HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1971/02/01 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
February l, 1971
The regular meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California, was
held on the above date beginning at 7:00 p.m. wi th the following members present:
Rice, Stewart, Adams, Chandler, Macevicz, James and Hillson. Also present: Director
of Planning Warren, Senior Planner Williams, Associate Planner Lee and City Engineer
Gesley.
Chairman Rice led the pledge of allegiance to the flag, followed by a moment of
silent prayer.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MSUC (Macevicz-James) Minutes of the meeting of January 25, 1971, be approved as
mailed.
PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 562 K Street, Construction and operation of day care center, W,D.C. Services, Inc.
Director of Planning Warren indicated on a plat the location of this 125' X 290'
parcel located in the R-3-G-D zone and presently vacant. The property adjacent on
the east is zoned R-1 and developed with single family homes; while the property to
the west and south is vacant except for a single family dwelling and is included in
the R-3-G-D zone. An auto dealership and body shop are located further to the west.
Mr. Warren reviewed the applicant's request to construct and operate a day care center
to accommodate 150 children. The site would be enclosed by a chainlink fence on the
west and south with a 6' concrete block wall on the east adjacent to the single
family dwellings. The staff considers this a good location for such a use due to
access on K Street, and that it would serve as a buffer between the commercial use
to the west and the residential use to the east. The staff is concerned with the
amount of traffic that would be generated on K Street.
The City Attorney arrived at the meeting.
This being the time and place as advertised the public hearing was opened.
Stanley E. Traner, real estate representative for W.D.C. Services, Inc., of 4050
Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles, reported that he works for a firm in Pennsylvania who
build and operate hospitals, day care centers, convalescent homes, and the like. Mr.
Traner reported that at the opening of this center they would provide only for 125
children, with 25 in each of the five modular type buildings. If enrollment
warranted they would later add a sixth building. The administration building, including
office and kitchen, would be in front of the modular buildings, with parking spaces
for employees and pick-up and drop-off area at the front of the lot. The play area
would be located at the rear of the lot. Mr. Traner stressed that under governing laws
all children must be let out and picked up on the site. They would anticipate a staff
of 13 people for 125 children, and if the sixth modular was added the staff would be
increased to 15.
-2- 2/1/71
In discussing the design of the buildings Mr. Traner indicated they are pre-fabri-
cated of steel or aluminum pipe construction, with prefabricated plywood siding and
darkened glass windows. This is a new design developed especially for California,
and this would be their first center in this area.
Mr. Traner reported that studies made at other day care centers revealed the peak
load for cars leaving the children would be between 9;00 and lO:O0 in the morning
and for pick-up between 6:00 and 6:00 p.m. He was of the opinion space for five
or six cars in the area at one time would preclude backing the traffic on to K Street.
Mr. Traner advised that this would be a five day a week care center, although if the
need arose the sixth day could be added. Mr. Traner emphasized that they would meet
all federal, state and local requirements for day care centers.
The Commission raised questions concerning the noise in the play area, and it was
determined the children would be in the age group of 3 to 6 years and would be outside
possibly in groups of 25 at a time.
Mr. Cottingham, 818 Cedar Avenue, indicated his residence is adjacent to the area
proposed for the playground. He questioned that a group of 150 children would serve
as a good buffer and he felt there must be property adjacent to public parks that
could be used for this purpose. He also commented on the noise occasioned by the
activities of the auto body shop.
_ As no one else wished to speak, for or against, the public hearing was closed.
In response to the last testimony, Director of Pl. anning Warren commented that the
staff's feeling of a buffer is placing some use between the heavy commercial and
residential uses, and that many houses all over town are adjacent to school yards.
The primary concern of the staff is whether the size and capabilities of the site
will accommodate this use, with the main problem being that of on-site traffic.
Member Hillson expressed the opinion that it is time for the private sector to come
in and provide these day care centers because there are plans for the federal govern-
ment and the state to start providing day care centers for working mothers and he
would rather see this done by a private concern than at the taxpayers' expense.
Member Stewart and Chariman Rice commented on the number of cars they see at one time
at other child care centers which they observe and indicated this is usually 2, 3,
or 4 cars at a time.
MSUC (Hillson -James) Conditional Use permit for construction and operation of a
RESOLUTION NO. PCC-71-1 day care center at 562 K Street by W.D.C. Services, Inc. be
approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The entire site plan shall be redesigned to accommodate the absolute maximum
number of storage spaces for the pick-up and drop-off area. If this matter
cannot be resolved on a staff level, it shall be brought back to the Planning
Commission for further consideration.
-3- 2/1/71
2. The parking area shall be redesigned to accommodate 16 parking stalls,
designed in a manner to minimize conflict with other circulation on the
site.
3. Any spot or flood lights shall be screened to prevent any glare being cast
on adjacent dwellings.
4. The architecture shall be reviewed for inclusion of wood siding and cement
asbestos shingles, with final colors to also be approved by the staff.
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.
A need for this type of facility has been demonstrated, and the location is
near a major north-south road.
