HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 2002/08/14
MINUTES OF THE
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. Public Services Building
Wednesday, August 14, 2002 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista
ROLL CALU MOTIONS TO EXCUSE:
Present: Chair O'Neill, Commissioners Castaneda, Hall, Cortes, Madrid,
McCann, Hom
Staff Present: Jim Sandoval, Assistant Director of Planning and Building
John Schmitz, Principal Planner
Rich Whipple, Associate Planner
Kim Vander Bie, Associate Planner
Michael Walker, Associate Planner
Dave Hanson, Deputy City Attorney I
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/SILENT PRAYER
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Read into the record by Chair O'Neill
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
MSC (O'Neill/Castaneda) (4-0-3-0) to approve Minutes of June 12, 2002 as submitted. Motion carried
with Commissioners McCann, Madrid and Horn abstaining.
MSC (O'Neill/Castaneda) (4-0-3-0) to approve Minutes of July 10, 2002 as submitted. Motion carried
with Commissioners Hall, Madrid and Horn abstaiing.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: No public input.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCA 02-05; Consideration of adoption of an ordinance amending the
Chula Vista Municipal Code by adding Chapter19.B9 relating to the
location, design and construction of wireless communication
facilities.
Background: Kim VanderBie, Associate Planner reported that staff researched wireless
ordinances in other municipalities and conducted two workshops, which included
representatives from the wireless communication industry. The workshops provided a forum to
discuss issues such as needs, limitations and progress in the industry and to seek input for
potential guidelines and requirements in a future ordinance.
As a result of the workshops, there appeared to be a general consensus that the existing policy
Planning Commission Minutes - 2 - August 14, 2002
should be streamlined to simplify and expedite processing applications and that it was very
important the performance and design standards not be compromised in the process.
The proposed ordinance is consistent with several aspects of the existing wireless policy, which
includes:
· A Conditional Use Permit is required for all wireless facilities
· Wireless communication facilities are allowed in any zone, but the location of a facility may
be denied if it would be detrimental to the public's health, safety or welfare.
· All proposed wireless communications facilities are noticed
· Stealth facilities may be processed by the City's Zoning Administrator
The proposed ordinance streamlines the existing wireless policy by also allowing the following to
be processed administratively by the City's Zoning Administrator:
· Stealth facilities (*) that do not exceed the maximum building height allowed in a particular
zone, and a roof-mounted facility that is screened behind a solid material on all four sides
and does not exceed the maximum height of the zone.
(*) Stealth facility - defined in the proposed ordinance as any wireless telecommunications
facilities that is designed to blend into the surrounding environment and is visually
unobtrusive i.e. architecturally screened roof-mounted antennas, façade-mounted
antennas painted and treated as architectural elements to blend with the existing
building thereby concealing the antenna or artificial trees such as monopalms and
monopines
Staff recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCA 02-05
recommending that the City Council adopt the draft ordinance amending the Chula Vista
Municipal Code by adding Chapter 19.89, Wireless Communications Facilities.
Commission Discussion:
Commissioner Castaneda stated that since federal law precludes local jurisdictions from
regulating health matters related to wireless facilities, he asked for further clarification as to what
other health conditions would apply under the language which states "Wireless facilities are
allowed in any zone, but the location of a facility may be denied if it would be detrimental to the
public's health, safety or welfare."
Ms. Vander Bie responded that issues relating to traffic, noise or those that are visually obtrusive
could fall under that category and would be consistent with the General Plan, which requires that
issues such as safety, health and welfare be taken into consideration.
Cmr. Castaneda asked, if the CUP were to be approved administratively, would there still be
some kind of notice sent to the area residents and what would be the determinant factor that
would compel staff to forward it to the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - August 14, 2002
Ms. Vander Bie clarified that all wireless facilities are noticed to the surrounding residents,
however, if there is any kind of opposition (big or small) expressed by the residents, then the item
would automatically come before the Planning Commission for consideration.
Commissioner Hall stated that in the past when the Commission considered facilities that were
located on City property, specifically park facilities, their recommendation has been to designate
the revenues generated from the leasing of City property to go to the facility that is hosting it,
therefore, he asked if this ordinance would be the appropriate venue to include such language or
provision.
Jim Sandoval, Assistant Planning Director responded that the ordinance does not address the
Commission's recommendation, however, a process relating to usage of City-owned property will
be developed in conjunction with the Special Operations Manager in the City Manager's office
which, would be a more appropriate venue to address this issue.
Furthermore, before Planning staff begins review of any project that is proposed to be located on
City property, prior review and sign-off has to first be given from the Parks Department and/or
from the Special Operations Manager who deals with financial negotiations and leasing of City-
owned property.
Commissioner Cortes stated that since it appears there will be a substantial amount of facilities
that will be approved administratively, he would like to requestthat staff provide the Commission
with a periodic update report as to the location, description and number of facilities that have
been approved by the Zoning Administrator.
