HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Rpts./1998/09/23
AGENDA
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Chula Vista, California
7:00 p.m.
Wednesdav. September 23. 1998
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
276 Fourth Avenue. Chula Vista
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL/MOTIONS TO EXCUSE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of August 12, 1998
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission on any
subject matter within the Commission's jurisdiction but not an item on today's agenda.
Each speaker's presentation may not exceed three minutes.
1.
PUBLIC HEARING:
PCA-98-07: Consideration of amendment to Section
19.64.150 and addition of Section 19.64.190 to the
Municipal Code allowing for the issuance of reconstruction
permits in certain instances for non-conforming non-
residential structures within the City of Chula Vista - James
BrennanlMid- Town Self Storage
2.
PUBLIC HEARING:
PCM-95-01A - Update to the Otay Ranch SPA I Public
Facilities Finance Plan for Village One and Village Five
3.
DISCUSSION ITEM:
Sideyard Setbacks
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:
ADJOURNMENT:
to a Special Meeting of October 21, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista.
COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA)
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), requests
individuals who may require special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a City
meeting, activity, or service to request such accommodation at least forty-eight hours in advance for
meetings and five days in advance for scheduled services and activities. Please contact Diana Argas
for specific information at (619) 691-5101 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDD) (619)
585-5647. California Relay Service is available for the hearing impaired.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ---1...-
Meeting Date 9-23-98
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: PCA-98-07; Consideration of amendment to Section
19.64.150 and addition of Section 19.64.190 to the Municipal Code
allowing for the issuance of reconstruction permits in certain instances for
non-conforming non-residential structures within the City of Chula Vista-
James Brennan/Mid-Town Self Storage
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this amendment to the Municipal Code is to allow for the issuance of
Reconstruction Permits for certain non-conforming non-residential structures located outside of
Redevelopment Areas. The existing zoning regulations provide that when a non-conforming non-
residential structure is destroyed by fire or other calamity, subject to certain limits, it may not be
reconstructed to the previously existing land use. The Municipal Code Section 19.64.150
presently places a limitation on the reconstruction of non-conforming non-residential structures
to those with a loss of 60% of less. If damaged over 60%, the non-conforming non-residential
structure camlOt be reconstructed on the property. This provision can cause certain difficulties in
obtaining financing for such properties.
One example of a non-conforming, non-residential use pursuant to Municipal Code section
19.64.150 is an existing mini-warehouse land use located at 1160 Third Avenue, known as Mid
Town Self Storage. Mini warehouse uses have been classified by the City's Zoning Ordinance as
an industrial use type and are not allowed under the current CC (Central Commercial) designation.
Mid Town Self Storage was constructed prior to the affi1exation of this area into the City of Chula
Vista in 1986. At the time of the affi1exation, the zoning of the property was C-36 (General
Commercial) which allowed such use subject to a Major Use Permit processed and approved by
the County of San Diego. According to the applicant, a Major Use Permit was obtained from the
County prior to construction. The applicant has initiated a request to the City to evaluate the
current provisions of the code regarding ability to rebuild non-conforming, non-residential
structures in the event of destruction.
A similar type of amendment was adopted last year for nonconforming residential units.
pr A QR-07
P~u?
This resulted in a change to the Municipal Code which presently allows such residential unit(s)
to be rebuilt if 100% destroyed except iflocated within an industrially zoned property. There was
no request at that time to evaluate non-residential non-conforming uses.
The Enviromnental Review Coordinator has determined that, as a procedural amendment, the
project is exempt from the California Enviromnental Quality Act (CEQA) under the General Rule
exemption section 15061(b)(3). CEQA only applies to projects which have the potential for
causing significant effects on the enviromnent.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution PCA 98-07 recommending that the
City Council adopt an ordinance to amend section 19.64.150 and add section 19.64.190 to the
Municipal Code relating to the issuance of reconstruction permits for non-conforming non-
residential structures.
DISCUSSION:
Existing Section 19.64.150 reads as follows:
Any non-residential nonconforming building damaged more than sixty percent of its value,
as established by the director of building and housing, at the time of damage by fire,
explosion, wind, earthquake, war, riot, or other calamity or act of God, shall not be
restored or reconstructed and used as before such happening; but if less than sixty percent
damaged, it may be restored, reconstructed or used as before, provided that such be
initiated within six months and be substantially completed within twelve months of such
beginning.
Existing section 19.64.150 is proposed to be amended as follows:
Section 19.64-150 Non-residential structures-Replacement restrictions
Any non-residential nonconforming building damaged more than sixty percent of its value,
as established by the director of plannin~ and building and housing, at the time of damage
by fire, explosion, wind, earthquake, war, riot, or other calamity or act of God, shall not
be restored or reconstructed and used before such happening; but if less than sixty percent
damaged, it may be restored, reconstructed or used as before, provided that such be
initiated within six months and be substantially completed within twelve months of such
beginning. The aforementioned provision shall be superseded to allow for reconstruction
if 100% destroyed. where a reconstruction permit is obtained prior to or within twelve
months follow~ destruction of said non-residential nonconformin~ structure as allowed
pr A QR-07
P~U'
by section 19.64.190.
In addition, section 19.64.190 will be added to the code establishing tl1e circumstances and
findings required to obtain a Reconstruction Permit:
Section 19.64. 190-Reconstruction Permits
A Reconstruction Permit may be approved to allow for the reconstruction of a non-
residential non-conformi~ structure in the event tl1at such buildi~ has been dam!lied or
destroyed by fire. explosion or act of God. Said permit shall allow for reconstruction
consistent with the ori~inal confi~ration of the buildin~. with the exception that no
reconstruction can take place witl1in tl1e City's current ri~ht-of-way. The Zonin~
Administrator. in accordance witl1 Municipal Code Section 19.14.180 and followi11i a
noticed public hearin~. may approve a reconstruction permit based upon tl1e followin~
criteria:
.L. The nonconformi~ of the buildin~ was not caused by any action of tl1e buildin~
owner.
2.... The ~rantin~ of the reconstruction permit will not cause the reconstruction of a
buildi11i. with a non-conformity which is or will be materially detrimental or
injurious to the nei~hborhood or public welfare based upon factors. includi11i but
not limited to parkin~. traffic. noise and incompatible land uses in tl1e immediate
surroundin~ area.
1.. The reconstruction does not exceed tl1e existin~ non-conformity.
1.. There are specific site constraints affectiru: the property which would make
conformance with current zonin~ re~lations an undue hardship and burden on the
property owner. Such site constraints include but are not limited to factors such
as minimal street fronta~e or limited vehicular access to tl1e site.
~ The nonconformity allowed by tl1e permit shall only apply to its current use. Said
reconstruction permit shall be conditioned such that any new construction must
meet current Buildin~ and Fire Codes and not be permitted within the City ri~ht
of way. The director of planni~ and buildin~ may waive certain other current
development standards includiru: buildin~ setbacks and landscapin~ re~lations
based upon hardship and upon the findin~ they wiH not cause a detrimental impact
to the surroundiru: area.
pr A QR-07
P~U4
ANALYSIS:
Model for analysis:
The Municipal Code of the City of San Diego contains a provision allowing for the issuance of
a Reconstruction Permit based upon certain fmdings (see Attachment 1) and was used as a model
for this change to the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code. At the same time, the majority of
Reconstruction Permits issued by the City of San Diego are for non-conforming residential uses.
As a result, they have not had to address to issue of compatibility of non-conforming non-
residential uses as they relate to the surrounding area. Because of tl1is fact as well as the
preponderance of such non-residential non-conforming uses occurring within the various
Redevelopment areas in the City of Chula Vista, staff recommends retention of the findings
required by the City of San Diego with an additional fmding that this provision shall not apply to
properties located within any Redevelopment Area in the City. In addition, specific wording has
been added to read "In the event the existing structure was built within the Citys current right-of-
way, replacement with new construction must occur behind the right-of-way line. In addition. any
reconstruction must adhere to current fire and building codes which are in effect at the time
reconstruction/replacement of the structure occurs.
