Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1972/11/20 MINUTES OF A REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA November 20, 1972 The regular adjourned 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 Director of Public Works Robens and Assistant City Attorney Blick. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chain~an Rice, Followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Member Rudolph requested that the minutes of the meeting of October 30, 1972, on page 9, sixth paragraph, which stated that the Commission concurred that the arena itself is desirable, be corrected to indicate that she did not concur, but stated that she did not have enough information about all of the various impacts it would have on the city to know if it was desirable or not. MSUC (Whitten-Rudolph) The minutes of October 30, 1972, be approved as corrected and the minutes of November 6, 1972 be approved as mailed. Member Chandler abstained from voting on the motion as he was absent from the meeting of October 30. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The Chairman called for oral communications and none were presented from the audience. Commission member Rudolph reported that with reference to the Commission meeting of October 30, the press reports were highly inaccurate in the case of the action regarding Sports World. She felt that the press' misunderstanding of the action of the Commission so distorts the public's impression of what actually occurred that members of the public may be led to take actions they would not have taken if there were a correct understanding of the situation. She noted that the City Attorney had explained that the Commission could take action approving in concept the Sports World Development as it was presented at that meeting without an environ- mental impact statement; however, such action would have required a recorded vote of each member of the Commission and no such vote was taken. Instead, during the discussion the Commission noted that they had insufficient information to take any kind of action at all. Traffic problems of horrendous proportions were pointed out and many other questions remain unanswered. Mrs. Rudolph commented that she does not intend to vote for or against this proposal without having full informa- tion about all of the impact, good and bad, that the development will have on our City and its citizens. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): Consideration of P-C Development Plan of Sports World - Dr. Leonard Bloom Acting Director of Planning Williams reported that the staff has continued discus- sion with Dr. Bloom's consultants and have recently received their proposal for solutions to the traffic problem; however, there has not been time enough to -2- 11/20/72 analyze the proposal and it is requested that the hearing be continued to the meeting of November 27, 1972. Member Wilson asked what position such continuances place the applicant in, and whether he is delayed in making further plans until an approval of the concept of development is obtained. Donald Worley, Attorney with Seltzer, Caplan, Wilkins and McMahon, 3003 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, representing the applicant, advised that they concur with the request for a continuance to the next meeting. MSUC (Chandler-Whitten) The public hearing for consideration of P-C Development Plan for Sports World be continued to the meeting of November 27, 1972. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - ll Third Avenue Extension - Request to locate modular building for temporary use in Flood P}ain - Department of Motor Vehicles Associate Planner Lee advised that since there is a conflict between the applica- tion and certain Building Code regulations, it is requested that this public hearing be continued to the November 27 meeting in an effort to resolve the problem before action is taken. MSUC (Macevicz-Whitten) The public hearing for consideration of a conditional use permit to locate a modular building for temporary use in the Flood Plain be con- tinued to the meeting of November 27, 1972. PUBLIC ~EARING: VARIANCE - 1480 First Avenue - Request to create two lots havin9 no street frontage - Saburo Muraoka Associate Planner Lee indicated the location of the property on the west side of First Avenue, just north of the SDG&E easement and noted that the property is zoned R-3 and R-3-G as is adjacent property. He pointed out the lot is approxi- mately 602 feet deep with 92 feet of frontage on First Avenue, and is currently improved with a single family residence on the western portion of the lot, and with a reservoir and utility building to serve the adjacent mobile home park located nearer to First Avenue. The applicant proposes to divide the property into three lots, with the two rear lots to be served by an easement from First Avenue. The ordinance requires that each lot has 60 feet of street frontage unless an easement is approved. Mr. Lee reviewed the conditions recommended by the staff for approval of the request which include the filing of a parcel map, provision of guest parking and undergrounding of utilities. He suggested that the condition requiring that the access easement be paved in conformance with City standards for residential alleys, which would require concrete pavement, be modified to require only a minimum width of 15 feet improved to City standards since the applicant already has asphalt surfacing on the easement. He further suggested adding a condition that the property served by the easement shall not be used by more than one single family dwelling on each lot unless the driveway width is increased to 20 feet of paved surface for the entire length of the driveway. -3- 11/20/72 This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Saburo Muraoka, 1480 First Avenue, owner of the property, indicated his concur- rence with the proposed conditions and advised that his only plans for the property at the present are to convey the lot created at the front to his son for construction of a house. As no one else wished to speak, for or against, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Whitten-Wilson) Approval of a variance for the division of property RESOLUTION NO. PCV-72-19 at 1480 First Avenue, creating two lots having no street frontage, subject to the following conditions: 1. A parcel map shall be required for the division of the property. 