Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1970/01/05 MINUTES OF A REGULAR CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA January 5, 1970 The regular meeting of the City Planning Commission was held on the above date beginning at 7 p.m., in the Council Chamber, Civic Center, 276 Guava Avenue, with the following members present: Rice, Chandler, Macevicz, Adams, and Putnam. Absent: (with previous notification) Member Stewart. Also present: Director of Planning Warren, City Attorney Lindberg, and Assistant City Engineer Gesley. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Adams-Putnam) Minutes of the meeting of December 15, 1969 be approved as mai 1 ed. (Continued) - Action on prezonin~ request, for commercial zoning, for property along the north side of Orange Avenue, approxlmatel, 600 west of Melrose Avenue from A to C-C - Princess Park Estates, Inc. Director of Planning Warren explained that action on this item was continued from the meeting of December 15, 1969, so the staff could discuss further with the applicant two or three courses of action. At this last meeting, the Commission prezoned C-N a 1.14 acre sliver of property for the proposed shopping center and also recommended that the R-3 request be prezoned a combination of R-1 and R-3-G-S. The recommendation was based on the approval of a precise plan or a subdivision map showing the ultimate development of the property with leases; at that time, the property would then be prezoned either C-C or C-No After meeting with the applicant, a conclusion was reached that the C-N zoning was satisfactory, since their proposed uses can be accommodated with the C-N. The decision before the Commission is whether or not to recommend to the City Council that the property be prezoned C-C, as requested originally, or the C-N, which is the recommendation of the staff, and now agreeable with the developer. City Attorney Lindberg stated he is in the process of drafting the ordinance pertaining to this subject in which he will put into precise language the requested change to C-C and R-3 be prezoned R-1 providing for the eventual filing of a precise plan to be approved by the Commission--the property north of Orange Avenue be prezoned C-N and south of Orange to R-3-G-S; or that a subdivision map be filed based on the approval of a precise plan. The northern area be required for filing of a precise plan within 5 years, and the southern area within 2 years. Mr. Eugene Freeland, attorney representing the applicant, explained that their original request was for C-C zoning; however, they are satisfied with the C-N proposal. They are acceptable to the filing of a subdivision map, but are against the filing of a precise plan, since they feel the Commission has ample control over the development with built-in provisions in the C-N zone. Chairman Rice recounted the action at the last meeting (December 15, 1969) in which the Commission discussed a time limit--the five year limitation on the commercial request. -2- 1/5/70 City Attorney Lindberg explained that he added the alternative of the subdivi- sion map because the developers may wish to subdivide the property in the future, and sell off a portion of the land. The prezoning will be subject to the approval of a precise plan on a part or whole of the property. MSUC (Adams-Chandler) Resolution of the City Planning Commission Recommending RESOLUTION NO. 609 to the City Council the Prezoning of Property Along the North Side of Orange Avenue, Approximately 600' West of Melrose Avenue from A to R-1 and upon approval of a Precise Plan to C-N Findings are as follows: a. Additional commercial zoning is or may be needed to serve the needs of the increasing surrounding population. b. The technique proposed by the Planning Commission will promote the orderly development of the shopping center as the need occurs. (Continued) PUBLIC HEARING - Rezoning Propert~ at the northwest corner of Melrose Avenue and Orange Avenue from C-N to C-C - Princess Park Estates, Inc. Since this matter is directly related to the previous matter (prezoning of the property immediately to the west), City Attorney Lindberg stated that the Commission should only file this matter if the applicant concurs with this action. If not, the Commission could deny the request and the applicant would then have the right of appeal to City Council. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Director of Planning Warren noted the location of the property in question, and explained that following the matter of prezoning which will ultimately place the adjacent property in the C-N category the staff recommends, and the applicant has voiced his agreement, that this particular property remain in the C-N zone in order to be consistent. Eugene Freeland, attorney for the applicant, remarked that the Commission has found, by their earlier action, that the size of the parcel is amenable to a C-N zoning; therefore, they are now asking that the Commission deny their request for the C-C zoning. The applicant feels that the safeguards under the C-N zone is sufficient control over this development, both to the staff and community. There being no further comment, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Director of Planning Warren commented that the applicant has expressed his agree- ment with the C-N zoning--their only objection is to the condition of the precise plan. The Commission concurred that it would be logical to deny the request and give the applicant the right to appeal the decision. -3- 1/5/70 MSUC (Chandler-Putnam) Denial of the rezoning request from C-N to C-C for that property at the northwest corner of Melrose and Orange Avenues since the zoning would be inconsistent with that proposed for prezoning to the west, and the applicant has stated hisagreement to accept the C-N zoning as it exists. The applicant was advised of his right to appeal this decision to the City Council within l0 days. (Continued) - Action on request for variance to create two parcels without required street frontage at 753 First Avenue - Mrs. N. Butterfield Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the property in question, the adjacent land use and zoning. He explained that the public hearing on this matter was closed at the last meeting (December 15, 1969) and action on the item was continued to this meeting. The original proposal was to divide the parcel into three lots, two to be served by an easement. Discussion ensued at the last meeting as to the extent of the improvements to the easement--either the applicant should provide them or the City at a subsequent time. The applicant has now revised his plans and is proposing a 15' easement just north of the southern property line (marked parcel "C" on the plat) and just east of the westerly property line (parcel "A"). This proposal is acceptable to the staff with the conditions that the easement be improved to City standards; all construc- tion be subject to site plan and architectural approval and the requirement to provide two on-site guest parking spaces on each lot. Mr. Howard Gesley, Assistant City Engineer, noting the angle of the corner, stated this would not be a good way to turn this corner, and it would not be approved by the Engineering Division. Mr. Butterfield, 753 First Avenue, representing his mother, stated he discussed this with Mr. Manganelli of the Planning Department, and he indicated that he would be putting in the proper radius for this turn. He would agree to having this imposed as a condition. Director Warren declared he would submit this as a condition of approval. MSUC (Putnam-Macevicz) Approval of the variance request subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed easement shall be just north of the southern property line of parcel "C" and just east of the westerly property line of parcel "A" with a radius on the corner as approved by the City Engineer. 2. The easement shall be improved to City standards. 3. A minimum of two improved on-site guest parking spaces shall be provided with each dwelling unit when constructed. These spaces shall be in addition to the two-car garage requirement. 4. All construction shall be subject to site plan and architectural approval. -4- 1/5/70 Findings be as follows: a. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the owner exists. Subdivision of land in the area, and purchase of land by the City has created an area that cannot be served by a dedicated street. 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. There are several other properties in the area that front only on easements. 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. No adjacent properties will be affected. d. That the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the General Plan. The General Plan is not affected. PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit - 340 Fourth Avenue - Use of lot for additional parkin~ for~edical center in R-3 zone - Medpar Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the property in question as 55' x 200' vacant parcel south of the Doctor's Park. A drainage channel which runs south to the west separates this proposal from the remaining vacant property in the area. There is proposed a 15' setback adjacent to Fourth Avenue, which will be landscaped. At the rear of the setback a 6' fence is proposed and the parking will be to the rear of this fence. The applicant has stated that through the use of the Doctorrs Park, they find that the parking is inadequate, and have proposed this additional parking which they state will be used exclusively by their employees. The staff deems this proposal logical and necessary and recom- mends approval with the conditions that the area be fil~ed with concrete; the parking layout be approved by the staff; the fence either be constructed on the 20' setback or a variance be obtained to allow it on the 15' setback. Member Putnam commented that the area has already been black-topped and questioned how this was allowed. He felt a penalty should be imposed on these people who go ahead with their developments without benefit of Commission approval. The Commission discussed generally the traffic problem generated as a result of this park. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Fred Michaud, Manager of the Chula Vista Doctors' Park, stated that they have found many problems in the development of this park. One problem was staff parking. He explained that the ingress and egress will be off the southerly driveway; it will be used exclusively by the staff; 19 employees have compact Cars; they had a two-tier effect on this lot, and they used the fill that was -5- 1/5/70 there; all they did was follow the existing contour of the ditch. Director Warren questioned whether the legal description of the property was adequate to incorporate the 90° angle parking, as proposed by the applicant. The Commission questioned the number of spaces which the applicant states he will provide--50--and the staff's comments that the lot could only provide 26 spaces. Director Warren commented that the applicant is not required to provide additional parking spaces; he is doing this on his own. The only question is if this lot is adequate to accommodate what he desires to do. Mr. Michaud indicated that he sees the reasoning for adhering to City standards for paving a lot to be used by the general public; however, this lot is designed primarily to keep their employees out of their public parking lots. Director Warren explained to Mr. Michaud that whatever is done on this property has to be done according to City standards. He asked for a continuance of two weeks on this matter in order to resolve these problems. Mr. Macevicz asked how the general public would be kept out of this parking lot. Mr. Michaud answered that they have 68 employees and do not anticipate any unused spaces in this lot. Mr. Warren explained that the staff agrees to the applicant's proposal to use this property for a parking lot; however, there seems to be an error in dimensions. Mr. Michaud reported that the lot will be used for parking for a period of two years; the property is too valuable to be used indefinitely as a parking lot. MSUC (Chandler-Macevicz) Continue the public hearing on this matter to the meeting of January 19, 1970, and the staff be directed to meet with the applicant to resolve the problems raised during the testimony. PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit - 500 block of Broadway - Recreational operation in C-T zone - San Diego Funmaster, Inc. Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the property in question, the adjacent land use and zoning. The operation involves a facility called "Sock-A-Tube" to be located on the vacant lot in the 500 block of Broadway across from the shopping center. Mr. Warren passed around a brochure to the Commission describing this type of operation. He added that the staff recognizes that such uses have a function and should be permitted in some areas in the City; however, this is an inappropriate location because of adjacent uses. The appli- cant has indicated that the use would be a temporary one, for a period of six months. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. -6- 1/5/70 Mr. Clarence Hulse, 180 E. Naples Street, representing San Diego Funmasters, explained the operation of this facility. They have been looking for a location in Chula Vista and feel this particular location would be compatible for many reasons: it is a vacant lot with area around it sufficient for their parking needs; they will landscape the lot to departmental specifications; the operation is well supervised; there is a lack of this type of facility in the City; it will bring in more business to the shopping center; it will not detract from the sur- rounding area; it is quite colorful; there will be 15 units generally used by the 8 to 17 age group; with the passing traffic, the n~se factor will not be audible. Mr. Tom Huddleston, Manager of the Southern California First National Bank north of this proposed operation, and also a member of the Broadway Association, stated he is opposed to this from the bank's standpoint. They are already incurring problems with the parking because of the restaurant to the south--they are using the bank's parking facilities, especially on Saturday nights. There will be a certain amount of noise, and since this operation will be adjacent to their bank teller's window, there will be a problem. This type of operation is not the best use of land in a downtown area; it would have a detrimental effect. Mr. George Holten, owner of a barber shop in the area, and also a member of the Broadway Association, stated they oppose this use as they feel it is not the proper place for this type of operation. Mr. Merrick, associated wi th Creaser and Warwick, realtors handling this trans- action, related some problems they have had in leasing this lot. They are now working with the Sheraton Inn, which hopes to start construction within 9 months to one year. He discussed the parking for the restaurant to the south and stated that they pay a fee for acquisition of parking rights for the Broadway frontage adjacent to their business to the north, and for the property to the south. Chairman Rice commented that it was inconceivable to him that the Commission can talk about architectural