Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1979/06/27 AGENDA City Planning Commission Chula Vista, California Wednesday, June 27, 1979 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of June 13, 1979 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance PCV-79-6 - Consideration of request for reduction in lot size, rear yard and lot depth, 720 Fourth Avenue, Donald and Martha Causton 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract '~ Kimball Terrace, 80 Third Avenue, conversion of 5 unit apartment complex to condominiums 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of PCA-79-12 to amend the Municipal Code relating to storage requirements for condominiums and adoption of a storage policy for condominium units 4. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): Consideration of PCA-79-9 to amend the Municipal Code relating to dwelling groups in R-E and R-1 zones ORAL COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR'S REPORT COMMISSION COMMENTS To: City Plannin9 Commission From: D.J. Peterson, Director of Planning Subject: Staff report on agenda items for Plannin9 Commission Meeting of June 27, 1979 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance PCV-79-6 - Consideration of request for reduction in lot size, rear Nard and lot depth, 720 Fourth Avenue, Donald and Martha Causton A. BACKGROUND 1. The applicant has submitted an application for a variance requesting a reduction in the minimum lot size from 7,000 sq. ft. to 6,000 sq. ft., a reduction in the minimum lot depth from 90 feet to 60 feet, and a reduction in the rear yard setback for two story structures from 20 feet to 10 feet, in order to divide an existing 15,450 sq. ft. parcel into two lots at 720 Fourth Avenue in the R-1 zone. 2. The project is exempt from environmental review as a Class 3(a) exemption. B. RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a motion to approve the variance request subject to the following: 1. The existing garage on lot "A" shall either be relocated or replaced with a two-car garage with appropriate paved access from James Court. 2. The setbacks for the westerly lot shall be as follows: a. Front yard - 15 feet from the inside edge of sidewalk for any fencing over 3½ ft. high or the main structure, and 22 feet from the face of the garage to the inside edge of the sidewalk. b. Side yard - 20 feet setback from the westerly property line. c. Side yard - 5 feet setback from the easterly property line. d. Rear yard - 5 feet setback from the northerly property line for a single- story structure and 10 feet for a two-story structure. 3. Development on the west parcel shall be subject to architectural approval of the Zoning Administrator. 4. The applicant shall be required to record a parcel map providing for the necessary dedication of street and division of the two parcels prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. The applicant shall brant an access easement acceptable to the City for the 5 ft. wide sidewalk shown adjacent to James Court. Said easement may be granted in conjunction with the required street dedication for James Court. The applicant will be .required to construct the sidewalk in accordance with City standards. City Planning Commission Meeting of June 27, 1979 Page 2 C. DISCUSSION 1. Existing site characteristics. The subject property is a 75' x 206' parcel located at the northwest corner of Fourth Avenue and James Court. The 75 foot frontage is along Fourth Avenue. James Court is a cul-de-sac street which is fully improved with the 46 foot right of way width, except for the northerly 19 feet adjacent to the applicant's property and extending for the entire 206 feet of frontage. The site is relatively level, sloping gently toward the west and is developed with a single family dwelling and a detached garage located near Fourth Avenue. The access to the garage is from Fourth Avenue. The existing house is located 34 feet from Fourth Avenue and approximately 27 feet from the north property line. The remainder of the property is vacant. 2. Proposed lot split. The applicant wishes to divide the property into two lots which will require the approval of a parcel map, including the dedication and improvement of the southerly 15 feet of the property for the completion of James Court. Some additional right of way will be required also for the installation of a 30 foot curb return at the southeast corner of the property. In addition, a 5 ft. wide sidewalk will be required along James Court. The street dedication will result in a reduction of the lot area from 15,450 sq. ft. to 12,240 sq. ft. with the most easterly lot being 6,240 sq. ft. and the westerly lot being 6,000 sq. ft. 3. Proposed development. The applicant has submitted a schematic plan showing the proposed development on each lot. The existing garage will be removed and replaced with a new garage attached to the west end of the existing house. A 17' x 22' room addition is also proposed on the north side. The new garage will be located 5 feet from the proposed property line between the two parcels. The development