HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1979/05/09 .... AGENDA
City Planning Commission
Chula Vista, Calif~rnia
City Council Chambers
Wednesday, May 9, 1979 - 7:00 p.m ........................
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meetings of April 18, 1979 and April 25, 1979
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. Consideration of request for vacation of Madison Avenue from "H" Street
to 290 feet south
2. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC-79-14 - Request for conditional use permit to operate
real estate school at 428 "F" Street in the C-O zone -
Anthony Schools
3. Consideration of request to convert residential structure to office use,
717 Third Avenue in C-O zone - R. N. Cassel
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of PCA-79-9 to amend the Municipal Code
relating to dwelling groups in R-E and R-1 zones
5. Consideration of Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 1979-80
for conformance to the Chula Vista General Plan
6. Consideration of staff recommendation for implementing Booz, Allen and
Hamilton Report
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
/
COMMISSION COMMENTS
To: City Planning Commission
From: D.J. Peterson, Director of Planning
Subject: Staff report on agenda items for Planning Commission
Meeting of May 9, 1979
l. CONSIDE~\TION OF REQUEST FOR VACATION
OF blADISON AVENUE FROM "H" STREET TO
290 FEET SOUTH
A. Background
1. On December 12, 1978, Harriett Rubin Stone submitted a
request to vacate the subject portion of Madison Avenue.
2. This portion is bounded on the east and west sides by
commercial property owned by the petitioner. The property
adjacent to the southerly terminus of Madison Avenue is
also zoned commercial and is under a different ownership.
3. The petitioner is planning to renovate her property and
proposes to use the vacated street for parking and
landscaping.
4. This street vacation has not been coordinated with the
owner of the property to the south of the petitioner's
property. However, that owner has been made aware of
the proposed vacation and will be advised of the Public
Hearing before Council.
B. Recommendation
Based on the findings contained in this report, adopt a
motion recommending that the City Council approve the vacation
of that portion of Hadison Avenue subject to the following
condition:
Petitioner shall grant to the owners, their successors,
heirs and assigns of that parcel of land (Assessor's
Parcel No. 571-050-06) at the southerly terminus of the
subject portion of Madison Avenue, a 25 foot easement
for ingress and egress.
C. Findings
The Engineering Division has reviewed the request for this
proposed street vacation and recommends approval based on the
following:
1. At present, the only traffic en this portion ef }.ladisen
Avenue is comprised of vehicles travellin{: to and from
retail businesses which will benefit from increased
parkinq created by the vacation.
· City Planning Commiss
Agenda Items for Meeting of Itay 9, 1979
page 2
Consideration of Request for
Vacation of Madison Avenue
from "H" Street to 290 feet
South
2. The closing of the street will not be detrimental to
the flow of traffic in the area.
3. The street was dedicated as an easement for street pur-
poses by the owner in 1955 with the possibility of connecting
this portion of Madison Avenue to an existing portion
330 feet to the south. Since that time, however, the
southerly portion has been modified to a cul-de-sac and
the property between the north and south portions has become
a retail shopping center.
4. The petitioner has arranged to dedicate utility easements
to the respective utility companies by separate instruments,
therefore, the only reservation needed is a 10 foot sewer
easement to the City.
5. The property at the south end of the subject portion of
Madison Avenue presently has access to "H" Street. This
access should be retained by the granting of an easement
for ingress and egress. Denial of this access would be
detrimental to businesses on the southerly property and
would increase congestion at the intersection of "H"
Street and Broadway by virtue of vehicles going to the
shopping center from the west.
JWH:fpw
EXISTING
,.~.~I O PP IAI C.~
MANKATO ST,
ORAWN BY ? I ¥ L E
....L._~_G~____~ STREET VACATION MADISON AVE
~-~-7~ t SOUTH OF 't'1
STREET
City Planning Commission Page 3
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 9, 1979
2. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC-79-14 - Request for conditional use permit to operate
real estate school at 428 "F~' Street in the C-O-D zone -
Anthony Schools
A. BACKGROUND
1. The applicant is requesting permission to locate and operate a real
estate school within an existing 6100 sq. ft. structure (formerly occupied by
the Department of Human Resources) located at 428 "F" Street in the C-O-D
zone (Commercial Office, Civic Center Design Control)
2. An Initial Study (IS-79-54) of possible adverse environmental impacts of
the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Committee on April 26,
1979. The Committee concluded that there would be no significant environmental
effects and recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a conditional Negative
Declaration.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Adopt the conditional Negative Declaration on IS-79-54 and find that
this project will have no significant environmental impact.
