Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1970/04/06 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA April 6, 1970 The regular meeting of the City Planning Commission was held on the above date in the Council Chamber, Civic Center, 276 Guava Avenue, beginning at 7 p.m. with the following members present: Rice, Stewart, Adams, Chandler, Macevicz, James, and Hillson. Also present: Associate Planner Manganelli, Associate Planner Lee, City Attorney Lindberg, and Director of Building and Housing Grady. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Macevicz-Adams) Minutes of the meeting of March 23, 1970, be approved as mailed. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING (Continued) - Lots 7-10 of Palm Gardens Subdivision on Via de Laurencia (H Street Extension - 0 block) R-E to R-l-lO and change of setback from 25' to 20' - Commission initiated Associate Planner Manganelli pointed out on a plat the location of the lots involved in this action and reminded the Commission this hearing was continued from the meeting of March 23, 1970, at the request of an attorney representing property owners in the area who are protesting the action. Mr. Manganelli commented that this problem came about as a result of the City's acquisition of this property for the ultimate extension of H Street. The rear 80 feet of these lots has been set aside for street right-of-way which reduced the lots to less than 13,000 sq. ft. They were formerly zoned R-l-B-20 and with the adoption of the new Zoning Ordinance they were changed to R-E. Lots developed in the R-E zone are required to observe a 25' front yard and 40' rear yard. Since the lot size has been reduced, and deed restrictions on the property require that a certain size home be built, it has become difficult to develop the lots under these conditions. Mr. Manganelli pointed out that the adjacent lots in the City are zoned R-l-lO and R-1 (7,000 sq. ft.) while the County area is zoned R-l, minimum lot size 10,000 sq. ft. Mr. Manganelli reviewed the staff's findings for approval of this zone change. Mr. Manganelli reported the receipt of a petition of protest containing 26 signatures representing 19 properties, also the receipt of two letters protesting the reduction in the size of lots. City Attorney Lindberg commented that the Planning Department has clearly outlined the cause of the reduced lot size, but the City recognizes these are legal building lots which can be built u~on and the Department is trying to avoid the necessity of applying for variances which would have to be granted, because under the existing conditions, they would not be buildable lots. -2- 4/6/70 Chairman Rice declared the public hearing reopened and asked if the attorney representing property owners wished to speak. Attorney James Edmunds addressed the Commission pointing out the type of development that exists in the area--this being one of several areas where there are really nice homes. The residents desire to have such zoning that that type of development will continue there. He pointed out that under R-E zoning and observing the required setbacks, it would leave a building pad area of 55' x 90' which would be ample. He stated that the restriction they are most concerned about retaining is the requirement that structures be 15' from the sidelines of any lot; under R-l-lO zoning this would not have to be maintained. Mr. Durant, 1163 Alpine Avenue, advised that he has purchased Lot 9 which is included in this consideration for rezoning. He has talked to some of the residents in the area and felt their concern is that people will come in and build small homes. He wished to assure them his will not be a small home; he has designs for a dwelling that will be 3200 to 3400 square feet in area. His plans observe a 22' setback from the front property line, the rear would be approximately 45 to 46 feet. One side yard would be 25', and as this is a pie-shaped lot, the front corner at the other side would be 8' and the rear corner 30'. There being no further comment, either for or against, the public hearing was declared closed. Member Hillson asked if this rezoning is accomplished is there anything that would prohibit a person from building a small-sized house on the lot. Chairman Rice pointed out that the reduction in required setbacks would increase the amount of the lot that can be developed. If the Commission rules favorably on this application it would allow for larger homes on the sites. Member Stewart asked the difference in side yard requirements in the R-E zone and the R-l-lO. Mr. Manganelli advised the R-E zone requires a total of 25' for both side yards and the R-l-lO a total of 18'. Member Stewart pointed out that the size of these lots was diminished through no fault of the property owner, it was in the public interest to extend H Street, and he felt the proposed change is good zoning practice. Member Chandler