on the westerly lot is proposed as a two story dwelling, located 22 feet back of the sqdewalk, 5 feet from the north property line, 12 feet from the east property line and 38 feet from the west line. D. ANALYSIS 1. The subject property contains more than twice the minimum lot area (7,000 sq. ft.) for the R-1 zone and could be developed with another dwelling through the dwelling group provision if it were not for the fact that over 3,000 sq. ft. of the property is required for the completion of James Court. The required dedication reduces the lot to just over 12,000 sq. ft. and reduces the width from 75 feet to 60 feet. The location of James Court was predicated more on the development of the adjacent properties rather than the subject property, resulting in a disproportionate ratio of dedication (20% of the lot taken off for one street). Additional development of the site cannot occur without the lot being divided and the division of land is not possible without relief from certain code requirements. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of June 27, 1979 Page 3 2. The reduction in lot area, depth, and setbacks will allow for the property to be developed similar to the single family dwellings constructed in this area, provided the orientation of the new structure results in an area equal to that of a rear yard and the front setback is consistent with the adjacent development. The completion of street improvements on James Court will substan- tially reduce traffic problems and the appearance of the entire neighborhood will be greatly enhanced as a result of granting this request. The conditions of approval will insure that the development will compliment rather than adversely affect the adjacent properties. The reduction of the rear yard setback from 20 feet to 5 feet for the westerly parcel along the north property line will not have a detrimental effect on the adjoining lots since the houses constructed on these lots are located either adjacent to Fourth Avenue or J Street (see locator) and the adjacent lots are 165 feet and 200 feet deep. A sketch (Exhibit "B") is included depicting the limits of lot coverage and setbacks which would be imposed on a single story building constructed on the newly created lot. E. FINDINGS 1. That a ~ardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the owner exists. Said ha~dehip may include practical difficulties in developing the property for the needs of the owner consistent with the regulations of the zone; but in this context, personal, f~mily or financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits, and neighboring violations a~e not hardships justifying a variance. Further, a previous variance can never have set a precedent, for each case must be considered only on its individual merits. The location of James Court was predicated on the development of adjacent properties and not the subject property, resulting in an unusually high percentage (26%) of the property to be used for street purposes (dedication and sidewalk easement). 2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of sub- stantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and in the same vicinity, and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors. There are other properties in the immediate vicinity which contain less than 7,000 sq. ft. The applicant has sufficient area to divide the lot into two 7,000 sq. ft. lots prior to the street dedication. Approval of this request will enable the applicant to enjoy the same privilege as other properties. 3. That the authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to a~'acent property, and will not materially impair the purposes of the zoning ordinance or the public itnerest. The granting of this request will cause the completion of James Court which will enhance the general appearance of the street and reduce the present traffic conflicts at the intersection with Fourth Avenue. 4. That the authorizing of such variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City or the adopted plan of any governmental agency. Granting this variance will allow the property to develop a full width residen- tial street to serve the entire neighborhood, thus conforming to the standards contained in the General Plan. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of June 27, 1979 Page 4 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 79-17, Kimball Terrace, 80 Third Avenue, conversion of 5 unit apartment complex to condominiums A. BACKGROUND 1. In June, 1977 the City Council approved a precise plan for a 5 unit apartment building to be located on the northwest corner of Third Avenue and Kimball Terrace. 2. The owner has submitted a tentative subdivision map for Kimball Terrace (Chula Vista Tract 79-17) for the construction of a 5 unit condominium structure in accordance with the approved precise plan. 3. The Planning Commission certified the Negative Declaration (IS-77-11) for the precise plan on March 23, 1977; no further action is required. B. RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the tentative subdivision map for Kimball Terrace, Chula Vista Tract 79-17, subject to the following conditions: 1. The owner shall offer for dedication on the final map a 10 foot wide strip of land, 5 feet on either side of the center line of the existing 36" R.C.P., and an ll foot wide strip of land, 5.5 feet on either side of the center line of the existing 51" R.C.P., to the City as easements for drainage purposes. 