Impacts upon Redevelopment:
The Community Development Department had initially expressed a concern over how issuance
of a Reconstruction Permit could affect the goals and policies of redevelopment. However, based
upon the addition of criterion #4 which discusses the presence of specific site constraints, they
now support the proposed amendment. It is believed there will not be a significant number of
properties located within one of the City's redevelopment areas which will contain the type of site
constraints described under this criterion.
Discussion of Required Criteria:
Due to the sensitivity of allowing a non-conforming, non-residential structure to be reconstructed
if totally destroyed, a number of criteria are being required to insure that such Reconstruction
Permits are not approved indiscriminately and without adequate consideration as to their potential
impacts.
Criteria:
1. The non-conformity of the building was not caused by any action of the building owner.
Discussion:
This criterion requires that the existing structure was constructed at the tinIe it was allowed
pr A QR-07
p~u ~
under the Zoning Ordinance and that it was constructed legally (ie with a building permit).
An initial concern of staff related to tl1e adequacy of building permit records to substantiate
whetl1er tl1e various developments of tl1e City, especially within tl1e Montgomery Area,
were originally built with permits. This concern was significant in that it is a primary
criterion for the granting of a Reconstruction Permit. Subsequent staff research has
indicated that tl1e County Assessor's Office can be considered a "fInal source" for building
permit information. This "final source" is sometime relied upon by the City of San Diego
and La Mesa, which appear to be the only two other cities within San Diego County which
have allowance for this type of permit.
2. The granting of the reconstruction permit will not cause the reconstruction of a building,
witl1 a non-conformity of which is or will be materially detrimental or injurious to tl1e
neighborhood or public welfare based upon incompatibilities, including but not limited to
parking, traffic, noise and land uses.
Discussion:
This criterion requires that the use be evaluated in terms of potential impacts to the area
in which the site is located. This includes the issue of compatibility of uses with the
surrounding area. Such impacts could also involve inadequacy of parking, traffic or noise
impacts.
3. The reconstruction does not exceed the existing non-conformity.
Discussion:
The granting of a Reconstruction Permit will in no way allow for the expansion of the
existing structure beyond its original footprint except as otherwise permitted by Section
19.64.050 regarding "Enlargement, extension of reconstruction prohibited-exceptions".
These exceptions regarding expansion are primarily limited to those which are authorized
by the Planning Commission after determination that expansion is necessary and incidental
to its use.
4. There are specific site constraints affecting the property which would make conformance
with current zoning regulations an undue hardship and burden on the property owner.
Such site constraints include but are not limited to the site containing minimal street
frontage and limited vehicular access to the site.
Discussion:
This criterion will insure that the intent of the goals and policies of the General Plan as
well as redevelopment are adhered to by limited tl1e granting of a permit to those
properties which contain specific site constraints.
pr A QR-07
P~ul'l
Permit Process
As described in the proposed amendment delineated above, a Reconstruction Permit could be
applied for prior to or within twelve months following destruction of said non-conforming
structure.
It is recommended that the process established for the issuance of a Reconstruction Permit be
similar to other discretionary permits issued by the Zoning Administrator with the exception that,
in this case, a public hearing would be scheduled in all cases in which a Reconstruction Permit
request is being processed. As such, staff recommends that a processing fee (to be determined)
be required for each request for a Reconstruction Permit, along with applicable application form
and submittal requirements. Staff in turn will process the request. As with other administrative
permits, property owners within 300 feet of the subject property will be notified. In this particular
case, the Public Hearing Notice will contain both the date of the Zoning Administrator action as
well as set time and location for the hearing. If issues or questions are raised by those notified,
a modified hearing/meeting will be set up witl1 tl1e Zoning Administrator, similar to the process
currently followed for Large Family Day Care Permits. Staff will develop an appropriate
application form as well as format for the Reconstruction Permit. Samples of those used by other
jurisdictions will be used as examples for developing tl1e necessary format. These samples are
shown in Attachment 2.
CONCLUSION
For the above mentioned reasons, staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment.
Attachments
I. Example of code section from City of San Diego regarding reconstruction permits
2. Example of reconstruction permits
3. Draft Planning Commission Resolution
4. Draft City Council Ordinance
H;\HOME\PLANNINGVEFP\PCRPT\RECONSRU
.04/22/~8
09:04
CITY OF 5D/DEVELOF'MENT S'JC5 ~ 519 591 5171
Gl02
. SAN DIEGO MUNICIPAL-COI
E:-}(I.5Tfrl~,cod~ '" .., .::~'
'H. -:-' .::;, tl-~:?I~r~;'1'O'..~"t., ~~J !:~3:2J.~t1.,iJ'f::i ~t~~" ..",.
'.'" :" -j ...J. DIVI810N8'!r!'..".~n, ::;:;'
.....,.",'.; GeD.eralRegu1atioDs ....,:.'.:;:;'
f
;
..
-('
... "'" -
....;.,:.:: .'""'oi:;,; ."~" .',~-, ,.:: ::,. . . .,:.."_
(
., ,.....i-;..J
j 101.0301 Non..,coDformiDg P.s_~sPer-
~J~~;7i.:.:-: ..:~r;. '7,~~':..~::' ~,:.:: :;ci.::,;;....::::Cl.. '~:J"
".~pt~as.p.~!t..~h~ t,he~_or:~.D!'all ,
bnoilnoiftp'J im~ClUlDts arid.~ mating in
a.:ay Df, ~e ~d zDn;;s~r '~cti',th..;,e..~ 'respee-.
tiVl!!.1y:at the time atthe adoption afthis Code may .
bec:OlltiziUed.. ....... . ..;, ,:'. .' ...... ..,..
.. Emapt ai proVided hei:cizi."iUi 1iUildDiC. struc-
ture, Sign, advertising displaYs, Dr impnwement
now e%istU1g shall beeltered or eularged, and 110
buildings, structure6, sigDa. advertising displlu's
or impi-oveme:a.ts. Shall be uected, constru:c:ted or
established which is deeigl1ed, arranged or '
inti!nded for occUPIlDc1 Dr iise mimy Of said _s
or diStnct;..t1.strieted by tbiJi'.Cha tar.aPms!: Such
., .' ~-'. ,.. ',.,' .... '. p,. .. . ;:. .
erection.' cOnstruct:i.OIl. or e&t'JI fth 1II'h.....enL.. . . .
. ~'1-17-84 by CJ-.i6115N.S.) ...
5 101.0302 EDstiDg' Ordb.iJ1Jces" R1Iles,
RegDlaticms Or Permita:Betaiued .
Except as herein spi;c;ifica11y provided. it is not
inteDded bytbis Chapter to moc!ify or abn>gate or
repllel any ori!;....."es. rules; regulations. ~ per..
mits pi'eviawily adopted Dr i5SU1id pw;aWmt to law, .
relating'to tlu''':Se,;maJiagemeiit.o.r eo:a.diJ.ct of.
bnj)tI;.;;p;"str1ictUres. sig:a.S;8dvei1:isi:a.gdisp1aya; ·
improvem;"itii or:p:remises; promed;'however,
that where this Chapter imposes a greater nostric-
tio:a. uPon the eremllll,...tab);,,},........t/elterati011 .
or e:a.largement of buildillgs, structures; &igns,
:ad"erli~~g !fisplays, ~p~."..emel1~. or.~es
than!~ .i~p!,sed.or re.quit:a.~.bi 8U~~ o,,~~"~"~"', .
rul~. ~gu.la~.D1;wmits, the prtI!iaiOJlS,ofthil,
~~.~.~l:,~ :,'.;~.:,.)tll:.l~)~I-:.) ,f~".' ~ .:'. '"
"'~.1~17~~(~,0:-:16:tJ?N,~J. ,ri.::.",,".,
;......~".........;,.'"'I._..# h~....i,...t.(.,.tJ~ '_,' _.lli.:~.{_,...k... ,,' ......
i ::'1ol'.osQ3":. cm.~.~;:,;.e.~N..;;.:;~~~ :
.. .'Ioui""-......" ~-....,.._..._,.,.........._......_.......
