HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1972/09/18 MINUTES OF REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
September 18, 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 followin~
members present: Rice, Macevicz, Chandler, Rudolph, Adams, Whitten and ex-
officio member Miller. Also present: Director of Planning Warren, Associate
Planner Lee, Assistant Director of Public ~orks Robens and Assistant City
Attorney Blick.
The pledge of alle§iance to the flag was led by Chairman Rice, followed by a
moment of silent prayer.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Member Rudolph requested that the minutes of the meeting of September 6, 1972
be corrected on page 7 to show it was not Assemblyman Deddah with whom she had
an appointment but an administrative assistant in his local office.
MSUC (Chandler-Rudolph) The minutes of the meeting of September 6 be approved
as corrected.
The Chairman called for oral communications and none ~ere presented.
Resolution approvin~ variance at 814 Fifth Avenue for creation of lot with no
street frontage an~ under minimum required size -
Mrs. C. A, Jeter
Director of Planning Warren recalled that the public hearing for this request
was held and closed on September 6th. After determining that the lot in ques-
tion is a buildable site, the Commission continued consideration of a resolution
to this meeting, directing the staff to recommend required conditions. The
staff has provided conditions to assure the desired standard of development for
a lot ~ithout street frontage.
MSUC (Rudolph-Whitten) Approval of a zone variance to create a lot
RESOLUTION NO. PCV-72-15(B) without frontage on a dedicated street and
containing less than 7,000 sq. ft., subject
to the following conditions:
1. A parcel map shall be required for division of the property.
2. The applicant shall comply with Resolution Ilo. 6140 regarding the adequacy
of public facilities.
3. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed dwelling unit can connect
to the City sewer system as required by the Division of Engineering.
4. Site plan and architectural review shall be required prior to obtaining
building permits.
-2- 9/18/72
5. Access to the property shall be obtained by means of a driveway easement
and turn-around located parallel to the westerly property line.
a. The driveway shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide and paved according
to City standards.
b. A T-type turn-around or other acceptable method shall be provided at
the end of the driveway easement.
6. All utility service shall be undergrounded.
7. Two offstreet paved parking stalls, in addition to the required two-car
garage, shall be required.
Findings are as follows:
a. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the
owner exists.
In order to develop this property, which has an unusual depth, an access
easement is necessary since the lot would have no 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
and in the vicinity of the subject property.
The lot will substantially conform to the standards of the R-1 zone and,
without the variance, it could not be developed.
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 Ordi-
nance or the public interest.
No detrimental effects would be created as long as the conditions of the
resolution are satisfied.
d. That the granting of a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of
the General Plan.
This development will be in conformance with the General Plan.
Request for modification of conditions concernin9 park requirements for E1 Rancho 'del Rey Units 1~ 2 and 3 (P.U.D.).
Director of Planning Warren noted that consideration of this request was con-
tinued fromm the meeting of September 6, 1972 as E1 Rancho del Rey contended
that the park land requirements for their development were inequitable as
compared to the requirements made of other developers under the Park Land
Dedication Ordinance. The staff was requested to make a statistical report
of a comparison of the requirements.
-3- 9/18/72
Associate Planner Lee displayed a plat showing the park service district in
which E1 Rancho del Rey Units 1, 2 and 3 are located, noting that under the
master park plan this area includes three park sites and an open space canyon.
Total park requirements for this district, based on projected population
estimates, is 21 acres of park land.
Mr. Lee pointed out that as shown in the computations furnished the requirement
for Units 1 and 2, based on the number of housing units and additional square
footage as agreed upon to compensate for smaller lot size in Unit 1, is 7N acres
of developed park land. He noted that the applicant has dedicated 9 acres and
is required to improve this park land, which would result in a credit of 1N acres
of extra park land which may be used in the development of future units.
Mr. Lee reported that E1 Rancho del Rey was given a privilege in the reduction
of lot size in Unit 1 on the basis of providing the City with compensating open
space, and this was reflected in computing the amount of park land required for
Units 1 and 2.
He pointed out that Candlewood Subdivision, which is within the overall develop-
ment concept of this P.U.D.,contains approximately 20 acres, and will be developed
with single family homes. The City is requiring the standard park acquisition
and development fees from this developer which will be used to provide developed
park land and open space within this park service district, because it permits
acquisition of far more land than by any other means.