2. All required guest parking shall be provided on site for those parcels created without street frontage. 3. A 20-foot wide access easement parallel to the southerly property line shall be required and paved a minimum width of 15 feet in conformance with City standards. Property served by the easement shall not be used by more than one single family dwelling on each lot unless the driveway width is increased to 20 feet of paved surface for the entire length of driveway. 4. All utility service shall be underground. Findings are as follows: a. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the owner exists. The configuration of the lot makes it impossible to create additional parcels with the required street frontage. b. That this variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same zone in the vicinity of the subject property. The variance is necessary in order to subdivide the property and to provice access to the newly created lots. c. That the authorizing of this variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and will not materially impair the purposes of the Ordinance or the public interest. All of the lots that will be created meet the minimum area requirements and will have access to a dedicated street by means of an easement. d. THat the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the General Plan. The General Plan will not be affected. -4- 11/20/72 Consideration of house plans for El Rancho del ReS Unit No. 1 - Larwin, Inc. Associate Planner Lee displayed a plat showing the location of this subdivision within the approved Planned Unit Development, noting that it was based upon the fact of making more efficient use of the 5,000 square foot lots and providing more open space comprised of green belts and parks. This resulted in a modifica- tion of the standard side yard requirement as well as other setbacks. Larwin is now requesting a change from the original plan for zero side yard to a conventional plan of 3 feet on one side and 7 feet on the other, or 3 feet and 10 feet in some cases. Mr. Lee noted in all cases there would be a 10 foot separation between structures, and the rear yard would be established at a minimum of 20 feet. Mr. Lee enumerated the number of 2, 3, 4 and 5 bedroom models proposed and the square footage of each, noting that they have 143 houses that are over 2100 square feet, out of the total of 240 proposed for this development. Houses with the larger floor area would be two story. He displayed renderings and discussed the proposed architecture, noting it consists of rough stucco and extensive wood trim, with an option for shake shingle or composition roofs. He discussed the difference in cost between the two types of roo~pointing out a typical 1400 square foot house would cost about $800 for asphalt shingles compared to $1300 for wood shake shingles. Mr. Lee pointed out the proposed housing would be in a higher price range than that originally proposed by the Gersten Company for this subdivision. He also noted that the proposed plan includes a lot to be used as a common boat and camper storage area, since deed restrictions recorded with the subdivision prevent the storing of such vehicles on the individual lots. This will require some solution as to the responsibility of the maintenance of the storage yard as it would be inappropriate for the city to provide for the management. Mr. Lee enumerated four conditions recommended by the staff for approval of the proposed plans. Member Macevicz commented that for houses of this size the side yard is entirely too small and results in an overcrowded or packed appearance. Acting Director of Planning Williams pointed out that the lot widths have been approved and recorded with the filing of the subdivision map and this cannot be altered. The question before the Commission is whether they will approve the change to conventional type housing, or wish to retain the single lot line concept originally anticipated. Donald Worley, Attorney with Seltzer, Caplan, Wilkins and McMahon, 3003 Fourth Avenue, San Diego, introduced Mr. Howard Meister, President, and Mr. Solazzo, Vice- President of Larwin-San Diego, Inc., and conveyed their pleasure in entering Chula Vista as developers for the first time. -5- 11/20/72 Chuck Solazzo, Larwin-San Diego, Inc., 5150 Mission Gorge Road, San Diego, discussed their housing development at Mira Mesa, and the extensive market research and product design which has resulted in the models they are proposing for this subdivision unit. He indicated they are attempting to plot the models on the lots in order to use the larger lots for the larger homes and retain as much space between houses as possible. He reported that with reference to the 6 bedroom home, that is an option they present in one model which, if taken to its ultimate design, would be a 6 bedroom. He indicated, however, that very few of these have been built in their other developments. Chairman Rice expressed concern that the construction of many large homes would result in more automobiles in the neighborhood than the available parking space could accommodate. Commissioner Macevicz voiced disapproval of leaving the landscaping of the lots to the individual home owners and felt that at least minimal landscaping should be required of the developer. The Commission was also concerned over the impact on the schools which would result from the construction of larger homes than was originally anticipated, and discussed the possibility of limiting the number of bedrooms in order to maintain the population density originally proposed