2. Based on the findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a
motion approving the request, PCC-79-14, subject to the following conditions:
a. The site plan shall be revised to provide for a minimum of 100
offstreet parking spaces.
b. The center driveway shall be increased to accommodate two way
traffic.~
c. The existing driveway and curb cut on the west side of the building
shall be closed and the area landscaped.
d. A landscaping and irrigation plan covering the entire site shall be
submitted and approved and a guarantee of installation must be
provided prior to the issuance of a business license. Said plan
shall include the location of existing trees on the site with a plan
for retention.
e. A lighting plan shall be submitted and approved and lighting shall be
installed prior to occupancy of the building.
f. The rooftop equipment shall be screened. Said screening shall be
approved by the Planning Department and be architecturally compatible
with the building.
g. A parcel map shall be recorded for the lease area within six months
of the approval of this permit, otherwise the conditional use permit
shall become null and void.
h. The exterior of the building shall be repainted.
City Planning Commission Page 4
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 9, 1979
i. The operation shall be monitored by the Planning Department and if
a traffic problem arises the Department shall submit a report to
the Planning Commission of the findings and recommendations. The
Planning Commission shall have the authority to require the applicant
to take appropriate action to correct any problems within a specified
time period. Said corrective action may include, but is not limited
to: a limitation on the hours of operation; reduction of seating
capacity; or access to additional parking.
j. Signing shall be limited to wall signs and monument signs in
accordance with the provisions of the C-O zone.
C. DISCUSSION
1. Adjacent zoning and land use.
North C-O Civic Center
South C-O Medical clinic
East C-O Vacant and parking
West R-3 Single family dwelling and vacant.
2. Existing site characteristics.
The applicant has leased 35,380 sq. ft. of property consisting of two parcels
and a portion of two other parcels. The lease area includes the single story
commercial structure located at 428 "F" Street formerly occupied by the Department
of Human Resources (unemployment office). The lease site slopes gently to the
south away from "F" Street. The existing building is located entirely on a
50' x 170' parcel and observes the following setbacks: front - 15 feet; both
sides - zero; rear - 30 feet. The parcel to the south is a panhandle lot with
a ten foot panhandle section running along the west side of the building. The
10 foot strip is paved and has a driveway on "F" Street. This strip serves as
access to a few unmarked spaces located at the rear of the building. The remainder
of the parcel is vacant. The remaining lease area consists of the westerly 62 feet
of the two parcels located to the east. The northerly parcel measures 100' x 100'
and has been paved for parking. There are two existing driveways along "F" Street
which provide access. The other parcel to the south is landlocked and vacant
except for two large trees.
3. Proposed plan.
The applicant proposes to remodel the interior of the building and install a
new entrance on the east side. The applicant will occupy the southerly 2600 sq.ft.
and sublease the remaining 3500 sq. ft. The site will be paved and striped for
83 parking spaces with landscaping in front and within the parking area. The
driveway on the west side of the building will be an exit only. While the plan
shows only 83 parking spaces, the applicant's lease stipulates that the lease area
provide a minimum of 100 parking spaces. In order to achieve 100 spaces, including
landscaping, it will be necessary to extend the lease area further to the east.
City Planning Commission Page 5
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 9, 1979
4. Classes and hours of operation.
The applicant has indicated that the number of classes per day and hours of
operation will be as follows:
Monday - 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Classes: 7:00 p.m. to lO:O0 p.m.
Tuesday - 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Classes: 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Wednesday - 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Classes: Noon to 3:00 p.m.; 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m
Thursday - 9:00 a.m. to lO:O0 p.m. Classes: 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Friday - 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. No classes
In addition to the classes, counseling and testing will be offered during all
hours of the day.
There will be a total of two employees on each of two different shifts.
5. Seating capacity.
The applicant proposes to provide two assembly areas. One assembly area will
be used for classrooms with a seating capacity for 93 students. The other
assembly area will be used for counseling and testing and will have a seating
capacity for 49 persons. Therefore, the maximum number of persons at any one
time would total 142. This figure represents the applicant's aspirations and
not the actual number of students presently in attendance at their site at 815
Third Avenue. The daytime classes are presently operating with a maximum of
40 students, whereas the evening classes are averaging 60 students.
