HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1970/08/31 MINUTES OF A REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
August 31, 1970
The regular adjourned meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista,
California, was held on the above date beginning at 7 p.m. in the Council
Chamber, Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue, with the following members present:
Stewart, Adams, Chandler, Macevicz, Hillson and James. Absent (with previous
notification): Chairman Rice. Also present: Director of Planning Warren,
Associate Planner Reid, City Attorney Lindberg and City Engineer Gesley.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MSUC (Chandler-Adams Minutes of the meeting of August 17, 1970, be approved
as mailed.
SUBDIVISION - Tentative map of Apollo Subdivision - Wittman Enterprises
Director of Planning Warren indicated on a plat the location of this subdivision
on East Rienstra Street between Marl Avenue on the east and the San Diego Gas &
Electric easement on the west. The property consists of 10.4 acres, zoned R-l,
and is proposed for development with 44 single family dwellings, with 11 lots
containing less than 7,000 square feet, which is within the limitation allowed.
Mr. Warren reported that he had received a call in the afternoon from a rep-
resentative of the subdivider indicating he would be unable to be present at
the meeting but that the conditions proposed by the staff were acceptable to
them. Mr. Warren then reviewed the conditions, including those recommended by
the Engineering Division.
Member Hillson raised a question as to the reservation of one lot for a future
street if the adjoining property is developed with single family units. He
asked if there would be another access to the other property if it is developed.
Director of Planning Warren pointed out that there will be another access, but
it is felt the second access street should be reserved if the property is
developed in single family lots; however, it should be isolated if it is
developed multi-family, rather than run the traffic through the subdivision now
being developed. It is, therefore, recommended that Lot 35 be reserved until
such time as the land use to the south is determined. If the street is not
required, then a 6' wide pedestrian easement should be provided across the lot,
which would be enclosed with a 6' high solid fence.
The Commission discussed the most suitable material for the enclosing fence.
It was pointed out that a wooden fence would require more maintenance, and a
chain link fence was therefore favored. The staff was requested to determine
whether or not the walkway is actually needed before submission of the map to
the City Council.
MSUC (Macevicz-James) Recommend approval of the Tentative Map for Apollo
Subdivision, subject to the following conditions:
8/31/70
page 2
1. If the accumulated runoff of 816 CFS which occurs at the northeast
corner of Lot 35 is to be placed in a closed conduit, then an enclosed
structure will be required to connect the conduit to the three existing
54" R.C.P. under East Rienstra Street.
2. The developer shall reserve Lot 35 for a future stub street and
shall bond for the installation of full street and drainage improvements
including, but not limited to, curb, gutter, sidewalk, pavement, street
lights, sewer, curb inlets, improved channel and conduit.
3. In the event the street across Lot 35 is not required, a 6' wide
pedestrian easement shall be provided across the lot and shall be enclosed
with a 6' high chain link fence on each side.
4. The developer shall obtain a letter of permission from San Diego Gas
& Electric Co. to the City of Chula Vista granting permission for ingress
and egress from East Rienstra Street across their right-of-way for the
maintenance of sewer facilities located in Lot 44 and a sewer easement which
was granted to the City of Chula Vista by San Diego Gas & Electric on
April 23, 1964.
5. A preliminary landscape plan shall be submitted prior to submission of
the final map. Said plan shall encompass all of the slopes utilizing the
following criteria for planting:
(a) Slopes of 3' in vertical height or less thall utilize fine leaf
ice plant such as mesenbreanthemum croceum or rosea.
(b) Slopes of 3' to 15' in height shall have the top 6' strip planted
in a fine leaf ice plant, such as mesenbreanthemum croceum or rosea,
the balance may be planted with carpobrotus edulis--substitutions may
be considered by the staff.
(c) All slopes exceeding lO' in height shall be watered by a sprinkler
system. The irrigation plan shall be submitted with the landscape plan.
(d) On all slopes greater than 15', add to item (b), one shrub or tree
per 150 square feet, one gallon size minimum, to be selected by a land-
scape architect for deep rooting qualities as well as aesthetic values.
VARIANCE - 57 E. Fortuna Street - Request for reduction of rear ~ard from 20' to 13' - M~ron E. Moore
Director of Planning Warren displayed a plot of the property indicating the
location of the proposed addition at the rear of the residence which would
extend to within 13' of the rear property line. This request is similar to
others which have been granted to allow for the expansion of a dwelling. There
is a small bank at the rear of the property. The staff recommends approval
with the condition that a minimum of 5' of level ground must be provided to the
rear of the addition.
Member Adams asked if this construction is under way at this time. It was
confirmed that it is.
8/31/70
page 3
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
There was no comment, either for or against, and the public hearing was declared
closed.