~:.. ~"~.. . .., .. _. _r.<' '"'~:"r"~'-' ,,::~ ...in
The lawful use oflanci ia:istmg at the time.the.'
Zcme ar.Jinut- becaiDe eifecti:ve,-Mth which an:Ii-
nUCesu'di:"Uiie'did zWtco~:m..;yI:N;=i:iniied .
. provided 110 w~_t 0; Sliditio!; to SW:h use is .
~fi~~grii.Ji~~~~~~..lffib:e~e ::
. the Zone" OnUuance became eIlective .with whic:l,:J.
or"d"f of: ~~i.811("Ch'J)uiIdfJlgJ!:liia not "CllDlorm'"';Jri'th".
respect t;, the dpelopmeD.t"Fe~atioW:;-m'ay b~t~ .
.. continuBd ~'iUi .~ .. .~. ... ~~aiiditUia:S Dr
. ......:y arpmeD.
alteratiolUl to such bUildi:a.g will Zlot il1Cl'Vlise its .
~ Dfna'D~rimtY iDa Will"Com'ai1i'i'~ ~'':
resPect ~~ the' aentopment ....~latiOJ1s. at th..
zone "ill. which th..,buildi:a.g is located; except as
~ provide'd by ~ODeYariance. ~':~""C; :.::,..... ~
.' ~Azay diaCol:I.t:inWUii:2 of a I2ODC011fcinamg use far .
a continuous period of' two 'yoiarC ahal1 be d........a ';
to c0118titute ~dOIUD~,DfllJlynilncoDfamrl:a.g
(
(-.01.,.
r~O. 454
U01.0303.
rights a:isi:ing at the time at the enactmeDhf the
arrt;,ftJ:l'PIr~' ")j:;r..''1i\;'~ ~ ::;r. h ".)t", -....:, ,;,~)t,.",,!.~. t., ""'.
:.tmy-che:a.ge' from,-aziD=mfarming uSe atlanci
or buildings t.o 'a more' .reiltrictjve or cllllforming
use shaJl co:r.stitute abendonment of such non"",,-
farming rights. ,j;;"" . . .'.c'...;; ,... ~-t\"
RepaU's and alterati.ms wlrich dD not m.:reue
the degree of lIonconformity o( a'noncOnfDrmillg
buildiDg,.strw:turB or improvement, lIIII"mc:reue .
the size'M degree ofllOJ1CODfonaity of.. use,may..
. be J!iade'pl'<i9ided that the aggregate value of sUch'
repiUrB or a1teraticms sha1l11ot eseeed 50 percent:
of itB fair market velue; ea:onIiDg to the assess-.
ment thereof' by the County Assessor (or the fiscal
year duriZlg which the repairs a:a.d elterations
0=. The terms "repairs" II11d "elteratiObS" do DOt
i:a.c:lude painting or replaa=e:a.t of esterior stucco
sidiDg, or shU3g11!6. .
!I[ any l1oZlcDnforDiinE buildinJ( or lI.5e be
.destroyed by fire. ezplllllion. act of God or act of the
lIublie _v to the uteD.t offifty 1>O=t (IJO'I,) or
~o:re Of the fair milrket value, accordi"..: to the
_element tbereofby the Cotmty .Ass8ssor for the
~ year during wmch 811d1 destr1lc:ticm occurs,
then and without fUrther actiOD by the City CDw)-
CIl the said b"jj<i,'U:" Dr use azul. the land on which
~d b>,;!iI;.,R' WIIS ~t..d or JlDBi:a.tei:a.ed. sball from
azul. after the date of NOh deatnxtion be subject to
all the ro,gu!atillD.a specijied byt:he Zone OrdiIlance
tar tile. d1striet m wInch such buiIdiDg we:. }oQted.
'rbe pn>VllDaD& !If'tbiI pazqrapJo &hail not apply'to .
a:a.y 110:a.eollformiDg buildin~ far which'aRecoIl-'
structio:a. Permit has baSIl or 111 obtained purluant '
to MUllicipal Code Sectillll101.050D(B). . .
.u tile use 15 a medi~1Il or CllllDBelizll service and
is prohihit..d purswmttO ~...;.: 101.11410 (11) (9)
(c), 101.04.28(11) (1). 101.0426(B) (1), 101.0427(11) .
(1); or 101.043S.2(B) (11) (e), al1d if such use .
. ez:isW l1li August 13, 1984, it shall1>-~"mp a DOD~ . .
c:onformiiIg use cd shall De gOverDed byt,be. pmi-
sions .of.this sectiol1. .Any .":c:h. medical 'Dr
cou:a.seliDg Hnice ezistiDg 'on the. effed:ive .date of .
the ord;n......... shall have met;; (90),days to ceaSe:
operatiOl1, -after which be th~' s~ces1iall be:
unlawful at that site II11d shaJl cOnstitute Ii viol..- ..
ticD. of this Code WIless a Coilditional Use PenDit
i5 'obteined in aCcDrdazace with SectioJ:a .101.0513. ...
'. If ....'i:a.veStigation by the Develo'pme...t Ser- ..
vices'Deparl:Xne:a.t reveals that a ps:i:ticul.ar prop-
erty 'col1tahia a legal,.uoncol1forming-.use .or .'
structure; a.~Dtiee of NOl1cOnforming Rights;,:.
may' be recOrded in the Cou:a.ty RecOrder's ofIice:" .
, This notice is deligned to provide .coJiBtrU.&:ti.;e ;:.':
110tice to &JI;Y BUI:Ce!I8DrB in mteieSt .that. DOl1Con-
formi:a.g rights as. to the property 0". st,rUc:tures
existed .at the timll' of the recordatioti of Dotice. : .'
NothiDg ill. this noti... sba1l permit the continuo.- ,
tion of a nonCODformine w... Dr str1id:ure that was
subsequently ezpanded, warged, abBnc10ned or
destn>yed which eztinguishes the previous nOI1- '.'
~e''''e'},~', .,'T.."", ... ... "
,If a sUbsequent investigation reveala.that ii .
ox:&:
,
',<,1
ATTACHMENT 1
MC 10.21
c
r
!.
( . "1
"'-".;'
"\.
