Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1972/11/27 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA November 27, t972 The regular adjourned meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California was held on the above date beginning at 7:05 p.m. with the follow- ing members present: Rice, Macevicz, Wilson, Chandler, Rudolph, Swanson, Whitten and ex-officio member Miller. Also present: Acting Director of Planning Williams, Associate Planner Lee, Assistant Director of Public Works Robens, Assistant City Attorney Blick. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Rice, followed by a moment of silent prayer. The Chairman asked for oral communications and none were presented. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): Consideration of P-C Development Plan of Sports World - Dr. Leonard Bloom Acting Director of Planning Williams reviewed for the Commission that the hearing on Dr. Bloom's request for modification of the General Development Plan and the P-C zone of the E1 Rancho del Rey area was first begun on October 30. The existing prezoning is P-C and the property is currently under the juris- diction of the County. A first phase annexation of 300 acres has been filed with LAFCO and is scheduled for hearing on December 4. The P-C zoning and the modifications proposed would become effective on approval and annexation of this property to the City of Chula Vista. Mr. Williams recognized there are some very severe time constraints and many problems to be solved, and the Planning staff and Dr. Bloom's consultants have expended a considerable amount of effort to evaluate the Sports World General Development Plan to the satisfaction of all parties. However, he believed the City should move cautiously toward approving the plan even in "concept" before all the facts are in, since "conceptual" approval gives the applicant the impression the City has accepted his project no matter what further prob- lems might be involved. Mr. Williams suggested the possibility of considering the plan and reviewing it in two phases. He briefly outlined that preliminary approval under Phase I would require an analysis of the financial viability of the arena-recreation- commercial complex, an analysis of the fiscal impact of the total Sports World development on the City's tax rate, an Environmental Impact Report, a solution to the traffic problems on "H" Street in the vicinity of the recreational- commercial complex and the shopping center, the development of acceptable temporary access to the arena-shopping center area until the freeway is completed, and the development of a routing proposal for construction equipment into the site for construction of the arena prior to completion of the temporary access. Final approval under Phase II would require determination of projected traffic, residential density, public facilities and utilities (schools, parks, riding and hiking trails, fire station, library, utilities, sewers), a development phasing schedule, cooperation with Larwin Construction Company's development immediately to the south, and open space proprietary and maintenance responsi- bility. -2- 11/27/72 Chairman Rice wondered if Mr. Williams or the City Attorney might brief the Commission as to whether or not all the items under Phase I were appropriate for the Planning Commission or perhaps should be considered at Council level. Mr. Williams stated that the economics of the development cannot be ignored. In a project of this size, and with inexperience in reviewing an arena, some consideration must be given to fiscal financial viability and fiscal impact of the development on the City's tax rate in terms of whether or not the in- creased taxes generated will pay for the increased services demanded of the City and the increased number of personnel and equipment necessary to provide them. Assistant City Attorney Blick opined that these problems might very well be bona fide considerations of the Commission but at this point there is insuf- ficient information to justify a serious decision on some of these matters. However, the approval in concept, which is being requested at this time, would not involve so much informational input. The Chairman declared the public hearing reopened. Dr. Leonard Bloom, the applicant, again asked for approval in concept of the project, emphasizing the benefits it would bring to the City and the status it offers. He commented that the problems in regard to traffic had either been solved or were approaching solution. He said that approval in concept is im- portant at this point because it means a basic approval of that type of develop- ment and would enable them to go forward and adhere to their schedule. There's a hockey team and a basket ball team which they are trying to find a home for next year. He felt approval in concept would not mean future automatic approval without solution of any problems which might arise, but requested acceptance in concept with whatever contingencies the Commission wished to attach. Robert Caplan, 3003 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, Attorney for Dr. Bloom, commented that when they entered into negotiations with Otay Land Co. for acquisition of the property, they ascertained that it had already been prezoned to the P-C zone and that a specific plan had been approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council. With