for the area. Mr. Worley reported that throughout the Larwin development in Mira Mesa there is an average of .65 elementary school children per house, which is just slightly above the normal in the San Diego Unified School District of .5 to .55. Howard Meister, President of Larwin-San Diego, Inc., spoke further of their marketing research which indicates that houses built at a zero side yard are not as acceptable as homes maintaining a side yard at each side of the house. He pointed out the orientation of the living area to the usable rear yard rather than to the side yard. He indicated their desire to be able to obtain FHA-VA financing and advised they would attempt to obtain a variance from F.H.A. in order to get such financing while utilizing the small side yards. Member Rudolph commented on the lack of privacy which results from too narrow side yards and indicated she felt a 5 ft. side yard is not usable and results in so much wasted space on the lot. The Commission also questioned the possibility of providing a greater housing mix in terms of size and price range. Mr. Meister indicated that in planning a larger area a greater mix could be attained, however, it is not practical in the development of 240 lots. Acting Director of Planning Williams noted the need to provide for different housing types in reference to the total Planned Unit Development, of which this is only one unit. -6- 11/20/72 After considerable discussion the majority of the Commission expressed the opinion that the proposed architecture is desirable and requested that the staff and developer work together to present a proposal limiting the number of bedrooms to be included in the development in an effort to retain the population density originally anticipated. It was suggested that such pro- posal be presented to the Commission on December 4. MSUC (Chandler-Whitten) Consideration of house plans for El Rancho del Rey Unit No. 1 by Larwin-San Diego, Inc. be continued to the meeting of December 4, 1972. Written Communications: Request by Farrell's Ice Cream Parlour to move their freestanding sign Associate Planner Lee advised that the applicant has an existing operation on the east side of Fifth Avenue, north of H Street, in the Home Fair shopping ceeter location. Their existing sign is located 280 feet north of H Street which is not on their leased property, but is just south of the driveway. They are requesting permission to relocate the sign further south~ nearer to H Street, to get better exposure from the shopping center and to the traffic along H Street. Mr. Lee pointed out other existing signs in the Home Fair center, including one for the restaurant on H Street, and the larger sign for the Home Fair department store which was intended to identify the entire center. It was pointed out that any business which locates in a shopping center complex must be willing to give up a certain amount of individual identification for the ability to associate with the complex. If each business were permitted a freestanding sign it would add to the confusion rather than solving the problem. Since the Commission has indicated in the past the desire to limit the number of freestanding signs in a shopping center, the staff feels it would not be in keeping with that policy to permit the applicant to move the sign to the proposed location. It is felt the applicant has not shown that the existing sign and location is inadequate to identify their business and have recommended that the applicant work with the owners of the Home Fair department store to redesign a sign for the entire center that would either include the various businesses, or limit the sign to the name of the shopping center complex. It is, therefore, recommended that the appli- cant's request be denied. James Magot, owner of Farrell's Ice Cream Parlour, 481 Fifth Avenue, stated their request is based upon a need to provide identification for their customers. He contended the proposed location would not be off-premise advertising since their leasehold responsibilities include a percentage of the maintenance of the entire lot as well as the lighting, and they are afforded the use of common parking. He reported the request stems from their need to realize exposure to the prime market, the Chula Vista shopping center. He noted that they do not identify with the Home Fair center since the building has been vacant for nearly a year, and they must depend on their individual identification. He also felt that in the future the trees planted along Fifth Avenue would completely screen their sign from H Street and from the Chula Vista shopping center. -7- 11/20/72 Member Macevicz observed that if each business located in this complex had a sign along H Street, there would be a total of nine signs. Mr. Magot expressed the opinion there would be no possibility of incorporating their sign with the Home Fair sign and hoped they might design a sign to identify Farrell's and the adjacent Jerry Lewis Theater. Member Chandler expressed the feeling that Farrell's building is attractive and in itself identifies the building. He would not favor moving their sign and hoped that in the future some of the other signs at that center may be removed. Member Wilson felt that approving this request would establish a precedent for other signs to be relocated in shopping centers. MSUC (Wilson-Chandler) The request by Farrell's Ice Cream Parlour for relocation of the freestanding sign be denied. Commission Comments Commissioner Wilson commented on a communication included in the Commission mailing from a disgruntled citizen and questioned the necessity of including such items. Chairman Rice noted that he has been receiving communications at his home address concerning the Sports World development and he felt such matters should be conveyed to the Planning ~epartment. ADJOURNMENT MSUC (Chandler-Whitten) The meeting be adjourned to the meeting of November 27, 1972. The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Helen Mapes, Sec