Mr. Lee advised that the staff recommends: (1) that the Planning Commission
determine that it was their intent to require both dedication and improvement
of park land and greenbelt areas within development Area A of E1 Rancho del Rey;
(2) that the system of fees required in Ordinance No. 1366 will be used to
balance the cost of acquiring and developing open space areas within develop-
ment Area A in an equitable manner; and (3) that the Planning Commission deny
the request to modify condition #16 of PUD-71-2, but indicate that the applicant
will be creditied with 1.7 acres of developed park land, which represents the
difference between the 9.2 acres being developed by the applicant with Units 1
and 2, and his actual requirement for those two units computed at 7.5 acres.
Paul Peterson, attorney representing E1 Rancho del Rey, contended that the 800
sq. ft. per unit should not be included in the park land requirement; he agreed
with the figure of 322 sq. ft. X 240 dwelling units for Unit 1, but suggested
that inasmuch as Unit 2 is composed of cluster or attached single family
dwellings, the park requirement as applied to duplex development, or 218 sq. ft.
(for apartments) X 180 dwelling units should be used. This would result in a
requirement for 2.68 acres of park land for Units 1 and 2; or using the alter-
native of accepting Unit 2 as a regular single family development and applying
the 322 sq. ft. requirement to those units, it would result in a total of 3.11
acres of park land which would be required under the Park Land Dedication
Ordinance if applied to these units.
Ron Calhoun of Wilsey and Ham, further elaborated upon discussions between their
firm and the Planning staff, during which it was determined that 800 sq. ft.
was the difference in lot size between the average R-1 subdivision in the City
of Chula Vista and the average size of lots in their Unit 1. He contended it
was not felt the 800 sq. ft. should be required on a one for one basis as
-4- 9/18/72
additional open space, but was a yardstick to be used for guidance. He also
maintained they were talking about two specific types of open space: developed
park land and passive open space which would require very minimal development.
Director of Planning Warren felt there had been a definite understanding that
800 sq. ft. per unit would be used to calculate the additional open space re-
quired to compensate for the smaller lot size permitted in Unit 1. He also
asserted the applicant knew this meant dedication and development of the land
and that it would be illogical to leave a strip of undeveloped "open space"
in this park area.
Mr. Peterson argued that the 800 sq. ft. did not mean a requirement of dedicated
and improved parks. He noted there is a great difference in dedicating 4~ acres
of open space and doing nothing with it, or improving 4~ acres of neighborhood
parks. He contended that it is his client's position that the whole development
Area A, which contains basically 7 units, would require the dedication and
improvement of 11.2 acres under the PUD resolution; but the staff is saying this
is not so, and that the dedication and development of 9 acres in connection with
Units 1 and 2 will merely result in a credit of 1.5 acres to be applied against
the requirements for Units 3 through 7. Their position is that this is 6 acres
in excess of the 3.11 acres which should be required for Units 1 and 2. He felt
that due to the geography of the area they might be required to improve the
northern park of 3.5 acres and the smaller one near the center of the develop-
ment of .7 acre, for a total of 4.2 acres, now and then improve the south park
at a later time as additional units are developed. He also requested a deter-
mination from the Commission as to whether the dedication and improvement of
11.2 acres would satisfy the requirement of the resolution for the entire
P.U.D. area.
Member Macevicz felt consideration at this time should be confined to the first
three units, since no plans have been presented for future units.
Member Rudolph pointed out that condition 16 of the resolution clearly states
it is the responsibility of the developer to develop all open space.
Mr. Peterson summarized their position, again reiterating their opinion that
only 3.11 acres of improved park land should be required with the development
of Units I and 2; and while they recognize that under the PUD resolution they
must dedicate 9 acres and have, in fact, already dedicated that amount, they
should be given relief on the improvement requirement by reducing it to
3 acres, or at most, to 4.2 acres as contained in the two parks. They also
further request a determination that the dedication and improvement of 11.2
acres would satisfy the requirement for all of Area A covered by the PUD
resolution.
Director of Planning Warren expressed the opinion that to be of use to the
residents the 800 sq. ft. of open space per lot would have to be included in
the neighborhood park and developed as such. He reiterated the staff is
willing to accede a credit of 1.7 acres toward Unit 3, but they are not willing
to make any further concessions or to apply the Park Land Dedication Ordi-
nance (especially as interpreted by the applicant) to this development since
it is not relevant and the developer is bound by the agreement entered into.
-5- 9/18/72
In discussion the Commission concurred that the requirement of 800 sq. ft.
per lot in Unit 1 must be construed as developed park land and this represents
a minimal requirement for a development of this size.