6. Parking ratio.
The 3500 sq. ft. of sublease area will require 12 parking spaces based on
the one space for each 300 sq. ft. of floor area. This would leave 71 spaces
available for the applicant's use under the present plan, and 88 spaces if the
parking is increased to provide the 100 spaces authorized under the lease agree-
ment. Under the present plan, the applicant's proposed parking ratio would
provide one space per 2 seats and if the 100 spaces are provided the ratio would
be one space per 1.6 seats.
D. ANALYSIS
1. The proposed use has historically required more offstreet parking than
most other private schools because all of the students are adults and a majority
usually drive to school alone. Based on a maximum attendance of 142 students,
the proposed 100 parking spaces would provide approximately 2 spaces for every
3 students. The chances of filling both assembly areas to capacity at the same
time is remote since the counseling and testing is done on a random basis and
attendance varies from one student to 40 students. Nevertheless, as a safeguard
staff has included condition "i" which allows the city to require additional
parking or reduction of seating capacity or limitation of hours of operation if
a parking problem exists at some future time. Generally, staff tries to make
conditions of approval as definitive as possible when an applicant is incurring
substantial expense in the utilization of a conditional use permit, so that
uncertainty about the future is minimized. The basis for this condition,
City Planning Commission Page 6
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 9, 1979
however, is the uncertainty as to the adequacy of the parking that is being
provided and the impact of a possible parking shortfall on adjacent properties
and the effect of inadequate parking and high traffic generation on street
capacity. Existing and proposed activities in the vicinity of Fourth and "F"
include:
a. Library and expanded civic center.
b. Town Centre Redevelopment Project
c. 120 unit senior citizen's project immediately west of the
subject property.
In addition, at such time as the Bay Front Plan is implemented, "F" Street
would provide a major access for Chula Vista residents to that area.
On the other hand, the applicant is providing 88 offstreet parking spaces for
his own use for a floor area of only 2600 sq. ft.--a ratio of one space for each
30 sq. ft. of floor area or ten times as much as required generally in the C-O
zone. Calculated another way, he is providing one space for each 1.6 seats,
again considerably more than the requirement for restaurants which is one space
for each 2.5 seats, and which is among the highest of our parking requirements.
All things considered, it seems unlikely to staff that the city would have to
take any action pursuant to condition "i", but on the other hand, the uncertainty
as to the adequacy of the parking justifies the inclusion of the condition.
2. The staff recommends that the applicant exercise his lease agreement for
100 parking spaces to reduce the potential of inadequate parking. This will
necessitate revising the proposed site plan to accommodate the additional parking.
The staff has prepared a suggested site plan (see Exhibit B) which accomplishes
the following:
a. Moves the lease line easterly 43 feet;
b. Provides for 90° parking spaces;
c. Provides for the preservation of the trees;
d. Closes off the driveway and curb cut on the west side of the building;
e. Widens the center driveway to accommodate improved ingress and egress;
f. Provides for landscaping on the site.
E. FINDINGS
l. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable
to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being
of the neighborhood or the community.
The proposed use serves the entire South Bay area and the proposed site is
centrally located and within the commercial center of the City of Chula Vista.
2. That much use wil~ not, under the circumstances of the particular case,
be detrimenta~ to the hogarth, safety o~ general welfare of persons residing or
working in thc vicinitu, or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.
The conditions of approval will insure that the proposed use will not be
detrimental or injurious to adjoining properties or persons residing in
the area.
Page 7
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 9, 1979
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions
specified in the code for such use.
The proposed use will comply with the parking requirements and the require-
ments of the Uniform Building Code.
4. That the granting of this conditional use will not adversely affect the
General Plan of the City or the adopted plan of any governmental agency.
The proposed use is in keeping with the land use designation of the General
Plan.
~ LOCATOR
\ . ~- PCC-79-14
~.~ ' ~EAL ESTATE SCHOOL
428 "F" ST.
