9 sq.ft.
Building letters and building emblem - 112 sqoft.
2. Signs to be constructed as per plot plan submitted at the meeting of 2/1/65; no
others are permitted.
Further, that 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 fuse thereof that do not apply generally to
property or class of uses in the same zone. For the increase in sign area:
Due to the proximity of this location - on the south will be a freeway interchange -
any reduction in signs approved would create a hardship on this station, since they
should enjoy the same sign space afforded most stations which are related to free-
ways.
For the reduction in setback: To allow for access for parking for the shopp~ing
facilities to the rear, it is necessary for the building to be placed closer to
the street than normal. In most commercial zones, service stations are usually
allowed to project canopies into the setback.
3. Granting this variance is necessary for the preservation of the substantial
property right of the applicant. Because of triangular shape of the entire
development, good site layout is difficult. This variance is necessary to properly
utilize the land and still allow proper circulation.
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, provided the setback is reduced only for the canopy and the
sign since the purpose of the setback is still being observed.
The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Members Stewart, Adams, Stevenson, Willhite and Guyer
NOES: Member Johnson
ABSENT: Member Comstock
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PUBLIC HEARING: Richard & David Kelton - Otay Lakes Road at Gotham Street - Service Station in C-1 Zone
The application was read in which a request was made for permission to construct
a service station on property located at the southeast corner of Otay Lakes Road
and Gotham Street.
Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location, adjacent
land use, and zoning. He then submitted four recommendations the staff would ask,
if approved.
The parking was discussed. Director Warren noted no parking was delineated on the
plot plan; however, when the applicant applies for a building permit, he will be
required to have one space for every 200 square feet of building.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Mr. Elmer Rens, Property Representative for Standard Oil Company of California,
explained the s~gns proposed: 120 square feet of signage area will be encompassed
in the "Standard" sign w~th the trademark "Chevrons" underneath; there will be "A"
frame signs specifically for prices and displays; another sign advertising the type
of repairs they will be doing, such as tune-ups, muffler installations, etc., and
another sign with the dealer's name on it. The applicant further stated that they
will have 125 feet of depth with an access easement on both sides; parking will be
throughout the Center, therefore, no parking problems.
Vice-Chairman Stewart questioned whether the station has any landscaping plans for
those stations proposed for residential areas. Mr. Rens said they did not; however,
they are willing to meet any requirements the City may stipulate.
There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed.
Member Wil~hite claimed the Commission should have some idea of what the signs will
be, since this station will definitely be surrounded by residential use and the
College.
Member Adams agreed, stating it was appropriate to limit the number and size of the
signs since it will be next to a residential area and the College.
Director Warren suggested the Commlssion approve the use, subject to the approval of
the signs at a later date.
MSUC (Guyer-Johnson) Approval of the construction of a service station subject to the
following conditions:
1. That lighting be so designed to reflect away from any residential use.
2. That no moving or flashing signs be allowed. The quantity, type and location of
signs must be approved by the Commission prior to issuance of building permit.
3. That landscaping be required where feasible and that a detailed plan be submitted
to the staff for approval.
4. That any outside sales or displays be restricted to an area beneath the canopy and
that all items sold on the site be ~tems normally incidental to service station
business.
VARIANCE
PUBLIC HEARING: Standard Oil Company of California - Otay Lakes Road at Gotham Street - Reduction in Front Yard Setback
The application was read in which a request was made for a reduction in front yard
setback from 25 feet to 9 feet for a canopy and pump block, and from 25 feet to zero
for a sign for property located at the southeast corner of 0tay Lakes Road and
Gotham Street.
Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan, noting the location. He stated
part of the request was for the erection of a sign; however, the applicant has not
indicated where the signs will §o or how many signs are proposed. The request for
the reduction to 9 feet is for the canopy and pumps; however, Mr. Warren continued,
he questioned the need for placing the pumps up front since the station seems to have
ample room, and it can be moved back somewhat.
Member Willhite said he had the same comment as that on the last service station, and
that was the amount of space from the pump block to the sidewalk. When opening doors
on both sides of the car, there just wouldn't be enough room left here. Director
Warren a9reed, declaring that 25 feet was too much of a setback; however, he did
question the 9 feet.
This be]n9 the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Mr. Elmer Rens, Property Representative for Standard Oil Company of California, ex-
plained the need for the 9 foot setback stating it has not created any problem in
any of their other stations.
Member Willhite stated the Commission is always concerned about getting cars off the
street in residential areas; he felt they would be making a mistake if they reduced
the setbacks for service stations. This would mean that they would be using the
sidewalk area. Member Willhite declared the setback should be at least 15 feet; this
should be a minimum.
Vice-Chairman Stewart disagreed, stating this was an intermittent thing, and the price
of commercial property was so great that the fact that a person might step out to the
sidewalk does not infringe enough to deny the reduction on this commercial property.