reiterated that this change would give the property owner more square footage on the lot with which to meet the 2,000 square foot building size stipulated in the deed restrictions. MSUC (Adams-Hillson) Resolution of the City Planning Commission Recommending RESOLUTION NO. PCZ-70-1 to the City Council the Change of Zone for Lots 7-10 of Palm Gardens Subdivision on Via de Laurencia from R-E to R-l-lO and change of front setback from 25' to to 20'. -3- 4/6/70 Findings in support of this determination are as follows: a. The setback requirements of the R-E zone would severely restrict the development potential of these lots. b. The retention of the R-E zone would result in lots which were non-conforming in area. c. The City parcels to the north and east are zoned R-l-lO while the parcels to the south are zoned R-1 (7,000 sq. ft. lots). d. The 20' setback would be in conformance with R-l-lO zoning requirements. PUBLIC HEARING - PREZONING AND REZONING - 1411 and 1425 Third Avenue plus 12 parcels east of Third Avenue fronting on quintard Street ah~ Third Avenue - Prezonin~ from C-2 and R-2-A to C-T and R-~ and Rezonin~ from R-3 to C-T - SetbaCks requested: lO' on comme~c~all~ zoned land and 15' on R-3 zone - Jennin~s and Mar~ Lou Hom and Commission initiated Associate Planner Manganelli pointed out on a plat the area requested by the applicant fronting on Third Avenue within the City to be rezoned from R-3 to C-T, also adjacent property in the County to be prezoned from C-2 to C-T, with the remainder of the L-shaped property lying to the east and with frontage on Quintard to be prezoned from County R-2-A to R-3. In considering this the staff felt the remainder of the property lying between Quintard Street and the applicant's property should be included at the same time. Therefore, they advertised for hearing, three lots fronting on Third Avenue plus one fronting on Quintard and improved with a dental office, to be prezoned C-T, with the remaining 5 lots on Quintard prezoned to R-3. Mr. Manganelli then pointed out the surrounding zoning and land use which includes the Fedmart-Safeway Shopping Center and the J L J apartment complex, a bike shop, plumbing shop, duplex and single family dwellings. Mr. Manganelli related that in analyzing this proposal it was noted that the property fronting on Third Avenue is already zoned commercial in the County and will probably be developed for commercial use either in or out of the City. The staff felt that by granting C-T zoning the development would at least meet City standards which it would not if it were developed in the County. The staff found no objection to the applicant's request for R-3 zoning for the large L-shaped parcel; it is easily developable and in complete accordance with the General Plan. Concerning the 5 small parcels fronting on Quintard, there are two problems: three of the lots are very narrow and the rest of the area is in a hole which makes it difficult to develop. It is recommended that these parcels be prezoned R-3 to become effective upon the filing of precise plans for their development. Mr. Manganelli pointed out that prezoning would become effective only upon annexation to the City. -4- 4/6/70 This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Jennings Hom, applicant, requested that the Commission approve their application for rezonin§ and prezoning as submitted so they can develop the property in conformance with the rest of the property on Third Avenue. David Liedike, owner of the property at 269 Quintard, read a letter bearing his signature and that of David Wilson and Mrs. Mildred Robnett, who also own property being considered for prezoning. The letter expressed opposition to R-3 zoning for the following reasons: 1. Two parcels are not adaptable for R-3 zoning as the property lies below the level of the sewage pipelines. 2. Additional traffic burden on Quintard should said property be zoned R-3. 3. The increased load being added within the sphere of Castle Park Jr. and Castle Park Sr. High Schools of surrounding property at present will only add to the problem should additioinal R-3 zoning be granted. 4. The narrowness of each individual parcel of land being proposed will tend to "tenamentize" said property leading to an undesirable atmosphere. The letter further requested that all property lying east of Third Avenue on Quintard to Mr. Hom's Quintard parcel be placed under commercial zoning. In this manner the overall schematic will show more conformity within this locale, to wit: Quintard property ending at the easterly property line of Fed Mart (on the north side) shall be commercial on north and south sides. All property on the easterly side of Fed Mart property line on the north and south side of Quintard shall be R-3. Member Stewart asked the staff to delineate between County R-2-A zoning and City R-3. Mr. Manganelli advised that County R-2-A zoning permits one duplex dwelling