HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1971/10/18 MINUTES OF A REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
October 18, 1971
The regular adjourned meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista,
California was held on the above date beginning at 7:00 p.m. with the following
members present: Stewart, Rice, Adams, Macevicz and Rudolph. Absent (with
previous notification): Member Chandler. Also present: Senior Planner
Williams, Associate Planner Lee, Assistant City Attorney Blick and Assistant
Director of Public Works Robens
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MSUC (Macevicz-Rudolph) The minutes of the Planning Commission meetings of
September 20 and October 4, 1971, be approved as mailed.
PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 619 K Street - Impound yard
for auto storage - Ray D. Coles
Associate Planner Lee displayed a plat showing the location of the proposed
facility at 619 K Street in the C-T zone. He also displayed a plat showing
the development, indicating the east boundary would be a solid building wall,
and the other three sides would be enclosed with a 6' solid wooden fence with
a gate fronting on K Street. There are presently two curb cuts at the front
of the property but the proposed landscaping would negate the use of one of
the curb cuts. The applicant proposes to use the easterly curb cut, but due
to its close proximity to the existing commercial building, the staff recom-
mends closing the easterly curb cut and using the westerly curb cut.
This being the time and place as advertised the public hearing was opened.
Ray Coles, 3218 Main Street, the applicant, commented that he would like to
retain both curb cuts and install two gates, since this would facilitate the
movement of vehicles on the lot and afford better utilization of the property.
Associate Planner Lee expressed the opinion there would be no objection to the
use of two driveways but he would recommend using the easterly driveway,
adjacent to the building, as an entrance only, and using the westerly driveway
as an exit.
Mr. Coles expressed agreement with the other conditions recommended by the staff.
MSUC (Rudolph-Rice) Approval of a conditional use permit to locate an
RESOLUTION PCC-71-26 impound yard for auto storage at 619 K Street, sub-
ject to the following conditions:
1. The easterly driveway shall be designated for entrance and the westerly
driveway for exit.
2. A landscaping and irrigation plan for the front yard and parkway areas
· shall be subject to approval of the Landscape Planner. The plan shall
be in conformance with the Landscape Manual, utilizing ground cover,
5 gal. shrubs, and 15 gal. trees, and a sprinkler system operated by a
- 2 - 10/18/71
timing clock. The parkway area between the two existing driveways
serving auto storage and the garage shall be filled with concrete
in accordance with Engineering specifications.
3. The applicant shall meet wi th the Landscape Planner to determine if
any existing trees should be saved to use in future development of
the site for another use.
4. The design of the 6' fence and solid gates shall be reviewed by the
Zoning Administrator. The fence shall be kept in good repair at
all times.
Findings are as follows:
a. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable
to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well-
being of the neighborhood or the community.
The use will provide auto storage near other auto oriented uses.
b. That such use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be
detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or
working in the vicinity, or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.
The facility will be adequately screened by fencing and landscaping. This
will protect adjacent property from any detrimental effect.
c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions
specified in the Code for such use.
All requirements, such as screening, paving and landscaping shall be
complied with.
d. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely affect
the General Plan of the City of Chula Vista or the adopted plan of any govern-
mental agency.
This use is in conformance with the General Plan.
PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE - Northeast corner of First Ave. and Flower Street -
Reduction of front yard 20' to 15' - John B. Vigus
Associate Planner Lee indicated the location of the property and pointed out
that due to the rough topography of the area there is a difference in elevation
of 24 feet between the front and back boundaries of the property. The proposed
dwelling would be 30' X 50' and the unusual configuration of the lot makes it
difficult to observe a 20 foot setback from the front of the property. The
staff recommends approval subject to conditions governing landscaping. Mr. Lee
pointed out that the proposed realignment of First Avenue would result in an
increase in the distance between the building and the street right-of-way.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
- 3 - 10/18/71
John B. Vigus, 162 East Oxford Street, stated it would not be worthwhile to
develop the lot without the variance for the reduction of front yard. He
agreed with the conditions recommended by the staff.