2. Prior to recordation of the final map, the owner shall dedicate sufficient right-of-way to the City to provide for a minimum 30 foot radius curb return and a minimum distance of 8 feet from face of curb to property line. The owner shall also dedicate a 7.5 foot strip of land along Third Avenue and a 5.5 foot strip of land along Kimball Terrace to the City as easements for street tree purposes prior to recordation of the final map. 3. A soils engineer's certificate shall be placed on the map. 4. The median island on Third Avenue shall be shown on the tentative map together with proposed left turn accommodations. 5. The storage areas shall be revised to allow for the opening of car doors within the garages and to provide from 40 to 80 cu. ft. of storage space adjacent to each unit. C. DISCUSSION 1. Existing site characteristics. The subject parcel is triangular in shape and slopes steeply from the south- west toward Third Avenue, having a maximum natural slope of 25% and average natural slope of 18%. An enclosed storm drain exists on the northeasterly portion of the site, running parallel with Third Avenue. The only adjoining property is located to the west on Kimball Terrace and is developed with a single family dwelling located approximately 10 feet from the property line. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of June 27, 1979 Page 5 2. Precise plan. In June, 1977 a precise plan (PCM-77-9) was approved for the construction of a 5 unit apartment complex consisting of four 2-bedroom units and one 3-bedroom unit in a split level building, ranging from 1-3 stories in height. The only change being proposed by the applicant is the addition of 270-300 cu. ft. storage cabinets which will be constructed inside the two-car g.arages being provided for each unit. 3. Condominium ordinance. In the latter part of 1978 the City Council adopted Ordinance #1891 setting forth specific requirements for condominium projects. Those requirements include standards for storage and a requirement for separate utility service and meters unless otherwise handled on a group basis by a homeowners' association. The remaining requirements are met in the construction of new units whether they are built as apartments or condominiums. 4. Requirements. In addition to the conditions of approval, the developer will be required to fulfill the following ordinance requirements: a. Pay the residential construction tax for condominiums of $375.00 per unit, plus $25.00 for each bedroom in excess of one (total of $2,025.00) prior to the issuance of a building permit. b. The developer shall pay the park acquisition and development fee of $200.00 per unit ($1,000 total) prior to the recordation of the final map. c. The applicant shall file a letter stipulating his i~tended method of providing utility service in accordance with the city code for condominiums. d. The subdivider is responsible for the construction of street improve- ments in Kimball Terrace and Third Avenue adjacent to the subject prop- erty. Improvements shall include, but not be limited to: curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveway approaches, A.C. pavement, street lights and street trees. Improvement plans for the required work shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to approval of the final map. The return at the northwest corner of Kimball Terrace and Third Avenue shall have a minimum curb radius of 30 feet. e. The subdivider must pay all applicable sewer connection charges prior to approval of the final map. f. Miscellaneous: 1) Utilities serving the subdivision must be undergrounded. 2) The developer must pay his proportionate share for the financing of traffic signals in accordance with the city code. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of June 27, 1979 Page 6 3) The developer must comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Preparation of the final map and plans shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Chula Vista Subdivision Manual and the Subdivision Map Act. D. ANALYSIS With the exception of the provision of storage, the design details of this project were resolved with the approval of the precise plan two years ago. Construction has not begun on the site, so the units will be built as condo- miniums right from the start. The applicant's solution to providing the required storage for each unit involves constructing a 3 ft. wide cabinet along one side of each garage. This solution presents two problems: first, the garages are only 20 feet wide which is a mini- mum width to accommodate two cars, so the 3 foot wide encroachment for storage makes difficult the parking of two cars within the garage; second, storage has not