on a 6,000 sq. ft. lot; the City R-3 permits one multiple family unit for each 1350 sq. ft. of net land area. Following a question raised by Member Chandler, Mr. Liedike confirmed that he felt C-T zoning should extend for the same distance from Third Avenue on both sides of Quintard. Mr. Liedike also stated that he bought the property on the south side of Quintard which was below the street level with the intention of developing it comercially. He could not develop it residentially even with R-2 zoning because of the sewer problem. The amount of fill required would be prohibitive. Mr. Manganelli presented a letter from O. E. Underwood who also requested prezoning to commercial because it would be infeasible to develop for other than co~ercial use. -5- 4/6/70 Mr. Manganelli pointed out that County commercial zoning along these arterials is usually 200 feet standard depth regardless of the configuration of the property. There being no further comments, either for or against, the public hearing was declared closed. Member Adams suggested that if a form of commercial zoning is considered for this property it should be C-O to permit professional offices. He added that he felt there is no great need for additional commercial zoning. Member Stewart commented that if the Commission considers going to C-T back to the point indicated, no action could be taken on that because it has not been advertised in that manner. He felt action should be postponed until the staff can do a study of the area based on the testimony presented at this hearing. Chairman Rice felt that such a study should also include the area of Third Avenue and Orange Avenue. City Attorney Lindberg recognized the desirability of appropriate zoning for property fronting on Third Avenue but questioned whether the L.A.F.C. would take favorable action on annexing only the frontage property and leave an island behind it. The island area would also have to be prezoned and the whole area should be taken into consideration in this zoning action. In view of this, Member Stewart recommended postponing action pending further study and recommendation by the staff. Mr. Manganelli felt this would possibly take about 90 days, if it included the entire area in the vicinity of quintard, Third and Orange. Chairman Rice asked what effect this would have on the applicant's plans. Art Schuler, real estate broker, 549 Third Avenue, speaking for the applicant stated it would put a terrific strain on their program as they have development plans and are anxious to proceed with them. Member Stewart asked if a study and recommendation concerning only Quintard and Third could be accomplished at an earlier date. Mr. Manganelli felt this could be done in two to three weeks since much of the study was accomplished because of this proposal. MSUC (Stewart-Chandler) Action be postponed to the meeting of May 18 and the hearing readvertised if necessary. PUBLIC HEARING - PREZONING - Jaehn's Orange Avenue Annexation - 5 acres located at th~ easterly terminus Of Orange Avenue south of Loma Verde Park - to R-1 - Commission initiated Associate Planner Manganelli pointed out the location of approximately 5 acres of vacant County zoned A-l-8 (agricultural) land located at the easterly -6- 4/6/70 terminus of Orange Avenue south of Loma Verde Park site. A tentative map for the development of a 15-lot single family subdivision has been submitted and approved by the Planning Commission. A petition for annexation to the City of Chula Vista will be considered by L.A.F.C. on Tuesday, April 7. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened, but as there was no comment, either for or against, the public hearing was declared closed. MSUC (Chandler-Adams) Resolution of the City Planning Commission recommending RESOLUTION NO. PCZ-70-K to the City Council the prezoning for 5 acres located at the easterly terminus of Orange Avenue, south of Loma Verde Park site, to R-1 Findings in support are: a. The R-1 zone conforms to the General Plan designation for this area. b. The uses approved for the property are permitted in the R-1 zone. PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 1179 Frontage Road - Construction and repair of racing cars - C-T zone - R. Dickson Associate Planner Lee pointed out the location of this request north of Palomar Street and east of Montgomery Freeway. There is an existing paved easement across the back of the property leading from Walnut Avenue to a restaurant and motel. The request is for permission to operate a garage to repair racing cars and dune buggies in an existing building; the Commission must determine its compatibility with existing uses. Mr. Lee enumerated the conditions which the staff recommends if this request is approved. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Robert Dickson, applicant, in answer to a question by Member James, advised that the hours of work would be from about 8:00 in the morning to about 10:00 p.m., with all work to be done inside the building. He further stated he was in agreement with the conditions suggested by the staff. Member Hillson asked if anything would be stored outside. Mr. Dickson assured the Commission there would not be outside storage. Mr. Frank Ballistrieri, co-owner of the restaurant at 1170 East Frontage Road, expressed his support for the approval of this request adding that he is familiar with the equipment they will be using and is satisfied there is no noise problem. -7- 4/6/70 Mr. Everett Heath, owner of Palomar Inn Motel, 1169 Frontage Road, expressed opposition based on his belief that if they are going to test engines there will be noise. Mr. Francis Ryan, 781 Palomar Street, commented that he is not in favor of bringing industrial uses into residential areas where it has not been zoned. He complained of the hazard and noise created by the former occupants of this property. Mr. Sidney Knowles, ll71 Walnut, expressed his belief that these are the same people that have been there all the time. The cars and trucks he sees there now are the same ones he has seen for several years and the noise is the worst feature. He also complained about water running down Walnut Avenue which is not paved, and he felt that no good purpose could be served by permitting this type of operation in the community. Member Macevicz asked the applicant if the engines he builds will be installed in cars and given a road test around the building. Mr. Dickson asserted they will not; the type of cars he works on do not run on the streets, they are too low. The engines will be run in the building only. Mr. Chesley Manock, ll90 Trenton Avenue, stated that he owns an apartment building in the area and lives in the area. He felt this use would not be compatible with any use in the area except the two service stations. Further- more the noise from high compression engines would be objectionable and the Commission should also check on air pollution as well as noise violation. Speaking as to compatibility, Member Macevicz commented that if the applicant gets out and cleans around the building it will be a 100 per cent improvement in that area. Mr. Robert Mayer, 736 Church Avenue, pointed out that everybody is presuming there is going to be a zone change here, whereas this is a C-T zone, which permits such use. He further stated they have a dynamometer with facilities for exhaust emission. He felt Mr. Dickson's use is compatible here because it isn't close to any residential buildings. There being no further comment, either for or against, the public hearing was closed. Member Stewart questioned the applicant about the standards of the noise suppression equipment that would be installed. Mr. Dickson advised that he would build the unit according to specifications of one used in Dan Gurney's shop in Costa Mesa; from the outside it sounds like a fan on top of the building. He further stated the only engines they will run will be Volkswagons, there will not be any big engines tested. The "Indy" cars come to the shop for body repair only and are sent back when completed. Member Stewart asked if Mr. Dickson would accept as a condition of the permit, a review by the Commission in six months to see if he is complying with noise suppression standards. Mr. Dickson consented to this. -8- 4/6/70 Chairman Rice asked if he would be agreeable to a stipulation that after 6 o'clock at night the doors would remain closed and the only sound that would be heard would be from the fam. Mr. Dickson agreed. Member Hillson commented that he has seen an operation like this in the east. It was in a residential area and did not create any undue disturbance. Associate Planner Lee pointed out that this property was annexed to the City in 1960 and carried C-2 Heavy Commercial zoning until July of last year, and under that zoning this use was allowed without any conditions. MSUC (Macevicz-James) Approval of a conditional use permit for the construc- RESOLUTION NO. PCC-70-8 tion and repair of racing cars and dune buggies at 1179 Frontage Road, subject to the following conditions: 1. Noise suppression equipment shall be installed in the building which will assure compliance with performance standards relating to noise as covered by the Zoning Ordinance Section 33.703. 2. All testing shall be performed within the enclosed garage and the doors will remain closed after 6 p.m.; hours of operation shall be limited to 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. 3. Offstreet parking shall be provided and shall accommodate at least six cars. The parking layout shall be approved by the Planning Department before issuance of the Zoning Permit and the area is to be paved and striped in accordance with the code. 4. The westerly driveway shall be paved from the concrete slab to the existing access paving. 