As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Rice-Macevicz) Approval of a variance for the reduction of front
RESOLUTION PCV-71-22 yard from 20' to 15' on property at the northeast
corner of First Avenue and Flower Street, subject
to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall submit a grading plan for staff approval.
2. Complete landscaping and irrigation plans in conformance with the
Landscape Manual shall be submitted for approval by the City's
Landscape Planner. The plans shall follow these guidelines:
(a) All trees that it is feasible to save shall be retained.
(b) All existing and new slopes shall be planted with a fine leaf
ice plant, substitutes to be considered by the Landscape
Planner. One 1-gal. shrub or tree shall be utilized for each
100 sq. ft. of slope area.
(c) The front yard area and all slope areas shall be irrigated by
a sprinkler system.
Findings are as follows:
a. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of
the owner exists.
Due to the rough topography and excessive right-of-way, development of
this property with a 20' setback would be impractical.
b. That this variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of sub-
stantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same zone and in
the vicinity of the subject property.
The reduction of this setback will provide this property with the same
development opportunities as other properties in this area and zone.
c. That the authorizing of this variance will not be of substantial detriment
to adjacent property and will not materially impair the purposes of the Ordin-
ance or the public interest.
The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the adjacent area
due to site distance problems or any other conditions. The Zoning Ordin-
ance provides for a 15' setback in R-2 zones.
d. That the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of
the General Plan.
The General Plan is not affected by the granting of this variance.
- 4 - 10/18/71
PUBLIC HEARING: Amendment to Animal Keepin~ Re~ations Ordinance
Senior Planner Williams advised that this hearing was set due to a request by
Sweetwater Valley residents during the hearin9 concerning horse-keeping amend-
ments to the City Code in the interest of providing a means of allowing animals
on residential lots in conjunction with 4-H, F.F.A. or other youth organization
projects. This is currently permitted in the County through issuance of a
special use permit.
Mr. Williams pointed out that although this was advertised as a public hearing
for considering an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, it was ascertained that
the City ordinance most concerned with regulating the keeping of animals is a
specific Animal Regulation Ordinance; therefore the staff recommends amending
the Animal Regulation Ordinance rather than the Zoning Ordinance.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Mrs. William Steffan, 3805 Palm Drive, advised that she is a 4-H leader in
Sweetwater Valley and that under County regulations there is no requirement
concerning lot size and she would like to see City regulations written in the
same way. She also felt there should not be a limit of one year on the per-
mission for keeping of such animals. She affirmed that enrollment in a 4-H
project is on a yearly basis, and in raising a market animal it is usually
kept for a period of months, ranging from 3 or 4 up to possibly 9 months, but
in a breeding project the animal is kept all year, and the project continues
from year to year.
Senior Planner Williams advised that the amendment to the Animal Regulations
Ordinance as proposed does not include a requirement for a conditional use
permit to a time limitation.
As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed.
The Commission raised questions as to the number and kinds of animals permitted
under the Animal Regulations Ordinance and whether this presented any conflict
with the Zoning Ordinance.
Senior Planner Williams suggested that a more complete study be made to deter-
mine any conflict between the two ordinances, and that the public hearing be
continued for approximately one month.
MSUC (Rice-Adams) The public hearing to consider amendments to the Animal
Keeping Ordinance be continued to the meeting of November 15, 1971.
SUBDIVISION: Tentative map of Apollo #3 - Time Development Co.
Associate Planner Lee displayed a plat indicating the location of 12 acres
lying north of Orange which the applicant proposes to develop with approximately
50 lots. Mr. Lee reviewed the background of this area, dating back to 1964
when this property was included in a tentative map filed by Princess Manor
covering a large area, including land on both sides of the proposed extension
of Orange Avenue. A final map was never filed by Princess Manor on this portion
of their property.