bee~provided adjacent to the units, which are all located on the second and third floor. It is staff's conclusion that the storage in the garage can be shifted in part to an overhead area in front of the cars and partially along one side to avoid conflicts with car door opening. In addition, each unit can easily accommodate a 40-80 cu. ft. storage area on the outside deck area to provide some storage adjacent to each unit. E. FINDINGS OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN Land Use Element - conforms. The General Plan designates this site for medium density residential (4-12 DU/acre) and the development is proposed at 11 DU/acre. The proposed subdivision is in confOrmance with the adopted precise plan and the R-3-P-12 zoning . Circulation Element - conforms. The completion of improvements on the site along Third Avenue are in conformance with the major street sections of the General Plan. Housing Element - conforms. The Housing Element of the General Plan is not affected by a 5 unit development. Conservation, Open Space, Parks and Recreation Elements - conform. The project is designed to fit in and blend with the terrain. No endangered species or natural resources have been identified on the site. The developer will be assessed in lieu park fees in conformance with the Municipal Code. Seismic Safety Element - conforms. There is no indication of historic seismic activity on the site.. Extension of public improvements will meet or exceed Safety Element standards. Noise Element - conforms. The applicant is required to construct the units in accordance with state standards to reduce noise levels in the building to acceptable levels. Portions of outside activity areas are screened as well. Scenic Highways Element - conforms. The site does not abut a "scenic route" or "gateway." City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of June 27, 1979 Page 7 Bicycle Routes Element - conforms. While Third Avenue is not designated as a bicycle route, the street is wide enough to accommodate the traffic mix of bicycles and motor vehicles. LOcATOR 5 UNIT CONDO.- 80 THIRD AVE. % City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of June 27, 1979 Page 8 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of PCA-79-12 to amend the Municipal Code relating to storage requirements for condominiums and adoption of a storage policy for condominium units A. BACKGROUND 1. On May 22, 1978, staff submitted a report to the City Council pertaining to a proposed amendment to the Municipal Code regarding private storage for condominium developments and a proposed storage policy establishing standards for the location of the private storage areas. After reviewing the report, the City Council referred the matter to the Planning Commission for a report and recommendation on the proposed amendment and policy. 2. The proposed project is exempt from environmental review as a class 3(e) exemption, B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt a motion recommending that the City enact an ordinance amending Section 15.56.020 C of the Municipal Code to read as follows: C. Storage for each condominium unit shall be provided in accordance with the following table. The required storage shall be for the personal and private use of each owner of a condominium unit and shall contain no dimension smaller than 2 feet. Required private storage area for condominium developments No. of bedrooms. Cu.ft. of storage Studio and one 150 Two 200 Three 250 Four or more 300 2. Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council adopt a resolution establishing a policy for private storage for condominium projects as set forth below: Storage policy for condominium units The following standards for storage areas for condominium developments are provided in order to guide developers of such units, but the Planning Commission and City Council will review each proposal on its own merits and may make additional requirements or approve departures from the stated standards when good cause can be shown. 1. Required storage areas should not be divided into more than two locations and no location should contain less than 40% of the required storage area. 2. It is highly desirable for a portion of the storage area to be adjacent to or within the unit it serves. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of June 27, 1979 Page 9 3. Storage areas shall be as secure as possible. All storage areas on the ground floor which are accessible from outside the living area must utilize 1" deadbolt single cylinder locks, security type hinges with non-removable pins and solid core doors. Such areas must be constructed in a secure and workmanlike manner and of materials so as to resist forced entries. 4. The configuration of the storage area should allow for all portions of it to be easily reached. 5. A storage area located within the living area of the unit will be counted toward the required area only if it clea_~exceeds the closet and cabinet space which is normally provided for such a unit. 6. One half of the required storage may be provided within the attic space if it is accessible by a pull-down or stationary stairway. 