04/22/9:;
09:05
CITY OF SD/DEUELOPMENT SUCS ~ 519 591 ~l(l
~u~
. ~SANDJEGO.MDl'iICJPAL Ct.. ..; ":::'1101:0502 '1
',.qm"'.o' ,..~.: 1{' I"~ '!.'It...-T '~.1,': ';.-. "'.Co," .,t.; 101.0501 "Boardofz,w,n-g.Appe8Js 5"".:.'\ 1
,-sf.::.ttf~ "7.':\ ..2:~t'~DMSION,5;!t~),' . ~i.')' ~"i_' ,. A.:CREATIONOF~~~:~~~.ldr:n~ I
Varia:nces.'CODditiollal Use Permits. There is herehy created.. Board of Zoning
. "-'1,... .a:aclSpecia1Perillit:a .'.'. Appealswhichsba1lconsistoffiwmembersanda
iZo"" Val"ian.ee" Incurp. '1-23-52 b" ~046 N.SJ; designated a1teruate. who shan serve -..itbout
amended 12-17-63 b" 0-6891N.S.; mit1ed"z.m. compmis&tion.'The meonbe3'iiDd alten>ate shall
'. """",,",,~.' "'lid<>.illC..'>'i., ,:,.:,,"'.' :..', he appomted by tbe Mayor arlli eoDtirinea by the
~tDr',1-:-1.~6 f>y.~ N.S.; repealed Co.mal. 'l'he ..._ber1I shalllll!iift WD year.t:enns .....~
. ", .:,j: 02-4-71 b"J'=10494 N.SJ .:. ,.. ;'. and each member ir.ban lIe!'"""iDtil his sw:<:esBor'is
(RetitU,d%l:ia.....,. CoruiitiD7I41 UIIe Permit and duly appointed and quslified. .The memben; shall
. ..RecanstTuction P.mnit J70cedures;" 2,.4-71 by be appointed in such a mlUlller th..t the tenDs af
0-10494 N.S.; retitled. ~nt:eS, ConJ.itiDMl ru>t mare than three memben shall ezpire in II1IY
. ."; Use year. The eo:piration date aba1! be'~ 1. During
Permiz. and Spet;UsJ. Permits" ~3 b" 0-15987 March of each year the 1I4ayor sbaIl designate one
N.S.J member as chairman; hDwever, i1I the absence of
auch d";g7'stion, the Board shan on or after April
IS select fram ItmDDg its IIU!IIIbers a chairman. The
alternate shall se"e only in the event of an
ab_ of a Board member _ ma,y not be desig.
nated Dr selected as c:hairmaD. In ths event of a
1'f'..;groat:i..... of.. member, the alternate shall serve
until. a DeW member is appDinted by the Mayor.
B. MEETINGS .
The Board shall meet regularly once a month or
as often ..s neceSSa:ry for the transaetion afbnsi.
ness. It shall establish its own rules and proce-
dures ~ssary 111' ICObvllDientfDdhe conduct of its
business. ~""'.:
Three members of the BaBrd ofZolUDgAppeals
shall CODstitut.e a quonun. The aflinnative vote of
Dot less thaJ>. thiee ...-J.a.,j shall be J)~ase"Y fino
8JD'8ctionbytheBoard.;"'.'.<)> .' . .,- :,;.
~ C.POWEaANDDtJ'TIES...:,"f";. ';' .,~: :'.;
. :' 'l'he Board of Zoning Appeals shall hear ....d
determine appeals from 'the ruliaP. decisions and
determinations of the "He~ OfIicer", as ~own
onDiagmD 2 ofCbapt;erXI., ,- " ,.' " ..,
. ~ 11-23-92 b" 0-17B6BN.S.).:,r,: ' 'J).
. . . ''''';.''.' ",_:: i:.: ""',L"":
.S . 101.0502 ...Vaii....--s ....,. '0'1."" :.:.
. ..A.. APPLICATION . ..--.! '-:'.:r,.;. :t',. ~. ;"10".'" "(1~ -;t;:r.;i
.:.An appJieation for a v~ ~ be'filed in ".1.'.
..ccordance'withSed:ion ~02. The ..pji1iCA;:ion
. shidhtate fully the ciJ'Cumstan125 and eonditi......
relied upon as groun05 for the' application 'and
shall be aci:cl!Dpamed. by adeqUate plans (iDi:ludi.ng .';
landscaping plans) and a legal desCription of the
"propertyiDvolved. :..::".:.'~', '?7.~ ... ',. ~~\ ::.:: :~
,~~~~~f?~~~~-... ..1
.,tJ The Development Sernces Direcior.:m:ay' '.;
BPJ'I'IYe or deny, in a~ 'll'ith.Prcic;;sa'~o", .:]
an appli~Ob for .. variaDeu-if wch'appliCation is ," ~.j
,for};"'a..d nlief.in"the~ of: ". ie-Hi> ;"if)';' '. ".. '.~
"; c:e l,Mod;4';_6".. ofdistai1ce or.uea: regulatioIis, .
pr<nilied sud1 moctificati.... d....s.JIOt.meed 'tWeDtY .'r
- pen:e2it (20-') afrequired frDnt;ue..... re..r;j>Brds. .
II.... ezceed ten pera!nt (lK) ar-..........u:m: lot COY-
......._re-.1~.t:ift~_. -',. ".~, "-" ,. ,....:.r.
.--_- 5..... -, _. ...'" ......-.I.,.~ .~ ,',," .....
. ; ..2. Modification of distance or area regul..tions
Cur prupeny loca\l!d 11:1 ail ..... 1k5i!:1I.I.IiI1IJ.I' Lb..
City Council as a -Neighborhood IJDprovement
.
t 101.0500 :PeveJ.opmea.t Sem.ces Direc-
torPermit!"u;"':i;' . .... .'.
. T:hP De1relopment Services"Direct.or may
app'"w-: or ~y, #i. ;,....~~ with '"Piii<:ess 0Di,",
thefon~~~:'i" '.' '.
A. bet Real E,tate~a! ~ermits ,
A Tract Real 'Estate. Office 'Pennit may be
approved for tract real estate ofIices, modd homea
. and ~ in cozmecti~ thez:ewith. The penaitmay
b~e ~~~ror..p.~~ to~one(l)year. .
. . .....ciinsbuc:Qon.ts . '
, Re"".."t;uctioJl. ~'PP"i.t,!nay ~ II,Pp~v~d to
allow for .the reCaristructioi> of Ii. rlODeanfoiming
puildin2: to the builcUrl.E'lI.,m.,;...l-..f;_'-l:ioniD
:the'e..ent"thilt 1iUgi ~~;I;I;:"L~ ~:':~ or
.~-' 'l.l' ,~....::..._". .~1'..V.1o\~i:t'-ltf;,'}"F'::.::....of
qe:j u~ foI;T AUW. GpIOS1D11, a 0 ~ or.... a
lIublic: enemy. 'l'J:uI Development Serricell fiirector
maY .P"~v.& Iii8iiciDsbucQon pemiit if the follow-
~ iindings can be made: .
'. . 1. The buildill,g's nallconformity ......s n'!t the
. result: of any action. ta1r.im by the pwJ.ding's,DWD~
aft.er the 'zollinc re.:watiDn to which 'the buildin~ .
d_~ not .....imm bas become effeetive. "..,.. . ;'
.2. The gi'a:ritiiiji 'lif the"reCozlstrui:tioJi'penDit
win n~penDit the reconstruction. of a buil~.
~ the n'onconfonriiN 'of whlch:haS bee~.'or will be
.. 1Uteriillj'd~tail <or iJijUliD-Wi'tD't!:i"neim.
borhoDCl or ~ welfare_' '.: \1!~~'~:,-,,::,n."'
,'. l.'33rlie'~.miioe~ Dot eiceed thiO'i!zist.
inl'n~~ty:. . .'~~r'I'o\"~~"'~'~-;.: .
. l.:. 'DIm Ccmatructirm. Permits
. . _...~.. ~_ ~~f'......~,~... ~ 1IW"r.~\ "r\' .,
.~; . 'A temparary{cDlI6tructlan 'per1lut may be
- &p)-."..4iD-aiY'&osiJr.;r. th....~ctiq Of stDr-
age yards ar temporary c~ristruliioDproject
'<.,oflices_-:Thii tliiDporiUy.uiss'may.be'a110D7ed for a
periOd not to Uceed nme months: l.t.VI ,.(iJ.>Cli-(j
D. 'Satel!iteAnteDna Permits
. A SatelJit.eAn~T~p-;;:~t'\nay 1>e"iippn.ved if
.. the: J)eYelopment Sei-Yice'i DirectorDnds t1i&t the
. propllslll is m amfoimance with the" standard. set
forth in the docuBlI;l1~eJ;tit1ed "Development
J Guidelines for Satellite AnteM1u";!idoptlid by the
City Couzacil Resolutiorl -No.:R-:26S861 On file in
.1ih!=.,~ ~.~ Cit;Y'~L,~:",.,~)1':, ~.~\.:"'~' .
