HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1994/07/27 (9)
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of July 27, 1994
Page 1
4,
PUBLIC HEARING:
ill
PCM-92-17: Consideration of revised Design
Manual - Citv Initiated
M PCA-95-0l: Consideration of amendments to
Section 19,14,582 of the Municipal Code to allow
administrative review of a broader range of projects
subiect to design review . Citv Initiated
A, BACKGROUND
In October 1992, the City Council approved the Permit Streamlining Workplan and
Implementation Schedule which, among other measures, called for (1) revising the City
Design Manual to include more concise and objective design guidelines with additional
illustrations, and (2) providing for administrative (staff) approval of a broader range of
projects subject to design review, These two streamlining proposals are the subject of
this public hearing,
On May 2, 1994, following six working sessions, the Design Manual Advisory
Committee voted 7-0 to approve and issue the revised Design Manual and proposed
design review process streamlining amendment for consideration and reconunendation
by the Design Review Committee. Economic Development Commission and Planning
Commission, and final adoption by the City Council. Mr. Frank Tarantino was the
Planning Conunission representative on the Advisory Committee,
At a special meeting of the Advisory Conunittee held on June 20, 1994, the Committee
voted 6-0 to incorporate several additional revisions into the Manual. These revisions,
which mainly dealt with the small-lot open space guidelines, resulted from concerns
expressed by several of the major developers which surfaced just prior to consideration
of the Manual by the Design Review Conunittee,
The Design Manual and process streamlining amendment have also been reviewed and
unanimously reconunended for approval by the Design Review Conunittee (by a vote of
5-0 on June 27, 1994) and by the Economic Development Conunission (by a vote of 5-0
on July 6, 1994),
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the revised Design Manual
is exempt from environmental review as a regulatory measure designed to enhance the
quality of the environmental (Class 8 exemption under CEQA), and that the Code
amendment, as a procedural amendment, is not subject to CEQA,
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of July 27, 1994
Page 2
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Planning Conunission Resolution PCM-92-17/PCA.95-01 reconunending that the
City Council approve the revised Design Manual and process streamlining Code
amendment in accordance with the attached draft City Council Resolution and Ordinance
and the findings contained therein,
C. DISCUSSION
Attached are copies of the present Design Manual and the revised Draft, and the text of
a Code amendment which would allow a broader range of projects to be considered by
staff rather than the Design Review Conunittee, As noted above, these are the result of
design review streamlining proposals originally recommended by the Economic
Development Commission and later adopted by the City Council.
The Design Manual helps implement the Community and Urban Design component of
the Land Use Element of the Chula Vista General Plan, This component establishes an
overall urban design structure for the planning area which provides an urban design
context from which to view individual projects,
As you will notice, the draft Design Manual is much more detailed than the existing
document. One of the primary criticisms of design review has been that the existing
guidelines are too general, do not give project proponents adequate direction, and are
subject to wide interpretation, Although design review is inherently a subjective process,
the revised guidelines will provide clear direction on design issues and possible solutions,
In addition to revamping the Design Manual, the Council has also directed that the design
review process be streamlined in several different ways, Some of these have already
been accomplished, such as simplifying and accelerating the sign permit approval
process, and accelerating the appeal process for sign and design review.
One of the important streamlining measures called for by Council is to allow for
administrative approval of a broader range of projects which are subject to design
review, Administrative or staff design review is generally preferable from an applicant's
point of view because (I) the fee is less, (2) it takes 3-4 weeks as opposed to 6-8 weeks,
and (3) it is less formal and more predictable.
Presently, staff has the authority to act in the place of the Design Review Conunittee for
signs, residential additions of two (2) units or less, and commercial and industrial
additions which constitute less than a 25 % increase in floor area, The proposal is to
double these limits -- to residential projects of four (4) units or less, and conunercial and
industrial (or institutional) additions up to 50% of existing floor area, Also, another
City Planning Conunission
Agenda Item for Meeting of July 27, 1994
Page 3
category would be added to include conunercial, industrial and institutional buildings up
to 20,000 sq, ft, provided they are located in planned conununity areas with their own
specific design guidelines and private review process.
In conjunction with these additional projects which could avail themselves of staff design
review, we are also proposing to process such projects so that a "decision point" is
reached early enough in the process so that if it is apparent that the applicant and staff
cannot reach agreement, the project can be referred on to the Design Review Conunittee
with little if any loss in time over what would have been required for a project originally
scheduled for the Conunittee. i.e" 6-8 weeks total.
