Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1972/12/04 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA December 4, 1972 The regular meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California was held on the above date beginning at 7:00 p.m. with the following members present: Rice, Macevicz, Chandler, Rudolph, Whitten, Wilson, Swanson and ex- officio member Miller. Also present: Acting Director of Planning Williams, Associate Planner Lee, Assistant Planner Lettieri, Assistant Planner Reid, Assistant Director of Public Works Robens and Assistant City Attorney Slick. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Rice, followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Macevicz-Whitten) The minutes of the meeting of November 20, 1972, be approved as mailed. OPJ~L COMMUNICATIONS Donald Worley, Attorney, 3003 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, requested on behalf of three of their clients--American Housing Guild, Larwin, and The Odmark Company-- that the public hearings on agenda items 3 and 7 be continued. Item 3 is the consideration of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance relating to the control of Planned Unit Developments. He indicated concern that there has not been sufficient time for developer input regarding the proposed changes. Acting Director of Planning Williams indicated the staff would have no objection to continuing the hearing on the Planned Unit Development provisions, but since item 7 relating to the Park Dedication Ordinance and Residential Construction is not a public hearing before the Planning Commission but merely a request for their reaction and suggestions are to be forwarded to the City Council where a public hearing will be held, he felt there was no need to continue that item. Mr. Williams suggested that if item 3 is continued, it should be to a meeting in January. MSUC (Whitten-Chandler) The public hearing for consideration of amendments relating to Planned Unit Developments be continued to the meeting of January 15, 1973. Consideration (continued) of approval of house plans for E1 Rancho del Rey Unit No. 1 - LaFwin-San Die~o, Inc. Associate Planner Lee pointed out this consideration was continued from the meeting of November 20 so the staff could meet wi th Larwin representatives to determine if a more equitable housing mix could be attained. The original proposal included models ranging up to 6 and 7 bedrooms. They have now proposed to increase the number of 3 bedroom units from 32 to 75 and to delete the options which would have resulted in 6 or 7 bedroom homes. The new proposal results in an average bedroom size of 3.8 for the entire project of 240 units. The percentages of the different sizes would be: 31% 3 bedroom, 57% 4 bedroom and 12% 5 bedroom. -2- 12/4/72 Mr. Lee reviewed the five conditions which the staff would recommend in approval of the architecture and site plan submitted. Member Macevicz suggested that an additional condition should be included to require landscaping of the lots. Assistant City Attorney Blick confirmed that landscaping is a reasonable condition. The Commissioners expressed divided opinions as to whether landscaping is a desirable condition since some home buyers prefer to install landscaping to their own taste. Charles Sollazzo, Larwin-San Diego, Inc., 6150 Mission Gorge Road, pointed out that the cost of landscaping must be borne by the home buyer whether it is put in by the developer or by the individual buyers. He further noted that if the homes are sold under F.H.A. financing, landscaping is required, although some buyers request that it be omitted. He suggested that as an alternative, they could provide landscaping for the front yard area and leave the rear yard to be done by the home buyer. Associate Planner Lee pointed out that the proposed condition for the maintenance of a boat/camper storage area would probably be meaningless since state law precludes the changing of a recorded subdivision map. The Commission discussed problems of parking which may result since deed restrictions filed with the map prohibit the storing of boats or trailers on the lots. It was pointed out this subdivision would have no greater problems in that respect than others which nave been developed. Member Rudolph reported that she had submitted a list of concerns which she had regarding this development and wondered if the Acting Director had any comment on them. Acting Director Williams reported that he took that list as applying to the total development. He felt most of the items could not be resolved in a subdivision of this size. Member Rudolph further commented on the lack of a mix of housing in terms of cost. She felt it was previously decided this development would meet the need for some lower priced ho~les. MSC (Whitten-Chandler) The architecture and site plans submitted by Lar~in-San Diego, Inc. for the development of E1 Rancho del i<ey Unit 1, be approved subject to the conditions enumerated by the staff and the added condition that the devel- oper shall be required to landscape the front yard area of the lots. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Members Whitten, Chandler, Macevicz, Rice, ~'and Wilson NOES: Member Rudolph ABSENT: None -3- 12/4/72 Consideration of request for approval of Parcel Map to divide property on east side of Nacion, south of Telegraph Canyon Road, and request for vacation of Nita Court - Verl Mason Associate Planner Lee displayed a plat showing the location of the property containing approximately 36,000 sq. ft. lying between Nacion Avenue and the on ramp of 1-805 freeway, noting that a parcel map to divide the property into four residential lots has been filed. Approval of parcel maps falls within the jurisdiction of the Director of Public Works and of Planning. This map is presented for Planning Commission consideration because one of the proposed lots does not have the minimum depth as required by the Subdivision Ordinance. Mr. Lee also displayed a detailed plat showing the proposed division of the property, the elevation of each lot, size of each lot and the location of utility poles along the east side of Nacion. It was pointed out that the pole in front of parcel #2 should be moved in order to permit a driveway for the parcel where the elevation difference between the lot and the street is the least. It was also pointed out that parcel #1 does not have a sufficient level area in width to accommodate a house and should be required to increase the width by the construction of a retaining wall along the south property line of the lot. Mr. Lee noted the location of Nita Court right of way to the east of Nacion and indicated there would be no need for a street in that location since each of the four lots would have sufficient frontage on Nacion Avenue. It is, therefore, recommended that the request for vacation of Nita Court be approved. Mr. Lee adivsed that the staff also recommends approval of the parcel map sub- ject to conditions pertaining to the filing of a grading plan, construction of a retaining wall on the south property line of parcel #1, relocation of the pole at the front of parcel #2 and the provision for turnaround type driveways for parcels #1 and #2 to eliminate the necessity of cars backing out onto Nacion where the slope is steep. Chairman Rice asked about the possibility of undergrounding the utility service in order to eliminate the necessity for the poles at the front of the property. Frank Phillips, Civil Engineer for the project, 3942 Itorton Road, Bonita, advised that the pole in question is an anchor pole for a power pole across the street, which means it can be relocated but not eliminated. MSUC (Rudolph-Macevicz) Recommend to the City Council the vacation of Nita Court and approve the parcel map for the creation of four lots subject to the condi- tions recommended by the Planning and Engineering staffs and the added condition that the service of the existing utility pole be undergrounded unless evidence is presented that it would be infeasible. Proposed Amendments to Zonin~ Ordinance relating to the control of Planned Unit Developments Chairman Rice reported to those in the audience who may have arrived after the opening of the meeting that this public hearing was continued to the meeting of January 15, 1973. -4- 12/4/72 PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of amendment to Zonin9 Ordinance relating to Sign Provisions in R-3 and C-O zones Associate Planner Lee reported that after the adoption of sign provisions for all zones, it became apparent that additional signs for identification of apart- ments and businesses or structures in the R-3 and C-O zones was needed. A proposal for amendments to the provisions was submitted to the City Council but was referred back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration approximately five months ago. Shortly after that the City Council placed a 60 day moratorium on sign abatement. The staff again pursued the matter of providing adequate identification in the C-O zone and feel that the differences have been resolved with the exception of pole signs. The staff is now presenting two additional changes to the C-O provisions which would permit a maximum of 25 sq. ft. of sign area on a screening wall or fence in lieu of a ground sign for businesses located on major or collector streets, and that businesses on major or collector streets would be permitted a freestanding sign up to a maximum of 10' in height and 12 sq. ft. in area for one business, and for lots with 75 feet or more frontage and accommodating more than one business a total area of 25 sq. ft. and height up to 15 feet would be permitted. Mr. Lee called attention to the figures obtained from an inventory of all signs in the C-O zone which indicates that only 33% of the signs are in conformance with the present sign regulations. He pointed out that since all but two of these facilities are located on a major or collector street they would have the option under the proposed amendment of replacing their freestanding sign with a 25 sq. ft. ground sign. Mr. Lee pointed out no changes are recommended from the original proposal for signs in the R-3 zone, and provisions to permit a freestanding pole sign or ground sign are recommended for inclusion in the C-O zone. Richard Schuller, doing business as Dick Schuller and Associates, 549 Third Avenue, indicating the size of signs permitted in the proposal is smaller than he would like since his own sign is 32 sq. ft. in area and 20 feet high. He felt this size is necessary for identification. He also objected to the fact that structures on one side of Third Avenue are not permitted the same signage as on the opposite side due to