(AmeNied 7,4l$-84 b" ~ 18088 N.S.) ,., .
,'[-')
I'IU. '-t--.J'-+
i
,
\
.-
MC 10-1.21
,-,,-,,M:-r' Si,)C - 619 691 5171
r~-:':. ~n.. ';i
.
\. V'?:.
ATTACHMENT 2
CITV OF SAN DIEGO
DECISION OF THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
DECISION-MAKER -C-\11 CASE NO.-
DtDIr AS: QJD,I'tf' -~ ...-.~ J1lM2 ...-vI..b AS
Jr&SJIUI:D'GIf ON l1SIt lMlItIWIt:U1I'IDIlIF MIL.--r",,",
AInC11NG JD ~ J1J 01 ~...~~ JII'II'.ewu:.
RECONSTRUCTION PERMIT - NO HEARING
WHEREAS,.'APPUCANT -, in Case No,.CASE NO. -, sought a
Reconstr.uction Permit nt_REQUEST. LEGAL DESCRIPTION, LOCATION AND
ZONE-; and, .- .
.
WHEREAS, the 'Decision-Maker considered the plans and materials
submitted, staff report, and inspection of the subject property; and,
WHEREAS. the Decision-Mak.er found th~ OICT A TION -: and.
WHEREAS, the building is. nOl"lConforming in_ DICTATION-. The
nonconformitv.WAS/WAS NOT - the result of any action by any owner after
the appUcation of the ;zone which made the building nonconforming; and,
WHEREAS, the approved reconstruction permit, with the conditions imposed,
_- WILLlWILL NOT -, be materiallv detrimental or injurioLJs to the neighborhood or
public wetfare; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED, bV the kearing Officer of the City of San Diego, that in
light of the for,egoing, the Reconstruction Permit sought bvllltApPLICANT -, ill
Case No. ~ASE NO. -. is hereb.~ APPROVED, DemED - .
"ADO IF APPROVED - This approval is not a permit or license and any permits
and licenses required bv law must be obtained from the proper department.
Furthermore, if any condition of this grant is violated, or if 'the same be not
complied with in every respect, then this permit shall be subject to revocation;
followinG a noticed public hearing per Municipal Code Section 101.0220.
, ....~.---- '--~'-->._-'-'--~-"-'--~-~-~'---'--'--'--
L;1L1::'
..
.
".
.
(J7/29/~=
113:::6
~.~3
INFO&RPP SVC ~ 619 691 5171
q::.==::.s
- 2 -
C-CASE #-
That the applicBllt shell comply with aU Uniform Building Code requirements and
shall secure all necessary permits. To secure all necessary permits. the applicant is
notified that substantial modifications to the building to comply with applicable
building, fire. mechanical and plumbing codes and State laws requiring access for
disabled persons may be required.
The permission granted by this Reconstruction Permit shall become effective and
final on the sixteenth I' 6th) working day. unless a written appeel is filed on official
form and accompanied by required fee within fifteen (15) working days; said appeal
to be filed in with the Development Services Department. Third Floor. Development
. Services Center, .'222 First Avenue. An appaalfrom the decision of the Decision-
Maker may be taken to a hearing officer by a concerned person.
_iADD IF DENIED - This DENIAL shall become effective and final Dn the .
sixteenth. 116th) working day after a decision is made. unless a written appeal is
filed on official form and accompanied by required fee within fifteen (15) working
days; said appeal to be filed with Development Services Department, Third Floor,
Development Services Center, 1222 First Avenue. An appeal from any decision of
the Decision-Maker may be taken to the a hearing officer by a concerned person.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Decision Date: ~t4-
~ DECISION-MAKER
po TlTLE-
IIIfiit6 DECISJON-MAKER'S:INVESTIGA TOR'S:TYPIST'S INITIAlS-
~M23-
DOC.J.D. -
.i
This infonsation will be made available in alternative formats upon request.
", ~...
~.
(P54)SHEl.L,6919 -
\"
.
\... .
~~
.'.
\~.'"
!
, Ii
~,.. '"
:..
~: .
\
\, .oi
.... \
.;.'....-". ".
<' '"
\J)
RECORDING REQUES~D BY:
1364 (
(
(
(
~ e~)
(
(
(
~oc U 1994-0494267
16-AUG-1994 08:24 AM
O~ICIAL RECORDS
SAH DIEGO COUHTY RECORDER'S OtFICE
GREGORY SMITH, COUHTY RECORDER
RF: 7.00 FEES: 13.00
AF: 5.00
Mf: 1.00
AFTER RECORDING RETIJRN TO:
La Mesa Community Development Dept
Gty of La Mesa
8130 Allison Avenue
La Mesa, California 91941
FOR RECORDER'S USE ONI.. Y
CERTIFICATE OF NONCONFORMING USE
7255, 'Tl57, 7285.. & 7287 UNIVERSITY AVENUE (APN 474-181-13 through 19)
WHEREAS, Section 24.02.130 of the La Mesa Zoning Ordinance makes provisions
for the issuance of a Certificate of Nonconforming Use where it can be determined that
such use or structure shall not constitute a hazard to public, health, and safety; and,
WHEREAS, the Owner, Schaefer Ambulance Service, Inc., of property located at
7255-87 University Avenue, La Mesa, and further described as:
Lots 3,4,.5, 6,7, 8, 9, and 10 in Block 1, VISTA LA MESA VILLAS, according to
Map thereof No. 2440, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego
County December 4, 1947,
has requested that a Certificate of Nonconforming Use be issued for this PI:Operty; and,
WHEREAS, the above described property contains an ambulance service business,
which has been determined to be nonconforming with the regulations for the C-F-D
(General Commercial-Floodway-Design Review Overlay) zone in which the property is
located; and,
WHEREAS, the ambulance service business is located within 5 separate structures
on the property which contain offices, sleeping quarters for crews, and vehicle
maintenance areas; and,
WHEREAS, Section 24.02.130 C (4) of the La Mesa Zoning Ordinance does permit
new uses and structures to be established on a building site where a non-conforming use
exists only when a Certificate of Nonconforming Use has been issued for the site; and
WHEREAS, Section 24.02130 L(l)c. of t..~e La :Mesa Zoning Ordinance does state
that a Certificate of Nonconforming Use may be reviewed from time to time in
accordance with the procedures established in this section and may be revoked if
determined, after the required hearings, that such nonconforming use or structure is not
in compliance with any conditions established in a Certificate of Nonconforming Use or
that said nonconforming condition constitutes an existing or potential hazard to public
health, safety and welfare; and,
1365
WHEREAS, Section 24.130 1.1. permits the Community Development Director to
issue a certificate of Nonconforming Use if it is determined that said nonconforming use
or structure is otherwise in compliance with the provisions of Section 24.02.130 of the
Zoning Ordinance, and that said nonconforming use or structure does not constitute a
significant hazard to public health, safety and welfare. Such Certificates shan state all
terms or conditions by which such use or structure does not constitute a significant
hazard to health, safety and welfare; and,
WHEREAS, a determination to issue a Certificate of Nonconforming Use must be
made after the Community Development Director has held th!! adIninistrative hearing
and notified thl;' prcpzrty owner of such hearing; and,
. WHEREAS, the Community Development Director did properly notify the
property owner of the subj~ct property and hold an administrative hea..-ing in accordance
with Section 24.02130 iL, to define the nature of the nonconforming use and to
determine whether such use constitutes a significant hazard to the.health, safety, and
welfare of La Mesa as required in determining whether said nonconforming use should
be continued, altered, continued with conditions or terminated.
TIiE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FTh1DS AND DE1ERMJNES:
1. That the ambulance service business located at 7255-87 University Avenue
is a legal, nonconforming use in the C-F-D (General Commercial-Floodway Overlay-
Design Review Overlay) zone, which does not permit such a use.