7. Storage located within the carport area should not normally consti- tute more than 60% of the required storage. Exceptions may be granted by the Planning Commission and City Council if the carport area is close to the entryway$ to the units or on the interior of the site so as to be largely enclosed and quickly accessible from the dwelling units. Such exceptions may be allowed when no other practicable solution is apparent. The granting of such exceptions may be subject to such conditions as are necessary to guarantee extraordinary security of the storage area. 8. Storage areas should be designed so as to be architecturally compatible with the character of the condominium development. 9. Storage areas shall not be located where they would increase the danger of fire, ar block important access routes to fire or police personnel. C. DISCUSSION 1. The Code presently requires each condominium unit to have a minimum of 256 cu. ft. of private storage space. Said storage must not be part of the interior living area of the unit and contain no dimension less than two feet. Since the adoption of this requirement, private storage for condominiums have been approved in carport areas, patios, on balconies, under stairwells, in attics made accessible by pull-down stairways, and within closets which were determined to be clearly larger than provided in "normal construction". In no case has the storage been allowed to be in more than two locations for each unit. 2. The present storage requirement of 256 cu. ft. applies to one, two and three bedroom units alike. After reviewing F.H.A. standards for multi-family storage, staff concluded that it would be more equitable to establish a sliding scale requiring a minimum of 150 cu. ft. for a one bedroom unit, with 50 cu. ft. increments for each additional bedroom. The City Council noted in their action on the May 22, 1979 report on condominium storage that 150 cu. ft. should be the minimum for either a studio or a one bedroom unit. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of June 27, 1979 Page l0 3.~ Staff believes City actions taken thus far with respect to providing private storage have been sound. However, the staff has had to interpret whether or not storage proposals would be acceptable without having more specific standards to guide an applicant. In view of the various solutions which have been proposed for providing storage, it became obvious to the staff that guidelines and/or standards should be established to avoid the present confusion and to provide better guidance for the applicant. Because of the many variables involved in this matter, the standards and guidelines should be adopted by resolution to retain a degree of flexibility in their application. 4. The City Attorney has forwarded a memo to the City Council, dated June '13, 1979, in which he has expressed concern over the City's legal authority to control the standards or guidelines pertaining to storage which require: a. Portions of the storage to be adjacent or within the unit~ b. Attic storage to be readily accessible; c. Limit the required storage within the carport area unless said storage is in close proximity to the dwelling unit entry. The memo concludes that the balance of the proposed regulations pertaining to storage, which are intended to insure that adequate amounts of storage are provided to minimize or eliminate unsightly displays of items, and security requirements are clearly within the authority of the City to regulate based on safety and genera~re {including aesthetic concerns). The Planning staff concurs with the City Attorney's opinion in the latter, but we are also convinced that guidelines which will insure that storage will be both accessible and convenient are needed to provide assurance that the storage will be used. If the storage (s neither convenient nor accessible, it will not be used and the general welfare of the residents within the project, as well as the City, will be affected by the clutter and unsightliness which results from storage of items in lawn areas, walkways, parking areas and other such exposed areas. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of June 27, 1979 Page ll 4. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): Consideration of PCA-79-9 to amend the Municipal Code relating to dwelling groups in R-E and R-1 zones A. BACKGROUND This item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of May l, 1979 so staff could further study the proposed zoning text amendment regarding the "dwelling group" provisions of the Municipal Code. A copy of the original staff report is attached as background information. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt the Negative Declaration on IS-79-50 and find that this project will have no significant environmental impact. 