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 6' concrete block wall will protect the adjacent residentail uses and
~ traffic generated will be controlled on the site and not on the public street.
c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified
in the Code for such use.
The operation will comply with all conditions.
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 governmental agency.
The General Plan is not affected.
Chain~an Rice advised of the right of appeal to the City council within 10 days.
Request for deferral of public improvements - California Auto Wreckers, 248 West Bay Blvd.
Director of Planning Warren pointed out the location of California Auto Wreckers ad-
jacent to Interstate 5, and indicated that the redevelopment of this site was
occasioned by the proposed reconstruction and widening of the freeway. The frontage
road for the property will be moved to the opposite side and the applicant has
requested deferment of installing the public improvements. Mr. Warren enumerated the
conditions recommended by the Division of Engineering in approving this request.
Mr. Gerald Dawson, Attorney, representing Mr. Harding Campbell, owner of the property,
- testified that it was not Mr. Campbell's desire to redevelop this property, but it
was required as a result of the widening of the freeway and condemnation of a portion
of the property. He recognized that the City ordinance requires installation of
public improvements upon redevelopment of the property, but since this redevelopment
-4- 2/1/71
was caused by condemnation of the property he raised objection to the application
of the ordinance. He stated the applicant would prefer to go along with the
installation of improvements at a reasonable time, and he felt this should be when
the property is redeveloped for another use. To install curb, sidewalk, and drives
when a wrecking yard is there would be a mistake.
Mr. Dawson further advised that Mr. Campbell proposes to develop this property to a
freeway-oriented use when the present lease expires, which will be in 3 years and
ll months, and he feels that would be an appropriate time to install the public
improvements. He would also agree to an ultimate time limit of 5 years to assure
that this will not continue as a wrecking yard beyond that date.
City Attorney Lindberg commented that the point being made is that the property would
have continued in its present condition but for the condemnation and taking of
property by Highway Department and there would have been no occasion for installing
public improvements.
The Commission discussed the need for the public improvements and the proposed time
schedule for widening the freeway.
MSC {Stewart-Chandler) That the deferral of the installation of public improvements
by California Auto Wrecking at 248 West Bay Blvd. be granted for a period of five
years or until the land use changes from that of an auto wrecking yard, whichever
comes first.
The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Members Stewart, Chandler, Adams, James and Rice
NOES: Members Macevicz and Hillson
ABSENT: None
PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING - Phase III, City rezoning, area between Interstate 5 and
Fifth Avenue) and C Street and Ada Street
Director of Planning Warren commented this is the third phase.of rezoning studies
conducted in an effort to bring zoning into substantial conformance with the adopted
General Plan. He remarked that some of the recommendations for zone changes have met
wi th opposition from property owners, one area in particular being that in the
vicinity of Interstate 5 and Palomar. He reviewed the petitions and letters received
in protest and suggested that after receiving testimony at this hearing, it should
possibly be continued, and a meeting arranged between the staff and property owners to
discuss planning and zoning for the more controversial areas.
Mr. Warren suggested that Mr. Lee make the staff presentation covering the entire
area under study before comments are received on any section of the area.
-5- 2/1/71
Associate Planner Lee briefly discussed a land use map of the area, and then
discussed plats which indicated the proposed zone changes. He pointed out that
while these do not exactly duplicate the land use map, an effort has been made to
bring zoning and land use into conformance and to retain compatibility with adjacent
use.
Mr. Lee pointed out each parcel for ~qich a change of zone is recommended and gave
the reasons for the recommendation. He commented that it is now the philosophy to
rezone the existing industrial zoned land occupied by the railroad tracks into
conformance with the adjoining zone, due to the fact that uses allowed in the
industrial zone are not compatible with adjoining residential areas. An example of
this is that in past years billboards were allowed on this narrow strip of land
without regard to the effect on adjoining use.
Mr. Lee also pointed out that some lots which had been rezoned in the past to allow
apartments or commercial development had not been so developed and the remaining lots
are now inadequate for such use; they are therefore recommended for rezoning to the
type of residential use existing on the lots until such time as development plans
indicate a need for other zoning. This condition exists on F Street and also on H
Street as well as on a few other isolated lots.
Mr. Lee further remarked that where mobile home parks are located on industrial or
commercial zoned property, under the new Zoning Ordinance it will be necessary to
abate this use within five years unless the zoning is changed to a residential
classification.
Concerning the area in the vicinity of L Street and Palomar, Mr. Warren again reported
that this is the area from which the most protests had been received and he felt a
meeting between the property owners and the staff would be beneficial in determining
the goals for the area. He therefore wished to withhold the staff recommendation for
that particular area.
Chairman Ri ce opened the public hearing and requested testimony on the area between
C Street and F Street. No comments were made concerning the suggested changes.
Testimony was then requested on the area between E Street and G Street.
Edna Updegraff, 719 First Avenue, spoke concerning three duplexes on F Street owned
by herself and her sister, commenting that they hoped to develop this property into
something more productive than duplexes. Due to the fact the taxes have risen almost
50% from the previous year, she feels such redevelopment is necessary.