2. That the property in question is approximately 0.69 acres.
3. That the ambulance service business has been continually operated on the
site since prior to 1977 when the property was annexed into the City.
4. That said nonconforming use does not constitute a significant hazard or
nuisance to public health, safety or welfare as it currently exists.
NOW, TrlEREFORE, BE IT FURTIiER RESOLVED BY THE COlvIMUNIIY
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR IN ACCORDANCE wrrn: SECTION 24.02130 OF THE
LA MESA ZONING ORDINANCE .AS FOLLOWS:
1. The foregoing findings of fact and determinations are true and hereby
made a part thereof.
2 The nonconforming ambulance service business may continue to be
operated at 7255-87 University Avenue subject to the following conditions:
a. Any additional uses occupying any of the structures on the property
must be a permitted use in the C zone.
b. The ambulance service use may occupy any or all of the existing
buildings on the site. Any expansion of the building areas on the
lot will require an additional review of this Certificate.
1366
c. The ambulance service use shall be considered terminated and not
be allowed to continue if the use is not in continuous operation for
a period of 180 consecutive days or more.
3. The property must be well maintained at all times including, but not
limited to, all structures, the parking areas and landscaped areas.
4. If any structures are destroyed or damaged so as to require reconstruction
in conformance with this Certificate, building permits for such reconstruction shall be
submitted to the City within ninety days of said damage.
5. In accordance with Section 24.02.130l(1)c., this Certificate and any
conditions attached to its approval is subject to review and reconsideration from time
to time by the City.
6. . This Certificate of Nonconforming Use shall become effective after being
filed with the San Diego County Recorder and returned to the La Mesa Community
Development Department.
APPROVED BY:
~.;{~
~ty-Z Development Director
Di:-/i'f
e:\cp\doc\cnu94-02
ATTACHMENT 3
__-",'_...._~.-O ~
RESOLUTION NO. PCA 98-07
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 19.64.150 AND SECTION
19.64.190 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
RECONSTRUCTION OF NON-CONFORMING NON-RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURES.
WHEREAS, the current Zoning Ordinance allows non-residential units which are
nonconforming due to current zoning to be reconstructed only if 60% or less of the value of tl1e
building is damaged/destroyed; and
WHEREAS, an application was submitted requesting staff to investigate the possibility of
allowing the issuance of a permit to allow reconstruction of said structures in the event of 100%
destruction;
WHEREAS, a previous amendment was adopted allowing non-conforming residential units
to be reconstruction in the event of 100% destruction (if outside the industrially zoned areas); 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 tl1e city at least ten days prior to the hearing, and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely September
23, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Plaffi1ing
Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed, and
WHEREAS, the Commission found that the proposal, as a procedural amendment, is
exempt from enviromnental review and is not subject to CEQA.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT FROM THE FACTS PRESENTED AT
THE HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends that the City Council amend
Section 19.64.150 and add section 19.64.190 to the Municipal Code to allow for reconstruction
of nonconforming non-residential units as shown on Exhibit "A".
That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council.
R,.,o]"t;on pr A QR-07
P~u?
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Patty Davis, Chairperson
Diana Vargas, Secretary
H:\HOME\PLANNING\JEFF\PCRESO\RECQNSf
R",<nl11tinn pr A QR-07
P~U'
EXHIBIT "A>>
Section 19.64-150 Non-residential structures-Replacement restrictions
Any non-residential nonconforming building damage more than sixty percent of its value,
as established by the director of plannin~ and building and housing, at the time of damage
by fIre, explosion, wind, earthquake, war, riot, or other calamity or act of God, shall not
be restored or reconstructed and used before such happening; but if less than sixty percent
damaged, it may be restored, reconstructed or used as before, provided that such be
initiated within six months and be substantially completed within twelve months of such
beginning. The aforementioned provision shall be superseded to allow for reconstruction
if 100% destroyed. if a reconstruction permit is obtained prior to or within twelve months
followin~ destruction of said non-residential nonconforrni~ structure as allowed by
section 19.64.190.
Section 19 .64. 190-Reconstruction Permits
A Reconstruction Permit may be approved to allow for the reconstruction of a non-
residential non-conforrni11f structure in tl1e event that such bui1din~ has been dama~ed or
destroyed by fire. explosion or act of God. Said permit shall allow for reconstruction
consistent with tl1e ori~inal confi~uration of the buildin~ with the exception that no
reconstruction can take place witl1 the Citys current ri~ht-of-way. The Zonin~
Administrator. in accordance with Municipal Code Section 19.14.180 and followi~ a
noticed public hearin~. may approve a reconstruction permit based upon tl1e followi~
findinis'
.L. The nonconfonnity of tl1e bui1din~ was not caused by any action of tl1e bui1din~
owner.
2.... The ~rantiT\i of the recol1<truction permit will not cause the reconstruction of a
buildiru:. with a non-conformity which is or will be materially detrimental or
injurious to tl1e nei~hborhood or public welfare based upon factors includiT\i but
not limited to parki11i. traffic. noise and incompatible land uses in tl1e immediate
surroundiT\i area.
1.. The reconstruction does not exceed tl1e existi11f non-conformity.
1.. There are specific site constraints affectin~ tl1e property which would make
conformance witl1 current zoni~ re~lations an undue hardship and burden on tl1e
R...nl11t;nn pr A QR-07
P~U4
propertY owner. Such site constraints include but are not limited to factors such
as minimal street fronta~e or limited vehicular access to tl1e site.
~ The non-conformity allowed by the permit shall only apply to its current use. Said
reconstruction permit shall be conditioned in that any new construction must meet
current Buildin~ and Fire Codes and not be permitted within tl1e City ri~ht of
way. The director of plaffilin~ and buildi11i milj' waive certain otl1er current
development standards includinl: buildin~ setbacks and landscapiT\!: rel:ulations
based upon hardship and upon the find~ they will not cause a detrimental impact
to tl1e surroundin~ area.
A rTACHMEN ~w 4
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING TITLE 19 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY SECTION
19.64.150 AND ADD SECTION 19,64.190 RELATING TO
RECONSTRUCTION OF NON-CONFORMING NON-RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURES WITHIN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA.
WHEREAS, tl1e current Zoning Ordinance allows non-residential units which are
nonconforming due to current zoning to be reconstructed only if 60 % or less of the value of the
building is damaged/destroyed; and
WHEREAS, an application was submitted requesting staff to investiagate the possiblity of
allowing the issuance of a permit to allow reconstruction of said structures in the event of 100 %
destruction;
WHEREAS, a previous amendment was adopted allowing non-conforming residential units
to be reconstruction in the event of 100% destruction (if outside the industrially zoned areas); and
WHEREAS, the Plaffiling 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 tl1e city at least ten days prior to the hearing, and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely September
23, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed, and
WHEREAS, the Commission found that the proposal, as a procedural amendment, is
exempt from enviromnental review and is not subject to CEQA.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby amend
Section 19.64.150 and 19.64.155 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code to read:
Section 19.64-150 Non-residential structures-Replacement restrictions
Any non-residential nonconforming building damage more than sixty percent of its value,
as established by the director of plannin~ and building and housing, at the time of damage
by fIre, explosion, wind, earthquake, war, riot, or other calamity or act of God, shall not
be restored or reconstructed and used before such happening; but if less than sixty percent
damaged, it may be restored, reconstructed or used as before, provided that such be
initiated within six months and be substantially completed within twelve months of such
beginning. The aforementioned provision shall be superseded to allow for reconstruction
if 100% destroyed. if a reconstruction permit is obtained prior to or witl1in twelve montl1s
followilti destruction of said non-residential nonconformilti structure as allowed by
section 19.64.190.
Ordinance No.