2. Adopt a motion recommending that the C.ity Council enact an ordinance amending Section 19.58.130 of the Municipal Code as shown on Exhibit "A" attached. C. DISCUSSION 1. At the May 9 hearing, both the Planning Commission and staff expressed some reservation over the fact that under the proposed zoning text amendment, a dwelling group would be listed as a principal permitted use in the R-E and R-1 zones, so that a person having a 14,000 sq. ft. lot in the R-1 zone would have the right to locate a second residence on the lot. Under the present ordinance, a conditional use permit is required and the Planning Commission has full review authority over the case. Staff believes that this review is appropriate and has amended the draft ordinance to continue to require the conditional use permit process. 2. The amended draft ordinance is now limited to clarifying and detailing the standards for dwelling groups. These are the standards by which the Planning Commission would evaluate applications for conditional use eermits for a dwelling group. Exhibit A Revise Section 19.58.130 to read as follows: 19.58.130 Dwelling groups A dwelling group as defined in Section 19.04.076 of this title may be permitted provided that all of the following conditions and requirements are met: A. The area of the lot devoted to each structure used for dwelling purposes shall be equal to the minimum lot size of the underlying zone exclusive of the access road and guest parking areas. B. Each dwelling shall be connected to a gravity sewer or any other means approved by the City Engineer. C. All onsite utilities shall be undergrounded. D. No garage conversions shall be permitted. E. All roadways, driveways and guest parking areas shall be paved with a minimum 5 inches of portland concrete cement. F. The minimum width of an access roadway serving one dwelling structure shall be 15 feet and 20 feet for two or more structures. G. Guest parking shall be provided for those dwellings served by an access roadway. The number of spaces shall be as follows: 1. One dwelling structure - one space. 2. Two or more dwelling structures - one and one-half space per dwelling structure. H. An onsite fire hydrant may be required by the Fire Department when it is deemed necessary. I. If the property is graded to create a building pad for each dwelling structure, the minimum level pad area (no slope over 5%) of each pad shall be not less than 80% of the minimum lot size required for said dwelling, but in no case shall the minimum level area be less than 5000 square feet. J. Development proposed on existing natural topography having an average natural slope of 10% or greater, and with less than 10% of the site to be graded shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Planning, who shall consider whether such development will adversely affect adjacent properties or development. K. The following yards shall be based upon the front orientation of the structures: Front yard - 15 feet from the access roadway and from any setback line set forth in this section. Any garage facing the access roadway shall be a minimum of 22 feet from the access roadway. Side yard - Not less than that required by the underlying zone. Rear yard - Not less than that required by the underlying zone upon initial construction. Exhibit A Page 2 L. In addition to the setbacks established in this sectionj'the minimum separation between dwellings shall not be less than the combined total of the yards required by the underlying zone, except where the dwellings face each other, in which case an additional 20 feet shall be provided between dwellings. M. All development permitted under this provision shall be subject to the requlations and requirements of this title except as otherwise regulated in this section. N. The development shall be subject to site plan and architectural approval of the Director of Planning. O. The types of dwelling structures permitted under this provision shall be limited to those listed under the permitted uses of the underlying zone. NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT TITLE: Zoning Text Amendment relating to standards for dwelling groups Project Location: Not site specific Project Proponent: City of Chula Vista CASE NO. IS-79-50 DATE: April 4, 1979 A, Project Proposal. The following are proposed zoning text amendments regarding the "dwelling group" provision of the R-E, R-1 and R-2 zones within the Chula Vista Municipal Code (Section 19.58.130). These amendments were prompted by the ambiguity in the language of the Code and difficulty in its application. Chapter 19.22 R-E - RESIDENTIAL ESTATE ZONES Section 19.22.020 Permitted Uses. Add new paragraph C to read as follows: C. Dwelling groups subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.130 of this title. Section 19.22.040 Conditional Uses. Amend by deleting'paragraph for dwelling groups. Chapter 19.24 R-1 - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE Section 19.22.020 Permitted Uses. Add new paragraph B to read as follows: B. Dwelling groupsJubj~t to the provisions of Section 19.58.130 of this title. Section 19.22.040 Conditional Uses. Amend by deleting paragraph A for dwelling groups and relettering paragraphs B and C to A and B. . Section 19.24.120 Setbacks - Rear yards - Exceptions permitted when. Amend this section