5. All debris shall be removed from the site. 6. All obsolete and unauthorized freestanding signs shall be removed from the site, together with miscellaneous poles and angle iron extending above the parapet. 7. This conditional use permit shall be granted for a period of three years, subject to review by the Planning Commission in six months to assure compliance with all conditions. At the end of three years the request shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission for any significant changes in the area that may alter the requirements for continuance or require other conditions to be met on the site to insure compatibility with the adjacent area. Findings for approval 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 proposed use is in general keeping with the uses in the neighborhood and would be located within an existing building. -9- 4/6/70 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. In view of the conditions required of the applicant, the proposed use would not be detrimental. c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions speci- fied in the Code for such use. The 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 proposes this area for industrial use. PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE - 475 H Street - Request permission to erect two entrance signs for the Shoppin9 center parking lot - The Bi~ Apple Associate Planner Lee recalled that the Commission has previously approved signs totalling 222 sq. ft. for this shopping center. They are now requesting two directional signs to be placed at the main entrance on H Street and on Fifth Avenue. In the draft for the sign ordinance for this zone, provisions is made for 10 sq. ft. directional signs at the discretion of the staff. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Cliff Burford, representing the applicant, advised that the purpose for these directional signs is for public convenience. There has been some confusion by the public in entering the parking lot and it is their hope this will resolve it. The Commission discussed the condition of completing the landscaping to City standards prior to issuing permit for installation of these signs. There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed. Chairman Rice expressed the hope these entrance signs will solve the parking problems of that lot; he finds the parking layout extremely poor. Member Chandler commented that it seems like they created their own problem at this center, but other lots can have directional signs, and since the proposed location of these signs is at the main entrance off of H Street and off of Fifth Avenue, it may help. Member Hillson remarked that there are so many signs on the north side of H Street that it is hard to find what you are looking for. -lO- 4/6/70 MSC (Chandler-James) Approval of variance for permission to erect two RESOLUTION NO. PCV-70-7 entrance signs at the Big Apple shopping center, subject to the following conditions: All landscaping on the site under the jurisdiction of the Big Apple shall be brought into conformance with the landscaping standards for the City of Chula Vista prior to the issuance of a building permit for installation of said signs. Findings are as follows: a. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the owner exists. The proposed directional signs will be placed at the entrances to the shopping center, thus facilitating circulation to and from the parking areas. The proposed draft of the new sign ordinance provides for directional signs at the discretion of the Zoning Administrator. b. That this w~riance is necessary For the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same zone and in the vicinity of the subject property. Other properties in the immediate vicinity have similar directional signs at entrances and exits. c. That the authorizing of this variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and will not materially impair the purposes of this ordinance or the public interest. This will not be a detriment to the area since the proposed signs will actually aid circulation in and out of the parking area. d. That the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the General Plan. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Members Chandler, James, Rice, Adams, Stewart NOES: Members Hillson, Macevicz ABSENT: None PUBLIC HEARING - Amendment to Zonin~ Ordinance - Industrial Zones - Commission initiated Associate Planner Lee advised that problems had arisen in changing from the old industrial zone classifications to those provided in the new Zoning Ordinance and it was determined by staff analysis that a third industrial zone was needed. A proposed draft of the new I-L Limited Industrial zone as well as revisions of the I-R Research Industrial and I General Industrial zones were sent to the Commission for review and have also been reviewed with the Chamber of Commerce Industrial Committee. Mr. Lee suggested that instead of reviewing the entire ordinances he would answer any questions the Commission may have. -ll- 4/6/7O Member Hillson pointed out a discrepancy in Section D of the I-R zone which indicates 35' as the height of a 3~ story building. It was directed that this be corrected to 45'. City Attorney Lindberg advised that if the new I-L zone is approved by the Commission'their recommendation to the Council should include that this is, in effect, a substitute for the existing I-R zone and all property presently zoned I-R be changed to I-L. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mrs. Richard Martin, owner of property at 3418 Edgemere, commented that she is very much in favor of this change, and that she had written a letter objecting to the change previously made from M-1 to I-R. There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Chandler-Macevicz) Recommend to the City Council the amendment to RESOLUTION NO. PCA-70-2 the Zoning Ordinance by adding a new section known as Limited Industrial, revising provisions of the I-R and I Sections, and reclassifying all property presently classified as I-R to I-L MSUC (Stewart-Adams) RESOLUTION NO. PCM-70-7 Resolution adopting a chart of permitted used in industrial zones Consideration of Home Occupation Permit - 173 J Street - Sale of health Equipment - Bill and Jan-Lou Services Associate Planner Lee enumerated the uses requested in this application as the retail sale of citizen band radio equipment, camping equipment, exercising equipment and sport clothing for camping and exercising. Staff investigation revealed that the retail sales would be mainly by appointment, however, the amount of on-site sale and the increased traffic to be generated by this operation leaves doubt in the staff's mind as to whether this can be classified as a home occupation. He requested that the applicant review the proposed occupation for the Commission. Mrs. Jan Lou Morton, 173 J Street, stated that the Mar V Lounger is a piece of exercising equipment and not gym equipment; it is used as an exerciser, for lounging, as a chair, or as a slant board. It is portable and can be folded up and taken in a car. She purchased her unit in October, 1968 from a wholesaler, and then worked for them on their referrals. This was not too satisfactory and she wished to get a business license to sell them on her own. She felt that demonstrations in her home would not cause excessive traffic and there would be only one or two people at a time. -12- 4/6/70 Member Macevicz expressed concern about the citizen band radio equipment and accessories, feeling this might cause more walk in type of traffic than the other equipment. Mrs. Morton advised this is not necessarily so as these units are installed in automobiles, trucks and camping equipment. Through membership in various organizations that use this type of equipment, contacts and sales are made through other members. Orders are taken and sent to the factory, with delivery made direct to the customer. The applicant can demonstrate the equipment but cannot install it, that is done by a radio service store. Mr. Lee reported that letters in protest of the granting of this home occupation have been received from Mr. and Mrs. Clarence Close, 178 King Street and from Dave Aldridge, 182 King Street, both located north of the subject property, pointing out that the establishment of retail sales outlet is imcompatible in a residential area. Member Macevicz remarked that he is not opposed to having secretarial service performed in the home, but is opposed to the applicant's branching out to the sale of gym equipment and radio equipment. Member Adams commented that a lot of these operations sound simple to start out but grow into more than is anticipated. Chairman Rice sympathized with the applicant in their desire to broaden their operation but advised that a home occupation is restricted to a use compatible in a residential area. Mr. Thomas Webb, 164 J Street, and Mr. Jack Osborn, 165 J Street, also expressed opposition to any lciense to make a retail shop out of a home. Member Macevicz expressed the opinion that the applicant should not be deprived of continuing her present secretarial service, but branching out into other fields that would bring additional traffic should be denied. MSUC (Adams-Macevicz) Denial of application for Home Occupation License for the sale of health equipment, citizen band radio equipment, and accessories. Request for extension of time on conditional use permit - Southeast corner of Fourth Avenue and Center Street - Convalescent Home - Care & Retirement Enterprises, Inc. Associate Planner Lee related that this request is for an extension of time on a conditional use permit granted in 1967 and extended in 1968 and 1969. The original intent for development was to utilize the existing foundation that was left when the old packing shed was removed. The Chief of the