Member Adams raised objection to the fact that the addition is already framed
and ready to enclose before the variance was applied for. He questioned why
a building permit had been issued for an addition which would require a
variance.
Director Warren advised that the permit had been issued for a patio roof, and
after the roof was on it was desired to enclose the area.
MSUC (Chandler-Adams) Approval of request for variance at 57 E. Fortuna Street
be approved, subject to staff recommendations.
Mr. Myron Moore arrived at the meeting and was advised by Chairman Pro Tem
Stewart that the variance had been granted but that construction work should
not be resumed prior to the expiration of the 10 day waiting period. He
pointed out that comment had been made that construction had been undertaken
before authority was granted to do it.
Mr. Moore desired to answer this comment, and with the consent of the Commission,
the public hearing was reopened to hear Mr. Moore's statement to the effect that
he had a building permit to build a patio screened room and he was told that if
the rear was 60% open it would meet the requirements of a patio. He is now
requesting a variance in order to close in the addition.
Mr. Moore then raised a question as to the requirement for 5 feet of level
ground at the rear of the addition. He asserted the 3 feet of level area
currently existing is enough for their yard function and that the bank has been
in place for 16 years and is stable, and they would prefer to keep it that way.
Member James expressed his opinion that in this case it would be preferable to
leave the bank as it is with 3 feet of level area, rather than dig into the bank
for 2 additional feet.
MSC (Chandler-James) Amend previous motion to require condition of only 3 feet
of level ground adjacent to the addition.
Findings are as follows:
a. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of
the owner exists.
Because of the minimal lot size and the location of the house, the owner
would be able to expand only by encroaching into the rear yard setback.
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 Commission has in the past approved reductions in rear yard setbacks,
some in this area.
8/31/70
page 4
c. That the authorizing of this variance will not be of substantial detri-
ment to adjacent property and will not materially impair the purposes of
the ordinance or the public interest.
The addition will cover only 11.5% of the rear yard area, an accessory
structure could cover up to 30%.
d. That the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives
of the General Plan.
The General Plan is not affected.
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Members Chandler, James, Macevicz, Stewart, and Hillson
NOES: Member Adams
ABSENT: Chairman Rice
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - Northwest corner of Trousdale Drive and North Glover -
Truck freight terminal - Alec L. CorN
Director of Planning Warren pointed out the location where the applicant proposes
to construct a freight terminal on property presently zoned for limited indus-
trial use in the Flood Plain District. Truck terminals are a conditional use
in this zone. Mr. Warren enumerated the surrounding land uses and discussed the
proposed street development in the area including a future freeway. He also
reviewed the conditions recommended by the staff for approval of this conditional
use.
Member Hillson asked if the restriction that all floatable material be contained
in a warehouse would increase the burden on the builder. It was felt this
question should be answered by the applicant.
Member Macevicz asked if when the flood control channel is in and the future
freeway access roads are completed, and there is a cul-de-sac at Trousdale and
Glover, will there be only one exit for the freight truck terminal. The City
Engineer did not have the information to answer that question.
This being the time and place as advertised the public hearing was opened.
There was no representative present to speak for the applicant or to answer
questions raised by the Commission.
MSUC (Chandler-Macevicz) The public hearing for the consideration of a condi-
tional use permit be continued to the meeting of September 14, 1970.
8/31/70
page 5
REZONING (Continued) - 562 K Street - from R-3-G-D to R-3 - Mestler & Gentry
Director of Planning Warren advised that this item was continued from the
August 17 meeting so the developer could prepare tentative plans for review
by the Commission. No plans have been submitted, but on this date a letter
was received from the applicant once again requesting an extension to
September 14, indicating that plans will be prepared by that time.
MSUC (Macevicz-Adams) Continue the public hearing for rezoning 562 K Street
to the meeting of September 14.
PREZONING - North of Ota~ Valle~ Road~ south of Orange Avenue extension -
to P-C - George and Lucile Sears
Director of Planning Warren indicated the location of 160 acres lying east of
Oleander Avenue, south of the future Orange Avenue extension and north of Otay
Valley Road. He outlined the adjacent land use and proposed development. He
pointed out that if prezoning to P-C is approved it will result in specific
plans on which ultimate zoning would be based. The project, as proposed,
involves seven units, 3 or which would be single family dwellings, one of
multiple family dwelling units, an elementary school site, a neighborhood
park site and small convenience shopping center. The density would be 7
or 8 dwelling units per acre which conforms to the density shown on the
revised General Plan as recommended to the City Council.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Mr. Bill Rick, Rick Engineering Co., 3557 Kenyon Street, San Diego, advised
they have prepared the plan for development by Avco Community Developers, Inc.