Don Rolstad with Paul Miller Real Estate Company, spoke in support of Mrs. Updegraff's
request that the three lots on the south side of F Street from the corner of Ash, be
excluded from the downgrading from R-3 to R-2. He contended this is an adequate
parcel of property for an apartment development.
Charlie Barker, Descanso, spoke concerning 17 duplexes which he owns on Ash Street
directly across from the Chula Vista Hospital. He reported these are getting old and
while he does not have plans for redevelopment right at the moment he would like to
see zone remain R-3. These lots are approximately 65' X 105' or llO'. The duplexes
were built about 1946.
-6- 2/1/71
Chairman Rice then asked for comments concerning the area between G Street and I
Street.
John J. Bryan reported that he and his partner own the office building at the
southeast corner of Jefferson and H Street. They purchased the lot about two years
ago on reliance of the C-T zoning which exists. This is adjacent to commercial
development and he argued that rezoning it back to R-1 would be prejudicial.
Ken Thompson, owner of property at 507 Jefferson Avenue which adjoins that owned by
Mr. Bryan, commented that he had not opposed commercial development to the north,
west and east because they felt that would be the ultimate use for their property
also and it would be a heavy financial loss if this were to revert back to the R-1
zone.
Director of Planning Warren adknowledged that this area may need additional study, but
refuted the arguments presented by Bryan and Thompson.
There were no comments concerning the area between I Street and L Street and the
chairman called for testimony on the area south of L Street.
James Yamate, owner of property on Moss Street between Industrial Blvd. and the
freeway, felt this was not the time for the rezoning of his property to C-V and
prefers that it remain in the I Industrial zone. The property is presently in
agricultural use, and he was concerned that changing the zone to C-V might result
in increased taxes which would make it impractical to continue farming operations.
Mrs. Trusty advised that they own all of the property near the freeway between
Palomar and Ada Street and requested that this property remain in the C-T zone. She
indicated they had annexed to the City of Chual Vista because they were not satisfied
with the R-3 zoning applied by the County. They do not wish to regress back to the
R-3 zoning which existed in 1957.
Mr. Bill Richardson, owner of land on Walnut Avenue which is proposed for rezoning
from industrial to R-3, asserted this should remain in the industrial zone in
conformance with the original General Plan. He pointed out the need for industrial
development in Chula Vista if the residents are to earn thel~ livng here.
Chairman Rice directed that further testimony concerning this area be withheld until
a future meeting after the staff has met with property owners.
MSUC (Stewart-Chandler) The public hearing concerning Phase III of City rezoning be
continued to the meeting of March 1, 1971.
Appeal by Med~6rd NeOn of staff decision concerning a sign for Sambo's Restaurant at SEC of F Street and BrOadWa~
Director of Planning Warren reported that in a telephone call from Oregon late this
afternoon the applicant asked that this request be taken off the agenda. It is
assumed this matter will be worked out with the staff.
MSUC (Chandler-James) The appeal by Medford Neon concerning a sign for Sambo's
Restaurant be filed.
-7- 2/1/71
Request by U, S. Post Office for extensiOnof time on conditional use permit for
faCilitieS on Third Avenue south Of J Street
Director of Planning Warren reported that representatives of the Post Office
Department were unable to be present, however, a bid had been submitted to Washington,
they are waiting for approval and expect to break ground within 90 days.
MSUC (Stewart-Chandler) A one y~ar extension of time on conditional use permit for
facilities on Third Avenue be granted to the U. S. Post Office.
Director's Report
Mr. Warren reported that at the workshop dinner meeting on Monday night, February 8,
discussion will include the Commission's budget requests for the coming year and
interchanges with 805 and H and Bonita Road.
Chairman Rice called attention to a letter received some time ago from the Imperial
Beach Planning Commission indicating their desire to meet with Chula Vista to discuss
mutual problems. Mr. Warren expressed his willingness to follow and see if Imperial
Beach is still interested if it is the Commission's desire. The Commission expressed
agreement with setting up a meeting ~n the future when the schedule permits.
Oral Communications
Member Maoevicz opened discussion concerning the interchanges at E Street and F Street
on Freeway 5. He felt the design of the interchanges is inadequate for relieving
traffic congestion. The Commission discussed the cloverleaf versus the diamond type
on and off ramps.
Chairman Rice raised a question concerning the possibility of using the F Street
railroad crossing to move traffic west during the congested lunch hour period.
Director Warren commented that the staff would look into the possibility of having
this crossing open to traffic between ll:O0 a.m. and 1:00 p.m.
Mrs. Stone, owner of property at Broadway and H asked what type of interchange will be
used at H and Freeway 5. She was advised this will be a diamond type interchange with
longer on & off ramps than presently exist and with traffic lights to control the
traffic.
The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m., to the meeting of February 22, 1971.
Respectf.~'l ly submitted,
Helen S. Mapes, Secret~ary
Chula Vista Planning Commission