MSUC (Macevicz-Chandler) The request for modification of conditions concern-
ing park requirements for E1 Rancho del Rey Units 1, 2 and 3 of the P.U.D. be
denied based on the recommendations and explanation by the staff and that this
recommendation be forwarded to the City Council.
PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 1187 l~alnut Avenue - Request to use
two parcels in C-T zone for parkin~ for E-Z Haul Truck and
~r~i.ler Rentals - Harold G. Taylor
Associate Planner Lee showed the location of the property on the east side of
Walnut, noting that the request is for use of a vacant parcel and a portion
of a lot developed with a single family dwelling. He pointed out the com-
mercial uses to the south, vacant property to the west and residential uses
to the north and east. He displayed a detailed plat of the property noting
the applicant intends to fence the property along Walnut Avenue and to con-
tinue the fence along the north property line and along the east to the
southerly boundary. He has requested that the existing dwelling be left on
the site and an existing garage, which he is requesting be converted into a
utility shed for the operation of the rental storage area. He noted that the
paving of Walnut Avenue ends at the south edge of this property.
Mr. Lee advised the concern of the staff is the protection of the adjacent
residential uses to the north and east. The Zoning Ordinance requires a 6 ft.
masonry wall to be installed between commercial property and the residential
zone; in addition it requires that the outdoor storage of merchandise and
material must be enclosed by a solid fence or building. The applicant has
requested a waiver of this condition and that he be permitted to use a chain
link or wooden fence instead.
He pointed out the General Plan indicates this area for development in future
years for limited industrial uses which indicates a change in the land use in
the future. Inasmuch as this area is in a transitional period, the staff felt
it would be unreasonable to require a masonry wall along two sides of the
property.
He reported the applicant had indicated the existing house would be used as a
caretakers residence, and in that event there would be no necessity for solid
fencing between the residence and the storage area. The staff finds a chain
link fence along Walnut would be acceptable if slats were used in the fence
to give the effect of solid wood fence.
Mr. Lee reported the Division of Engineering has indicated they would not
require street improvements on Walnut Avenue as a condition of approval at
this time; however, the annual review may lead to that requirement in the
future.
Mr. Lee reviewed tile conditions recor,~ended by the staff for approval of
this conditional use permit.
-6- 9/18/72
Assistant Director of Public Works Robens indicated that he did not have an
opportunity to inspect the site to determine the need for street improve-
ments. He asked if this hearing could be continued for a week in order that
he might view the site.
Chairman Rice asked the applicant if a continuance would present a hardship.
Harold G. Taylor, 1187 Walnut, indicated that this would present a hardship
and pointed out that he had been advised if he did not improve the property
as much as $5,000 he was not required to pave the street. Since he could not
afford to put in the street improvements at this time, he therefore limited
the improvement on the property. He felt other property owners in the area
would also be interested in improving the street in the future.
Mr. Robens felt an annual review of the operation would be satisfactory as a
requirement for improvements in the future.
The public hearing was opened, as advertised.
Harold G. Taylor further discussed his proposed use of the property, confirming
that it is his intention to use the existing dwelling as the residence of a
caretaker or watchman for security purposes to prevent theft of parts from the
trucks and trailers at night. He advised that the existing garage or shed
would be used for the storage of furniture dollies, blankets, rear view
mirrors, trailer hitches, etc., used with the trucks and trailers. He con-
firmed that this business would be conducted from the service station on the
other side of Walnut Avenue and this lot would be used solely for storage of
the vehicles.
Mr. Taylor indicated his desire to install a fence but felt that 6 feet in
height is too high. He also felt the slats in the front fence would be detri-
mental and could see no reason for requiring solid fence, since it faces
industrial property and the freeway. He stated a preference for using a
3 ft. fence.
Robert McCune, partner in Palomar Industries located on the other side of
Palomar Street, reported that he had spoken to most of the immediate neighbors
and they all seemed to favor Mr. Taylor's proposed use of the property and no
objections were voiced. He requested that every consideration be given to
granting Mr. Taylor's request.
The Commission discussed the fence requirement and felt a solid fence along
the front would not be necessary and that the fence around the dwelling should
be left to the applicant's discretion to meet his needs.
MSUC (Whitten-Macevicz) Approval of a conditional use permit to allow the
RESOLUTION No. PCC-72-28 use of two parcels for parking of E-Z Haul truck
and trailer rentals at 1187 Walnut, subject to
the following conditions:
1. The Planning Commission shall review this conditional use permit annually
to assure compliance with conditions of approval and determine whether
changes have occurred in the area which warrant additional conditions.