Page 2
Section 19.64. 190-Reconstruction Permits
A Reconstruction Permit may be approved to allow for the reconstruction of a non-
residential non-conformi~ structure in tl1e event that such buildin~ has been dama~ed or
destroyed by fire. explosion or act of God. Said permit shall allow for reconstruction
consistent willi tl1e ori~inal confi~ration of the buildin~ with the exception that no
reconstruction can take place witl1 tl1e Ci~s current ri~ht -of-way. The Zonin~
Administrator. in accordance with Municipal Code Section 19.14.180 and followiru: a
noticed public hearin~. may approve a reconstruction permit based UpOll the followin~
findin~s .
1.. The nonconformi~ of tl1e buildin~ was not caused by any action of the buildin~
owner.
2.... The ~(antin~ of the reconstruction permit will not cause the reconstruction of a
bui1din~. witl1 a non-conformity which is or will be materially detrimental or
iJ1jurious to tl1e neiihborhood or public welfare based upon factors includin~ but
not limited to parki~. traffic. noise and inco11lPatible land uses in the inmIediate
surroundin~ area.
1.. The reconstruction does not exceed the existin~ non-conformity.
1.. There are specific site constraints affectin~ the property which would make
conformance with current zoninl! re~lations an undue hardship and burden on the
property owner. Such site constraints include but are not limited to factors such
as minimal street fronta~e or limited vehicular access to tl1e site.
~ The non-conformity allowed by the permit shall only apply to its current use. Said
reconstruction permit shall be conditioned in that any new construction must meet
current Bui1din~ and Fire Codes and not be permitted witl1in tl1e City ri~ht of
way. The director of plannin~ and bui1di~ may waive certain other current
development standards includin~ bui1di~ setbacks and landscapin~ re~lations
based upon hardship and upon the fmdin~ they will not cause a detrimental impact
to tl1e surroundin~ area.
Presented by Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Plaffiling
John M. Kaheny
City Attorney
H:\HOME\PLANNING\JEFF\ORDINANC\RECONST
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: 2
Meeting Date: 09/23/98
ITEM TITLE: Public Hear41;;: PCM-95-OlA - Update to the Otay Ranch SPA I
Public Facilities Finance Plan for Village One and Village Five
RECOMMENDATION: That tl1e Planning Commission recommend tl1e City Council adopt
the attached draft City Council Resolution No. _ approving the
update to the Otay Ranch SPA 1 Public Facilities Finance Plan for
Village One and Village Five
On May 14, 1996 tl1e Otay Ranch Public Facilities Finance Plan (pFFP) was adopted by Council
along with tl1e SPA One Plan, among other docmnents required for implementation of tlte Otay
Ranch General Development Plan. Subsequent to the approval of the SPA Plan and PFFP, and
the SPA One Plan tentative map, PCS-94-06 was approved. As a condition of approval of the
tentative map, Condition No. 126 required that tl1e PFFP be revised "where necessary to reflect
the revised phasing plan." Changes to the phasing in ownership have prompted the current
amendment to the PFFP. The revised Otay Ranch PFFP is attached to this report.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt Resolution No. _ approving the updates to the
Otay Ranch Public Facilities Finance Plan.
DISCUSSION:
Reasons for Update
The original PFFP adopted on May 14, 1996 was based on the phasing of the SPA One Plan for
Villages One and Five. This phasing was done to determine when additional or upgraded facilities
would be needed to meet or maintain compliance with the City's Quality of Life Threshold
Standards. It was known at tl1e time of the approval of tlte tentative maps that the PFFP would
eventually need updating prior to approval of the first final map, but what was not known was the
extent of the changes. The PFFP has been revised to reflect the tentative map dwelling unit
numbers.
In addition, because of changes to ownership, some of the phase boundaries had to be changed.
This resulted in the movement of dwelling unit figures from one phase to another, however, the
total nmnber of dwelling units has decreased since the original PFFP was adopted, based on the
approved tentative maps. A number of tables and charts have been revised to reflect approved
tentative map figures changes in ownership in the phases.
H:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\PFFP\9501PC.RPT
PCM-95-01A: Update of the Otay Ranch SPA I PFFP
Chan~es in Phasinl; Scheme
Item No.2, Page No.2
Since the original PFFP was adopted in 1996 and during the processing of the tentative map,
ownership of certain areas changed, thus c1J:mging the boundaries of some of the phases. In order
to simplify tl1e phasing and the reader's ability to follow the various tables and charts in case
phasing changes, the phase numbers have been changed to colors. Please refer to the two attached
maps. The first one, "Figure 2" in the lower right corner, shows the original phase numbers.
The second one, "Phasing Exhibit" in the lower right corner, shows the new phase colors. The
McMillin Company owns tl1e property in tl1e Gray and Orange Phases, while the Otay Ranch
Company owns the remainder. The following table converts the numbers to colors and colors to
numbers:
Old Phase
Nmnber
lA
IB
2A
2B
3
4
5
6
7
Total DU's
No. of
Dwellinl;s
260
653
632
573
493
525
320
1,173
1.129
5,758
New Phase
Color
Blue
Brown
Gray
Green
Orange
Pink
Purple
Red
Yellow
Total DU's
No. of
Dwellinl;s
568
1,010
639
474
236
1,100
301
--2Ql
5,198
New Phase
Color
Pink
Green
Yellow (pt), Gray (pt)
Blue
Gray (pt). Orange (pt)
Brown (pt), Orange (pt)
Red (pt)
Gray (pt), Orange (pt), Red (pt)
Purple
Old Phase
Number
2B
309
4 (pt)
2A(pt), 3(pt), 4(pt), 6(pt)
IB
3(pt), 4(pt), 6(pt)
lA
7
5(pt), 6(pt)
2A
Total dwelling units in NUMBERED phasing: 5,758
Total dwelling units in COLORED phasing: 5,198
H:\HOME\P~ING\MARTIN\PFFP\9501PC.RPT
PCM-95-01A: Update of the Otay Ranch SPA I PFFP
Item No.2, Page No.3
Based on the above figures, there are no changes in the trigger points specified in the tentative
maps, yet tl1e PFFP remains in compliance witl1 tl1e GMOC threshold standards.
Traffic
~.
The total major street costs for SPA One has been updated to include tl1e current costs estimates
from the Olympic Parkway Assessment District. The total cost for Olympic Parkway between
Pas eo Ranchero and Brandywine has been assigned to SPA One, although the improvements
exceed SPA One's fair share of the infrastructure requirements. The balance of the cost of
Olympic Parkway, that exceeds SPA One's share will be financed through the Olympic Parkway
Assessment District, which will include Villages Two, Six and Eleven, or other funding
alternatives listed on page 51 of tl1e updated PFFP.
Conclusion
Staff has concluded that because the actual number of dwelling units have been reduced due to th e
processing of tentative maps. tl1e amended PFFP witl1 tl1e colored phasing scheme adequately
addresses the financing of public facilities, and public facilities will be adequate to served the
proposed developments.
Attachments
1. Otay Ranch SPA I PFFP
2. Figure 2 of the originally approved PFFP showing the numbered phasing plan
3. Phasing Exhihit of the updated PFFP showing the colored phasing plan
H,IHOMEIPLANNINGlMARTINIPFFPI950IPC.RPT
H;\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\PFFP\9501PC.RPT
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-95-01A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE OTAY
RANCH SPECIFIC PLANNING AREA I PLAN PUBLIC
FACILITIES FINANCE PLAN TO REFLECT CHANGES IN
PHASING FOR VILLAGE ONE AND VILLAGE FIVE
WHEREAS, Condition of Approval No. 126 of Tentative Subdivision Map requires the
updating of tl1e Otay Ranch Specific Planning Area I Plan Public Facilities Finance Plan (PFFP)
"where necessary to reflect the revised phasing plan"; and
WHEREAS, tl1e phasing of Village One and Village Five has changed due to changes in
ownership since tl1e adoption of tl1e original PFFP in 1996; and
WHEREAS, the Enviromnental Review Coordinator has determined that the amendments
to the PFFP fall under the purview ofEIR-95-01, as amended; and
WHEREAS, tlIe. Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said
amendment to the PFFP and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners
within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of Village One and Village Five 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.
