Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1971/09/20 MINUTES OF A REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA September 20, 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, Chandler, Macevicz, Hillson and Rudolph. Also present: Director of Planning Warren, Senior Planner Williams, Associate Planner Lee, City Attorney Lindberg and Assistant Director of Public Works Robens. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): VARIANCE - 2 Sandalwood Drive - Create 3 lots without required street frontage - Bart Corporation Director of Planning Warren reported that this hearing had been continued from the meeting of June 28, and that the staff was reminded on this date by the residents of the area that it had been stated that a reminder of the hearing date would be sent prior to this meeting. This was overlooked and was not done, for which Mr. Warren apologized, and with the consent of the applicant the Commission is asked to continue the public hearing to the meeting of October 4, 1971, in order that a reminder notice can be mailed to the residents of the area. City Attorney Lindberg advised that this had been a gratuitous offer by the Director of Planning and was not a legal requirement and should not recur, since the City is not obligated to send notice of continued hearings and persons who feel they should be reminded of continued hearings can cause undue delay. MSUC (Rice-Chandler) The public hearing for a variance to create 3 lots with- out required street frontage at 2 Sandalwood Drive be continued to the meeting of October 4, 1971. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): PREZONING - Proposed Sweetwater Valley Annexation Director of Planning Warren referred to maps on display which indicate the present county zoning, proposed prezoning and a concept plan for the entire Sweetwater Valley under consideration for annexation. Mr. Warren reminded the Commission that the prezoning and concept plan had been discussed in detail at the public hearing held on August 30 and the hearing continued so the staff could check on existing special use permits. He reported that it is the City's procedure that where a valid conditional use permit exists in the County the use would be allowed to continue after annexation, or the City could initiate conditional use permits. Mr. Warren discussed the proposed commercial and R-3 zoning for the Cascade development north of Bonita Woods, confirming that the R-3 zoning granted by the County carries no legal restriction of the density of development other than the maximum permitted in the basic zone. The developer has mailed to the -2- 9/20/71 Planning Department a copy of the tentative map which they have filed with the County Planning Department, indicating the building of condominium town- houses at a density of about 13 to the acre, and not to exceed 15. The staff recommends that the City grant some type of R-3 zoning for this property with a precise plan attached which would limit construction to 470 units or ten (10) dwelling units per acre as initially requested. Chairman Stewart declared the public hearing open. Mr. Underwood, 46 Minot, pointed out that he owns property contiguous and east of the freeway and objected to having this property placed in the A-8 flood plain zone since it has been zoned commercial since he purchased it in 1959. Director of Planning Warren advised that the County is now in the process of rezoning this area to the agricultural and flood plain zone. He said the agricultural zone is not considered a development zone, but is a holding zone until the property is ready for development. No studies have been made to determine how the freeway interchanges should be developed and he felt that to place commercial zoning on that property now would be premature. He ex- plained that the Valley Prezoning Committee had recommended that all of that area be placed in the flood plain zone. Ann Payne, 3836 Alameda Way, Bonita, member of the prezoning committee, reported they were not aware of this specific commercial zoning. They had discussed the freeway and interchanges and it was generally felt that until such time as the freeway was laid out and construction started, as well as construction of the flood control channel, there should be no specific zoning other than a holding zone. City Attorney Lindberg asked that in view of the present circumstances in conjunction with annexation proceedings, anyone present opposed to the annexa- tion be requested to register their presence, at least, if they did not wish to give testimony. Chairman Stewart asked anyone in the audience opposed to the prezoning plan as it affects the annexation to please indicate their presence. Mr. Underwood stated he is so opposed. As no one else wished to speak, for or against, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Macevicz-Rice) Recommend to the City Council the approval of the RESOLUTION NO. PCZ-71-S prezoning and concept plan as indicated on the maps and as set forth in the committee's report, including recommendations of the Planning Depart- ment staff. -3- 9/20/71 PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT - Zenith II - American Housing Guild Director of Planning Warren reported that this item was continued from the September 8 meeting at the request of the applicant rather than accept an apparent Conmlission denial of the request. The applicant was instructed to redesign the project in accordance with standards set forth by the staff. Mr. Linton of American Housing Guild has indicated such redesign is not feasible and it is their desire to present the original plan to the Commission for action. Chairman Stewart reopened the public hearing on this application. Jerry Linton, American Housing Guild, reported that they had earnestly tried to incorporate the