He mentioned other developments in the San Diego area which this firm has
completed. He pointed out it is their objective to provide housing for middle
income families who do not desire or qualify for federally subsidized housing;
it will be developed with facilities needed to support this community, allowing
for schools and a limited degree of commercial development. It will include
an internal organization to handle maintenance of open space in so far as
possible. They recognize that this type of zoning is an exchange between the
community and the people who will occupy these homes. In this exchange the
land is pemlitted to accommodate more homes than a conventional subdivision
will permit; and the community asks in exchange that the project be planned
on a building-to-building relationship, and that the sub-community ~tself
contribute to its own support and not depend on the general community for all
of its service demands.
Mr. Rick reviewed the surrounding uses, including the single family homes to
the west, proposed Rehabilitation Center to the east, and the present refuse
disposal area which it is hoped will be developed into a regional park. He
pointed out that the site itself, in its configuration and topography, finds
better development through the Planned Community zone.
8/31/70
page 6
Regarding the commercial site, Mr. Rick commented that this request came out
of experience, since it is difficult to create a community that is attractive
to people if they have a long way to go to provide simple needs, such as food
store facilities. It is not desired to have a service station here and it was
pointed there are ample sites for service stations at the freeway interchanges
to the north and south of this development.
Mr. Rick also discussed renderings of the types of attached single family units
and of apartment house developments. He confirmed that the single family units
would be attached side to side, with probably 4 to 6, then a side yard break.
Member Macevicz raised a question as to the adequacy of the secondary schools
in the area to accommodate the increased enrollment resulting from this
development.
Mr. Lyle Butler, 1635 Rosecrans Street, San Diego, advised that he had talked
to the Sweetwater High School District and they indicated they could adequately
take care of the enrollment from this development. They are in the process of
building a high school to the south and they will be building a junior high
to the north of this site. The only people who wanted a school site within
this development was the elementary district.
There being no further comment, either for or against, the public hearing was
declared closed.
MSUC (Adams-Chandler) Approval of concept of development proposed for property
north of Otay Valley Road, south of Orange Avenue extension, under P-C zone,
with directions to staff to present resolution containing conditions of develop-
ment for Commission consideration at meeting of September 14, 1970.
PREZONING (Continued) - 4700 block Otay Valley Road, 600' east of Oleander, from
A-3(8) to "I" zone ~General Industriall - Jimmie Shinohara
Director of Planning Warren pointed out the location covered by the application
of Mr. Shinohara and approximately 16 acres between Princess Manor and the
Shinohara property, which the staff included for consideration of prezoning
inasmuch as annexation would involve both properties.
The original application requested "I" General Industrial zoning but a letter
received from the applicant on August 28 indicated he would accept Limited
Industrial zoning on the southern portion of the property, with some commercial
at the southwest corner, and R-3 on the northerly portion of the property.
Mr. Warren reviewed the adjacent land use, mostly agricultural, but including
the Omar rendering plant further to the east and a salvage yard; also the
requirement for an access road across this property to serve the proposed
Brandywine development previously discussed. He stressed the desirability
of Limited Industrial zoning rather than General Industrial due to the more
restrictive development standards which would be more compatible with residen-
tial use. He indicated a topographic change between the area recommended for
Limited Industrial and that recommended for residential. He did not feel
there is a need for additional commercial zoning on this property due to
commercial zoning granted by the County in the vicinity of the future freeway.
8/31/70
page 7
The continued public hearing was declared opened.
Mr. Virgil Clapp, 1199 Broadway, Chula Vista, representing the applicant, pointed
out that Mr. Shinohara has been requested to work out with the developers to
the north a street through his property. He is willing to discuss this and
come up with something reasonable. He is opposed to R-1 zoning adjacent to the
Omar rendering plant; and is requesting C-2 zoning on Otay Valley Road to
accommodate a service station. He stated that if the Commission seriously
considers approving a lesser zoning than that requested they would request
a delay until they see what the overall planned zoning is for the 160 acres
to the north.
Mr. Oscar David Cruz, 308 East J Street, reported that he and his brother own
the property adjacent to Mr. Shinohara's on Otay Valley Road which is being
proposed for prezoning, and they do not think it is good for them to accept
Limited Industrial zoning there. He expressed the belief that there should be
a buffer zone between single family dwellings and industrial zone. They would
accept R-2 or R-3 zoning to serve as the buffer zone.
Mrs. Danny Palm, 1660 Oleander Avenue, asked what Limited Industrial zoning
would include--what type of uses.
Mr. Warren advised that the Limited Industrial zone permits quite an exten-
sive list of uses, but they are subject to certain performance standards
that would eliminate the possibility of any emission of odors, smoke or noise.
Me then listed some of the permitted uses.
Mrs. Palm commented that she would favor a buffer zone adjacent to the homes on
Oleander Avenue to protect the single family units from the industrial uses.