that approval in mind, a revision of the plan had been sub- mitted. The entire area is surrounded by the City of Chula Vista, and request has been made for annexation of the first 300 acres, as advised, leaving the other 1200 acres for annexation at a later date. He urged over-all approval of the plan, recognizing that the detailed plans would be before the Commission again and again and envisioning future problems arising over the next rive to ten years as other parcels of the remaining property are annexed and development continues. Peter Watry, 81 Second Avenue, expressed concern about the traffic which would be generated by this project and the increased traffic congestion throughout Chula Vista. He mentioned that the growth rate of traffic exceeds the growth rate of population, that the building of roads and freeways generates greater traffic which leads to building more free~ays in an every-widening cycle, and hoped that Chula Vista would not repeat the mistakes of Los Angeles. He said we cannot assume that automobile transportation is infinitely expandable and suggested that some of the modern systems of mass transportation be explored in connection with this development -3- 11/27/72 Michael McQuillen, 4425 Vista Nacion, Lynwood Hills, stated he had signed a petition objecting to the construction of this area and to the inclusion of the whole idea as being provisionally accepted. He very strongly objected to any use of the Lynwood Hills area as an access during the period of construc- tion or later when the shopping area and Sports World complex would be com- pleted, and also objected to the building of apartments immediately south of Lynwood Hills. He said his employment takes him to New York and San Francisco, but he lives in Chula Vista because he likes the small town, rural type area and disapproves of a big city arena with its rock concerts and traffic which would change the very nature of the City of Chula Vista. Eugene Coleman, 1670 Gotham Street, believed an overlay of the proposed Sports World development on the General Plan of Chula Vista would show Sports World to be at the heart of the projected residential development of this area. He thinks an arena rightly belongs in an industrial area, and if built in a residential area the residences in the vicinity would eventually become blighted. It was his thought that another regional shopping center would cause a blighted area in the Third Avenue, downtown shopping area, and questioned whether we need another regional shopping center in Chula Vista. Chairman Rice pointed out that if this shopping center were approved, it would be the only regional shopping center in Chula Vista. If Mr. Coleman were think- ing of the Chula Vista Shopping Center, this is not regarded as a regional shopping center. Acting Planning Director Williams advised that the Chula Vista Shopping Center is figured as a community shopping center, or simply a shopping center. A regional shopping center usually covers close to 100 acres and will have three major anchor tenants with from 50 to lO0 subsidiary shops. The basic definition is in terms of its market area. A regional shopping center situated at this point should draw customers from all over the South Bay. Chairman Rice also noted that the arena complex is proposed to be surrounded by commercial area, with the residential beyond that. The arena itself would not be in a residential area. Mr. Williams commented he believed Mr. Coleman's remarks to be well taken, as the Inglewood Forum, the Los Angeles Sports Arena and San Diego Arena are in industrial or commercial areas. However, there is a big topographic difference in this instance. The residential areas would be on the tops of ridges and the floor of Rice Canyon and physically well removed from the arena and the shopping center. The freeway would certainly provide a tremendous amount of buffering from the western part of the community. He also pointed out that the subdivi- sions that have been designed for the past few years with curvilinear streets and cul-de-sacs are stable and viable and could be expected to retain their values. C. A. Napier, 666 Gilbert Place, commented that he was a sports fan but he be- lieves this to be the wrong location for an arena because of the noise, pollution and congestion generated by the traffic. He also did not believe the tax revenue realized from the project would pay for the added police and services. -4- 11/27/72 Kathryn Moore, 1134 Tobias Drive, Chairman of the South Bay Citizens Planning Committee, disapproved of the school sites as shown on the plan particularly the elementary school shown opposite the shopping center and with the drug situation as it is these days. Mr. Williams assured her that none of the school sites shown are permanent; they are all subject to approval by the School Districts. Member Chandler suggested he would like to see something a little more concrete on what's going to be done with traffic, times and dates, and not just estimates on how cars would be handled leaving a sports event, and how they would be exited to Bonita Road, which already carries a heavy traffic load. Mr. Williams observed that any possible overlap of arena traffic with shopping center traffic would obviously be in the early evening, and that should not be critical. The Engineering report of the projected traffic on Bonita Road is basically