conditions stipulated by the staff and Commission, but found this to be a near impossibility as the conditions would increase the cost of tile townhouses so the required se~ling price would be above what they feel is the current market. Mr. Linton took exception to a statement at the former hearing which likened their project to a ghetto because we propose carports instead of garages. He contended carports would not produce that effect. MSUC (Adams-Chandler) The application for a Planned Unit Development for Zenith II be denied on the basis that the developer finds it impossible to conform to the conditions enumerated by the staff and Commission. PUBLIC HEARING: CHANGE OF SETBACK - Northwest corner First Avenue and Country Club Drive - 25' to lO' on First Avenue~ 30' to 20' on Country Clu~ Drive - Glades ~'Das Associate Planner Lee reminded the Commission that a few weeks ago a request for reduction of setback from 25' to 15' adjacent to First Avenue was con- sidered and approved for this same property. The applicant is now requesting a reduction from 25' to 10' on First Avenue and 30' to 20' on Country Club Drive. As pointed out at the previous hearing, the existing setbacks would not allow the owner to build to 40% coverage of the lot as permitted in the Zoning Ordinance. The previous reduction granted would have allowed a build- ing area just under 3,000 square feet; granting of this request would give a building area of 4,000 square feet. This would afford more flexibility in locating the desired dwelling on the lot and allow more space between this structure and the existing dwelling on the adjoining lot to the west. Due to the variation of setbacks along First Avenue, the staff supports the applicant's request for a reduction to 10' on First Avenue, but would not recommend approval of a reduction of setback on Country Club Drive since other properties on both sides of Country Club Drive observe the 30' setback. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. As no one wished to speak, for or against, the public hearing was closed. -4- 9/20/71 MSUC (Chandler-Rudolph) Recommend to the City Council the reduction of RESOLUTION NO. PCZ-71-Q(a) setback from 25 feet to lO feet adjacent to First Avenue and no reduction from the 30 foot setback adjacent to Country Club Drive for property located at the northwest corner of First Avenue and Country Club Drive. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 135 Highland Avenue - Construction of exhibition model rooms in Handyman parking lot in C-T-F zone Director of Planning Warren displayed a plat indicating the location of the lot and of the existing store on the lot, and pointed out that with the con- struction of the freeway in this area the Handyman store will have to relocate. As this is in the flood plain district, a conditional use permit is required for any construction. Although through an error the building permit was issued and the structure has been built, the applicant was required to make application for the necessary conditional use permit. The staff recommends approval of a conditional use permit, to expire on May 18, 1975, the same date as the original conditional use permit for location of the store. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Henry Heimsen, representing Handyman, 8372 Center Drive, La Mesa, confirmed that Handyman Remodeling Division is a subsidiary of the Handyman Store organization which had obtained the original permit, but they are separate identities and he felt they had complied with City requirements when they submitted plans and obtained a building permit. He expressed the opinion that the room addition model is a good use and is consistent with the zone and with the Handyman Store. He requested that the staff's recon~endation for approval be upheld. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Hillson-Adams) Approval of conditional use permit for exhibition RESOLUTION NO. PCC-71-24 room addition model in the Handyman parking lot at 135 Highland Avenue in the C-T-F zone; said pemit to expire on May 18, 1975. 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 is well located adjacent to a home and building supply sales establishment. -5- 9/20/71 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. Due to the nature of the building, use and the duration of the permit, no detrimental effect will be produced. c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the Code for such use. All conditions and regulations will 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. Because of the temporary nature of this request, the General Plan is not affected. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ~ Additional parkin~ facilities for Dept. of Motor Vehicles in R-3 zone - Leah Shapov Associate Planner Lee indicated this conditional use permit is required in order to furnish parking for a conm~ercial use in the R-3 zone. He pointed out the location of the Department of Motor Vehicles building and their existing parking facility. He reviewed the adjacent zoning which includes C-C, C-O and R-3. The applicant has requested that since this use will be for a limited time, until expiration of the lease of the Department of Motor Vehicles, that minimal standards be imposed for paving and landscaping of the parking lot. The staff feels that if the additional parking is approved, the lot should be improved to the same standards as the existing lot and the entire parking area should be redesigned to provide more efficient circulation and better utiliza- tion of the proposed lot. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Abe Siner, representing the applicant and owner of the property, reported that in 1½ years when the present lease of the Department of Motor Vehicles expires, they will either want a new building on a different location or to have a new building in the present location. In either event, the additional parking requested at this time will be a temporary measure. He requested approval to grade the lot at its existing level, and apply 2" of A.C. paving over the existing ground without the D.G. sub-base, install bumper stops and striping. He indicated the existing building would not be leased for another use if it was vacated by the D.M.V. He added that he would be willing to submit a letter that if the D.M.V. renews their lease in the present location, he would take out the temporary paving and replace it according to City standards. -6- 9/20/71 Member Rudolph suggested the need for landscaping to screen this parking lot from the existing mobilehome park. Mr. Siner pointed out that the mobilehome park itself has adequate landscape screening and a fence. As no one else wished to testify, the public hearing was closed. Associate Planner Lee pointed out that the proposed parking lot and the exist- ing parking facility operate independently as they are laid out. If the appli- cant does not grade this lot to coincide with the existing parking, there is no way to coordinate the circulation between the two parking areas. While the Zoning Ordinance stipulates 4" of D.G. under the 2" A.C. paving for permanent use, the Engineering Division can allow a lesser amount of D.G. if compaction tests show the soil would hold the paving. The Commission discussed paving and circulation problems and agreed this should be worked out between the applicant and the staff. MSUC (Hillson-Adams) Approval of the conditional use permit to provide RESOLUTION NO. PCC-71-25 additional parking for the Department of Motor Vehicles, subject to the following conditions: I. The parking lot shall be graded and paved with 2" A.C. 2. Redesign of existing and new parkin§ area to provide more efficient circulation shall be subject to staff approval. 3. In the event the lease with Department of Motor Vehicles is renewed at this location, the temporary paving shall be removed and paving in accordance with City standards for permanent paving shall be installed, utilizing a 10 foot landscaping strip adjacent to "C" Street. 4. If the lease is not renewed, this conditional use peri,lit will expire in March, 1973. 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. This facility, adjacent to existing parking and the Department of Motor Vehicles office, is needed for the increase in persons utilizing the office and the wellbeing of the neighborhood by providing additional offstreet parking to relieve street parking. -7- 9/20/71 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. This use will not be detrimental because of the grade separation and conditions imposed. c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the Code for such use. All regulations and conditions will be complied with. d. That the granting of this conditional use will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Chula Vista or the adopted plan of any governmental agency. The General Plan designates this area for commercial residential uses; the proposed use will provide a logical transition. PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE - 795 Third Avenue, Reduction of front yard, 5' to 0 in C-C Zone - Mark Fishauf Associate Planner Lee indicated the location of the property at the northeast corner of Third Avenue and K Street, showing the location of the existing building constructed on the property line, and the proposed addition for which the applicant also requests a 0 setback. The 5' setback has been established on the property on both sides of Third Avenue at this location since 1955. The staff feels there is no justification for permitting additional construction with no setback and recommend denial of the request; they would, however, recommend approval of a modified variance for roof extension 3 feet beyond the maximum provided in the ordinance in order to match the roof line of the existing struc- ture and still provide a 5 foot area to be landscaped in front of the structure. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Mark Fishauf indicated his desire for a straight line for the front of the building with 150 feet of windows in front. He indicated that if this is not permitted he will leave the property as it is. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Hillson-Rice) The request for a variance for a 0 setback for RESOLUTION NO. PCV-71-20 construction of an addition to the building at 795 Third Avenue be denied and a modified variance be approved to permit roof extension 3 feet beyond ' the maximum provided in the Zoning Ordinance. Findings are as follows: a. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the owner exists. The 5 foot setback established for this area has been in existence since 1955 to provide a minimum area for landscaping on newly established -8- 9/20/71 structures; however, a 7 foot roof overhang is necessary for the new structure in order to match the proposed roof line of the existing structure to the south. b. That this variance is necessary for the preservation and enjo~ent of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same zone and in the vicinity of the subject property. No hardship has been shown for reducing the building setback from 5 feet to O; but the 7 foot overhang will not affect the 5 foot building setback and will allow a 5 foot area to be landscaped in front of the structure. 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 Ordinance or the public interest. The setback established in the Zoning Ordinance for C-C zones is a standard 25 feet for all new areas, but the 5 foot setback will allow landscaping in front of the structure. d. That the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the General Plan. The General Plan is not affected. Chairman Stewart advised the applicant of his right of appeal to the City Council within l0 days. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT to Zoning Ordinance establishing new fee schedule for services Director of Planning Warren called attention to the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance revising the fees charged for various services rendered by the Planning Department. He pointed out that many of the fees have changed very little during the past several years and some of them are far out of line with other cities and what they should be here. He enumerated the suggested changes as follows: Proposed Existing Fee New Fee Variances and Conditional Use Permits $ 35.00 $ 85.00 (with public hearing) Variances and Conditional Use Permits 35.00 35.00 (without public hearing) Zone Changes 50.00 175.00 Plan~ed Unit Developments 100.00 350.00 Appeals 15.00 35.00 -9- 9/20/71 Mr. Warren also suggested that a change be made in the $100 fee presently established for a Planned Community application; and also that consideration should be given to furnishing multi-level fees based on the number of units for P.U.D.'s and P.C's, since there may be considerable variation in size of planned unit development. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Kathryn Moore, 1134 Tobias Drive, asked if this proposed change in fees takes into consideration the price "freeze." Director of Planning Warren pointed out that the Commission's action is a recommendation to the City Council, it is set for hearing by that body, and then if adopted there is a 30 day delay before the ordinance becomes effective. If the "freeze is still in effect when that happens, it presumably could not go into effect. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Member Macevicz suggested that the three levels of fees for P.U.D. applications should be established before the resolution is sent to the City Council. Director of Planning Warren commented that a 2 weeks deferral would enable the staff to prepare a recommendation in this regard. MSUC (Macevicz-Rice) The public hearing concerning an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to establish a new fee schedule for services be reopened and continued to the meeting of October 4, 1971. Request for deferment of public improvements at 149 D Street - Joe D. Trevisani Director of Planning Warren indicated the location of the lot where the applicant proposes to construct a residence. There are no public improvements, with the exception of street paving in this area, and a report from the Engineering Division points out it is impractical to construct only a small segment of the street improvements at a time. The Engineering Division recommends granting the deferment. MSUC (Chandler-Adams) Approval of the request for deferral of public improvements at 149 D Street. Request for interpretation of accessors use at Service Station, 1099 Third Avenue, C-T Zone - Russell Evans Director of Planning Warren reported that the building in question was ordered removed by the Building Inspection Department and this was complied with. The applicant was not present at the meeting, and the request was filed. -10- 9/20/71 Request for extension of time on variance to split lot at 719 First Avenue - Edna Upde~raf__f The applicant has requested a one year extension of time on the variance due to several problems which have delayed development, most of which have now been resolved. MSUC (Adams-Chandler) Approval of a one year extension of time on variance to split lot at 719 First Avenue. Commission Comments Member Rudolph raised a question concerning the role of the Environmental Control Commission with reference to the impact of various housing developments. Director of Planning Warren commented that he felt the charge to the Environmental Control Commission has not been clear to the present time; the Council has scheduled a joint meeting with the Environmental Control Commission to attempt to clarify their duties and establish a good working relationship between that Commission and the Planning Cummission. City Attorney Lindberg affirmed that the charge of the Environmental Control Commission as contained in the Ordinance is very broad and an effort is being made to more clearly define their role and coordinate their efforts with other commissions. Member Rudolph also questioned the communication between various departments of the City, citing a hearing held on September 1st concerning changing the desig- nation of state highways. Since transportation vitally effects planning she felt the Planning Commission should have been made aware of the hearing. Member Macevicz asked if anything had been accomplished concerning the redesign of interchanges between Interstate 805 and Bonita Road, "H" Street, and other crossings. Director of Planning Warren reported that the City Council had agreed some of these things should be restudied and the City contacted the State Division of Highways. Their representatives had valid answers for most of the questions concerning the proposed design; however, they are making provision for bicycle or pedestrian and bridle paths on the Bonita Road interchange and will try to make provision for some type of special crossing on Palomar. A report concerning the meeting with highway representatives has been sent to Administration who will report to the City Council; no final action has been taken by the Council. Member Chandler requested permission to be absent from the meetings on October 18 and 25, due to his vacation schedule. MSUC (Rice-Adams) Permission granted for Member Chandler to be excused from the meetings of October 18 and 25, 1971. ~djournment MSUC (Rice-Chandler) The meeting adjourn at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Helen Ma~es. Secret~rv '