- 5 - 10/18/71
Mr. Lee advised that communications have been received from F.H.A. and from
the County Planning Department, both of which point out problems which should
be resolved prior to approval of this tentative map. Mr. Lee enumerated
problems concerning the dedication and improvement of streets and provisions
of a drainage facility which have not been resolved with this proposed sub-
division map. The staff recommends denial of the map.
Chairman Stewart asked for comments from the applicant or their representative.
Louis Wolfsheimer, Attorney from San Diego, representing Time Development Com-
pany, reported that his clients have purchased only the property shown for
division into the 50 lots and, therefore, are not in a position to dedicate the
proposed land for the extension of Orange Avenue since it does not belong to
them. He felt the requirements stipulated by the staff represent off site
improvements which they should not be expected to install in connection with a
subdivision of this size.
The Commission concurred that a major collector street would be required to
serve this development and would have to be included in plans for this sub-
division. They also objected to the narrow strip of property which would be
left unimproved between this development and Orange Avenue.
MSUC (Rice-Rudolph) Recommend to the City Council that the tentative sub-
division map for Apollo Unit No. 3 submitted by Time Development Company be
not approved due to the following reasons:
1. The area remaining between the proposed extension of Orange Avenue
and the southern boundary of this subdivision would not be suf-
ficient to provide adequate R-1 development.
2. The tentative map makes no provision for the dedication or improve-
ment of Orange Avenue or Brandywine Avenue, which are necessary to
serve this property.
3. Compliance with City Council Resolution #6140 to insure the adequacy
of public facilities in newly developed areas has not been indicated.
It was not shown that required public services would be provided
concurrent with need.
Request for modification of condition of conditional use permit for
S~vation Army - 648 Third Avenue
Associate Planner Lee reviewed a conditional use permit granted in May, 1969,
to the Salvation Army for the development of a community center at 648 Third
Avenue. He pointed out that one of the conditions of that permit was the
requirement of a solid backdrop to screen the outdoor basketball courts from
adjoining residential property (three lots adjacent to the rear of this
property). It was later determined that this backdrop could be a 12' high
chain link fence with a woven synthetic fabric cover. A letter received from
a representative of the Salvation Army on October 8 indicated that the resi-
dents have requested that the opaque vinyl fabric to be attached to the chain
link fencing be deleted. The staff feels that problems might result if this
- 6 - 10/18/71
light barrier is omitted but would concur with waiving the condition if it is
the desire of the residents.
Mr. Lee also reported the receipt of a letter from Jerry Hoffman, representing
the three property owners, in which he enumerated objections concerning the
location of the fence, the effect of the sprinkler system installed, and the
grading of the back portion of the Salvation Army lot.
Victor Wulff, Architect, 4401 Bonita Road, representing the Salvation Army,
reported that the property has been developed according to the requirements
stipulated by the Commission. In discussion with the Planning staff the use
of the opaque plastic covering was agreed upon as well as planting trees along
the west property line which would grow into a dense screen. He advised it was
never suggested that the trees be planted between the backdrop fence and the
block wall on the adjacent properties.
In discussing the drainage problem, Mr. Wulff affirmed that the property has
always drained toward the west since the rear of the property is 6 feet lower
than the front at Third Avenue.
Jerry Hoffman, 645 Landis Avenue, speaking for the adjacent residents, contended
it had been their impression when development plans for the property were dis-
cussed that trees would be planted between their wall and the fence on the
Salvation Army property, and such trees would eventually screen the fence from
their view.
In response to a question from Chairman Stewart, Mr. Hoffman stated they would
be willing to forego the entire fence; he later added he would favor installing
the fence but without the vinyl covering.
Mr. Wulff commented that he felt Major Yardley of the Salvation Army should be
consulted about whether the fence should be eliminated.
Major Yardley, City Commander for Salvation Army, stated that he felt the 12'
fence should be installed for their protection as well as the protection of the
adjacent residents.