Building and Housing has been contacted to determine whether this foundation is a public hazard and should be removed. The applicant feels this should not be related to the conditional use permit. -13- 4/6/70 City Attorney Lindberg advised that if the City Council determines that the conditions as they exist there are dangerous and should be corrected, they can make such an order. He also brought up the question of parking and where it should be accommodated. Mr. Lee pointed out that in constructing a convalescent facility they would have to meet the parking requirements, and if certain property were not avail- able to them they would have to decrease the number of beds or alter their design. Chairman Rice expressed the opinion that conditions in this area have changed and are not the same as when an extension was granted last year. Member Hillson commented that if an extension is approved, a condition should be made that the area be cleaned up and made presentable. City Attorney Lindberg felt this could not be a condition for the extension of conditional use permit, but agreed the appearance of the lot should not be allowed to condinue as it is. He pointed out that the granting of an extension should not assume the continuing of an agreement with the City for parking. Mr. Gene York, President, Care & Retirement Enterprises, Inc., spoke with reference to the recommendation of the staff that the extension be subject to the removal of the existing foundations. Mr. York discussed this with the Planning staff, with the Chief of Building and Housing, and with the owner of the land, and he felt the problem has been substantially resolved. The owner has agreed to install a wire fence around three sides of the foundation--north, east and west--to prevent traffic from crossing the lot. Mr. York elaborated in detail the difficulties encountered in attempting to obtain financing for this project. He advised that if the extension is not granted they will lose the state permit issued for the operation of a convalescent facility. The rules for issuing such permits have been changed, and it would be extremely difficult to obtain a new permit. Chairman Rice reminded that the thing germain here is whether the use is appropriate and whether the extension should be granted. MSC (Stewart-Chandler) Approval of one year extension of time on the conditional use permit for construction of a convalescent hospital at the southeast corner of Fourth Avenue and Center Street. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Members Stewart, Chandler, Macevicz, Rice, James, Adams NOES: Member Hillson ABSENT: None -14- 4/6/70 Request for extension of time on Zenith Subdivision Tentative Map - Mahy Construction Co. Although the final map for this subdivision has been submitted, it has not been recorded, therefore, an extension of the tentative map has been requested for a one year period. MSUC (Stewart-Chandler) Approval of one year extension of time on tentative map for Zenith Subdivision. To be set for hearing - Street name changes - "I" Esplanade and "J" Esplanade to Manor Way~ and National Parkwa~ to Halse~ Street Requests have been made to the Planning Department for change of name of these streets. There are two addresses on I Esplanade, two on J Esplanade, and one address on National Parkway. MSUC (Chandler-Macevicz) Public hearing be set for April 27, 1970, to consider renaming "I" Esplanade and "J" Esplanade to either Manor Way or Manor Drive and National Parkway to Halsey Street. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Lee noted a letter received from William Nemour of Princess Park Estates, Inc., requesting reconsideration of the requirement for a wall at the boundary of Orange and Melrose Shopping Center site; however, Mr. Nemour advised that he could not be present at this meeting to discuss the request. The Commission directed the staff to notify Mr. Nemour that he would be welcome to speak under oral communications at any Planning Commission meeting. Chairman Rice read a letter from Donald G. Langdon, Chairman, Imperial Beach Planning Commission, suggesting that commissioners from Chula Vista, Coronado, National City, and the citizens' group from San Ysidro, meet to confer on matters of mutual concern and interest once or twice a year. The Commission concurred in supporting this suggestion and felt it might prove beneficial in matters concerning the development of the Bay front. Chairman Rice directed the staff to make a favorable reply to Mr. Langdon setting forth that this suggestion is in conformance wi th the wishes of this Commission and that Chula Vista Commissioners would be happy to meet with them at some convenient time to establish a format for these meetings. ADJOURNMENT MSUC (Hillson-James) The meeting be adjourned to the meeting of April 20, 1970. The meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Helen S. Mapes Acting Secretary