The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPlanning Comm Rpts./1995/09/06 (7) PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT Page 1, Item 2- Meeting Date 09/06/95 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: Zoning Text Amendment PCA-96-01; Request to add wording to Section 19.68.020 T.l of the Municipal Code which would clarify that noise associated with the normal operations of any land use approved by a conditional use permit is considered "environmental" rather than nuisance noise - Bitterlin Brice Development Partners, Agents for MCA Concerts, Inc. This amendment would clarify the distinction between "nuisance noise" as opposed to "environmental noise" as it would relate to conditional uses in general and the operations of the MCA Amphitheater in particular. The Environmental Review Coordinator has concluded that this text amendment is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCA-96-01 recommending that the City Council amend Section 19.68.020 T.l of the Municipal Code to clarify the distinction between environmental and nuisance noise as it relates to conditional uses in accordance with the attached Draft City Council Ordinance and the findings contained therein. DISCUSSION: I. Proposal In an application and letter dated August 18, 1995, the Applicant has requested that the wording found in 919.68.020 T.l be expanded as follows (additional wording highlighted): "Noise Disturbance--Environmental. Those noise disturbances resulting from land use activity normally permitted under the land use code, gjjp~.I!~.~*~9RJ:i~~~.J#~!1 p~tmi~, but which exceed the noise level limits set by this code for' that particul<lrland use. Environmental noise sources are specified in, but not limited by the list in Appendix A." The impact of this wording would be that noise resulting from the normal and expected operations of a land use approved under authority of a conditional use permit would be considered the same as the noise resulting from the normal and expected operations of a permitted use, Le., "environmental" rather than "nuisance" noise. For example, freeway noise is considered environmental noise because the noise results from the normal use of the land as a transportation corridor. Children playing on a school playground during school hours would also be considered environmental noise. Environmental noise is the expected result of a given land use. In the case of the amphitheater, any noise resulting from a concert would be considered normal and expected, and thus environmental noise. 2. Analvsis Page 2, Item~ Meeting Date 09/06/95 The substance of the amendment is that the impact of environmental noise is measured over a one hour period in order to achieve an average compliance with the standard, and is enforced through the nonnal code compliance process. Conversely, nuisance noise, which is not considered nonnal and expected, cannot exceed the standard at any time and is enforced by the Police Department in response to specific complaints, i.e., a loud party in a residential neighborhood. The applicant has been assured by staff that noise from the nonnal, scheduled operations of the amphitheater would be considered and measured as environmental noise notwithstanding this amendment. However, MCA prefers to have the language in the Code so as to avoid any confusion or misunderstandings in the future. Staff believes the additional language clarifies any ambiguities in the Code and recommends adoption of the amendment. Attachments 1. Commission and Draft Council Resolution/Ordinance 2. Application and letter dated August 18, 1995 3. Disclosure Statement (m:\home\planning\martin\mca\9601 pc.rpt) Attachment 1 Commission Resolution and Draft Council Ordinance RESOLUTION NO. PCA-96-0l RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO ~19.68.020 T.l OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, Bitterlin Brice Development Partners, Agents for MCA Concerts, Inc., has submitted a request to amend the Municipal Code in order to clarify that noise normally associated with a conditionally permitted land uses is to be considered the same as noise normally associated with a pennitted land use, i.e., environmental rather than nuisance noise under the defInition of ~19.68.020 T.l, Noise Disturbance -- Environmental; and WHEREAS, the Municipal Code could be considered ambiguous as related to noise produced by conditionally pennitted land uses; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has concluded that the amendment is generally exempt pursuant to Section l506l(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the Director of Planning set the time and place for a hearing on said amendment and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city at least ten days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m. on September 6, 1995 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT FROM THE FACTS PRESENTED AT THE HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends that the City Council enact the attached ordinance amending (m: \home\planning\martin\mca\9601pc. res} Resolution No. PCA-96-01 Page #2 ~ 19.68.020 T.l, Title 19 of the Municipal Code in accordance with the fmdings 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 6th day of September 1995 