in terms of ultimate development of the whole area, assuming that all of the streets shown on the map were complete. The City certainly has every opportunity to condition the timing of the development so the temporary access would not be overtaxed prior to the completion of the freeway. However, some inconvenience would have to be accepted during the construction. Mr. Williams further pointed out that the question before the Commission at this time is whether Chula Vista wants a Sports Arena. Working out the technical problems, and there are many of them is going to take a great deal of time. It is obvious that this area is developable, and he believes the presently proposed approach to such development to be more realistic than any previously proposed. He referred again to the six items he had listed in Phase I as being necessary for preliminary approval. Member Whitten felt he had given conditional approval when he said at the first hearing that he liked the idea of a sports arena and requested the staff to pursue the investigation, but he wanted hard and fast answers on all aspects of the situation before he was prepared to give further approval. He added that so much attention has been given to the traffic problems, in listening to the testimony he wondered if perhaps everyone understood that is vacant land out there, and unless the City of Chula Vista is willing to purchase it to prevent development, then the fact must be faced that the owners will wish to develop it. Member Rudolph inquired about the comparative size of the Chula Vista Shopping Center and the proposed regional shopping center, and asked if the traffic projections upon completion of the development were the same as the 1990 pro- jections. Mr. Williams answered that the commercial development of the Chula Vista Shopping Center, without streets and including the Home Fair Shopping Center, is in the neighborhood of 60 acres. The total acreage of the regional shopping center would be lll acres from street to street, but with the unusable slopes around the edge of it, the net acreage would be approximately 74. He said the traffic projections were those of 1990. Member Rudolph stated she would like to have the staff continue the studies, be- cause at this point she hasn't the faintest idea whether she approves of the arena or not. -5- 11/27/72 Member Swanson remarked that if, as seems likely, sooner or later there will be a residential development out there, the shopping center would be a necessity to serve the homes in that area, and if the regional shopping center is not constructed or there is no revenue bearing property, then the estab- lished homes would bear the tax brunt of added police and fire protection, etc. He asked what the increase in home tax rates would be. Mr. Williams replied that he was unable to give the figures on that, but it was one of the very reasons which could make the arena and the shopping center very important in this type of plan. And, if there is any place in the whole area of Chula Vista where there is a possibility of building a regional shopping center, where it will have the needed access and the centralized location, this is it. Member Macevicz commented he is gravely concerned about the traffic congestion which the arena would generate on all residential streets anywhere in its vicinity several times a week, and has such mixed emotions over the project he would like to see the citizens of Chula Vista vote on it. Member Wilson expressed willingness to approve the concept, recalling that the area has already been prezoned with the residential area and the shopping center in mind, and noting that the Planning Commission and the Planning Department would continue to be involved with the additional detailed plans. The Commission discussed whether or not the hearing should be closed or con- tinued to another meeting to allow for further information to be provided on the numerous unanswered questions, and the Planning Director was asked how long he felt it would take to complete the studies in Phase I. Mr. Williams said that it was entirely dependent upon how rapidly the staff received the material from the applicant. The Chairman inquired of Dr. Bloom if he or his staff were prepared to give the Commission any date on when information relative to Phase I could be provided to the Planning staff. Mr. Williams commented that the Environmental Impact Report would be the controlling factor there, but perhaps something could be worked out on the other items. Dr. Bloom suggested taking the items, one at a time, to see if he might be able to give the answers. He reminded Mr. Williams he had sent him a detailed list of the 284 events that have been committed to the arena in writing for next year, withholding the financial information, which is readily available if it can be held in confidence. 