Member Adams said he felt a reduction to 12 feet should be the minimum.
There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed.
The Commission discussed the setbacks normally allowed in a commercial zone. Director
Warren stated the present setback on this property was 25 feet which is in excess, but
the applicant does have 125 feet of depth and has parking space completely around him.
Director Warren commented on the problem of some service stations in town now where
bumper guards are required because of the small areas for parking the cars.
Member Adams felt a study should be made of all the service stations in town to
determine how many were encroaching on public rights-of-way and to determine what
dimension between pumps and sidewalk is appropriate.
Mr. Rens declared that 12 feet did not make that much difference to the station; they
would go along with this. Their sole purpose for requesting the 9 foot reduction was
to bring the service station as much out in the open as possible.
MSUC (Johnson-Adams) Approval of a reduction in front yard setback from 25 feet to
12 feet for the pump block and canopy and from 25 feet to 5 feet for the sign, sub-
ject to the following condition:
1. Details as to the number and size of the proposed signs to be submitted to the
Planning Commission for approval.
Further, that 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. Normal commercial setbacks are
usually zero to f~ve feet within the City of Chula Vista. Applicant indicates
the purpose of the setback will be maintained with the plans they intend to
develop.
3. Granting this variance is necessary for the preservation of the substantial
property right of the applicant. Without this setback, applicant is denied the
opportunity to develop his property in the manner afforded others with service
stations in commercial zones.
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, if the variance is allowed only for the sign, pumps and canopy.
BOLLENBACHER & KELTON~ INC. - Southwestern College Estates~ Unit No. 1 - Reduction
PUBLIC HEARING: in Floor Area of Homes
The application was read in which permission was requested to construct 34 homes
with floor areas of 1100 to 1300 square feet on property located on Harvard Street
between Wayne Avenue and Scripps Avenue.
Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location of the sub-
division and the area for the proposed homes. Director Warren indicated the pro-
posed homes will have the following floor areas: 1107, 1116, 1245, and 1123 square
feet; all will be three bedroom homes,single story, with an attached garage having a
minimum of 400 square feet.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Mr. Ray Swanner, 5909 Warlng Road, San Diego, representing Bollenbacher & Kelton, Inc.,
stated the land was purchased five years ago. lin the fall of '61, the College pur-
chased the property involved.) The Commission approved their map submitted at that
time and there was no restriction on the size of the homes to be constructed. Since
that time, an ordinance was enacted restricting the floor area of a home to 1300
square feet. According to Mr. Swanner, they have subsequently built 24 homes in
this subdivision ranging in price from $18,750 to $26,000; however, they are having
a very difficult time selling these homes because they cannot get people who qualify,
to live there. These people must have an income of $800 per month, with a minimum
down payment of $1300 to $1600. The cost range for these people would be to have a
"take-home" pay of $800 to $1000 per month. The homes they propose to build would be
in the price category of $15,500 to $17,500, with monthly payments averaging from
-7-
4160.17 to $112.21. These people would need a "take-home" pay of $500 to $550 to
qualify for one of these homes. The FHA declared they were way out of their price
range in trying to cater to people who will be going to the schools and college in
the area. Mr. Swanner then submitted some renderings of the homes they propose to
build in the area describing the construction and layout of each.
Member Willhite asked what would be the percentage of 1100 square foot homes they
propose to build. Mr. Swanner stated they will build about one dozen homes of
different sizes to begin with, see which ones sell, and go on from there.
Mr. Paul Yeager, 414 "J" Street, spoke against the request. He felt the 1300 square
foot minimum floor area ordinance was a good one; if anything, the Commission should
raise this to 1400 square feet.
There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed.
Member Adams declared he hated to see this area brought down to the level of the
Princess Manor subdivisions. He felt a minimum of 1200 square foot per house for
3 bedrooms could be allowed, but definitely nothing lower than that.
The Commission discussed the possibility of considering the "sliding scale" before
rendering a decision on this matter. City Attorney Lindberg stated the Commission
is being asked for a specific variance for an area and the facts have been presented.
The Commission knows about the proposed "sliding scale"; however, the two items should
not be mixed.
Member Willhite commented on the fact that the Residential Subcommittee recommended a
minimum floor area of 1200 square feet and stated that room size is still the signifi-
cant factor. When the Princess Park people came in and asked for a variance to build
homes less than our ordinance called for, the Commission approved this because they
felt the area in which they were going to develop was a difficult one; also, the
subdividers brought in pictures and floor plans of the homes which the Commission
approved. Member Willhite felt they should follow the same procedure for this request.
Member Johnson commented that the map was filed prior to the ordinance, and now they are
faced with economics they would not ordinarily have been concerned with if this
ordinance was not passed.
Vice-Chairman Stewart declared the Commission did approve the original map with the
smaller homes. Director Warren stated the subdivision would not be designed any
differently than if the developers had known they would have to build larger homes.