the difference in zone. He contended this is discriminatory. He felt the sign provisions should be further researched with the business community to determine their needs. With reference to the difference in zoning on opposite sides of Third Avenue Acting Director Williams advised this is due to the smaller lot widths and depths on the side zoned C-O which would preclude good retail commercial development since the parking requirements could not be met. He contended that business facilities on small lots do not require the same amount of signage as those on large parcels of property. Wes Goodvin, Goodvin Realtors, 561 Third Avenue, reported that he had suggested that freestanding pole signs be permitted 40 sq. ft. in size to a maximum of 20 feet high. He had also proposed allowing a longer abatement period for the existing signs. He again requested consideration of increasing the size limitation to these figures. -5- 12/4/72 Dick Kau, President of Chamber of Commerce, indicated he is not prepared at this meeting to discuss the specific provisions, but suggested that the Planning Commission meet in a workshop session with the business community, consisting of the Broadway Association, Third Avenue Businessmen, Chamber of Commerce, and realtors, and completely rewrite a sign ordinance to cover the entire city, rather than attempting to amend the provisions in a piecemeal fashion. Chairman Rice pointed out that attempting to rewrite the entire ordinance relating to signs would be more time consuming than the Commissioners could undertake. He felt the businessmen should meet with the staff and then present their proposals to the Commission. Commissioners Rudolph and Macevicz commented on the number of workshop sessions which have been held to consider sign provisions and to obtain input from the business representatives. Mr. Kau contended that suggestions made by the Broadway Association to the staff in regard to sign provisions were ignored by the staff in their presentation to the Commission. Chairman Rice suggested that the staff try one more time to meet with businessmen and attempt to reach a proposal acceptable to both sides. Member Whitten suggested that the businessmen submit their proposals to the staff in writing and if they are not acceptable to the staff they could then be dis- cussed by the Commission in a workshop session. Kathryn Moore, 1134 Tobias Drive, reiterated statements she made at previous meetings that the present sign ordinance is a good one, and she would not favor any increase in size of signs. She felt that the real estate signs, other than identification of the business, are completely superfluous since buyers do not depend on them in their search for a house, but rely instead on newspaper adver- tising. She contended the problem is not with the sign ordinance, but with competition between businesses themselves, each trying to outdo the other as to size of sign. Mrs. Harold Irwin, owner of Chub's Club on Third Avenue, expressed the feeling there is a great deal of misunderstanding--not knowing exactly what the ordinance means to each individual. She reported their compliance with the elimination of the flashing sign when instructed to do so. Jack Taylor, 691 Third Avenue, reported that permits to install the signs were obtained from the city many years ago. He reported he did not understand the information sent out relative to nonconformance of signs; he felt there should have been more personal contact from the staff with instructions of the changes required to make the signs conforming. Mr. DeChiel of DeChiel Realty, 620 Third Avenue, reported that the Chamber of Commerce and Broadway Association have presented a proposal for a sign ordinance to the City. He felt there would be nothing gained in adopting provisions for signs in the R-3 and C-O zones which would not be in accordance with that proposal, assuming it is accepted. He maintained no further action should be taken until the proposal made by the CHamber has been thoroughly studied. -6- 12/4/72 Acting Director of Planning Williams suggested that the public hearing be closed and a new hearing be advertised when the staff has gained input from the businesses concerned and can return with a recommendation to the Commission. MSUC (Chandler-Whitten) The public hearing in consideration of amendments re- lating to sign provisions in the R-3 and C-O zones be closed. The meeting recessed at 9:00 p.m. and reconvened at 9:15 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of various changes in the General Plan Map Acting Director of Planning Williams reported that about a year ago the state adopted legislation which requires that zoning be consistent with the General Plan by January 1, 1973. This is a significant change from prior law when the General Plan merely served as a guide to zoning and land use. Mr. Williams explained that the proposed revisions will be presented in three parts: (1) revisions to the Zoning Map; (2) revisions to the General Plan Map; and (3) revisions to the General Plan text. The first two items are being pre- sented at this time for immediate action due to urgency of the deadline mandated by the State. The revision to the General Plan text will be presented within thirty days. Mr. Williams advised that proposals for rezoning and General Plan changes are based on the following criteria: 1. If the zoning and land use were of a higher category than that shown on the General Plan, the General Plan was revised to reflect the zoning and use. 2. If the zoning and land use were of a lower category than that shown on the General Plan, the General Plan was revised to the lower category. 