control in the shopping center and then consider something like this to the west. This location is no place for this type of operation. MSUC (Adams-Chandler) Request be denied on the basis that it would not be compatible with the adjacent uses. The applicant was advised of his right to appeal this decision to the City Council within 10 days. (Continued) PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit - 277 Broadway - Request for used clothing, furniture, and appliance store National S~ciety of the Volunteers of America Director of Planning Warren advised the Commission that the applicant has requested that the application be withdrawn. ~SUC (Chandler-Macevicz) Application be filed. -7- 1/5/70 ~Cpntinued) - Request for permission to operate truck terminal in the Sweetwater Valley Industrial Park - Trousdale Street - A Martin Director of Planning Warren reviewed this matter stating the staff discussed the operation with the applicant and it was determined that the use would be one allowed in the "I" zone, and prohibited in the "I-R" zone, which zoning presently exists on the property. Since the Commission can no longer consider a use variance, the staff informed the applicant that the property must be rezoned to accommodate this proposed use. Mr. Warren explained that the M-2 zone was changed to the "I" zone, which works out very well; however, they have discovered that the "I-R" zone is no substitute for the M-1 zone. The characteristics of the "I-R" zone are so different that some difficulty is expected on this when it comes to changing the zoning map. The staff will be recommeding a revision on this to the Commission. Mr. Arnold Martin, realtor, San Diego, stated that the property is presently owned by Home Federal Savings & Loan, and the freeway will in no way affect the property. Everything north of Trousdale STreet will be bypassed by the channel. He stated there is no place in Chula Vista for a truck terminal operation, which indicates the need for a zone study. He stated he investigated every possible site especially west of the freeway, and nothing is available. City Attorney Lindberg discussed his experience with this type of operation on "L" Street and the problems encountered here. It is difficult to find an appropriate place for this type of operation. It is not in the category of industrial research; it is a warehouse operation and must find a place between our two existing zones. As discussed with the Planning Director, under the "I-R" section of the ordinance, No. 4: "any other research or light manufac- turing use determined by the Commission to be of the same general character as the above permitted uses," this could allow some flexibility under the existing zone to allow this type of use. Nevertheless, in the long run, it is recommended that some other type of zoning be taken into consideration. This is a vital operation and must be accommodated in this City. Mr. Martin suggested the Sweetwater Industrial area be split at Trousdale Street: everything south to the trailer park would be I-R zone, and that area north of this street which abuts the freeway and flood channel be the area in which this use would be allowed. He added there should be no objection in this particular location, provided the operation is kept at a reasonable noise level. Mr. Martin agreed that this could be a third in-between industrial zone. Chairman Rice directed the staff to make a study of this problem at the earliest possible date in order to get some solution to this problem. The Commission suggests that perhaps a third zone would be the best possible solution. No action was taken on the request. Request for approval of si~n - Fifth Avenue and H Street (Bi~ Apple Shopping Center) - Farrell's Ice Cream Director of Planning Warren submitted a location map noting the property in question and the location of the proposed business. The building will be -8- 1/5/70 - approximately 300' north of H Street, west of the Big Apple Discount Store. It is in the supplemental "D" zone, which requires staff approval for architecture of all the buildings; however, because the Commission approved the architecture of all the other buildings in this center, the staff felt this request should be referred to them also. Mr. Warren then passed around a colored photograph of the proposed building noting the architecture as frontier-western done in stucco and wood. Since there has been no attempt by the Commission to adhere to any particular architectural theme in this center, the staff finds this building interesting and attractive, and are recommending approval of the architecture of the building but with no finding of architectural compatibility. Director Warren then discussed the request for a freestanding sign which they feel is needed because of the location of this business. The only other free- standing sign in the center is the Kentucky Beef which they claimed was needed to attract the traveling public. The staff is recommending approval of the sign; it is within the 100 sq. ft. maximum allowed in the "D" zone. The sign would have yellow bulbs following the periphery of