-7- 9/18/72
This may include installation of public improvements as required by the
Division of Engineering.
2. A 6 foot high solid wood fence (subject to staff approval) shall be
required along the northerly and easterly property lines.
3. A fence, subject to staff approval, shall be required along the westerly
property line. The fence shall not be required in front of the single
family dwelling.
4. Any proposed lighting arrangement shall be subject to staff approval.
5. Any proposed signs shall be subject to staff approval.
6. The use of the property shall be limited to the storage of trucks and
trailers for rent and such accessory activities as the installation of
trail er hitches. No repair of trucks or trailers shall be permitted.
7. The existing dwelling shall remain on the property so long as its use
is limited for a caretaker or an office in conjunction with the storage
operation.
Findings are as follows:
a. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable
to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well-
being of the neighborhood or community.
A truck and trailer rental facility is appropriate at this location since
it is adjacent to major streets and a freeway and it will provide a
service needed in the area.
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.
Adequate protection of adjacent residences will be assured with solid
fencing and Planning Commission review of the conditions in one year.
The operation of the facility will be conducted from a second location
so that any noise or traffic would be minimal.
c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions
specified in the Code for such use.
All required regulations and conditions will be complied with, except for
a waiver of the zoning wall.
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 proposed use would not affect the General Plan.
-8- 9/18/72
PUBLIC HEARING: a. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 173 Fourth Avenue - Request to
construct and operate a home for the elderly in R-3 zone -
Retirement Properties
b. V~RIANCE - 173 Fourth AvenUe - Request for reduction of
side yard from 20' tO 7' - Retirement Properties
Associate Planner Lee reported that this request is for permission to construct
and operate a home for the elderly at a location extending from Fourth Avenue
through to Glover Avenue. As indicated on the development plan, the building
will maintain a 30 foot setback from Fourth Avenue with no access from Fourth;
the access will be from Glover with a 20 foot setback observed at that property
line. The proposal is for a two-story structure of Spanish architecture. The
staff recommends approval subject to two conditions which would include fencing
on the north and south property lines and a revision of the proposed parking
plan to accommodate a turn-around area or a secondary access drive.
Mr. Lee advised it had been determined that the variance for reduction of side
yard from 20' to 7' is not necessary since the proposed use is not in the same
classification as a hospital. It is recommended that this application be filed.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Charles Aston, local address 525 Third Avenue, Chula Vista, reported that the
use requested is properly described as a retirement manor or hotel for the
elderly, being planned and staffed for senior citizens who wish to receive 24
hour services in a protected environment. This should not be compared with a
convalescent hospital. The guests will all be ambulatory and not in need of
medical care. This would be similar to the resident portion of Fredericka
Manor.
Roy Carlson, 1399 Ninth Avenue, San Diego, asked if the occupants of this
retirement home would not have privately owned vehicles.
Director of Planning Warren pointed out that in any retirement home a few of
the occupants own automobiles but the ratio is much smaller than in a standard
apartment building. It is felt the parking as proposed will be adequate.
Jeanne Campbell, 525 Third Avenue, owner of the property, expressed her
pleasure in having this type of a structure in Chula Vista. She hopes the
Commission would consider it favorably and be as pleased with it as she is.
As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Chandler-Rudolph) The request for a conditional use permit to con-
RESOLUTION IlO. PCC-72-27 struct and operate a home for the elderly at 173
Fourth Avenue in the R-3 zone be approved, subject
to the following conditions:
1. Solid fencing shall be provided on the north and south property lines to a
maximum height of 6 ft. except in the front setback areas.
2. Parking, as shown on the proposed plan, shall be revised to accommodate a
turn-around area or a secondary access drive.
-9- 9/18/72
Findings are as follows:
a. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable
to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well-
being of the neighborhood or the community.
The site is located within close proximity to park facilities and shopping
areas, which should serve the guests of the facility. Whereas there are
similar facilities of the type proposed in the area, there is no evidence
that there is an overabundance of units.
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 proposed use is primarily a residential care operation very much in
keeping with the underlying zone which permits apartments.
c. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions speci-
fied in the Code for such use.
All rules and regulations of the Code are 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 recognizes a variety of housing types and provides for
this type of facility in locations that are close to recreation and
shopping.
MSUC (Macevicz-Whitten) Application for a variance for reduction of side yard
from 20' to 7' on property at 173 Fourth Avenue be filed.