One of the primary concerns regarding the design review process is that it comes at a
time in the evolution of a project when time is definitely money, and many applicants
simply cannot afford the extra time it takes to appeal their projects on to the next level
of decision making, The change in procedures noted directly above, as well as the
accelerated appeals processes already in place, should go far in addressing this problem,
Also attached is a copy of the design review Procedural Guidelines which have been
updated and revised to explain and describe the design review process in greater detail,
and to include the more recent operational changes we have made to ensure the process
is as user friendly as possible, A flow chart has also been added to help clarify the
process and time frames, We are not asking for Commission action on the Guide, but
we would appreciate your review of the document for clarity and usability, Staff will
solicit from the Conunission any concerns or conunents at the hearing,
Attachments
1. Planning Commission Resolution PCM-92-17/PCA-95-01
2. Draft City Council Resolution and Ordinance
3. Current Design Manual
4. Revised Design Manual
5. Design Review Procedural Guidelines
WPC F:\HOME\PLANNING\2060.94
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-92-17/PCA-95-01
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE
CITY COUNCIL THE REPEAL OF THE EXISTING DESIGN
MANUAL, THE APPROVAL OF THE REVISED DESIGN
MANUAL, AND AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 19.14.582
OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF A BROADER RANGE OF
PROJECTS SUBJECT TO DESIGN REVIEW
WHEREAS, in October 1992, the City Council approved the Permit Streamlining
Workplan and Implementation Schedule; and
WHEREAS, among other measures, said Workplan called for (1) revising the City
Design Manual to include more concise and objective design guidelines with additional
illustrations, and (2) allowing for administrative review of a broader range of projects subject
to design review; and
WHEREAS, on May 2, 1994, following six working sessions, the Design Manual
Advisory Conunittee appointed by the City Council voted 7-0 to approve and issue the revised
Design Manual and proposed design review process streamlining amendment for consideration
and reconunendation by the Design Review Conunittee, Economic Development Commission
and Planning Conunission, and final adoption by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, at a special meeting of the Advisory Conunittee held on June 20, 1994, the
Committee voted 6-0 to incorporate several additional revisions into the Manual; and
WHEREAS, the revised Design Manual and process streamlining amendment have also
been reviewed and unanimously recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee
(by a vote of 5-0 on June 27, 1994) and by the Economic Development Conunission (by a vote
of 9-0 on July 6, 1994); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the revised
Design Manual is exempt from environmental review as a regulatory measure designed to
enhance the quality of the environmental (Class 8 exemption under CEQA). and that the code
amendment, as a procedural amendment, is not subject to CEQA under its General Rule; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said proposed
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 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely July 27,
1994 at 7:00 p,m, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Conunission and said hearing was thereafter closed.
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION,
based on the facts presented at the hearing, reconunends that the City Council approve the
attached draft resolution and ordinance repealing the existing Design Manual, approving the
revised Design Manual, and amending Section 19,15,582 of the Municipal Code based on the
findings contained therein,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City
Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 27th day of July 1994 by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
William C, Tuchscher II, Chairman
Nancy Ripley, Secretary
[M :\homc\planning\2063. 94]
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CIruLA VISTA REPEALING THE EXISTING DESIGN
MANUAL AND APPROVING THE REVISED DESIGN
MANUAL FOR THE CITY OF CIruLA VISTA
WHEREAS, in October 1992, the City Council approved the Permit Streamlining Workplan and
Implementation Schedule; and
WHEREAS. among other measures, the Workplan called for revising the City Design Manual to include
more concise and objective design guidelines with additional illustrations; and
WHEREAS, on May 2, 1994, following six working sessions, the Design Manual Advisory Committee
appointed by the City Council voted 7-0 to approve and issue the revised draft Design Manual for consideration
and recommendation by the Design Review Committee, Economic Development Commission and Planning
Commission, and final adoption by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, at a special meeting of the Advisory Committee held on June 20, 1994, the Conunittee voted
6-0 to incorporate several additional revisions into the Manual; and
WHEREAS. the revised Design Manual has also been reviewed and recommended for approval by the
Design Review Committee (by a vote of 5-0 on June 27, 1994), by the Economic Development Commission (by
a vote of 9-0 on July 6, 1994), and by the Planning Commission in accordance with Resolution PCM-92-17!