the sign, and it is noted these yellow bulbs would also follow the arches of the building. The staff recommends that these yellow bulbs be eliminated from both the sign and the building. Mr. Cliff Burford, representing the applicant, noted the height of the free- standing sign is 25'. As to the architecture of the building, Farrell's Ice Cream is a national organization and uses the same type architecture on all of its buildings--this is their "national image." The Commission inquired as to other proposed uses in this center. Mr. Burford maintained they still have room for a market in the center. They have no objections to the recommendations of the staff except for the elimination of the bulbs on the building. If they eliminated these from the porch area, it would make the entrance way too dark. Director Warren asked the staff to leave the elimination of the yellow bulbs on the building to the approval of the staff. Member Adams discussed the color of the building, which he commented was a little gaudy. Chairman Rice remarked that he had no objection, as long as it doesn't become too gaudy and the lights from the building will not reflect upon the residential area across the street. MSUC (Putnam-Chandler) Architecture of the building and approval of the free- standing sign be granted, subject to the condition that the small yellow bulbs be prohibited from the sign and the building. Lights on the building are subject to staff approval. -9- 1/5/70 Request for determination of architectural compatibility of Move-In - 4004 Palm Drive - Daniel Green Director of Planning Warren stated this was a request for a move-in of a house from 49 Hilltop Drive to 4004 Palm Drive. The Commission recently approved a variance allowing this property to be served by an easement. Director Warren submitted a plot plan noting the location of the proposed move-in and passed around some pictures of the house to the Commission. He added that what is proposed is compatible with what is in the area, and the staff is recom- mending that such a finding be transmitted to the City Council. The Commission concurred. NSUC (Putnam-Adams) Approval of the move-in, subject to the conditions outlined by the Building and Housing Department, and the requirements of the "D" Design Control Modifying District. The finding of the Commission is that the structure is architecturally compatible with the area, in accordance with the standards delineated in Section 8.21 of the City Code. Request for extension of time on variance - 249 E Street - Richard Wilson Director of Planning Warren stated a variance was granted this applicant in 1967 to construct an office building with apartments in the rear of the site. The office building is completed, but not the apartments. The Commission previously extended this variance to January 17, 1970, and the applicant is now requesting another extension. The staff is recommending approval, since conditions on this have not changed. Member Macevicz questioned the reason for the further extension. Director Warren indicated that he did not know why the applicant was not proceeding with the construction of the apartments, perhaps it was lack of financing. The only concern of the staff in making a recommendation to the Commission is whether or not conditions in the area have changed; in this case, they have not. Member Macevicz felt the applicant should be at the meeting to answer the inquiries of the Commission. It has been three years now since he was granted this variance, and the applicant has not utilized it. He discussed the granting of these requests, suggesting the first request for extension should, in all probability, be an automatic one; however, subsequent requests for extensions should state the explanation for the request, and the applicant or his representative should be present at the meeting. Land use and everything else changes since an initial request is made. Mr. Warren explained that the Commission is not granting the applicant something he should not have, just an extension of what has been approved. MS (Macevicz-Chandler) The policy be established that requests for extensions be as follows: The first extension be automatic, unless the recommendation of the staff indicates that change in conditions should cause denial. The second and subsequent extension should state the exact reason for the request and an appli- cant or his representative be present at the meeting to answer questions. -lO- 1/5/70 Member Putnam remarked that perhaps the applicant should be required to refile his application after the expiration of the first extension. City Attorney Lindberg stated the ordinance would then have to be changed in this regard. Director Warren discussed this further with the Commission indicating that this could be handled through the Administrative Procedures section of the ordinance which will again be before the Commission very shortly. MSUC (Macevicz-Chandler) Previous motion be withdrawn, and the staff be directed to work this out through the Administrative Procedurel Section. Request for the extension be approved. Council Referral - Proposed