200 bookings or more are considered the breakeven point for an arena. Mr. Williams has also been provided with the consultant's name and qualifications. Dr. Bloom pointed out the benefit of the commercial and professional development in offsetting the cost of the residential areas; however, the Chairman observed that the Commissioners were insisting on concrete tax figures, and if the Planning staff were expected to provide that kind of analyses, it might cause a delay of four or five months. Dr. Bloom asked if he made this information available, would he be able to get a vote from the Commission in a week's time. -6- 11/27/72 Mr. Williams explained that the office procedure of analyzing the information, writing and typing the comments and getting them to the Commission for their consideration would take longer than that. Chairman Rice told Dr. Bloom that the Commission was not trying to frustrate him by not committing themselves, but they felt it was virtually impossible to reach a decision on something of this magnitude without firm information on which to base it. Mr. Williams suggested that consideration be given to continuation on December llth; that perhaps much of the information might then be available. Dr. Bloom asked the City Attorney if the Commission did not vote at this meet- ing, could the request for conceptual approval be passed to the City Council without comment? Assistant City Attorney Blick replied that if the Commission would like to do so, it certainly could. Dr. Bloom explained that the delay would interfere with his schedule and re- quested that the item be forwarded to the Council without comment, which would enable him to adhere to his schedule and would not preclude the Commission from another hearing at the time the Environmental Impact Report is provided. Member Wilson moved that the request be passed on to the Council without com- ment, but the motion died for lack of a second. The Commission concurred it would be impossible to have an Environmental Im- pact Statement in two weeks, but believed they could work around it and reach some decision if answers to the other five items in Phase I were provided. MSC (Rudolph-Macevicz) The public hearing to consider the request of Dr. Leonard Bloom for a change in the P-C Development Plan of E1 Rancho del Rey be continued to a special meeting on December ll, 1972. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Members Rudolph, Macevicz, Chandler, Rice, Swanson and Whitten NOES: Member Wilson ABSENT: None The Chairman declared a l0 minute recess from 9:10 to 9:20. -7- 11/27/72 PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): Conditional Use Permit - ll Third Avenue Extension - Request to locate modular building for temporary use in Flood Plain - Department of MOtOr Vehicles ' Associate Planner Lee reminded the Commission that this item had been continued from the meeting of November 20 in order to resolve a conflict with the City's Building Code. The conflict with the Building Code has been resolved. A line which appeared on the plot plan as a property line has since been determined to be a leasehold line, consequently the necessity for a fire wall and other special requirements have been eliminated. Mr. Lee noted that a 1,800 sq. ft. modular unit has been proposed to be used for new and renewal drivers' license applications, to be located between the existing building and the westerly property line. The facility is expected to be in use for a period of two years, with the possibility of a third year. The proposed location of the building will eliminate six parking spaces; how- ever, it is anticipated the demand for parking should be lessened because of the increased rate of turnover due to the improved service allowed by the ad- ditional facility. It was recalled by Mr. Lee that a conditional use permit to utilize residentially zoned property for commercial parking purposes was granted the applicant in 1971. One of the conditions of approval was that if the applicant's lease were renewed (current lease expires in March, 1973), permanent paving and a 10 foot landscaping strip must be installed. The permanent paving has been put in; however, the landscaping has not. It has been determined by the City Attorney that since this use is only for an interim period, an environmental impact statement will not be required. The Chairman declared the public hearing reopened. Mr. Scott, 3960 Normal Street, San Diego, District Manager of the Department of Motor Vehicles, stated that recognizing the present facilities are totally inadequate to give proper service to the community, they are requesting use of the temporary building. They have funds requested in the 1973-74 State budget for site acquisition and in the 1974-75 budget for planning and building. It has been determined that the need is critical in this vicinity, so both re- quests have been placed in the 1973-74 budget, and it is expected funds will be available in July to start the project. Several sites in Chula Vista are under consideration for the new facility, but no decision has been made on the location. Use of the temporary building will be needed for approximately two years while the funds are acquired and the new building constructed. Mr. Scott also mentioned that on October 15, 1971, when they entered into their lease for expansion of the present building, a condition of the lease was that the landlord provide the 10 foot landscaping strip adjacent to "C" Street. The landlord had obtained from the City a deferral on this item, but it is still a condition of the existing lease and fulfillment of this requirement could be guaranteed by the applicant. As no one else desired to be heard, the public hearing was closed. -8- 11/27/72 - MSUC (Chandler-Whitten) Request of the Department of Motor Vehicles for a RESOLUTION NO. PCC-72-34 conditional use permit to locate a modular building for temporary use in the flood plain at 11 Third Avenue Extension be approved subject to the follow- ing conditions. 