3. If the zoning was of a lower category than that shown on the Plan and redevelop- ment at this time was appropriate, the zoning was changed. 4. If the zoning was of a lower category than that shown on the Plan and redevelop- ment was not appropriate at this time, the General Plan was modified to reflect the zoning. 5. There are some basic revisions in land use being proposed on the General Plan Map and therefore on the Zoning Map. Tony Lettieri, Assistant Planner, pointed out that review had indicated in many cases it would be desirable to revise the General Plan to agree with the land use and zoning. He noted that amendments to the General Plan are of four basic characters: 1. Changes in land use designations that are desirable due to actions by the City Council or other governmental agencies. 2. The lowering of residential densities in certain areas to protect existing stable single family and two family neighborhoods. - 7- 12/4/72 3. The reclassification of large, very high density residential (27-43 DU/Ac.) to high density residential (13-26 DU/Ac.) due to the hardships the R-3-H zone would place on those properties and a high probability of traffic congestion resulting from very high density development. 4. Reclassifications that reflect a deviation from the current General Plan. Mr. Lettieri then pointed out on the General Plan Map the location of the following proposed changes recommended under the first category: Between Broadway and I-5 Freeway: 1. The area north of Seavale adjacent to Broadway from thoroughfare commercial to high density residential since the property is not oriented toward Broadway and is improved with a mobile home park. 2. The area north and south of E Street adjacent to I-5 from thoroughfare commercial to visitor commercial to insure that freeway oriented uses would be established. 3. The area north and south of H Street adjacent to I-5 from thoroughfare commercial to visitor commercial for freeway oriented uses. 4. A small area on the south side of H Street approximately half way between Broadway and I-5 from high density residential to professional and administrative office use to prevent potential expansion of C-T zoning along this portion of H Street. The property is improved with offices. 5. Property on the north side of L Street west of Broadway from high density residential to research and limited industrial inasmuch as the residential use to the north and west are oriented toward Riverlawn, the commercial zoning to the east is primarily oriented toward Broadway, and industrial zoning to the south is oriented across L Street toward this property. 6. In the area south of h~ss Street west of Industrial, redesignate the area south of Moss Street to the SDG&E easement from research and limited industrial to high density residential, the area south of the easement to ?alomar from research and limited industrial to high density residential except the commercial uses adjacent to the interchange which should be designated thoroughfare commercial, the frontage on the south side of Palomar to thoroughfare commercial and the area to the south to high density residential. This area demonstrates many of the problems created by the state law. The area north of the SDG&E ease- ment contains a mobile home park and is shown on the General Plan as research and limited industrial. If the property is rezoned to an industrial classifica- tion the use would be nonconforming and subject to abatement. The area south of the easement is fragmented into many individual lots which makes them inappropri- ate for industrial zoning. Between Broadway and Third Avenue 1. The area at the southeast corner of Third Avenue and C Street from thorough- fare commercial and high density residential to research and limited industrial since the area is developed with an industrial use. -8- 12/4/72 2. The area on the north side of Third Avenue Extension from retail commercial to professional and administrative commercial as the area is developed with uses that would be conforming in the professional and administrative office classifica- tion. 3. The area east of Fourth Avenue north of Davidson from very high density residential to professional and administrative office commercial, because its proximity to the court, civic center, and downtown area makes office use seem appropriate. 4. The property at the southeast corner of Fourth and Center is zoned for multiple family use and shown on the General Plan as professional and administra- tive office commercial. The property is vacant and seems well suited for either use. If the Planning Commission wishes to consider rezoning the property to C-O, it should be set for public hearing. 