PCA-95-01 (by a vote of on July 27, 1994); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the revised Design Manual is
exempt from environmental review as a regulatory measure designed to enhance the quality of the environment
(Class 8 exemption under CEQA); and
WHEREAS. the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said revised Design Manual, 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 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely
in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth A venue, before the City Council and said hearing was thereafter closed,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL does hereby find that the public
necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice justifies the revised Design Manual and that
the Manual is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby repeal the existing Design Manual and
approve the revised Design Manual on file in the City Clerk's office, Document Number
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A, Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
[M:\home\p!anning\2064.94]
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AMENDING SECTION 19.14.582 OF THE CHULA VISTA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW FOR ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
DESIGN REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL CATEGORIES OF PROJECTS
WHEREAS, in October 1992, the City Council approved the Permit Streamlining Workplan and
Implementation Schedule; and
WHEREAS, among other measures, said workplan ca1led for a1lowing administrative review of
a broader range of projects subject to design review; and
WHEREAS, on May 2, 1994, the Design Manual Advisory Committee voted 7-0 to recommend
approva1 of the proposed amendment; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment has a1so been recommended for approva1 by the Design
Review Committee (by a vote of 5.0 on June 27, 1994), the Economic Development Commission (by
a vote of 9-0 on July 6, 1994), and by the Planning Commission in accordance with Resolution PCM-
92-17/PCA-95-01 (by a vote of _ on July 27, 1994); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the proposed code
amendment is a procedura! measure, not subject to CEQA under its Genera1 Rule; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said revised Design Manua1,
and notice of said hearing together with its purpose was given by its publication in a newspaper of
genera! circulation in the City at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely
in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was thereafter
closed,
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find, determine
and ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That the public necessity, convenience, genera1 welfare, and good zoning practice
justifies the amendment and that the amendment is consistent with the City of Chula vista General Plan,
SECTION II: That Section 19,14,582 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby amended
to read:
19.14.582 Design review committee-Duties and responsibilities.
A, The design review committee shall review plans for the establishment, location, expansion or
a1teration of uses or structures in a11 R-3 zones, all commercial and industria1 zones, and
development and redevelopment within redevelopment project area boundaries and shall approve,
conditionally approve or deny such plans, except when projects are within the boundaries of a
Page 2
redevelopment project, in which case the committee sha11 recommend approval, conditiona1
approval or denia1 to the redevelopment agency of the city, The committee sha11 render
decisions on minor proposa1s as defined in Agency Resolution No, 71.
B. The design review committee shall a1so review plans for the establishment, location, expansion
or a1teration of multiple family dwelling uses, major use permits, commercial, or industrial
projects or structures located within the 1985 Montgomery annexation area, and governed by
Chapter 19,70 of this ordinance,
C, The design review committee shall review all appeals filed to contest sign design rulings of the
zoning administrator,
D, The design review committee sha1l base its findings and action upon the provisions of the
effected design manuals of the city,
E, The design review committee shall prepare and adopt operational procedures, bylaws and
business forms,
F, The design review committee shall submit annual reports on its operations to the city planning
commission and redevelopment agency,
G, The fee for a hearing before the design review committee is the Required Fee(s),
H, The zoning administrator has the discretion, with the concurrence of the applicant, to act in the
place of the design review committee in the case of minor projects, including signs, commercial;
lIftd-industria1; eR!!!~!:!!MmBlt.~~~itio~s, which consti.t.~.te I~ss than a 25.1.~~~:~~i~c~~.~:...~~
floor area and residentia1tQ'lidts R661t1ens of tweCfont umts or less, Tbe~nifiaamitiisttatQt
-
administrator may be appeaIed to the design review committee in the same manner as set forth
in Section 19,14,583, The fee for zoning administrator design review sha11 be the Required
Fee(s) ,
SECTION III: This ordinance sha11 take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and
after its adoption,
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M, Boogaard
City Attorney
[M:\home\planning\2062.94)
19,14,582 Design review committee-Duties and responsibilities
H. The zoning administrator has the discretion, with the concurrence of the applicant, to act
in the place of the design review committee in the case of minor projects, including
signs, commerciaJi JJfItI industI'iaI;i ~ti;IIffi!!"R~ additions which constitute less than a
~ 50 percent increase in floor area,' arid residential imJ~g aeEliaells of Me f9m units
-
1X!~wPI~~~' A decision of the zoning administrator may be appealed to the design
review committee in the same manner as set forth in Section 19.14.583. The fee for
zoning administrator design review shall be the Required Fee(s),
(f:\homelp.......\d....-d)
, .