Commissioner Madrid stated she didn't read any language regarding the term of the CUP or
language which would allow the City leverage in requiring the carriers to upgrade the facility
should there be substantial technological changes.
Ms. Vander Bie responded that there is a standard Condition of Approval which says that the
CUP is good for five years provided they are in compliance with the Conditions of Approval and
at the end of the term, they are eligible for a renewal. There is also a standard condition which
addresses enhancements to the facilities should there be technological changes.
John Schmitz, Principal Planner, added that at such time when a CUP expires and the applicant
desires to renew the permit, an evaluation of the facility would be conducted utilizing existing
standards.
Commissioner O'Neill stated he has a different philosophical approach and questioned why City
property should be treated differently, in that wireless facilities being proposed on public
property can be processed administratively, whereas, only stealth ones on private property are
eligible for an administrative approval. In his opinion, the present public hearing process through
the Planning Commission is a more accessible venue to the citizens if they have a concern with a
facility going into a park.
Cmr. O'Neill further stated that he believes that all facilities proposed in the R-1 zone (stealth or
otherwise) should come before the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission Minutes - 4 - August 14, 2002
Commissioner Castaneda stated that he agrees with the following recommendations offered by
Chair O'Neill and Commissioner Cortes:
· To provide residents a more accessible venue in which to voice their concerns by having the
Commission continue to review the more sensitive sites, i.e. those in the R-1 zone and park
facilities.
· that staff provide the Commission with a yearly report apprizing them on the number of
facilities that were processed.
· That the report identify the aging of the CUP's, including how many sites are out of service,
and what measures the City is using to ensure that they are dismantled; and
· That a recommendation be forwarded to the City Council expressing the Commission's desire
that any revenues generated by the leasing of parks or recreational facilities be redirected
back into the hosting facility or to the Parks & Recreation Department budget.
Commissioner McCann stated that he is supportive of staff's recommendations and sees the need
to grant staff more discretionary approval in order to streamline the process, however, he is also
supportive of the concerns and recommendations made by other commissioners and was
wondering if it would be appropriate to continue this item in order to allow staff time to
incorporate the Commission's recommendations and further fine-tune the ordinance proposal.
Commissioner O'Neill summarized his recommendations as follows:
· That any proposal in the R-1 zone come before the Planning Commission;
· Depending on the impact of a façade-mounted facility on an existing building that
underwent Design Review approval, such facility shall also be subject to Design Review
approval.
· That there be homogeneous language between what happens on public property and any
other site. There ought not to be any need to treat what happens on publ ic property any
differently in terms of the ordinance and then the process.
MSC (Castaneda/McCann) (7-0) that this item be continued in order to allow staff time to
incorporate the Commission's concerns and recommendations, which are:
· That any proposal located in the R-l zone and public facilities be subject to review by
the Planning Commission;
· That depending on the impact of a façade-mounted facility on a building that
underwent DRC approval, the proposal shall also be subject to Design Review.
· That a recommendation be forwarded to City Council recommending that revenues
generated from leasing of public parks or recreation facilities be channeled back into
the hosting facility or the Parks and Recreation budget; and
· That staff's report incorporate language reflecting the Commission's desire to have an
annual report provided to them.
Motion carried.
Planning Commission Minutes - 5 - August 14, 2002
2. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC 02-20; Conditional Use Permit proposal for a 1.196 sf granny flat
as an accessory second unit in a Single-Family Residence (R-l) zone.
The unit will be situated behind an existing single family dwelling
located at 437 Elm Street.
Background: Michael Walker, Associate Planner reported the 1,196 sf granny flat is proposed to
be built on a 11,415 sf lot that contains an existing 1,050 sf single family dwelling, a 400 sf
detached garage and a 400sf accessory structure. The unit would be located behind the existing
dwelling consisting of 2 bedrooms, a den, living room and 2 bathroom designed in accordance
with ADA requirements.
The proposed accessory second unit has been designed to meet the State criteria and local
zoning ordinance.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 02-40 based on
findings and conditions contained therein for an accessory second unit, per State
Government Code Sections 65852.2(b)(1 )(A)-(l) for cities without adopted second unit
ordinances.
Commission Discussion:
Commissioner O'Neill stated that in the past, it has been staff's recommendation and the
Commission's desire to have the accessory unit and the primary dwelling match or be as
architecturally compatible as possible, and was wondering why this is not the case for this
proposal. He further recommends that there be single-metering on the property.
Mr. Walker responded that the construction material forthe accessory unit is from a manufacturer
and was pre-assembled in sections and brought to the site and erected. He believes the applicant
is attempting to find building material to match the existing dwelling, but is encountering some
difficulty, and stated that perhaps the applicant can elaborate further on his progress.
Commissioner Madrid stated that her vast experience in rental and housing units has been that
single-metering by no means accomplishes the desired effect in deterring the units from
becoming rentals. She further stated that because this unit will be built to ADA specifications,
she is inclined to allow the double metering in order the avoid creating a hardship on the present
occupants.