MSUC (Rice-Macevicz) The requirement for the vinyl covering on the chain link
fence be waived.
Request for interpretation of conditions relating to seating capacity and parking requirements - F~st Assembly of God Church -
Fourth and D
Associate Planner Lee indicated the location of the property and displayed a
plat of the site plan approved for development by the First Assembly of God
Church. This plan included 90 parking spaces to meet the requirement for a
seating capacity of 450 people at a 5:1 ratio. The church is now requesting
a reduction in parking spaces to 70 or 75 on an interim basis in order to
maintain an existing storage building which is located on a portion of the
area to be used for parking facilities. The church also requests that future
parking requirements to serve a seating capacity, of 625 be figured on the
ratio of 5:1 rather than the 2~:1 ratio as provided in Zoning Ordinance
- 7 - 10/18/71
regulations. They are also requesting approval of a reciprocal agreement on
parking facilities with the Seventh Day Adventist Church, located on the south-
west corner of Fourth and D, to take care of the extra parking required for
special occasions which would take place four or five times during a year.
Mr. Lee commented that the staff has no objection to the approval of the 75
parking spaces for a one-year period, and that a reciprocal agreement to
utilize parking at the Seventh Day Adventist Church facility would appear as
a logical solution for overflow parking on special occasions but would stipulate
that such an agreement would be null and void if the Seventh Day Adventist
Church wishes to hold services at the same time as the First Assembly of God
Church. He pointed out that the staff can see no alternative to requiring
that parking to accommodate any seating above the 450 approved on the develop-
ment plans be provided at the 3~:1 ratio as required by the Zoning Ordinance.
Howard Ryan, 381D Street, Pastor of First Assembly of God Church, contended
that the building was designed to accommodate 625 seats and the figure of 450
was written on the plans because they could only provide enough parking spaces
to serve that number. He spoke of their efforts to obtain additional property
adjacent to their site to provide additional parking. He felt it would present
an added financial burden on the church if this parking were to be figured at
the 3~:1 ratio.
The Commission discussed this development at considerable length with Pastor
Ryan and asked for the legal opinion of the Assistant City Attorney concerning
the ratio to be applied for increased seating and additional parking.
Attorney Blick pointed out that a conditional use permit applies to the property
for which it is issued, and if the church purchases additional property for
parking facilities a new conditional use permit would be required for that
property and the ratio would be that required by the Zoning Ordinance.
MSUC (Adams-Ri ce) Permission is granted to First Assembly of God Church for
a reduction of parking spaces as shown on approved plans from 90 spaces to 75
spaces for a period of one year; permission is also granted for a reciprocal
agreement between the first Assembly of God Church and the Seventh Day
Adventist Church located at the southwest corner of Fourth and D, whereby 50
offsite parking spaces might be used by First Assembly of God Church to permit
a seating capacity of 625, subject to annual review by the Planning Department
staff to assure that proper and adequate parking is being maintained, and if
problems are recognized by the staff the matter shall be brought to the
Planning Commission for review. Should the Commission determine that problems
do exist relating to conflict of services between First Assembly of God Church
and the Seventh Day Adventist Church or the deletion of any parking spaces at
either facility, the reciprocal agreement shall become null and void and the
seating capacity of First Assembly of God Church will be dependent upon the
number of parking spaces they are able to provide. It is further stipulated
that the parking requirement for 450 seats is based on the approved 5:1 ratio;
additional seating would require the provision of additional parking at the
ratio required by ordinance.
Consideration of revision in Parking Standards
Associate Planner Lee recalled for the Commission the parking table adopted in
1964, with revisions and additions adopted in 1969. The Public Works inspectors
have called attention to the need for requiring a seal coat on all permanent
and semi-permanent paving. In addition to requiring the seal coat for all
permanent and semi-permanent paving, the staff recommends the following:
1. Revision to the parking table setting forth the minimum stall widths
for compact vehicles.