5. An area east of the Broadway commercial frontage south of G Street from very high density residential to professional and administrative office commercial to serve as a deterrent against the encroachment of heavier commercial zoning along the side streets in this area. 6. The area on Fourth Avenue just north of H Street from very high density residential to professional and administrative office commercial since the City has committed itself to an expansion of Bay General Hospital in this area. 7. An area on the north side of I Street betwen Fourth and Fifth Avenues, east of the Boys Club and Sears parking lot, from retail commercial to professional and administrative office commercial which would be more compatible with the adjoining residential uses. 8. Property on the north side of J Street approximately 300' west of Third Avenue from medium density residential to high density residential, inasmuch as the property is developed with multiple family units, it would be inappropriate to rezone the site to conform with the General Plan. 9. The area at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and J STreet from thorough- fare commercial to retail commercial which would be more compatible with adjoining uses and zoning and would accommodate the current zoning and land use. lO. The area at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and K Street from professional and administrative office commercial to retail commercial, since the uses on this property cannot be accommodated by the professional and administrative office classification and the General Plan should reflect the commercial uses presently on the property. 11. An area on the south side of J Street, east of Broadway, from medium density residential to high density residential, since the property is improved with multiple family uses and this proposal would bring the General Plan into line with the stable land use and zoning. -9- 12/4/72 12. The area south of K Street, east of Broadway (east of South Bay Chevrolet) from medium denstiy residential to thoroughfare commercial and high density residential. A change to commercial zoning was granted to provide adequate commercial depth adjacent to Broadway; the remaining property is inadequate width for single family or two family development, therefore, the lowest density multi-family zoning is applied. 13. Various parcels south of L Street to the east of Broadway from medium density residential to high density residential and professional and administra- tive office commercial. Most of the area along Arizona and Moss is developed in conformance with the existing zoning which should be reflected on the General Plan. The only vacant area is large and appropriate for multiple family develop- ment and should be so designated. East of Third Avenue 1. The area on the west side of Second Avenue just south of State 54 from research and limited industrial to high density residential. Due to the freeway right of way and the topography of the area this property has no orientation toward the industrial zoning to the west; the existing R-3 zoning seems appropri- ate for the property. 2. The area on the east side of Third Avenue north of D Street from medium density residential to high density residential. This area is partially developed with multiple family units but the bulk of the area is vacant. Develop- ment could take place as either multiple family or single family, however, due to drainage through the area development costs would be high and it appears more logical to develop with apartments. 3. The area on the north and south side of E Street, 500'± east of Second Avenue from medium density residential to high density residential. The area on the north side of E STreet is developed with multiple family dwellings and the property on the south side is very large with adjoining single family dwellings oriented away from this property toward a side street. Multiple family develop- ment seems appropriate. 4. The area on the west side of Second Avenue between E and H Streets from high density residential to medium density residential. This change would seem to implement a policy that the City has followed in this area for some time since the lots fronting on Second Avenue have been retained in single family use. 5. Two areas east of Third Avenue, one on the south side of I Street and the second to the north of I Street, change from medium density residential to high density residential, since the properties have been zoned and developed with multiple family structures for some time. 6. The area at the northeast corner of J Street and Third Avenue from thorough- fare commercial to retail commercial as the lot is developed with a retail business and thoroughfare commercial ladn use seems inappropriate for this area. 7. The area north of K Street east of Third Avenue from professional and adminis- trative office commercial to retail commercial as the area is improved with retail uses, 8. The area on the south side of K Street east of Third Avenue, and east of Bank of America, from medijm density residential to high density residential, since -10- 12/4/72 the property is zoned for and developed with apartment units. 9. The area at the northeast corner of Third Avenue and Palomar from high density residential to retail commercial as the property was committed for commercial development and the owners are now preparing working drawings. 10. The area north of Quintard west of Hilltop Drive from medium density residential to high density residential. The area is primarily vacant with a few single family dwellings. Development could occur with single family dwellings but due to the large lot sizes and trends in the area multiple family construction seems most likely and the property has been zoned R-3-G. 11. The Otay/Albany school/park site is changed from the conceptual form to its final configuration. 