City Planning Conunission
Agenda Item for Meeting of July 27. 1994
Page 1
5,
PUBLIC HEARING:
PCA-94-04: Consideration of amendments to Section 19,64
of the Municipal Code to allow the replacement of
damaged condominiums which are nonconforming with
respect to densitv -City initiated
A, BACKGROUND
An issue arose recently wherein potential buyers of an individual condominium unit could
not obtain financing because the project within which the unit is located is nonconforming
with respect to present density limitations and, therefore, the same number of units could
not be rebuilt if the project was more than 60% destroyed per Section 19,64,50 of the
Municipal Code (see Exhibit A), Staff believes this is a problem unique to
condominiums which should be addressed by amending the Code to allow replacement
in such cases,
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that this zoning text amendment
is exempt from environmental review under CEQA as a Class 2 exemption - replacement
or reconstruction of existing structures or facilities,
B, RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution PCA-94-04 reconunending that the City Council amend Section 19,64
of the Municipal Code in accordance with the attached draft City Council ordinance and
the findings contained therein,
C, DISCUSSION
The Nonconforming Uses Section of the Municipal Code prohibits the reconstruction of
any nonconforming building damaged more than sixty percent of its value (see Exhibit
nAn), Staff was advised that buyers for the condominium unit noted above were unable
to obtain financing since the reconstruction of the unit could not be guaranteed,
Numerous lenders had apparently been approached. but once the nonconforming status
was disclosed, they were unwilling to provide financing for the sale, As a result, sales
were lost to two separate parties which had been interested in purchasing the property,
Condominium projects appear to present a unique situation with respect to nonconforming
use restrictions, Normally, when a multiple-family residential area is rezoned to a lower
density, nonconforming apartment units (those in excess of the permitted number) may
not be rebuilt if destroyed, although the sole property owner (whether that be an
individual, partnership, or corporation) retains the ability to reconstruct the number of
units permitted under the new zone, In the case of the destruction of a nonconforming
City Planning Conunission
Agenda Item for Meeting of July 27, 1994
Page 2
condominium project, one or more of the individual property owners could potentially
lose their individual dwelling unit, with their only remaining interest being in air space
and the project's conunon areas,
Staff has surveyed various other cities regarding their regulations pertaining to the
reconstruction of damaged or destroyed nonconforming residential structures, The
majority of the cities surveyed allow for the rebuilding of such structures as a matter of
right.
D, ANALYSIS
The intent of the Nonconforming Use regulations is to eliminate nonconforming uses as
soon as it is "economically feasible and equitable to do so" (19,64,010), The issue at
hand, therefore, is whether or not it is equitable to deprive a property owner of all but
air space, which is what the current Nonconforming Uses regulations could do in the
instance of the destruction of a nonconforming condominium, Staff has concluded that
this is not equitable or desirable, As a result, staff believes it is appropriate to amend
the Code to permit the reconstruction of residential condominium units damaged more
than sixty percent of their value,
There are nineteen properties within the City which are developed with condominiums
that exceed the density currently permitted, Four of these properties exceed the density
permitted by current zoning, while fifteen exceed the General Plan density (these are
within the Zoning/General Plan Consistency Study areas), The nineteen properties
contain a total of 375 condominium units, of which only 216 could be rebuilt under the
current restrictions on nonconforming uses, Therefore, some 159 property owners are
potentially affected by the amendment.
Both the Sweetwater Union High School District and the Chula Vista Elementary School
District have indicated potential concerns regarding the rebuilding of units within the
General Plan/Zoning Consistency study areas at densities higher than those currently
permitted by the General Plan. and the impact this may have on schools. After
discussions with both Districts, and in response to these concerns, language has been
included which would require property owners requesting rebuilding of affected units to
participate in any programs to mitigate school impacts as approved by the City which
may be in effect at the time of reconstruction,
EXHIBIT A
Section 19,64,150 Damaged or Destroyed Uses - Replacement
Restrictions
Any nonconforming building damaged more than sixty percent of its
value, as established by the director of building and housing inspection,
at the time of damage by fire, flood, explosion" wind, earthquake, war,
riot, or other calamity or act of God, shall not be restored or
reconstructed and used as before such happening exceDt as Drovided in
Section 19.64.155; 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 happening,
Section 19,64,155 Condominium Units - Replacement Permitted
Anv residential condominium unit which is nonconforminl! with
respect to density shall be allowed to be reconstructed in the event of
destruction of ereater than sixty Dercent of the DroDertv's
imDrovement as defined in Section 19.64.150. Drovided that such be
initiated within six months and be substantiallv comDIeted within
twelve months of such haDDeninl!. Said reconstruction shall meet all
code reouirements in Dlace at the time of reconstruction and. with
reSDect to any increase in area. the owner shaIl comDIv with any
aDDroDriate financial or other mechanism sDonsored bv the Chula
Vista Elementarv School District and the Sweetwater Union Hil!h
School District. as mav be aDDroved bv the Citv. to mitieate impacts
to school facilities.