September 23, 1998, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was tl1ereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, from the facts presented to the
Planning Commission, tl1e Commission has determined that the approval of the amendment to th e
PFFP is consistent witl1 tl1e City of Chula Vista General Plan, tl1e Otay Ranch General
Development Plan and all other applicable Plans, and that the public necessity, convenience,
general welfare and good planning practice support the approval.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends
that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the amendment to the PFFP in accordance with
the findings contained in the attached City Council Resolution No. ~
And that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the owners of the property and the City
Council.
H,\HOME\PLANNINGlMARTIN\PFFPl9501 PC.RES
Resolution No. PCM-95-01 A
Page No.2
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 23rd day of September 1998 by the following vote, to-wit:
-.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
Patty Davis, Chair
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
H:\HDME\PLANNINGlMARTIN\PFFP\9501 pc. RES
D R AFT RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AMENDMENf TO THE
OTAY RANCH SPECIFIC PLANNING AREA I PLAN
PUBLIC FACILITIES :FINANCE PLAN TO REFLECT
CHANGES IN PHASING FOR VILLAGE ONE AND
VILLAGE FIVE
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Otay Ranch General Development Plan was approved on October 28,
1998, and the Otay Ranch Specific Planning Area One Plan and Public Facilities Finance
Plan were approved on June 4, 1996; and
WHEREAS, tl1e property which is tl1e subject matter of tl1is resolution is
diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference, and commonly known as Village One and Village Five of the Otay Ranch
Specific Planning Area I Plan; and
WHEREAS, Condition of Approval No. 126 of Tentative Subdivision Map requires the
updating of the Otay Ranch Specific Planning Area I Plan Public Facilities Finance Plan
(PFFP) "where necessary to reflect the revised phasing plan"; and
WHEREAS, the phasing of Village One and Village Five has changed due to changes in
ownership since the adoption of the original PFFP in 1996; and
WHEREAS, the Enviromnental Review Coordinator has determined that the amendments
to the PFFP fall under the purview of EIR-95-0 1, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project
on September 23. 1998 and voted to approve Planning Commission Resolution
No. PCM-95-01A recommending to the City Council approval of the amendment to the
PFFP; and
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on said amendment to
the PFFP and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property
owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the prop erty at least 10 days prior to
the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at tlJe time and place as advertised, namely October 6,
1998 at 4:00 p.m. in tl1e Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before tl1e City Council
and said hearing was thereafter closed.
H:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\PFFP\950ICC.RES
Resolution No. _
Page #2
PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence ~n the amendment to the PFFP introduced befor-e the
Planning Commission at tl1eir public hearing on tl1is matter held on September 23, 1998
and tl1e minutes and resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into tl1e recor d
of tl1is proceeding.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL hereby
approves the amendment to tl1e PFFP based on the following findings and all other evidence and
testimony presented with respect to the proposed changes, and subject to the following findings.
FINDINGS
The amendments to tl1e PFFP are consistent witl1 the General Plan and tl1e General Development
Plan for the following reasons:
1. The amendments to the PFFP reflect the changes in phasing caused by changes in
ownership of various portions of Village One and Village Five and updates the estimated
number of dwelling units and resulting impacts.
2. The amended PFFP will promote the orderly sequentialized development of Village One
and Village Five in that more accurate information has resulted from the processing of
tentative maps tl1at are more exact in tl1e number of dwelling units.
3. The amendments to the PFFP will not adversely affect adjacent land uses, residential
enjoyment, circulation or enviromnental quality in that updated dwelling unit figures alIo w
for more exact calculations related to traffic, park requirements. police, fire and
emergency medical services, schools, libraries, parks, trails and open space, water
requirements, sewer capacity, and drainage. among other issues.
APPROVAL OF AMENDED PFFP
The City Council hereby approves the amended PFFP for Village One and Village Five
of the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area I Plan.
THIS RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL IS HEREBY PASSED AND APPROVED BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, THIS 6TH DAY
OF OCTOBER 1998.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
H,IHOMEIPLANNJNGIMARTINIPFFP\950ICC.RES
Resolution No.
Page #3
Robert Leiter
Director of Planning and Building
H'IHOMElPLANNINGIMARTINIPFFP\9501CC.RES
:.
John M. Kaheny
City Attorney
w
'"
~
~ c
~ ~ N
cr ~ ID
~
w DO "
" " CO
w 5 ] Ii:
z 0
~ U 0-
Z '-'
w w "'
tf) tf)
... ...
C :I: :I:
c.. c..
Z
W I
CJ I e
w I
...J I
>-
II:
c:(
:E
:E
:J
rn
w
rn
c:(
:r:
D..
;lUll I
Ei:,1 :n:?IO:O
1-0. nl5
",>
1--'
i ~ !~~~~
w>
-'-'
,,-
z:&
-<
UI..
in
,;
co
"'
w
5
~
I-
o
w
~
Z
w
~
i .
o '
\lig\
~ \
,
,
Z (~
o
>-
z
...
u
!:
ri:
I
li~~~o:.?:! CD
IO.~-:. ~
- N.n
> m
t7'-, ri:
""
0>
~
"'>
[,'"
~~
,.
~
~
~
,..
m
,;,
o
o~m~m-
~.......'" _ CI
...-..:~~
:..,
f 1L
',0-
~ )u
u:
-... \
ID ...~._--
-,
'.....~\.
~. :: '''~
I \' --'"
\ c::: \ a:: (
\.. \ )
_____\...__.r \
,
\
.
:!
RN:ID.'" !! r::
~~,;;::! Ii. III
-..
.
w
U>
S
~
~
... ~
IIIID 0: <I(
__........ ~ C ...
W IIIII)_~,""'IIII,_D
" :II W I-
:5 ~ 0 ~
= d:5 ::;t
> ...:::! d I-
>> ...0
>1-
o
0'"
>>J~
~~
tI
."
'"
0\
,
-..::..-;.;;..
*:h
!:
,;,
o
I
J~
1-JJ
-
;::
o
'"
z
~
"'
f~""
~
~'
,
i
.1
! ~
,I
.,
<5
I:
~
~
~
-
::
::
.s
Q.;
...
I:
:: !
c
~ H
~ iJ
" ~.
~ ~f
g~
- .... ..... '"
.- - ..
~ ~ <! ;e
.- Cl.
.. .:; '"'- J::
- ~ :Ie ~ en )(
~ ~ w w
~ -... ~
-b ~L CI .!::
: a. -I:~\ c: C.J
"" 1: ---.., <!>~ .- .... t:
: ~n III - ca
~ ~ 't ~ ~0 ~
:: ~" III a:
.. '- ~~
Z h .... .:; ....
~'< - :>.
~ ..:::... Q; ..... ca
~ Co ~Ci W-; -
0
"' ~ t1J
~
'-
~ .......
.....
..!. .E:- '"'-
~ .....
~ t;...)
Q ~
..:.
'" $
"" c5~
t .::-.. t;...)
t11: .....
- - '"'-
Q':: ~
~"
C1.,<:Q -
....
~
.E:-~
""..
t]
~~
.::- ~~
~ O-b
,,'"
C1., O()""
.. -
- "
-E
~f-
'0
c:
CJ)
en
CJ)
..J
-
"E
::J
(I)
rn
ta
..c
a..
~
<ii
u
c..
>-
I-
-
aJ
rn
m
..c
a.
.
.
.
.
CI)
.a
a:1
~-
<...-."
\l
H~
l.j
do
J~:
J ~ j
!~ .. I
.;lj:
,... -1. i
~.H!