Youth-Community Center in Hilltop-Telegraph Canyon Park Director of Planning Warren submitted a plot plan noting the proposed location for the Youth-Community Center. The building will be located in the northeast corner of the park along Hilltop Drive, adjacent to the church parking lot. The finding of the Commission is the determination that the proposed use of land would be in conformance with the General Plan. The General Plan shows this park as open space, and the staff recommends that the Commission transmit their finding to the City Council in this regard. City Attorney Lindberg added that although the structure does conform to the General Plan, it is equally important to recognize that this particular park site is one that the City received federal grants for open space, and it should not be allowed to be filled up with recreational facilities. At one time, a new firehouse was proposed for this site; however, this would be in violation of the terms of the federal government. The question is, how much do they want to devote of property that was purchased for open space, for active recreational use. Mr. Lindberg added that the federal grant would not have been given to the City if it was for this particular kind of use, and not for open space. Member Macevicz discussed the school across the street and the recreational facilities available there. He claimed the Parks & Recreation Department could set up a system here whereby the community could have full use of the school facilities; this would take care of all the recreational needs for this particular area. Director Warren cautioned the Commission that it was not their function in this case to contradict the recommendation of the Parks & Recreation Commission, but to determine conformance with the General Plan. Chairman Rice suggested a meeting with that Commission in order to convey their feelings on this subject. MSUC (Putnam-Chandler) Submit the finding to the City Council that the proposed construction of a Youth-Community Center at this park site is in conformance to the General Plan. The letter should also state the Commission's feeling that development of this area, as far as buildings are concerned, be restricted to essential park buildings and that open space be retained. -ll- 1/5/70 Deferment of Public Improvements - 30 D Street Director of Planning Warren explained that a request has been received, late Friday, for the deferment of the installation of sidewalk and driveway apron at 30 D Street. Mr. Warren submitted a plat noting the area in question, and remarked that the Division of Engineering concurs that no purpose would be served in putting in the improvements at this time. There is no sidewalk from Corte Maria Avenue to Hilltop Drive, and this home is the center house of the only three houses existing on the south side of D Street. The Engineering Division recommends that a lien in the amount of $500 should be imposed to insure the future installation of these improvements. Mr. James Anderson, son of the applicant, asked for Commission approval of their request. Director Warren explained that the applicant is making an addition to his home, the valuation of which would require the installation of these improvements. MSUC (Adams-Macevicz) Deferment of the installation of sidewalk and driveway apron at 30 D Street, and an agreement be signed whereby a lien in the amount of $500 be imposed to insure future installation of these improvements. Notice re~ardin~ dissolution of San Diego County Plannin~ Congress Director of Planning Warren referred to the report sent the Commission regarding the dissolution of the Planning Congress, which must be done by unanimous consent of all member Commissions. Three questions must be answered on this survey. The Commission concurred that the Planning Congress should be dissolved. MSUC (Putnam-Chandler) (1) This Commission is in favor of dissolution. (2) The disbursement of Congress funds to go to San Diego State College. (3) In the event there is not unanimous agreement to dissolve the Congress, this Commission will withdraw from the Congress. To be set for hearin~ - Proposed ordinance re~ulatin~ signs in C-B zone Director of Planning Warren referred to the draft of the proposed ordinance which was sent to the Commission. This is the result of staff meetings with a sign con~ittee selected by the Downtown Association. The staff is requesting that the Commission call a hearing to consider this proposed ordinance for the meeting of January 26, 1970. MSUC (Chandler-Macevicz) Public hearing be called for the meeting of January 26, 1970 to consider an ordinance regulating signs in C-B zone. -12- 1/5/70 Fotomat - Hilltop and Naples Shoppin~ Center Chairman Rice asked if a utility pole was added recently at this location. At a time when they are trying to minimize the number of poles here, it is inconceivable that additional poles would be allowed. Director Warren stated his staff will investigate this matter. ADJOURNMENT MSUC (Chandler-Macevicz) Meeting adjourn to the meeting of January 12, 1970. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~x/~a~ Fulasz