Commissioner McCann stated that for the sake of consistency and fairness, all secondary units
that the Commission has reviewed in the past, have been required to maintain a single meter.
Since there will be disabled individuals occupying both dwellings, he would be concerned that
ADA requirements to make reasonable accommodations would somehow be overridden by
denying the applicant's request to allow double-metering.
Commissioner O'Neill stated that the meter issue can be resolved by installing a separate private
meter, and in fact, would be a substantial savings over the cost of installing a new meter, which
could be anywhere from four to five thousand dollars.
---.-......-....-".-
Planning Commission Minutes - 6 - August 14, 2002
Public Hearing Opened 7:50
Lorraine Marticke, 437 Elm Avenue, Chula Vista, applicant, stated that the reason they are
requesting separate metering is because both units will eventually be occupied by disabled
individuals and the electric costs for heating and operating of all of the equipment are
substantially more than the average household.
Eldon Smith, 436 Elm Avenue, Chula Vista, neighbor, stated that the lot in question is gigantic
and would cost a fortune to landscape and irrigate it, therefore, all that has been there throughout
the years is a weed patch. He is in support of this project and urged the Commission to approve
it.
Mr. Smith indicated that they are working on obtaining the same façade for the secondary unit to
match the front unit and have encountered difficultly in obtaining one because they don't
manufacture it any longer, but will continue to look for something similar. He further stated that
the entire unit is intended to be maintenance-free and they will be working with the designer to
ensure that the roof material is of a quality material and appearance.
Public Hearing Closed 8:00
MSC (Hail/McCann) (7-0) that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCC 02-20 based on
the findings and conditions contained therein for an accessory second unit, per State
Government Code Sections 65852.2(b)(1)(A)-(1) for cities without adopted second unit
ordinances, with the additional following conditions:
. That both dwellings be architecturally compatible and/or match the primary single-
family dwelling; and
. That a single meter be maintained on the property.
Motion carried.
3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ 02-04; Request to amend the City of Chula Vista Zoning Map by
rezoning 1.62 acres of land in Otay Ranch Vilage Two from the Planned
Community (PC) Zone to Public/Quasi-Public (PQ) Zone for the purpose
of constructing a Fire Station (Fire Station No.7).
Background: Rich Whipple, Associate Planner gave a brief overview of the proposal and stated
that the amendment to the Zoning Map would allow the construction of the 12,000 sffire station
on 1.62 acres of land. The proposed rezoning of the Fire Station NO.7 site in Village Two of
Otay Ranch would accomplish the objective of delivering a needed fire station facility to meet
the needs of the City Fire Department Master Plan and maintain thresholds required in the City's
Growth Management Ordinance, therefore, staff recommends approval of the rezoning
application.
Public Hearing Opened and Closed 8:15.
MSC (McCann/Horn) (7-0) that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution NO PCZ 02-04
Planning Commission Minutes - 7 - August 14, 2002
recommending the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS 02-33) and adopt an Ordinance amending the City's
Zoning Map established by Chapter 19, Section 19.18.010 of the chula Vista Municipal Code
by rezoning 1.62 acres of land in Otay Ranch Village Two from the Planning Community (PC)
Zone to Public/Quasi-Public (P-Q) Zone. Motion carried.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
1. Update on Otav Ranch Resource Management Plan Amendment
Bob Leiter, Director of Planning and Building reported that the Otay Ranch Resource Management
Plan Amendment went before the City of San Diego Planning Commission and the Board of
Supervisors. As new development occurs in Otay Ranch, developers are required to convey a
certain number of acres of open space for every acre that's developed, which at build-out will end
up being an approximately 11,000 acre preserve that would be jointly managed and maintained by
the City and the County. Over the last 3 to 4 years approximately 1,400 acres of open space have
been conveyed through irrevocable offers of dedication that were approved by both City and
County staff.
Most recently, the County Planning Commission held a hearing and voted to turn down the
amendment because they felt that the habitat areas that were being added were of lesser value than
the ones that were in the original conveyance area and they also had been led to believe that the
City of San Diego Planning Commission had been led without advice or consideration from the
County. It was referred to the County Board of Supervisors after the Planning Commission denied
it and it was explained that the property that was proposed to be added did have the same value
and that city and county staff had been consulted throughout the process.
2. Nomination of new Planning Commission Chair for FY 02-03
MSC (O'Neill/McCann) to nominate Commissioner Hall as Chair of the Planning Commission and
Commissioner Castaneda as Vice Chair for FY 02-03. Motion carried.
Jim Sandoval, Assistant Planning Director reported that Council recently authorized the establishment
of a Historic Advisory Committee. As part of the make-up of this committee, a representative from
various Commissions would be desired, therefore, for the Commission's consideration, the nomination
of representative will be placed on a future Planning Commission agenda. Additionally, a
representative to GMOC will also be selected.
ADJOURNMENT at 8:25 p.m. to the Planning Commission meeting of August 28, 2002.
Diana~as~ 'S::'!:~ing Commission