by adding a new sentence at the end of the paragraph to read as follows: "This provision shall not apply to initial construction on the site." IS-79-50 page 2 Chapter 19.26 R-2 - ONE AND TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONE Section 19.26.020 Permitted uses. Amend this section to read as follows: "The following are the principal permitted uses in an R-2 zone: A. One or two single family dwellings on any lot; B. One duplex or two family dwelling on any lot; C. Attached single-family dwelling units; D. Dwelling groups subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.130 of this title; E. Other accessory uses and accessory building customarily appurtenant to a permitted use, subject to the requirements of Section 19.58.020; F. Agricultural uses as provided in Section 19.16.030. Section 19.26.110 Floor area per unit - Minimum - Regulatory provisions Amend this section by deleting the last sentence which reads as follows: "The minimum floor area for a single family residence in the R-2 zone shall be the same as in the R-1 zone." Add new Section 19.26.160 to read as follows: Section 19.26.160 Distance between dwellings. The minimum distance between detached single family dwellings shall be ten feet (10') except when the dwelling group provision is used as provided in Section 19.58.130 of this title. Proposed zoning text amendment for dwelling groups: 19.58.130 Dwelling groups. A dwelling group as defined in Section 19.04.076 of this title may be permitted provided that all of the following conditions and requirements are met: A. The area of the lot devoted to each structure used for dwelling purposes shall be equal to the minimum lot size of the underlying zone exclusive of the access road and guest parking areas. B. Each dwelling shall be connected to a gravity sewer. C. All on-site utilities shall be undergrounded. D. No garage conversions shall be permitted. IS-79-50 page 3 E. All roadways, driveways and guest parking areas shall be paved with a minimum 5 inches of portland concrete cement. F. The minimum width of an access roadway serving one dwelling structure shall be 15 feet and 20 feet for two or more structures. G. Guest parking shall be provided for those dwellings served by an access roadway. The number of spaces shall be as follows: 1. One dwelling structure - one space 2. Two or more dwelling structures - one and one-half space per dwelling structure. H. An on-site fire hydrant may be required by the Fire Department when it is deemed necessary. I. If the property is graded to create a building pad for each dwelling structure, the minimum level pad area (no slope over 5%) of each pad shall be not less than 80% of the minimum lot size required for said dwelling, but in no case shall the minimum level area be less than 5000 sq. ft. j. Development proposed on existing natural topography having an average natural slope of 10% or greater, and with less than 10% of the site to be graded shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Planning, who shall consider whether such development will adversely affect adjacent properties or development. K. The following yards shall be based upon the front orientation of the structures: Front yard - 15 feet from the access roadway and from any setback line set forth in this section. Any garage facing the access roadway shall be a minimum of 22 feet from the access roadway. Side yard - Not less than that required by the underlying zone. Rear yard - Not.less than that required by the underlying zone upon initial construction. L. In addition to the setbacks established in this section, the minimum separation between dwellings shall not be less than the combined total of the yards required by the underlying zone, except where the dwellings face each other, in which case an additional 20 feet shall be provided between dwellings. M. All development permitted under this provision shall be subject to the regulations and requirements of this title except as otherwise regulated in this section. N. The development shall be subject to architectural approval of the Director of Planning. IS-79-50 page 4 O. The types of dwelling structures permitted under this provision shall be limited to those listed under the permitted uses of the ~nderlying zone. B. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans. The project proposed is consistent with the Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance and is not at variance with the General Plan or associated elements. C. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. The project is not site specific, therefore will not adversely affect any natural or manmade resources. 2. The proposed amendments are not at varia.nce with the General Plan or asso- ciated-elements nor will the project achieve short term to the disadvantage of long term environmental goals. 3. The project is not anticipated to result in any adverse impacts which could interact to create a substantial cumulative effect on the environment. 