1. Approval is granted for only a two-year period. An extension of time may be granted upon the approval of the Planning Commission. 2. The modular unit shall be firmly anchored to prevent it from floating away in the event of flood. 3. A landscaping and irrigation plan for the l0 foot area adjacent to "C" Street shall be submitted and approved by the City's Landscape Planner and prior to the issuance of a building permit a letter of intent will be required from the Department of Motor Vehicles indicating they will be responsible for the landscaping within a reasonable period of time. Findings: 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. Since the existing facility is overcrowded, this new facility will alleviate that problem. The close proximity to the existing Department - of Motor Vehicles office will also eliminate confusion in locating the facility. b. That such use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. The new building will not adversely affect the health, safety or general welfare as long as the provisions for flood protection are carried out. c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the Code for such use. All applicable regulations will be complied with. d. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Chula Vista or the adopted plan of any govern- mental agency. The General Plan will not be affected. -9- 11/27/72 PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit - Request to construct office buildin§ and cabinet shop in Flood Plain District - Southeast corner of Trousdale Drive and Press Lane - Clyde T. Stahl Associate Planner Lee pointed out the location at the southeast corner of Trousdale Drive and Press Lane where the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to construct an office building and cabinet shop in the I-L-F zone and a waiver from the requirement for a six foot high masonry zoning wall. There are no unusual circumstances associated with this request for non- residential construction in the flood plain which would result in consideration different from previous conditional use permits. There is a significant difference in elevation ranging from five feet to 20 feet between the ap- plicant's property and the adjoining residential property that should serve as an adequate buffer and eliminate the necessity for a masonry zoning wall. It has been determined by the City Attorney that this project is trivial and, therefore, an environmental impact statement would not be required. This being the time and place as advertised the public hearing was opened. Clyde T. Stahl, the applicant, reported that his present building is in the right of way of freeway 1-54 and the Division of Highways would like to have him in his new location by January 2, which is almost impossible, but he would like to get started on the new construction as soon as possible. As no one else desired to be heard, the public hearing was closed. It was suggested by Chairman Rice that if any change in elevation occurred in the future between the applicant's property and the adjoining residential property, a zoning wall should be built immediately. Mr. Stahl agreed to this and to the other conditions recommended by the Planning staff. MSUC (Macevicz~Whitten) Request of Clyde T. Stahl for a conditional use RESOLUTION NO. PCC-72-35 permit to construct an office building and cabinet shop at the southeast corner of Trousdale Drive and Press Lane in the Flood Plain District be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Any floatable material shall be contained within a building or tied down to prevent it from floating away in the event of flood. 2. Any fencing used in place of the masonry zoning wall shall be subject to staff approval. 3. If there is any change in the topography due to grading which would warrant a masonry zoning wall, such wall will be constructed immediately. Findings: 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. -10- 11/27/72 The proposed use is a permitted use in the I-L zone and the conditional use permit is required because the property is located in the flood plain. 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. As long as the conditions required for construction in the flood plain are complied with there will be no adverse effects. c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the Code for such use. All requirements shall be met. d. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Chula Vista or the adopted plan of any govern- mental agency. The General Plan will not be affected. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Amendment to Zonin9 Ordinance appl~in9 to permanent and temporary outside sales and display Associate Planner Lee noted that the City Council at their July 11, 1972 meeting had directed the staff to draft an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regulating parking lot and sidewalk sales. The staff was also instructed to combine their efforts with the Chamber of Commerce in drafting the proposal, and Mr. Lee thanked the Chamber for their cooperation and assistance. Mr. Lee pointed out that the Zoning Ordinance presently prohibits the sale or outside display of merchandise in all commercial and industrial zones, with the exception of the General Industrial zone, and except those uses specifically referred to in the Ordinance, such as, off-street parking and loading facilities, sidewalk cafes and certain outdoor uses by conditional use permit, i.e., new and used cars, trailer sales and other similar uses. Mr. Lee stated that research showed that by limiting the report to parking lot sales, additional confusion would be created regarding the other forms of out- side sales and displays; therefore, the analysis was expanded to include these other areas. One of the major problems of outside sales and display has been that of enforce- ment relating to parking lot sales, which occur mainly on weekends when no one is available to enforce the ordinance. Many ongoing outside sales and displays of merchandise familiar to everyone, such as vending machines, newspapers, magazines, flowers, plants, books and coin-operated amusements have become part of the streetscape and not considered offensive in nature except when done in -ll- 11/27/72 a haphazard fashion or of such quantity as to become obtrusive. However, many items such as furniture, clothing, new and used goods, soil additives, appliances, lawnmowers and tires, to name a few, offer no real necessity for being sold and displayed outside of a building, and are objectionable. These are creating the problem of interpretation and enforcement. Both the staff and Chamber agree that outside sales and displays need to be regulated to prevent the more objectionable outside display practices, while providing for a certain controlled form of outside sales. The present provisions of the Ordinance are far too vague and leave too much to interpretation regarding the regulation of special events for grand open- ings and anniversaries for businesses. A staff proposal for regulating such special events provides also for the signing permitted during the promotion. Mr. Lee stated further that although considerable input by the Chamber is con- tained in the proposed amendments, the proposals do not reflect the total desires of either the Chamber or the staff, but represent a compromise which should serve the needs of the Chula Vista businessmen and still maintain the necessary degree of control to discourage the more undesirable features of outside sales and displays. Mr. Lee introduced Assistant Planner Liuag who showed for the Commission a series of colored slides depicting outside displays, a good portion of which were in areas immediately outside the City limits in the County or surrounding cities. He accompanied the slides with narration on the locale and the con- ditions displayed. Mr. Lee then gave the following brief synopsis of the proposed amendments, and read the proposed revisions in detail. Permanent Outside Sales and Display. This amendment stipulates what items may be displayed and those that are strictly prohibited. Display areas are allowed only when included as part of an approved site plan subject to certain conditions, such as location, quantity, and internal circulation. Sales and display are presently prohibited in the public right of way. No change is contemplated in this policy. Temporary Outside Sales and Display. This amendment would provide for parking lot sales and other similar events subject to certain conditions, issuance of a permit and time limitations. Temporary sales would be per- mitted a maximum of 7 consecutive days, 6 times a year, with a minimum of 30 days between sales. Pennants may only be used for safety precautions. Service Station Display. Provide for outside display, other than that permitted under a canopy. Structures used for display must be architec- turally compatible with the building and cannot be placed within the required landscaping areas or interfere with vehicular circulation. -12- 11/27/7Z Special Events. Reduces the time limit from 30 days to 14 days. Places conditions on promotional items and restricts the use of pennants to grand openings and change of ownership or lessee. A special event permit is required for approval. Temporary Promotional ~i~s. Establishes standards regulating signs during special events. The signing is limited only with regard to the cumulative effect and distractive character. Only one freestanding sign per street frontage is permitted. Acting Planning Director Williams commented that these proposals are designed primarily to get control areas for any outside display of merchandise into the basic commercial areas of the City so the displays do not interfere with the circulation of pedestrian or vehicular traffic. In the future, such areas will be required to be a part of the site plan when permits are requested. He also suggested that some consideration be given to the locating of vending machines, and include them on the site plan, as it is possible for them to be displayed attractively rather than haphazardly. This being the time and place as advertised the public hearing was opened. Dan King of E1 Cajon, who works in Chula Vista for U-Haul Co., asked Associate Planner Lee if this ordinance were passed how it would affect the present U-Haul dealerships and future dealerships in Chula Vista. Mr. Lee replied that the ordinance provides for trailer rentals under certain conditions at the present time and there are no significant changes. An area is indicated on the plan when the conditional use permit is requested, and the trailers remain in that location. Larry Mutchler, who is in control of inventory for U-Haul Co. in this area, stated