Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 2011/05/25 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Council Chambers 6:00 p,m. 276 Fourth Avenue May 25, 2011 Chula Vista, California CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL /MOTION TO EXCUSE: Members Present: Spethman, Liuag, Bringas, Tripp, Felber, Vinson Member Absent: Moctezuma MSC (Tripp/Felber) (6-0-0-1) to excuse Cmr. Moctezuma. Motion carried. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MOMENT OF SILENCE: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 9, 2011 Postponed to next regular meeting due to a lack four members being present who are able to vote on the minutes, INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Read into the record by Chair Spethman ORAL COMMUNICATION: No public input CONSENT ITEMS: None REPORT: 1. Information Item: Introduction of City Attorney Glen Googins. City Attorney Googins addressed the Commission and offered his services and that of his department's 2.. Public Hearing: PCM 04-10; Consideration of the City of Chula Vista Historic Preservation Program and Historic Preservation Ordinance i and consideration of and recommendation to the City Council to amend Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 19.56 concerning modifying districts„ Background: Ed Batchelder, Advance Planning Manager stated the Historic Preservation Program is the culmination of a comprehensive program that went through an exhaustive Planning Commission Minutes - 2 - May 25, 2011 public outreach effort and input from an advisory committee, He stated it's fitting that the completion of the program should be on the City's Centennial celebration, Mr. Batchelder introduced the Marilyn Ponseggi and Lynette Tessitore-Lopez, project managers Marilyn Ponseggi stated that in May 2007 the City Council approved a work program and directed staff to prepare a Historic Preservation Program and Ordinance that's consistent with the City's General Plan, a program and ordinance that would qualify as a Certified Local Government status in accordance with State and Federal laws pertaining to historic preservation. i Lynette Tessitore-Lopez gave an overview of the ordinance and expanded on the seven key sections of the ordinance that are intended to lead the user through the historic preservation process; they are: • Definitions • Historical Resource Surveys • Designation of Historical Resources • Historic Preservation Districts • Alterations of Historic Resources • Demolition of Historical Resources I • Incentives and Benefits Ms Lopez stated that the ordinance has an extensive Definitions section to assist the user in understanding the terms used throughout the Ordinance and program; they are: 1) Potential Historical Resource, 2) Eligible Historical Resource, 3) Historical Resource, 4) Minor Alterations, and 5) Major Alterations, Staff Recommendation: that the Planning Commission: i 1 Consider the proposed Historic Preservation Program, Historic Preservation Ordinance and other implementing ordinances and provide comments to the City Council; and 2, Approve Resolution PCM 04-10 recommending that City Council amend Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 1956 by adopting Municipal Code section 19.56..300 entitled Historic Preservation Modifying district -Purpose and Section 1956310 Historic j Preservation Modifying District-Application. Public Hearing Opened Kevin O'Neill stated he served as Chair of the Citizens Advisory Committee and gave an overview of compromises that were made by both parties in finalizing the HPP and Ordinance He added that contrary to detractors' belief that the ordinance isn't needed because we already have CEQA guidelines, the City is better off having an Ordinance that clearly defines what the parameters and guidelines are, Additionally, the Ordinance Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - May 25, 2011 enables the City to acquire Certified Local Government Status, to be able to apply for funding, as well as move forward with conducting the historical resource survey, He urged the Commission to recommend approval of the ordinance, with an additional recommendation that it's implementation be held in abeyance until such time as frontline counter staff and Zoning Administrator are trained and the historical resource survey is completed He also recommended that any denial of a building permit or by the HPAC be appealable to the City Council without additional cost Glenda Devaney stated the community overwhelmingly supports a historic program, as evidenced by the success and attendance of the recent Centennial Historical Home Tour; she urged the Commission's recommendation to approve the program and ordinance. Imozelle McVeigh stated the delay in finalizing the HPP has come at a cost and diminished the inventory of historical resources because some homes have been destroyed or remodeled beyond recognition from its original design. She urged the Commission's recommendation for approval. Susan Walter stated the Mills Act allowed them a break in the cost of reroofing, termiting, and maintenance work on their home, which otherwise they could not have afforded to do I James McVeigh stated that this ordinance strikes a balance between property owner rights and the need to preserve historic resources; he urged the Commission to recommend to the ~ City Council approval of the Ordinance Peter Watry echoed Mr, McVeigh's statement and stated the program and ordinance is a fine example of two groups with opposing passions coming together and compromising for the betterment of the community i Coreen McCall stated overwhelming support of the ordinance, but expressed reservation and would request further research on the issue of owner-consent regarding the eligibility of historic designation of these properties, In addition, in her opinion, the fine of $10K for the unlawful demolition of a historic i property is not high enough to be a deterrent, The City of San Diego fine is $75K and they are considering raising it to be a fine equal to the cost of reconstruction. Ellie Mello, representing Pacific Southwest Assoc, of Realtors stated they oppose the ordinance as written, are of the opinion that it undermines individual private property rights and believe there is room for improvement in the ordinance.. Ms Mello also stated that realtors need to disclose an accurate and current property profile to their clients and Planning Commission Minutes - 4 - May 25, 2011 urged that the City move forward to conduct the survey identifying historical resources as soon as possible Public Hearing Closed, Commission Comments: Cmr, Felber stated that Section 21 OS 060 addressing fines and penalties for delisting at no fault of the property owner has a connotation of doing something wrong, The language reads that the ZA or HPC may make a recommendation to waive fines and penalties.. If it's at no fault of the property owner, the language should read that the fines and penalties shall be waived. Cmr, Felber further added that there should be no fees for appealing a denial of the ZA or HPC Cmr. Vinson wished to go on record that he opposes anything that infringes on individual property rights and for that reason he cannot support making a recommendation to City Council to approve the ordinance and program, MSC (Tripp/ )that the Planning Commission approve PCM 04-10 Consideration of the City of Chula Vista Historic Preservation Program and Historic Preservation Ordinance and consideration of and recommendation to the City Council to amend Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 19.56 concerning modifying districts. Motion failed for lack of a second.. Attorney Shirey clarified that the Planning Commission's jurisdiction is related to making a recommendation to Council on Title 19 Historic Preservation Modifying District and they can take formal action by way of a motion approving Resolution PCM 04-10 He further clarified that even though the Planning Commission does not have jurisdiction to recommend approval on the overall Historic Preservation Program, they could offer a ~ courtesy motion indicating their approval or not on the overall program, MSC (Tripp/Felber)(5-1-0-1) that the Planning Commission approve Resolution PCM recommending that the City Council amend Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 19..56 by adopting Municipal Code Section 19„56.300 entitled Historic Preservation Modifying District -Purpose; and Section 19..56.310 Historic Preservation Modifying District - Application, with a caveat stating that their recommendation is contingent upon the RCC recommending approval of the Historic Preservation Program and Historic Preservation Ordinance. Motion carried with Cmr„ Vinson voting against the motion. MSC (Felber/liuag) (5-1-0-1) that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council that they consider not assessing fines and penalties for delisting if it is found that the cause of delisting is no fault of the property owner. Motion carried with Cmr. Vinson voting against the motion. Planning Commission Minutes - 5 - May 25, 2011 Adjournment at 8:25 to a Planning Commission meeting on June 8, 2011 Diana Vargas, Secretary to the tanning Commission ~i i