Vice-Chairman Stewart, however, felt the developers are entitled to some relief
because they aren't faced with the same circumstances today as they were then.
Mr. Swarmer explained the lot size and construction of the homes proposed stating the
garage is attached to one end of the home making it appear larger. The sideyards
are wider providing for vehicular access to the rear.
Vice-Chairman Stewart cautioned the Commission to be consistent about limiting the
floor area for the homes. He remarked that many contractors have stated the Commission
was keeping a lot of people from living in Chula Vista because of this ordinance.
Mr. Stewart added that people working in that area should be able to afford to live
in the area.
Mr. Swarmer stated they have 700 lots in the subdivision.
-8-
Chairman Stevenson commented there were many places in Chuta Vista these people
could qualify to llve in. Director Warren remarked the key to this matter was the
particular area involved. All prices of homes should be provided in Chula Vista;
a lower-priced home is being provided now. The area around the College has an
opportunity to be an exceptional area but timing is one of the important issues con-
cerning it. Guide lines should be set up to develop this community. Director Warren
added he could not dispute the facts on economics, and the fact that the developers
are having a hard time selling these homes; however, they must accept the fact that
they are in an isolated area. Now that the college ~s built, and when Freeway access
is complete, this area will open up. However, their current economic state is forcing
them to do something ~hey don't want and the City doesn't want.
Chairman Stevenson commented on the subdivision down the road from this one that has
one-half and one-acre lots and claimed he would hate to see a lower-priced develop-
ment built next to this area. He reminded the Commission they must find an exceptional
circumstance to approve this request.
MSUC (Stewart-Adams) Approval of construction of 34 homes having a minimum floor area
of 1200 square feet for 3 bedrooms and 1300 square feet for 4 bedrooms for that area
on Harvard Street between Wayne Avenue and Scripps Avenue, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Homes will be constructed in accordance with plans submitted with application for
the Conditional Use Permit.
2. The request is for a one-year period of time.
Further, findings be a s 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. At the time the subdivision map was
submitted, the Commission approved this with no restrictions on the size of the home;
later, the ordinance was enacted restricting the size of a home which worked a hard-
ship on the applicant, since the area has not developed in the manner anticipated.
3. Granting this variance is necessary for the preservation of the substantial
property right of the applicant. Without the variance, applicant is required
mo build homes he has been unable tosell.
4. Granting this variance will not be materially detrimen~l 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 architecturally compatible with
those existing in the area and will be of comparable construction quality.
AMENDMENTS TO ZONING ORDINANCE: Discussion - Architectural Control Ordinance and
Revised Minimum Floor Area Ordlnance
Director of Planning Warren reviewed the "sliding scale" recommended by a Mayor's
Committee:
1. 900 square feet for each dwelling containing 1 bedroom.
-9-
2. 1000 square feet for each dwelling containing 2 bedrooms or 1 bedroom and den,
family room or any other such room designated for miscellaneous purposes.
3. 1200 square feet for each dwelling containing 3 bedrooms or 2 bedrooms and den,
family room or any other such rooms designated for miscellaneous purposes.
4. 1300 square feet for each dwelling containing 4 bedrooms or 3 bedrooms and den,
family room or any other room designated for miscellaneous purposes, or more.
Parking space for two cars shall be provided with a two-car enclosed garage containing
a minimum of 400 square feet.
Director Warren also reviewed the ordinance prepared by the City Attorney for an
Architectural Board of Review, as suggested and recommended by the Committee studying
this matter. This ordinance would provide for every home in a subdivision beapproved
by the Board; four homes or less would be approved by the staff.
Member Johnson asked if this ordinance could be discussed at the meeting they have
planned to discuss the new ordinance. Director Warren said since it was not a
Consultant recommendation, it is not in the new Ordinance.
Member Willhite discussed the size the bedrooms would be if they conform to the
"sliding scale"; he determined they would be about 8½ x 10 feet which is, in his
opinion, too small. Director Warren felt the adjustment would be made throughout
the house and not just in the bedrooms. Member W~llhite commented the 1300 square foot
ordinance serves its purpose; the applicants are required to bring in their plans.
Member Adams stated he was in favor of the"sli~ing scale", but definitely opposed to
the installation of a Board of Review. V~ce-Chairman Stewart agreed, declaring it
would take people who are not available to administer this position. He added the
contractors are "screaming" now because of the delay in their plans.
Member Johnson asked if the ordinance was patterned after another Board of Review
from a different city. City Attorney Lindberg stated in San Diego, the Board meets
to review a plan only when the plan submitted is so 'lshocklngll as to be completely
out of llne. This Board has no power - they make their recommendation to the City
Council and if the City Council fails to make an approval within 35 days, it auto-
matically becomes approved. Mr. L~ndberg added that very few communities require
architectural approval of all residential construction.