that the company prides themselves on their equipment and the service which it offers to the community. It is their aim to cooperate fully with the City regarding the outside display ordinance, and he believes their own organization guidelines to be probably more rigid than the City's requirements. Mr. Williams expressed interest in seeing their guidelines and invited Mr. Mutchler to come in and discuss them with the Planning Department staff. No one else desiring to be heard, the public hearing was closed. The Commissioners questioned the staff on various details of the proposed amendments, and concluded that some further amendments might be necessary in the future, but any such problems could be handled as they occur, and they complimented the staff and the Chamber of Commerce on the excellent job they had done. MSUC (Whitten-Wilson) Zoning Ordinance amendments applying to permanent and temporary outside sales and display be recommended to the City Council. -13- ll/z7/7z Request for architectural approval of proposed office structure at 4041 Bonita Road - Victor Wulff Acting Planning Director Williams noted that this request for approval of the architecture of a proposed office building at 4045 (lot adjacent to 4041) Bonita Road in the C-C-D zone is an appeal from a decision of the Zoning Administrator. He reviewed the adjacent architectural and land uses: to the north is the golf course; to the south is the Bonita Village shopping center with rustic board and batten, shake roof exterior; to the east is a veterinarian office with rustic shake roof type architecture and apartments with rustic architecture and a com- bination of composition and shake roof with rough sawn siding; to the west is the applicant's current office with "red barn" type architecture and a "red brick modern" Fire Station. Mr. Williams displayed renderings and elevations of the proposed French Pro- vincial design, three-story building, and commented that although the architec- ture of the structure is an excellent example of French Provincial, it is incompatible with the established rustic character of the area and the adjacent buildings which are all of one and two-story height. Victor Wulff, 4041 Bonita Road, Bonita, the applicant, remarked that French Provincial is considered "country" design and he had purposely used it to minimize the height of the building. The three-story building is within the zoning limitations, and it was necessary in order to provide the necessary building space and also meet the parking requirements. Mr. Wulff said he has designed many buildings for the Bonita area and there is no architectural type uniformly used throughout the community. He believes his building is compatible without looking like all the other buildings in the block, and lends architectural interest. The Commission agreed they would not question the architectural and aesthetic judgment of an architect of Mr. Wulff's stature. MSUC (Chandler-Rudolph) Architecture of proposed office structure for Victor Wulff at 4045 Bonita Road be approved. Director's Report Mr. Williams presented to the Commission for their approval and signature the Resolutions of Commendation which they had requested be prepared in recognition of the years of service of Edward Adams as a Commissioner and of Bruce Warren as Planning Director. MSUC (Whitten-Macevicz) Approval of Resolutions of Commendation for Com- RESOLUTION NO. PCM-72-21 missioner Edward Adams and Planning Director RESOLUTION NO. PCM-72-22 Bruce Warren (former). Mr. Williams requested that the Commission schedule a special meeting for Monday, December 11, which is not a regular meeting night, inasmuch as they - had continured the public hearing on Dr. Bloom's Sports World to that date. He suggested, also, that if possible the agenda be kept free of any other items, and the special meeting be devoted to the discussion of the Sports World development plan. -14- )1/27/72 ° MSUC (Whitten-Rudolph) That a special meeting of the Planning Commission be scheduled for Monday, December ll, 1972. Commission Comments Member Whitten noted that MacDonald's on Broadway are using their unimproved parking lot for customer parking, and an enterprising homeowner had placed an illegal sign reading, "Aztec Vinyl" on the wood wall behind the Arco Station at the corner of Halecrest and Telegraph Canyon Road. Mr. Williams advised that the Zoning Enforcement Officer was aware of both violations and would take steps regarding them. Member ~hitten also commented that he did not feel enough time was allowed to review the staff comments and prepare for a Commission meeting with receipt of the comments on Friday afternoon. Other members of the Commission agreed that it was a short time to analyze the material, particularly when there was a long agenda. Mr. Williams said he would be willing to explore the possibilities of making changes; however, he did not know what the effect might be on current pro- cedures in terms of advertising and how far it might back up an applicant from time of application to actual hearing. He also advised that it might be necessary to consider scheduling extra meetings, possibly two a week for a time, because of the work load which is approaching with the necessary con- sideration of revisions to the General Plan. The Chairman adjourned the meeting at 11:45 p.m. Respectfully su~mi tted, Leoda Scholl Acting Secretary