12. The area on the south side of Bonita Road in the vicinity of Sandalwood DRive, redesignate the low density residential to medium density residential and a portion of the visitor commercial to retail commercial. The residential area is developed with R-1 subdivisions and low density residential is not appropriate. The C-N center is being occupied at this time. 13. The area on the south side of East J Street, just west of the City fire station from medium density residential to retail commercial as the City has recognized this neighborhood center by zoning the property C-N. 14. The area north of Orange Avenue around Melrose Avenue be designated as retail commercial and high density residential in recognition of the existing zoning and development. 15. Two park sites in the design of the Larkhaven Subdivision from medium density residential to open space. 16. The area on the north side of Bonita Road near the golf course restaurant which was involved in an exchange of land and subsequent rezonings which changed the configuration of the R-3-G zoning. The configuration of the high density residential and open space land uses should be revised on the General Plan to conform to the new patterns. 17. Two areas along Otay Lakes Road--one just north of Bonita Bel Air subdivision and zoned R-2-20-D, and the other just north of the SDG&E easement, zoned R-l-lO --require medium density designation to bring the General Plan into conformance with these long standing zoning districts. 18. The Halecrest Park site at 1-805 and J Street is proposed to be shown on the General Plan just to the west of Halecrest Elementary School. 19. The area along Telegraph Canyon Road, occupied by the Elks Club, is zoned R-1-D and should be redesignated on the General Plan from high density residential to medium density residential. 20. The area west of Oleander, north and south of Palomar, designated to be included in Greg Rogers Park is shown on the General Plan as open space and is zoned R-1. Since the property is not under the ownership of the City, the General Plan must be brought into conformance with the R-1 zoning, or the area zoned agricultural and purchased by the City. It is recommended that this area -ll- 12/4/72 be redesignated on the General Plan from open space to medium density residential. 21. The P-C plan for Brandywin~ included a new 5 acre park site and the precise location of a school; the designation of the precise location of the park and school site should be shown on the General Plan. 22. Area south of Brandywine subdivision from medium density residential to research and limited industrial to bring the General Plan into conformance with the I-L zone on the property. Chairman Rice questioned the various designations in the J Street and Third Avenue area. Mr. Williams explained that the changes proposed at this time are an effort to bring the General Plan into conformance with the uses and the zoning which have been approved and established in that area. A further study and revision of the General Plan may result in expansion of some of the commercial uses in the event of redevelopment. Chairman Rice questioned the advisability of redesignating the area west of Hilltop Drive north of Quintard from medium density residential to high density residential in view of the already congested traffic conditions on Hilltop Drive and the proximity to Castle Park High School. He felt single family development would be preferable. Mr. Williams pointed out the area has been zoned R-3-G and rezoning would be required if the medium density designation is retained. The Chairman opened the public hearing for testimony concerning the preceding proposals for changes in the General Plan. Pete DeGraaf, local resident, commented concerning the area east of Second Avenue, north of C Street, which involves two pieces of property, one occupied by Vista Hill Sanitarium and one occupied by K.O.A. Campground. He contended this property should not be rezoned to R-1 but should be designated Visitor Commercial to conform with the existing use. Acting Director Williams advised that this area is in the flood plain district and is currently included in the County's Sweetwater Regional Park Plan. He felt that Visitor Commercial zoning would be premature at this time since it will be some time before the 1-805 freeway is completed in this vicinity. Mr. Williams explained that the property which Mr. DeGraaf was referring to was originally advertised as a change in the zoning, and the staff is recommending against a change in zoning at this point--the recommendation is to change the Plan. Marie Aland, Realtor, 576 Garrett, commented that so many different locations were mentioned that she was a little confused about the proposed action for each. She particularly asked about the area of H Street between Broadway and I-5. Mrs. Aland further pointed out that she felt action may be taken on an awful lot of items without time for the Commission to study the proposal; there are a lot of different parcels of property being affected in a blanket proposal, which she felt really deserve individual consideration. She requested that the Commission not endorse a blanket proposal of changes without some further thought on it. -12- 