HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1985/12/03 Item 6 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item .4 (o
Meeting Date V112.6185
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: Appeal of Planning Commission decision on
PCC-85-24: Request to utilize 24 parking spaces of the Chula
Vista Alliance Church Road and Paseo the CalTransl of
District ct 11
Telegraph Canyon
Resolution / 70 Affirming the decision of the Planning
Commission on PCC-85-24
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning V (4/5ths Vote: Yes No )
REVIEWED BY: City Managers
On September 25, 1985, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit
PCC-85-24 for the use of 24 parking spaces Telegraph Canyon Vista
located at the northeasterly corner apprised of this action and has
for park-and-ride use. The City Council was app
called the application up on appeal.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt a resolution affirming the decision of
the Planning Commission.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: pte then Negative m Declaration issued bon
25, 1985, voted unanimously t
IS-85-49 (which is herewith in accordance rwith ResolutionpPCCn85-24 and
conditionally approve the project
DISCUSSION:
Adjacent zoning and land use
North P-C Single family dwellings
South R-3-P-10 Vacant, Telegraph Canyon Road
East P-C Single family dwellings
West R-3-P-10 Vacant, Paseo del Rey
Existing site characteristics
The subject property is relatively level and contains a church building, a
small home and parking for 51 cars. There are steep slopes on the easterly property
line of the site, and sft. above homes
pr posed for the westerly
ark andpride
liac are elevated some provided by a 30 ft. wide access road off Paseo
spaces. Access to the site is p
Del Rey.
Page 2, Item ' 6
Meeting Date
Proposed use
The project consists of a proposal by CalTrans to construct and maintain 24
parking spaces on the southwesterly portion of the property in return for a as a
five year lease from the church to use
by the through nFridaye
facility. The spaces would be ut ilized p.m. CalTrans reports that the
between the hours of 6:30 a .used to 50% capacity.
average facility of this typ e is
Ana lysis
In 1978 the Planning Commission approved a master plan for the church which
f
incorporates the 24 parking spaces in traffic Since the the only ii ye is of
limited size and should not create a problem,
the
appear to be whether or not the activ within not seh conflict itself
w during
adjoining
early morning weekday hours would create
residences.
There are only two single family dwellings ga adjacent
xi approximately 15 ftpr above the site.
ride spaces and these homes are elevated pp
sing
The primary source of noise would be minor Since i ncsu a engine wnoise, cl osi lg
of doors and perhaps some conversation. s
the
not occur before 6:30 a.m. and would e b� Would ebe from the appropriate eltongre ommend
difference in elevation, we believe
upon the condition that the c adding the noipermit would be subject
to review if complaints were received regarding
IMPACT: Not applicable.
WPC 2285P
�1 1 i (3
Crtu Vi:;z3, G�.iEii ia
Dated Dated / 02 `-� ,/
ineering cop.
g(abhorn �
CIVIL ENGINEERING LA ND PLANNING SURVEYING
283-008
TO: City Council
City of Chula Vista
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista , CA 92010
SUBJECT: PCM-86-6 at Southeast Corner of Paseo Del Rey
and East ' J ' Street
The Honorable City Council :
On November 19 , 1985 an Amendment to the Ranchero SPA Plan to
permit Child Day Care Centers within the P-C Zone was before
you for your consideration . After the public hearing and
considerable Council discussion the Resolution was continued
until December 3 , 1985 . Due to the brevity of the public
hearing portion of the meeting we are writing this letter to
help clarify some questions raised by yourselves .
The proposed amendment would allow a Child Day Care Facility to
be constructed on a site specifically zoned C-N within the
City ' s PC zone . A previous proposal considered joint use of
the site by a Day Care Facility and a convenience store . This
proposal was recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission on February 13 , 1985 but denied by Council on
February 26 , 1985 .
The Amendment before you now would utilize the entire site for
a Day Care Facility to be built in two phases . The initial
phase would have an enrollment of 175 children with an ultimate
expansion and enrollment of 275 children . The
fonitialcphaseen r
would provide 47 ,800 square feet of play area
resulting in 273 square feet of play area per child . The
ultimate expansion would provide 32 , 100 square feet of play
area for 275 children yielding 117 square feet of play area per
child . Design and construction of Day Care Facilities is
regulated by the State of California which sets minimum
requirements for play area based on enrollment . The State
requires a site to provide 75 square feet of play area per
child and assumes that the entire school enrollment will be in
the play area at the same time .
9619 chesap
Bake drive,suite 101,san diego,california 92123 tel:(619)565-7227
At one point in the meeting a comparison was made between Day
Care Facilities and Public Elementary Schools with respect to
site size and use . Such a comparison is invalid upon closer
inspection of the two uses . Elementary holsatypicallyiserve letic
an area of several miles in radius and provide
for several sports . Many times these fields are for t hetjoint
use by the school and the community . addition the same time the n red
school enrollment is dsuzedgaccordingly .
therefore the play areas
Typically , La Petite Academy ' s enrollment consists of both
preschool and school age children participating in either
partial or full -week programs . The childrens activities are
carefully scheduled for efficient , orderly use of he facility .
Use of their outside play areas are generally limited no
more than one-third of the enrollment at any one time .
The previous proposal for joint use of the site by a Day Care
Facility and a convenience store provided approximately 24 , 380
square feet of play area for 140 children yielding 178 square
feet per child . If the same criteria of 178 square feet per
child is applied to the current proposal a maximum ue enrollment
of 233 children could b9 '�50°Sgduare The
feetewuth' total parking of
would be approximately
44 spaces .
In view of the above , a maximum enrollment of 233 might be
considered as an ultimate limit without future Council action .
Thank you for your consideration .
Sincerely ,
William R. Dick
cc : John Goss , City Manager
George Krempl , Director of Planning
Tom Herron , City Attorney