I CIVIC CENTER
iDESIGN CONTROL
BOUNDARY
d Ioo'
~ ~ ~c~-
~ ~ ~9 CIVIC CENTER
N DESIGN CONTROL
~ ~ BOUNDARY
'-- "F" STREET
I0' ~ 62'
O' I0' 2O' ?0'
EXHIBIT A I
PCC-79-141
REAL ESTATE I
~CBOOLAT428 I
F ST. I
APPLICANT'S
PROPOSAL
122.00' '
EXIST ~,~-~- "F" STREET -
~ NEW DRIVE
EX/ST. DR IVES --~ EXIST
62' 45'
- ~REAL ESTATE
~{~'~; /.SCH00L AT 428
f;~.f~." [ 'F" STREET
62' 62' ,?, 41'
STAFF
PRO P O~,AL
· ' CONDITIONAL
PROJECT TITLE: ANTHONY REAL ESTATE SCHOOL
Project Location: 428 F ST.
Project Proponent: ANTHONY SCHOOLS 2727 CAMINO DEk RIO SO. 02¢1
5AN DIEGO 921¢8
CASE HO. I5-79-56 DATE: APRIL 26, 1979
A. PROJECT SETTING
THE PROPOSED PROJECT INVOLVES APPROXIMATELY .81 ACRES OF PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 428 F ST. CURRENTLY, THE SITE IS PARTIALLY DEVELOPED
WITH A ONE STORY, 61~ SQ. FT. COMMERCIAL BUILDING. THE SOUTHERN
PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IS IN A BASICALLY NATURAL STATE. ADJACENT
LAND USES INCLUDE THE CHULA VISTA CIVIC CENTER TO THE NORTH, A
SUBSTANDARD PARKING LOT AND SDG&E SUBSTATION TO THE EAST, MEDICAL
OFFICE BUILDINGS AND MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING TO THE SOUTH AND
SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO THE WEST.
A FIELD SURVEY CONCLUDED THAT THERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT PLANT VARITIES
PRESENT AND IT APPEARS THAT THE AREA DOES NOT SUPPORT ANY SUBSTANTIAL
WILDLIFE. THERE ARE NO KNOWN SEISMIC HAZARDS WITHIN THE VICINITY,
HOWEVER EXPANSIVE SOILS MAY BE PRESENT. A 39" RCP STORM DRAIN
UNDERLIES THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROJECT SITE.
B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
THE APPLICANT PLANS TO UTILIZE APPROXIMATELY 26~¢ SQ. FT. OF THE
EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING FOR ANTHONY'S REAL ESTATE SCHOOL. THE
REMAINING 35¢¢ SQ. FT. OF FLOOR AREA WILL BE LEASED FOR COMMERCIAL
OFFICE USE. ANTHONY'S SCHOOL WILL CONSIST OF TWO CLASSROOMS WITH
A TOTAL MAXIMUM CAPACITY OF 142 STUDENTS AND A BUSINESS OFFICE.
THIS FACILITY WILL BE OPEN FOR STUDENT COUNCILING, STUDY HALL,
ENROLLMENT AND EXAMINING FROM 9 AM .TO 1~ PM, MONDAY THRU THURSDAY
AND 9 AM TO 5 PM ON FRIDAYS. STRUCTURED CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION WILL
BE HELD FROM 7 PM TO 1¢ PM ON MONDAYS, WEDNESDAYS AND THURSDAYS,
FROM 9 AM TO 6 PM ON THURSDAY AND FROM 12 PM TO 3 PM AGAIN ON
WEDNESDAYS.
THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO PROVIDE I~ PARKING SPACES, $8 OF WHICH
WILL SERVE THE SCHOOL. CONSTRUCTION OF PARKING FACILITIES WILL
WILL INVOLVE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY
WHICH IS CURRENTLY VACANT. ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING WILL BE INSTALLED
ACCORDING TO CITY STANDARDS.
C. COHPATIBILITY WITH ZONING AND PLANS
THE PROPOSED USE IS SLLOWED WITHIN Tile CURRENT C-O ZONE WlTti THE
APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAl. USE PERMIT. THE PROdECT, SDBJECT TO
t.,NF~ ~,,~,,CE WITH THE GENERAL PLA'~---&ND ASSOCIATED
; E LE,"iENTS .
D. IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT%
~ . SOILS
EXPANSIVE SOILS ~AY BE PRESENT ON SITE. TQ ENSURE ADEQUATE
PAVEMENT CONST~UCTION~ A PRELIMINARY SOILS REPORT SHOULD BE
P~EPARED AND IF EXPANSIVE SOILS ARE FOUND TO BE PRESENT~
"GUIDELINES FOR THE INSTALLATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF PAVING
ON PRIVATE PROPERTYu PER THE CHULA VISTA BUILDING AND HOUSING
DEPT. SHOULD BE FOLLOWED.