12/4/72 Acting Director Williams advised that bringing the zoning and General Plan into conformance by January 1 is something the State has directed, and the changes proposed at this time are for that purpose. Gene York, 72 Sandalwood Drive, spoke with reference to the property at the southeast corner of Center Street and Fourth Avenue, and requested that it be set for a public hearing for change in zone to C-O as opposed to a change in the General Plan. MSUC (Macevicz-Whitten) The question of rezoning of the property at the southeast corner of Fourth Avenue and Center Street to C-O zone be set for public hearing. Virgil Clapp spoke concerning the property north of Quintard west of Hilltop Drive and reported it was formerly a chicken ranch. He purchased the property two years ago for the purpose of building apartments. It was zoned R-3 and he has been paying taxes on the property accordingly and felt he should not be penalized for not developing the property immediately by having the zoning now changed to R-1 which would prohibit the use for which the property was purchased. MSC (Whitten-Swanson) The question of rezoning property north of Quintard west of Hilltop Drive from R-3-G to R-1 be set for hearing. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Members Whitten, Swanson, Rice and Rudolph NOES: Members Wilson, Macevicz and Chandler ABSENT: None Mr. Clapp asked for clarification of the last item in the proposed changes, which concerns property on Otay Valley Road. It was noted that the proposed change would bring the General Plan into conformance with the existing I-L zoning on this property. Assistant Planner Lettieri noted that the second type of changes on the General Plan map is the lowering of residential densities in certain areas to protect existing stable single family and two-family neighborhoods. It is recommended that blocks of property in the following locations be redesignated to medium density residential rather than high density residential as presently shown: South of E Street,north of Davidson, Fourth Avenue to Broadway North of E Street, approximately mid-block between Third and Fourth Area at the northwest corner of E S reet and Second Avenue South of H Street, west of Fourth Avenue South of I Street between Fourth Avenue and the Broadway commercial West of Broadway between H Street and L Street East of Fourth Avenue, J Street to L Street Mr. Lettieri then noted that the third reclassification proposed is from very high density residential to high density residential. The staff is proposing these changes due to the hardships the R-3-H zone would place on these properties and the high probability of traffic congestion resulting from the very high density development. The areas involved are: -14- 12/4/72 Assistant Planner Reid displayed a plat of the area showing the adjacent land uses and zoning. He noted that the General Plan is proposed for a revision from Research and Limited Industrial to High Density Residential. He suggested there are two possibilities for the property: either rezone it to C-T or to R-3. Walnut Avenue primarily serves residential uses, it is, therefore, the staff's recommendation that R-3 zoning would be more appropriate for the property. Acting Director of Planning Williams reported that following his own investigation of the site he felt the appropriate recommendation would be to extend the C-T zoning from Palomar to include this parcel. The C-T is the heaviest commercial zone and permits a large number of uses. Bill Richardson, 3630 Fir, noted that he has owned part of this land for 22 years and half of the land was zoned M-1 before it was changed two years ago to I-L. He further noted that the present designation on the General Plan is Limited Industrial, therefore, the General Plan and zoning are in conformance on his property and he could see no reason for effecint a change in both. He con- tended that the property could not be developed for R-3 uses and that it is not suited for C-T development because of the distance from Palomar. He, therefore, strongly urged the Commission to leave the General Plan designation and zoning as it presently is for Limited Industrial use. In viewing the plat it was noted that a small area on the east side of Walnut Avenue is zoned R-3. It was suggested by Member Wilson that consideration be given to extending the C-T zoning to the SDG&E right of way. MSUC (Whitten-Chandler) A public hearing be advertised to consider rezoning to C-T for property located on the east side of Walnut Avenue approximately 300' north of Palomar Street extending to the SDG&E right of way. MSUC (Chandler-Whitten) The public hearing for consideration of various changes in the General Plan Map be continued to the meeting of December ll, 1972. MSUC (Rudolph-Whitten) The public hearing for consideration of various zone changes to bring zoning into conformance with the General Plan Map be continued to the meeting of December II, 1972. Consideration of Amendment to Park Dedication Ordinance and Residential Construction Tax MSUC (Whitten-Chandler) Consideration of amendment to Park Dedication Ordinance and Residential Construction Tax be continued to the meeting of December ll, 1972. ADJOURNMENT The Chairman declared the meeting adjourned at 11:55 p.m. to the meeting of December 11, 1972. Respectfully submitted, Helen Mapes, Secre~ary