Mr. R. H. Peterson, 1661 Oleander Avenue, remarked that he understands if the
City is to annex there must be some contiguous land, and asked if that is why
Mr. Cruz' land was considered for prezoning. He asked if Mr. Cruz could object
to having his land prezoned.
Mr. Warren pointed out that it would be difficult to annex Mr. Cruz' property
if he didn't favor it. It would be possible to go around it, but it would
seem desirable to face the problems of land use now as one unit, and the City
Council could prezone it all whether or not it ever came into the City.
Chairman Pro Tem Stewart elaborated that prezoning has no legal standing unless
application is made to annex it to the City. It merely indicates that it is
the best land use as determined by the public hearing.
Member Hillson commented that it would be a rather abrupt departure from past
practices if they were to put R-1 next to Industrial area. He felt a buffer
zone should be put in between the two.
Member Macevicz pointed out that multi-family development of the Brandywine
project borders the R-1 proposed by the staff on this property.
Mr. Warren agreed that some form of higher density zone might be in order if
some kind of plans for the development were presented.
MSUC (Chandler-Macevicz) Recommend that the question of p~ezgning for 4700.
block of Otay Valley Road be referred to the staff for res~uoy, and a repor~
and recommendation be presented to the Commission on September 28, 1970.
8/31/70
page 8
Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman
MS (Macevicz-Chandler) Nomination of Mr. Les Rice to serve as Chairman of
the Planning Commission.
MS (Adams-Chandler) Nominations be closed.
Mr. Les Rice was elected by unanimous ballot to serve as Chairman until
July l, 1971.
MS (Adams-Chandler) Nomination of Mr. Stewart for Vice Chairman.
MS (Macevicz-Chandler) Nominations be closed.
Mr. Kyle Stewart was elected by unanimous ballot serve as Vice Chairman until
July 1, 1971.
Discussion of Civic Center signing
Mr. Warren referred to a memo sent to the Commission in which he considered
the need for coordination of a sign program in the Civic Center area. While
the signs presently used may not be considered obnoxious, each one is different
and seem to be designed to suit the need of whoever requested it. The Planning
Department recently received a request for approval of signs to direct people
to the court building. He asked for an indication from the Planning Commission
as to whether they feel there is a genuine need for coordination of signs, and
if so, there should be some recommendation to the City Council so the architect
can be advised.
MSUC (Adams-Chandler) Recommendation to the City Council that the architect
work out a suitable sign program for the Civic Center complex.
Discussion of proposed spheres of influence - L.A.F.C.
Director of Planning Warren brought to the Commission's attention a copy of a
memo from Supervisor Jack Walsh to the Board of Supervisors in which he
suggests "that the 'spheres of influence' of expanding cities with adopted
plans be designated special zones within which we would adopt planning require-
ments to harmonize with those of the adjacent city." Mr. Warren indicated that
Chula Vista has been preaching this for years and it is amazing that it has not
been accomplished. He suggested that the City Council be requested to send a
resolution to the Board of Supervisors supporting Mr. Walsh's proposal.
MSUC (Chandler-Macevicz) The City Council be requested to send a resolution to
the Board of Supervisors supporting Supervisor Walsh's proposal for urban
spheres of influence.
8/31/70
page 9
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Planning Director Warren commented on the receipt of a notice of a symposium
sponsored by Citizens' Co-Ordinate Century 3, to be held Wednesday,
September 9, from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m., at the Grant Hotel in downtown San Diego.
The cost of $3.25 includes lunch and re§istration. He advised there are
funds in the Commission budget to cover this meeting of any Commissioners are
interested. Members Stewart and Adams indicated they would be interested in
attending this meeting.
Chairman Pro Tem Stewart noted the receipt of an invitation for a luncheon on
Wednesday, September 2, at Reuben's restaurant. Each member received a similar
invitation.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Member Macevicz reported that some residents to the north of the new police
station development indicated the construction has created a "Fort Chula Vista"
and it does not show what the plan originally proposed for Guava Street
looking south. The cement wall or block wall is directly on the sidewalk with
notches in the wall for just three trees. All they can see is a big wall
against the covered walkway and they ask why this was not left at a lower
height so they could see the landscaping of the area. The people immediately
to the north of the area are very unhappy with the results of what has been
produced there.
Mr. Warren reported that one of the problems was the question of space. The
high wall was necessary to separate the function of the police facility from
the central plaza of the Civic Center. He commented that the Police seemed
to be obsessed with the desire for security on the whole project. He expressed
the hope that the final project will look better from the street than it
appears to now.
ADJOURNMENT
MSUC (Macevicz-James) The meeting be adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Helen S. Mapes, Acting Se~retary