2 . DRAINAGE
UNDERGROUND STOR~ DRAINAGE FACILITIES UNDERLY THE SUBdECT
PROJECT. HOWEVER~ THE ~9" RCP SURFACES AND FLOWS INTO AN
OPEN NATURAL DRAINAGE WAY JUST ~EST (DOWNSTREam) OF THE PROdECT
SITE. PAVING THE NATURAL PORTION OF THE SI IE ~[LL INCREASE
THE AMOUNT AND VELOCITY OF RUNOFF ENTERING THE DRAINAGE
SYSTE~. CURRENTLY, A PROBLE~ EXISTS DOWNSTREAN OF THE SUBdECT
SITE DU~ING PERIODS OF HEAVY RAINFALL. TO ENSURE PROPER
DRAINAGE, THE APPLICANT SHOULD SUBN~T DRAINAGE PLANS TO THE
PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. FOR APPROVAL.
~. PA~KING
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO PROVIDE A NAX[~U~ OF 88 VEHICLE
PARKING SPACES FOR THE REAL ESTATE SCHOOL. THE CITY TRAFFIC
ENGINEER HAS INDICATED THAT 8g SPACES ~AY BE ~NADEOUATE FOR
THE USE AND SPILL OVER PARKING COULD AFFECT ADdACENT USES AND
ON STREET PARKINg AREAS. SINCE THE PROPOSED USE IS DEFINED
AS UNCLASSIFIED AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERNIT IS NECESSARY~
ADEQUATE ON-SITE PARKING FACILITIES ~ILL BE REQUIRED AS A
CONDITION OF THE CUP.
E. ~IT~GATION NECESSARY TO AVOID SIGNIFICANT ~MPACT.
A SOILS REPORT SHOULD BE PREPARED AND SUBSEQUENT
RECOMMENDATIONS INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT.
2. DRAINAGE PLANS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE DEPT. OF
PUBLIC WORKS FOR APPROVAL.
3. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF REVIEW SHOULD BE IMPOSED ON THE
SEATING CAPACITY AND THIS AMOUNT OF PARKING PROVIDED TO INSURE
THAT ADJACENT AREAS WILL NOT BE BURDENED BY OVERFLOW P~RKING.
F. FINDINGS OF INSIGNIFICANT IMPACT
]. THE SITE IS VOID OF ANY SIGNIFICANT NATURAL OR MAN-MADE
RESOURCES AND THE PROJECT WILL NOT BE SUBdECT TO ANY UNUSUAL
OR SUBSTANTIAL SEISMIC HAZARD. EXPANSIVE SOILS MAY BE PRESENT,
HOWEVER, POTENTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS CAN BE MITIGATED.
2. THE PROPOSED SHCOOL IS IN GENERAL CDNFORMANCE WITH THE
GENERAL PLAN AND ASSOCIATED ELE~ENTS AND WILL NOT ACHIEVE
SHORT TERM TO THE DISADVANTAGE OF LONG TERM ENVIRPNMENTAL
GOALS.
3. POTENTIAl_ [t~PACTS CAH BE MITIGATED AND NONE AqE ANTICIPATED
TO INTERACT W~t[CH COULD ~ESUIT I~ ANY SUBST~N~ I,J_ DUt-!t~I.ATIVE
~FFECT QN THf- F 'V
4. THE PROdECT IS NOT EXPECTED TO RESULT IN A SIGNIFICANT
INCREASE IN VEHICLE TRAFFIC, NOR WILL ANY SUBSTAN,TIAL INCREASE
IN RELATED EMISSIONS OR NOISE RESULT,
G, CONSULTATION
1. INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS
CITY OF CHULA VISTA D, d. PETERSON
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
WILLIAM ULLRICH
ASSOC. ENG.
GARY HANSEN
TRAFFIC ENG.
GENE GRADY
DIRECTOR OF BUILDING & HOUSING
STEPHEN TAYLOR
ENV. CONTROL COMM.
WM. IMS, JR. APPLICANT
2. DOCUMENTS
FOGG REPORT
CHULA VISTA IMPROVEMENT MAPS
TITLE 19 OF THE C.V. 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 PZanninq Dept., 276 4th Ave., Chula Vista, CA.