4. No significant increase in vehicle traffic nor related noise or emissions are expected to result from project implementation. D. Consultation 1. Individual and Organizations. City of Chula Vista D.J. Peterson, Director of Planning Bill Ullrich, Associate Engineer Peggy Donovan, Environmental Control Commissioner Gene Grady, Director of Building and Housing 2. Documents. Title 19, Zoning - Chula Vista Municipal Code The Initial study Application and evaluation forms documenting the findings of no significant impact are on file and available for public review at the Chula Vista Planning Dept., 276 4th Ave., Chula Vista, CA. ~N 3 (r~v. 5/77) City Planning Commission page 14 Agenda Items for Meeting of April 25, 1979 8. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of PCA-79-9 to amend the Municipal Code relating to dwelling groups in R-E and R-1 zones A. BACKGROUND 1. This item involves a proposed zoning text amendment regarding the "dwelling group" provision of the Municipal Code (Section 19.58.130). The amendment has been prompted by the present ambiguity in the language of the code and difficulty in its application. 2. An Initial Study, IS-79-50, of possible adverse environmental impacts of this project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on April 2, 1979. It was concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and it is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the Negative Declaration. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt the Negative Declaration on IS-79-50 and find that this project will have no significant environmental impact. 2. Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council enact an ordinance amending Title 19 of the Municipal Code as shown on Exhibit A (attached). C. DISCUSSION 1. Section 19.04.076 of the code defines a "dwelling group" as a "group of two or more detached buildings used for dwelling purposes located on a parcel of land in one ownership and having any yard or court in con, non." 2. "Dwelling groups" are allowed in the R~E and R-1 zones subject to approval of a conditional use permit and are a principal permitted use in the R-2 zone. The original intent of the "dwelling group" provision was to allow additional dwelling units on a parcel when the additional unit would not exceed the density permitted in the underlying zone. For example, a 14,000 sq. ft. lot would be allowed two single family dwellings to be constructed, provided, of course, a conditional use permit was approved by the Planning Department. 3. The "dwelling group" provision of the code (Section 19.58.130) has been poorly drafted. The conditions and requirements are difficult to understand and interpret, resulting in problems in implementation and potential development not in accordance with the original intent of the provision. As an example, a 28,000 sq. ft. lot in the R-1 zone could be developed with one detached single family home and one triplex as the code is presently written, even though a triplex is not a permitted use in the R-1 zone. Another example is a 21,000 sq. ft. lot in the R-2 zone. Since "dwelling groups" are a permitted use in the R-2 zone, an individual may apply for a building permit to construct a single family dwelling and a 5 unit apartment structure on the property, and if the development meets the requirements of the code the building permit would be issued. These hypothetical situations do not meet the intent of the "dwelling group" provision which was to allow a clustering of units within a zone, provided those units are of the type permitted in the zone; i.e. detached single family in the R-1 zone and duplex in the R-2 zone. City Planning Con~nission page 15 Agenda Items for Meeting of April 25, 1979 4. It is also possible to interpret the "aggregate of the minimum lot area for the individual dwelling in the group" to mean that in the case of the R-2 zone, one unit would be permitted for each 3500 sq. ft. of lot area. This interpretation could result in three dwelling units on a 10,500 sq. ft. lot. This, too, does not meet the original intent. 5. Other difficulties related to interpretation make it imperative to amend the section by clearly stating the conditions and requirements and under what circumstances a "dwelling group" may be developed. 6. The staff has also completed a draft amendment to the code establishing conditions, requirements and regulations governing the development of panhandle lots. The amendment was prompted by the repeated approval of variances creating such lots. The proposed amendment to the "dwelling group" provision has incor- porated many of the provisions of the "panhandle lot" amendment. This is in anticipation of the lot being split in the future and to offset any variance requests which may arise because of differences between the two provisions. 7. Since "panhandle lots" may be created without a variance, it would no longer be appropriate to require a conditional use permit to develop property in the same manner due to the ownership. For this reason, it is recommended that a conditional use permit no longer be required for a "dwelling group" in the R-E and R-1 zones. The procedure is not required for the R-2 zone.