Vice-Chairman Stewart felt the "D" zone should be imposed on everything, so that they
would be assured it would stay compatible.
Mr. Warren stated that blanket architectural control can be effective if the residents
and governing body agrees they want it.
Member Guyer declared the Commission could aptly take care of these architectural
matters, since the group was quite diversified.
MSUC (Stewart-Adams) The Architectural Board of Review Ordinance be tabled.
RESOLUTION NO. 343 Resolution of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista,
MSUC (Stewart-Guyer) California, Stating Their Intent to Call a Public Hearing for
February 15, 1965, for the Purpose of Considering Amending
Sections 33.3 and 33.16 of Chapter 33 - Zoning Ordinance of the
City Code.
-10-
MISCELLANEOUS
Request by Princess Manor for Approval of New Floor Plan for Portion of Homes in
Princess Manor~ Unit No. 3
The letter was read from Princess Park Estates, Inc., requesting that an additional
type of dwelling be approved for building in Princess Manor No. 3. Thls home is
identified as Model No. 3030 having 1007 square feet area with an attached garage
having an additional 336 square feet. The applicant plans to construct 23 units of
this new dwelling.
Director Warren explained this plan would be substituted for another plan already
approved by the Commission. It involves "shuffling" of other plans; trading this
plan for another home of the same size.
V~ce-Chairman Stewart questioned whether the same ratio would be maintained for
each group of dwellings so there wouldn't be any violation of the original agreement.
He felt they were trying to build smaller homes ~nstead of larger homes.
Mr. Ralph Spaid, Secretary-Treasurer of Princess Park Estates, stated they had
increased the number of the larger homes considerably in Units 2 and 3. Director
Warren reported that Unit 1 had 8 % of homes over 1600 square feet; Unit 2 - 27 %
over 1600 square feet, and in Unit 3, 27 % of the homes proposed will be over 1600
square feet. Mr. Spaid indicated the percentage of larger homes in Unit 3 will be
greater than in Unit 1. He stated they were "pulling out'~ 11 of the 2-story,
3 bedroom houses. In the overall picture, the percentage of houses over 1280 square
feet are much higher now than the homes under that.
Vice-Chairman Stewart felt a statement should be written on the application stating
they are maintaining a consistent average of these homes for their entire unit~
Director Warren commented that it could not measurably change the situation that is
there now. Vice-Chairman Stewart declared they should maintain the agreement so that
they wouldn't be substituting a smaller home for a larger one.
MSUC (Adams-Stewart) Approval of 23 homes in Princess Manor Unit No. 3 identified as
Model No. 3030 and having 1007 square feet with an attached garage having an additional
336 square feet with the stipulation that the percentage of homes this size not exceed
that in Unit No. 1.
Review of Plans for Brookside Winery - Bonita Road~ .West of Bridge - "D" Zone
Director of Planning Warren submitted the plot p~n noting the location of the pro-
posed winery, the adjacent land use and zonings. He then showed a sketch of the
building proposed: Spanish style structure, white stucco and red tiled roof. Director
Warren commented that no landscaping plans were submitted although required, since
this was the I'D" zone, and that he would suggest a condition be imposed whereby
landscaping plans would have to be submitted and approved before final building in-
spection. The Parking would be adequate, as required by ordinance. Director Warren
added that the building would be an asset to the area.
Chairman Stevenson questioned the actual operation. Director Warren stated it would
be a retail establishment, which is permitted in a C-1 zone.
Mrs. Dover, who with her husband will be operating the establishment, stated this was
the seventh winery in ten that are proposed. They will be operating under the Master
Winery License in which they are allowed to sell only champagne, wine and some brandy.
-ll-
They will not be bottling the wine at this location; the wine will be shipped in
and they will sell it here, and take orders for it. The building will have a wine-
tasting bar, also. As far as landscaping goes, Mrs. Dover agreed to whatever is
stipulated by the staff.
MSUC (Willhite-Guyer) Approval of plans as submitted, for Brookside Winery subject to
the condition that landscaping plans be submitted to the Director of Planming for
approval prior to final building inspection.
A~pointment of Delegate and Alternate for San Diego County Planning Congress
A letter was read from Mr. Dan Cherrier, Secretary, San Diego County Planning Congress
requesting the names of a director and alternate for the Board of Directors for the
Planning Congress be forwarded to him as soon as possible.
MSUC (Adams~Guyer) Bruce Johnson be appointed as Director.
MSUC (Guyer-Willhite) Bruce Warren be appointed as Alternate.
ADJOURNMENT
MSUC (Guyer-Willhite) Meeting adjourn to 3:30 p.m. on Wednesday, February 10, 1965,
~n the Administrative Conference Room, C~vic Center.
Meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~JJennie M. Fulasz 'J
Secretary