by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: William C. Tuchscher II, Chair ATTEST: Nancy Ripley, Secretary (rn: \home\planning\martin\mca\9601pC. res} ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING ~19.68.020 T.l, TITLE 19 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO CLARIFY THAT NorSE NORMALLY ASSOCIATED WITH A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED LAND USE IS TO BE CONSIDERED THE SAME AS NOISE NORMALLY ASSOCIATED WITH A PERMITTED LAND USE WHEREAS, Bitterlin Brice Development Partners, Agents for MCA Concerts, Inc., has submitted a request to amend the Municipal Code in order to clarify that noise normally associated with a conditionally permitted land use is to be considered the same as noise normally associated with a permitted land use, i.e., environmental rather than nuisance noise under the defInition of ~19.68.020 T.l, Noise Disturbance -- Environmental; and WHEREAS, the Municipal Code could be considered ambiguous as related to noise produced by conditionally permitted land uses; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has concluded that the amendment is exempt pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, on September 6, 1995 the Planning Commission voted_ _ to recommend that the City Council adopt the amendment to the Municipal Code in accordance with Resolution No. PCA-96-01; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said amendment and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city at least ten days prior to the hearing; and (m: \home\planning\martin\mca\9601 cc. ord) Ordinance No. Page #2 WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely September 26, 1995, 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 there are no potential significant environmental impacts associated with the amendment. SECTION II: That the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice justify the amendment, and that the amendment is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan. SECTION III: That ~19.68.020 T.1, Title 19 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "Noise Disturbance--Environmental. Those noise disturbances resulting from land use activity normally permitted under the land use code9~R~!!!~I~qmii~BR~~B.~~~~e~.!t, but which exceed the IloIse levd limits set by t:l1iscode for t:l1at particular land use. Environmental noise sources are specified in, but not limited by the list in Appendix A. " SECTION IV: This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect on the thirtieth day from and after its second reading and adoption. Presented by Approved as to form by Robert A. Leiter Director of Planning Bruce M. Boogaard City Attorney (m: \home\planning\manin\mca\960 1 cc.ord) Attachment 2 Application and Letter Dated August 18, 1995 City of Chula Vista Planning Department Case No: ftA-q~-01- Filing Date: 3 -I i? - '1l.o MISCELLANEOUS REQUEST APPLICATION TYPE OF REQUEST Study: Report: Policy: Master Plan: Fee Schedule: Preliminary: Muni Code Amendment: Street Name Change: Land Use Chart: Ordinance; Interim: Urgency: Other (Specify): Specific Plan: Amendment: Redevelopment: Amendment: SPA Plan: x Amendment: Noise Exception and Clarifying Amendment Project Description: MCA Amphitheater - OUtdoor amphitheater with 10,000 fixed seats and additional seating for 10,000 patrons on a lawn berm. Project also includes parking for 6,000 cars and support facilities, i.e. restrooms, concessions, etc. Applicant: Bitterlin Brice Developnent Partners} as Agent for Telephone No.619-221-4406 MCA COncerts, Inc. Address: 1055 Shatter street, San Diego, CA 92106 *FoDnerly Bitterlin Starboard Developnent Partners Contact Person: Garry R. Jackson Telephone No. 619-221-4400 Related Cases: Conditional use permit/Design Review/Grading permit/ Consolidation map/street vacation Assessor's Parcel Numbers: see attached r..:.::lrry 'R .T~~k~nn Print Name 7/25/95 Date mscappl LATHAM & WATKINS 1.".Ul fl. WATKINS 11899.18731 DANA LATHAM 11898.19741 ATTORNEYS AT LAW 70' "8" STREET. SUITE 2'00 SAN OIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92'0'.8'97 TELEPHONE (8'91238.1234 FAX (8'91 898.74'9 TLX 690778 ELN 82793278 &!;!!CAGO OFFICE SE"RS TOWER, SUITE nOD CHICAGO. ILLINOIS 80606 TELEPHONE 13121 876-7700 FAX (3121 ..3-.".7 LONDON OFFICE ONE ANGEL COURT LONDON (C2R 7HJ ENGLAND TELEPHONE + 44.71-3744444 FAX.. 44-71-3744480 LOS ANGELES OFFICE 133 WEST FIFTH STREET. SUITE 4000 LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 80071-2007 TELEPHONE 12131 485-1234 FAX 1213'191-8783 MOSCOW OFFICE 113" :..ENINSKY PROSPECT. SUITE C200 MOSCOW 117198 RUSSIA TELEPHONE -+ 7.150'3856.5555 FAX -+ 7.103156-&556 August 18, 1995 BY TELECOPY Mr. Joe Monaco City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, California 91910 Re: MCA AmDhitheater Pro;ect Dear Joe: NEW JERSEY OFFice ONE NEWARK CENTER NEWARK. NEW JERSEY 07101-3174 TELEPHONE (201) .31.1234 FAX 12011131.7298 NEW YOAIe. OFFICE I" THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 1000 NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10022.4102 TELEPHONE (2121 loe.1200 FAX (212) 71 1 -,ue4 ORANGE COUNTY OFFICE 'BO TOWN CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 2000 COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 12626.112& TELEPHONE (7141 140-123& FAX (714) 7&a-1210 SAN FRANCISCO OFFICE lOB MONTGOMERY STREET, SUITE 1900 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA ",, 1-2U2 TELEPHONE (4111 Jl1.0eoo FAX 141111 JIB.lon WASHINGTON D.t:. OFFICE 1001 PENNSYLVANIA AVE., N.W., SUITE 1300 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20004-2&05 TELEPHONE 12021 837.2200 FAX (2021 637.2201 To follow up on our telephone conversation on Wednesday, this will confirm our understanding that the Planning Commission hearing on this project will be continued until September 6, and that the City Council hearing will be continued until September 26, unless the planned tour of other amphitheater facilities can be completed in time to have the City Council hearing occur on September 19. To prepare for those hearings, you will supply me with Tetra Tech's final revisions to the draft EIR, as well as a draft of the conditional use permit, as soon as possible, and we will endeavor to supply you with our comments within a day or two after we receive the text. On a parallel track, we will work with other departments in the City on the "business deal" so that it can be adequately summarized for the Planning Commission and the Council. Also, in reference to Steve Griffin's letter of August 11, we understand the City's position to be that the noise ordinance regulates impacts on actual land uses, rather than impacts on land use categories. In other words, unless and until land impacted by sound emanating from the amphitheater is developed and occupied, there would be no violation of the SD180\WPS1\mca\monaco.1D2 LATHAM. WATKINS Mr. Joe Monaco August 18, 1995 Page 2 ordinance, even if measured sound in the (vacant) area exceeds the threshholds established by the ordinance. Given this interpretation by the City, and consistent with MCA's willingness to cause its operations to be in compliance with the ordinance when and if development occurs, MCA is prepared to withdraw its request for an "exception" under Ii 19.68.070 of the Zoning Ordinance. However, in order to address MCA's concern that measured sound in vacant areas in excess of the threshholds established by the ordinance could be the basis of private nuisance lawsuits, MCA would nonetheless require an amendment to the noise ordinance clarifying that sound generated by operation of the amphitheater would not constitute "nuisance noise" as defined in the ordinance. As was stated in my letter of July 26, as presently written, Ii 19.68.020 of the ordinance and the categorization of sound sources listed in Appendix A of the ordinance arguably require the sound emanating from the amphitheater to be characterized as "nuisance noise," and we are not content to rely on the discretion of the enforcement officer under Ii 19.66.078 B. Thus, we propose the following clarifying amendment to Ii 19.68.020 T.1 of the noise ordinance (new text is underlined) : "Noise Disturbance--Environmental. Those noise disturbances resulting from land use activity normally permitted under the land use code ~ Dermitted bv a conditional use Dermit or variance, but which exceed the noise level limits set by this code for that particular land use. Environmental noise sources are specified in, but not limited by the list in Appendix A." Finally, I will shortly sumbit to you proposed minor revisions to the noise mitigation program outlined in your August 2 letter to Randy Jackson. Please give me a call if you have any questions about this letter. I would in any event appreciate confirmation that the text of the proposed ordinance amendment, and the justification for it, contained in this letter is sufficient to cause the application previously filed to now be considered SD180\WP51\mca\monacQ.I02 LATHAM a. WATKINS Mr. Joe Monaco August 18, 1995 Page 3 complete, as s-o':ne confusi';!n apparently was created previously when my July 26 letter was not physically attached to the application. Very truly yours, ~ Jon D. Demorest of LATHAM & WATKINS cc: Mr. Jay Marciano Adam Friedman. Esq. Mr. Chris Bitterlin SD180\WPSl\mca\monaco.102 Attachment 3 Disclosure Statement THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or financial inte.-est, payments, or campaign contribvcions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the contract, e.g. owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. Bitterlin Brice Development Partners (formerly Bitterlin Starboard Development Partners) Bitterlin Development Corporation United Brice Group Ltd. MCA Concerts, Inc. Los Alisos Development America Kukdong, Inc. 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. Bitterlin Development Corporation Chris Bitterlin Mark Bitterlin United Brice Group Ltd. G. Bradford Saunders Alice G. Saunders 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. N/A 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? No City of Chula Vista Disclosure Statement Bitterlin Brice Development Partners July 25, 1995 Page Two 5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. Randy Jackson Chris Bitterlin Dave Nielsen O'Malley Miller Bill Bethmann Tom Anglewicz G. Bradford Saunders Mark Bitterlin Jon Demorest Doug Paul Kathy Garcia Bill Engle 6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more then $1,000 to a Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? No Date: July 25, 1995 ~