2. Two additional charts for spelling out minimum distances for ramp
slopes, setting forth a maximum of 15% with the requirement for P.C.C.
(Portland Concrete Cement) for any grades exceeding 12%. The standard
also sets forth a minimum transition period as the ramp enters public
property and also approaching a parking area.
3. Minimum clearances are set forth providing adequate turning areas at
the ends of parking stalls or other obstructions.
4. A chart is included illustrating the minimum sig~distance required
by the Division of Engineering as adopted in the City Code for Chula
Vista.
5. Striping details are included setting forth double striping require-
ments for all non-residential areas.
Tables and charts of these revisions were presented to the Commission.
Chairman Stewart questioned the need for requiring double striping in
industrial zone parking lots.
Member Rice felt the double striping would be an advantage in any parking lot.
He further felt that all existing lots should be encouraged to change to
double striping.
Member Rudolph suggested that in the interest of encouraging the use of compact
cars, which emit less pollution and require less parking space, that a count
of the compact cars in the area be obtained and all lots be required to utilize
a corresponding percentage of compact parking spaces, with such spaces located
in the most favored locations on the lot. She suggested that the staff look
into the feasibility of this.
Members Macevicz, Rice and Adams expressed their opinions that this would not
be feasible but would, instead, be discriminatory.
MSUC (Adams-Rice) Approval of revised Parking Table, Pavement Standards
RESOLUTION PCM-71-17 and Charts for private vehicular areas.
Director's .Report
Senior Planner Williams displayed a revised plot plan submitted by Earl Scheib
to meet the conditions specified by the Commission in granting the conditional
- 9 - 10/18/71
use permit for the automotive paint and body repair business at the southeast
corner of Broadway and Arizona.
MSUC (Macevicz-Rice) Approval of the revised site plan for Earl Scheib paint
shop at Broadway and Arizona.
Senior Planner Williams reported that public hearings could not be held on
Monday, October 25th, since it is a legal holiday and asked the Commission's
wishes concerning cancelling the meeting entirely or scheduling a workshop.
Member Rudolph favored scheduling a workshop meeting as she felt there are
many problems and new ideas which could be discussed by the Commission members.
Other members indicated that plans for the holiday weekend would prevent their
attendance at a meeting on the 25th.
MSC (Rice-Macevicz) The Planning Commission meeting scheduled for October 25th
be cancelled.
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Members Rice, Macevicz, Stewart and Adams
NOES: Member Rudolph
ABSENT: Member Chandler
Senior Planner Williams reported that plans are being made for a field trip on
Saturday, October 23rd, to take City Council to view the P.U.D. projects
currently being developed in the City, and invited any Commissioners desiring to
go on the trip to do so.
Member Rudolph expressed interest in attending this trip.
Commission Comments
Member Rice commented on the necessity for the Commission to pay particular
attention and be as explicit as possible in establishing conditions when
granting variances or conditional use permits in order to avoid misunderstanding
at a later date.
Member Rudolph commented that during discussion concerning an extension of time
on a variance at a previous meeting, the remark was made that variances are
always renewed and applicants expect this and act accordingly. She felt it is
a disservice to the community to allow them to continue that way and that a
resolution should be adopted putting all applicants on notice that renewal may
well be denied and any expense incurred is at the applicant's risk. She sug-
gested that a resolution might state: Variances granted for a specific period
of time, i.e., one year, are to be presumed to be for the stated period of time
only. There will be no presumption that the variance will be extended. Ac-
tions by the applicant which do not take that into account would be at the
- 10 - 10/18/71
applicant's own risk. A request for variance extension would be considered
only on the facts at the time of the request for extension.
Member Adams asserted this is essentially the policy followed by the Commission
now and having a resolution on record would not prevent people from presuming
that a variance would be extended.
Adjournment
MSUC (Macevicz-Rice) The meeting be adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
Respectful ly submitted,
Helen Mapes, Secret