RESOLUTION NO, PCA-94-04
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF AN
AMENDMENT TO SECTION 19,64,150 OF THE CHULA VISTA
MUNICIPAL CODE AND THE ADDITION OF SECTION 19,64,155
PERTAINING TO THE REPLACEMENT OF NONCONFORMING
RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a Municipal Code text amendment was filed
with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on May 9, 1994 by the City of Chula
Vista; and
WHEREAS, said application requests approval of an amendment to the Municipal Code
to allow the reconstruction of residential condominium units more than 60 % damaged which are
nonconforming with respect to density; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the proposal is
a Class 2 exemption from enviromnental review under CEQA, replacement or reconstruction of
existing structures or facilities, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said proposed
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 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely July 27,
1994 at 7:00 p,m, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Conunission and said hearing was thereafter closed, and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION,
based on the facts presented at the hearing, reconunends that the City Council adopt the attached
draft ordinance amending Sections 19,64,150 and adding Section 19.64,155 of the Municipal
Code based on the findings contained therein,
That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 27th day of July 1994 by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
William C, Tuchscher II, Chairman
Nancy Ripley, Secretary
ORDINANCE NO,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING SECTION 19,64,150 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL
CODE AND ADDING SECTION 19,64,155 TO MODIFY THE
NONCONFORMING USES REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO THE
REPLACEMENT OF RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for an amendment to the Municipal Code was
filed with the City of Chula Vista on May 9, 1994 by the City of Chula Vista; and,
WHEREAS, said application requests approval of an amendment to the Municipal Code
to allow the reconstruction of residential condominium units more than 60 % damaged which are
nonconforming with respect to density; and,
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator determined that the proposed
amendments are exempt from environmental review as a Class 2 exemption, replacement or
reconstruction of existing structures or facilities; and,
WHEREAS, on July 27, 1994, the Planning Conunission voted to adopt
Resolution No, PCA-94-04 and thereby reconunend that the City Council enact the proposed
amendments to the Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said application 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 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely August 9,
1994 at 6:00 p,m, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and
said hearing was thereafter closed,
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find,
determine, and ordain as follows:
SECTION I:
That the public necessity, convenience. general welfare, and good zoning
practice justifies the amendment and that the amendment is consistent with
the City of Chula Vista General Plan,
SECTION II:
SECTION III:
SECTION IV:
Presented by
That Section 19,64,150 is amended to read as follows:
Section 19,64,150 Damaged or Destroyed Uses . Replacement
Restrictions
Any nonconforming building damaged more than sixty percent of its
value, as established by the director of building and housing inspection,
at the time of damage by fire, flood, explosion" wind, earthquake, war,
riot, or other calamity or act of God, shall not be restored or
reconstructed and used as before such happening exceDt as Drovided in
Section 19.64.155; 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 happening,
That Section 19,64,155 is added as follows:
Section 19,64,155
Condominium Units
Permitted
Replacement
Anv residential condominium unit which is nonconforminl! with
respect to densitv shall be allowed to be reconstructed in the event of
destruction of l!I'eater than sixty Dercent of the DroDertv's
imDrovement as defined in Section 19,64.150. Drovided that such be
initiated within six months and be substantially comDIeted within
twelve months of such haDDeninl!. Said reconstruction shall meet all
aDDlicable code reQuirements in DIace at the time of reconstruction
and. with reSDect to any increase in area. the owner shall comDIv with
any aDDroDriate financia1 or other mechanism sDonsored bv the Chula
Vista Elementarv School District and the Sweetwater Union Hi~h
School District. as may be aDDroved bv the Citv. to mitil!ate impacts
to school facilities.
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect on the
thirtieth day from and after its adoption,
Approved as to form by
Robert A, Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M, Boogaard
City Attorney