Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1989/02/14 Item 13 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item Meeting Dates 47- 89—" c 4 l(1l!i ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: PCA-89-2; Consideration of an amendment to the Municipal Code to allow mixed commercial-residential projects by conditional use permit in the C-C zone - Appel Development Corporation Ordinance aPq 6Amending the Code to allow for mixed-use projects in the C-C zone SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning P k- REVIEWED BY: City Manage (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X ) Appel Development Corporation has submitted this request for the City to consider an amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow mixed-use (commercial - residential ) projects by conditional use permit in the C-C Central Commercial zone. If the amendment is approved, Appel will seek approval of a rezoning (from C-T to C-C) and conditional use permit for a mixed-use project at the southwest corner of Broadway and Flower Street. The proposal is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 5061 (a) (3) of the CEQA Guidelines. RECOMMENDATION: That Council concur with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On January 11 , 1989, the Planning Commission voted 4-0 with one abstention to recommend that Council enact the amendment depicted on Exhibit A in accordance with Resolution PCA-89-2. DISCUSSION: When the present zoning ordinance was adopted in 1969, provisions were included to allow multiple family development by conditional use permit in the C-0 Commercial Office and C-B Central Business District zones. The ordinance was later amended to allow multiple family development by CUP in the C-N Neighborhood Commercial , C-C Central Commercial , and C-T Thoroughfare Commercial zones as well . Projects were guided by reference to the density and development standards of the R-3 zone. A provision unique to the C-T zone was a prohibition against multiple family projects within 200 feet of the front property line. In 1986, the City Council amended the zoning ordinance to remove the provision for multiple family in the C-N, C-C and C-T zones based on the belief that Page 2, Item Meeting Date i residential use in these zones constituted a significant and permanent change in land use which should be evaluated and implemented via a rezoning rather than a CUP. The provision was retained in the C-0 and C-B zones on the basis that: (1 ) residential use is more consistent with the uses and business hours in the C-0 zone, and (2) all C-6 zoned areas lie within the area governed by the Town Centre Redevelopment Plan which allows for mixed-use projects. ANALYSIS: There are several factors which favor the proposal : 1 . Mixed-use projects can presently be considered only in the C-B and C-0 zones. The amendment would allow such projects to be considered on a wider scale, outside the central business district and involving retail and service commercial as well as office commercial uses. The new Draft General Plan specifically calls for the consideration of mixed-use developments along sections of the Broadway commercial strip. The approach should be used selectively and on sites which are large enough to ensure the integrity of each use; but the benefits of mixed-use development can be significant. It can facilitate the development/ redevelopment of otherwise underutilized commercial sites. It can foster mutually supportive projects such as senior housing in conjunction with convenience retail and service commercial uses. And it can also provide the opportunity to ease the transition between commercial properties and abutting residential areas. 2. The amendment would only allow for true mixed-use projects, with the commercial and residential components planned and implemented as a unit. The ability to convert commercial acreage to residential use without the benefit of a rezoning was the primary reason for the prior amendment which deleted residential as a conditional use in the C-C as well as the C-T and C-N zones. In the present case, there would be no authority to establish residential use in place of or as a first phase to commercial development. 3. It would be impractical and in some cases impossible to implement a mixed-use project via separate zones. For instance, it would be confusing to draw separate zones for a mixed-use development where the uses interface in a complex or irregular manner. It would be impossible to use zoning to reflect second-story residential over first-floor commercial . 4. The amendment would only involve the C-C Central Commercial zone--or, as recommended here, the C-C-P zone, which would require a precise plan and review and approval of the DPC. It would not apply to either C-T zoned areas which involve "heavier" commercial uses which would present more difficult compatibility problems, nor to C-N zoned areas which are usually not large enough to accommodate mixed-use projects in an appropriate manner. Also, as noted above, the C-C zone is more flexible and generally applicable than the C-0 and C-B zones which presently allow residential use by CUP. Page 3, Item 3 Meeting Date ;V/ 141, The amendment, as depicted on Exhibit A, includes several standards for mixed-use projects including the requirement for simultaneous implementation of both use components as discussed above. The standards also address residential density. The maximum allowable density would be governed by the provisions of the R-3 zone based on the project area less any area devoted exclusively to commercial use, including commercial parking and circulation areas. The actual density approved under the CUP could be significantly less than the maximum depending on site specific factors including the density and relationship of surrounding residential areas, if any. The residential component would be required to meet other applicable standards of the R-3 zone, including private and common open space and independent off-street parking. An additional provision requires largely independent access and circulation in order to avoid traffic conflicts between the commercial and residential components. Another provision refers to the possibility of a restriction on commercial uses and/or business hours depending on the interface with residential units. The amendment would, therefore, provide basic standards and guidelines for mixed-use development, but many issues will need to be refined and addressed through the CUP process. Because of the nature of the land use decision involved, we have also included a requirement for review and approval by the City Council following the recommendation of the Planning Commission. ISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable. WPC 5877P by he City Council of Chula Vista, California Dated 0/-026 -39 a lo' RESOLUTION NO. PCA-89-2 RESOLUTION CF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO SECTIONS 19.36.030 AND 19.58.205 TO ALLOW MIXED-USE PROJECTS BY CUP IN THE C-C ZONE WHEREAS, Appel Development Corporation submitted a request for the City to consider an amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow mixed-use (Commercial-Residential ) projects by conditional use permit in the C-C Central Commercial zone, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said amendment and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city at least ten days prior to the hearing, and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m. , January 11 , 1989, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed, and WHEREAS, the proposal is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061 (a) (3) of the CEQA Guidelines. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT FROM THE FACTS PRESENTED AT THE HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends the adoption of amendments to Title 19 of the Municipal Code as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council . PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 11th day of January, 1989, by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Commissioners Carson, Tugenberg, Casillas, and Fuller NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Cannon and Grasser (with notification) ABSTENTIONS: Commissioner Shipe Joanne E. Carson, Chairman ATTEST: Ruth M. Smith, Secretary WPC 5864P EXHIBIT A CHAPTER 19.36 CENTRAL COMMERCIAL ZONE 19.36.030 Conditional Uses. o. Mixed commercial -residential projects, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.205. CHAPTER 19.58 USES 19.58.205 Mixed commercial-residential projects in the C-C-P zone Mixed commercial-residential projects may be allowed in the C-C-P zone upon the issuance of a conditional use permit and subject to the following standards and guidelines: A. The conditional use permit shall be subject to review and approval of the City Council following the recommendation of the Planning Commission; B. The commercial and residential components shall be planned and implemented together; C. The maximum allowable residential density will be governed by the provisions of the R-3 zone based on the total project area, less any area devoted exclusively to commercial use, including commercial parking and circulation areas. The approved density may be significantly less than the maximum alTowable density depending on site specific factors, including the density and relationship of surrounding residential areas, if any; C. Parking, access and circulation shall be largely independent for the commercial and residential components of the project. Each use component shall provide off-street parking in accordance with City standards; E. The residential component shall meet the private and common open space requirements of the R-3 zone; F. The conditional use permit may include a restriction on commercial uses and/or business hours in order to avoid conflicts with residential units. WPC 5825P