SUBDIVISION: Tentative map of Larkhaven Units 3 and 4 - American Housing Guild
Associate Planner Lee indicated the location of Larkhaven Unit 3, containing
132 lots, bisected by Orange Avenue, and the smaller Unit 4, containing 15 lots,
located west of Units 1 and 2. He noted that the applicant has reserved a five
acre park site which would have to be acquired and developed by the City, with
fees collected in the area as development occurs.
Mr. Lee pointed out that the portion of the subdivision lying north of Orange
is relieved of any fee requirements based upon the dedication of park land and
Little League fields to the City. Since this dedication has not been accom-
plished, it should be clarified that if it is not dedicated, the applicant
would be committed with Units 1 through 4 to $52,000 in fees.
Mr. Lee noted that this subdivision represents the final extension of Max
Avenue, across Orange Avenue, and stubbing out at the Woodlawn Park area. He
indicated that Orange Avenue, a major collector street, would be developed
-10- 9/18/72
similar to the way proposed in Units 1 and 2, with a solid decorative block
wall along both sides of the road, with landscaping in the center median to
be the responsibility of the City, while the area between the sidewalk and the
block wall would be the responsibility of the developer with ultimate main-
tenance to be under a maintenance district formed by residents of the area.
He also discussed the requirement for fencing for those areas which abut the
park site, Walnut Avenue and C Street, and the need for a pedestrian access
walk between two lots to an entrance to Rohr School §round.
Mr. Lee reported that the staff recommends deleting the portion of this map
lying north of Orange Avenue until plans for improvement of the property
adjacent on the east are submitted, in order that a street pattern may be
designed to connect the two properties in the event the eastern parcel is
developed for R-1 use.
Jerry Linton, American Housing Guild, pointed out the advantages to be gained
by the City in this development, including additional park land and the con-
nection of Orange Avenue to improve the circulation pattern in the southern
part of the City. He expressed reservations on the matter of forming a
maintenance district for the land between the sidewalk and the wall at the
top of slope along Orange Avenue, and suggested that this area be maintained
by the City.
Mr. Linton also objected to deleting the portion of the subdivision north of
Orange Avenue and indicated they would not wish to change the street pattern
for that area due to the grade that would be encountered in extending a street
through to the property on the east. He requested that the map as submitted
be sent to the City Council.
Member Macevicz asked if the developer has reached an agreement with the school
districts concerning the payment of fees.
Mr. Linton indicated they feel this is an illegal means of obtaining money for
the schools and that they are in a judicial process on the legality of the
fees. They are presently negotiating with the school districts.
After discussion of the points raised by Mr. Linton, the Commission concurred
that all conditions recommended by the staff should be submitted to the City
Council with particular emphasis on the recommendation to delete the area
lying east of Max Avenue and north of Orange Avenue as a part of this sub-
division.
MSUC (Macevicz-Whitten) Recommend to the City Council the approval of
tentative map for Larkhaven Units 3 and 4 subject to the conditions recommended
by the Director of Planning and the Director of Public Works as contained in
the staff comments.
-11- 9/18/72
Request for consideration of Home Occupation License for woodworking shop at
143 Landis Avenue in R-3 zone - Donal~ E. Burham
Associate Planner Lee reported that the applicant is proposing to make cabinets
and other miscellaneous items in a woodworking shop and will utilize a table
saw, band saw, radial saw, sander and hand drill, all of which are less than
one horsepower. The staff is bringing this request to the Commission because
of the use of machinery; they recommend approval subject to conditions limiting
the work to the hours of lO:O0 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., the shop limited to a one
man operation and the equipment to that listed above.
Don Burham, 143 Landis, reported this is a hobby shop which he plans to use
after retirement to supplement his income; he indicated it would not be an
extensive operation.
Member Whitten noted there is quite a buffer between this site and the neighbors
which should preclude a noise hazard. Member Rudolph observed the structure is
completely fenced which also provides a safety measure for children in the area.
Chairman Rice called the attention of the Commission to the Commission's right
of review of any home occupation and the fact that the permit can be revoked if
complaints are received.
Member Adams maintained this is not a suitable operation for a home occupation
and would set a precedent for other shops of this nature.
MSC (Whitten-Chandler) The request for a Home Occupation License for wood-
working shop at 143 Landis Avenue in the R-3 zone be approved subject to the
following conditions:
1. All work shall be done between the hours of lO:O0 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.
2. The shop shall be limited to a one man operation.
3. Equipment to be used shall be limited to those presently utilized, i.e.,
table saw, band saw, radial saw, sander and hand drill.
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Members Whitten, Chandler, Rudolph, Rice and Macevicz
NOES: Member Adams
ABSENT: None
-12- 9/18/72
Request for architectural approval of carport enclosure in Brandywine
DegelOpment at i580-67 Mendocipe - Karl Giguiere
Associate Planner Lee advised that a resident of Brandywine is requesting per-
mission to fence his existing carport to utilize this as a dog enclosure but
still retaining it as a parking place for the car. Mr. Lee reminded that the
Brandywine development had been subject to specific architectural approval by
the Commission in the original development. He noted that the residents now
have an architectural review committee appointed by the Board of Directors
of the Homeowners Association. He reminded the Commission that one of the
conditions of approval for this Planned Unit Development was a deed restriction
prohibiting the conversion of any parking stalls for any other use. The staff
feels this enclosure does constitute a conversion of the carport; also, that
approval of this request would lead to more requests in the future for enclo-
sures or additions, and that some policy in this regard should be established.
The staff suggests that a letter be sent to the Board of Directors of the
Homeowners Association asking them to submit a standard fence design, including
designated areas where it might be installed.
Director of Planning Warren felt this request should not have been brought to
the Commission before the architectural review board had acted upon the design
and materials. He pointed out that as Planned Unit Developments are utilized
more frequently in the City, it is important for the Home Owners Associations
to be self-sustaining and to enforce their own regulations. He felt that en-
closing the carport did not affect its usefulness as a carport, but this should
be done uniformly throughout the development.
Karl Giguiere, 1580-67 Mendocino Drive, submitted pictures of the enclosure and
noted that the purpose was to make a pen for the dog during the day. He at-
tempted to design this in a way that would be compatible with the rest of the
building. He indicated he would adhere to any standards for enclosure which
might be established.
Director of Planning Warren suggested that the Commission defer action on this
request, and ask the home owners architectural control committee to submit
standards for sidewalls or other methods of enclosure which would be acceptable
throughout the development.
Bill Bowers, 1580-83 Mendocino Drive, spoke in favor of approving Mr. Giguiere's
enclosure and noted that he still parks his car in the carport every night so
it has not affected its usefulness for that purpose. Mr. Bowers spoke of
problems he had encountered in getting approval for a fence due to lack of
communication within the association.
Walter Smith, 1585-15 Mendocino Drive, indicated he represents the Board of
Directors of Mendocino Management and the architectural committee. He felt
there had been a lack of communication between the sales office and the Board
of Directors. He indicated the architectural committee had referred Mr.
Giguiere's request to the City Planning Department for a determination relative
to allowing this use of a carport. He expressed the willingness of the Com-
mittee to submit their recommendation for design standards for enclosures and
additions to the City for approval.
-13- 9/18/72
MSUC (Whitten-Macevicz) Consideration of the request for carport enclosure
at 1580-67 Mendocino Drive be continued to the first meeting in November.
Director's Re~ort
Director of Planning Warren called attention to a workshop meeting scheduled
for Monday, September 25, at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room.
The Commission requested that dinner be scheduled at the Stag and Hound
Restaurant at 7:00 p.m.
Mr. Warren advised that the City Council expects a recommendation on a review
of the General Plan. He indicated it had been hoped to start this fall on a
major revision of the plan through utilization of citizen committees; this
cannot be accomplished by the December date, but he felt it should be discussed
at the workshop session. He suggested that the land use map be reviewed for
problem areas and make recommendations for changes to the Council to meet the
December deadline, and at the same time begin work to initiate new citizen
committees for a comprehensive review and completion of the new elements
required by the State.
Commission Comments
Member Macevicz asked about the sign change for Jack-in-the-Box at the corner
of Broadway and H and whether this had staff approval. Mr. Lee indicated the
staff would check to determine if the changes made required a building permit.
Chairman Rice called attention to the removal of landscaping in front of the
Arco service station across from Rohr. He asked that the Zoning Enforcement
Officer check this.
Member Adams requested two reservations for the League of California Cities
dinner meeting in National City.
Member Rudolph reported that the City Beautification Committee is requesting
nominations for the City Beautification Award. She asked that any suggestions
be submitted to her during this week.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by Chairman Rice at 10:20 p.m. to the workshop
session at 5:00 p.m. on September 25, 1972.
Respectfully submitted,
Helen S. Mapes
Secretary