NNVIRONP. IPiNTAB REV[EN COORDYNATOR
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 9, 1979 Page 8
3. Consideration of request to convert residential structure to office use,
717 Third Avenue in ¢-0 zone - R. N. Cassel
A. BACKGROUND
1. The applicant proposes to convert an existing single family dwelling
into a psychology clinic at 717 Third Avenue in the C-O zone. The zoning
ordinance requires Planning Commission approval of any remodeling involving the
conversion of residential structures for non-residential use.
2. This request is categorically exempt (class 1 a) from environmental
review.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion approving the request for the conversion of the existing single
family dwelling at 717 Third Avenue for use as a psychology clinic, subject to:
1. The submission of a revised site pla~ layout as shown on attached
Exhibit B.
2. The installation of a 6' high zoning wall along the easterly property
line.
3. The submission of a design for monument sign for staff approval which
meets the design criteria of the C-O zone.
4. Changes of land use will require staff review to insure acceptability of
access to the parking area.
C. DISCUSSION
1. Adjacent land use and zoning:
North C-O Medical office
South C-O Medical office
East R-1 Single family residences
West C-O Church
2. Site characteristics.
The subject property is a 50' x 132' parcel developed with a single story
920 sq. ft. wood frame single family dwelling (see Exhibit A). The structure is
located 15 feet north of the south property line. A 3½' wide concrete walkway
exists on the south side of the building with the remaining 11~'+ proposed for
driveway ingress and egress.
3. Proposed conversion.
The applicant proposes to convert the single family dwelling into a psychology
clinic. The proposed conversion (shown on Exhibit A)
includes the following:
a. Paving of a 12 ft. wide driveway and rear portion of the lot for
parking.
b. Exterior remodeling work, most of which has already been completed,
Page 9
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for ~eeting of May 9, 1979
such as; exterior studco with pop-outs around some windows and
new arched facade around the front porch area.
c. Complete reworking of all landscaped areas.
d. Signs, subject to separate approval, will be reviewed by staff in
conjunction with building permits.
D. ANALYSIS
1. The applicant secured a remodeling permit to stucco an existing single
family residence. He then proceeded to remodel the structure and site for
conversion as a commercial office without the knowledge or approval of the city.
After construction was well under way the applicant contacted the city and
requested approval, at which time he was informed that Planning Commission action
would be required.
2. The structure has been inspected by the Building and Housing Department
and reviewed by the Fire Marshal. The structure substantially meets the require-
ments for a commercial structure.
3. As a commercial structure, the building presents an acceptable, clean,
and simple architectural design.
4. The present parking standards for the proposed use would require a total
of 5 parking spaces. The applicant has submitted a proposed parking layout which
does not comply with minimum code requirements for stall size and back up area.
However, the site has sufficient area to accommodate the number and stall size
required for the proposed use. Therefore, staff has proposed a revised site
layout which exceeds the minimum parking requirements by providing for 7 stalls
(Exhibit B).
The proposed access driveway is approximately 12 ft. wide with a 3 ft. wide
concrete sidewalk paralleling the drive, providing 15 ft. of clearance. The
15 feet provides for one-way access only. However, because the intended use
involves only the psychologist, his secretary and one patient at a time, there
should be no conflict with the driveway. Staff is recommending a review of any
change in land use to assure that problems would not result in the future.
5. A complete landscape and irrigation plan, in accordance with the City
Landscape Manual, will be required for the entire lot upon application for a
business license.
6. The property located directly to the east is zoned R-l, therefore, in
accordance with Sec. 19.58.360 of the Municipal Code a 6 ft. high concrete block
zoning wall is required to be constructed on the east property line.
NORTH
,, ILOCATOR ~. 1 ~
\ ~CONVERT SINGLE FAMILy
THIRD AVE.
City Planning Commission Page l0
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 9, 1979
4. PUBLIC HEARING (cont.): Consideration of PCA-79-9 to amend the Municipal
Code relating to dwellin~ ~roups in R-E and R-1 zones
A. BACKGROUND
On April 25 the Planning Commission continued this item to May 9 at the request
of staff.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Continue the item to the meeting of May 23.
C. DISCUSSION
Additional time is required to revise this amendment to the zoning ordinance.
City Planning Commission Page ll
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 9, 1979
5. Consideration of Capital Improvement Program for fiscal year 1979-80
for conformance to the Chula Vista General Plan
A. BACKGROUND
Section 65401 of the State Planning and Zoning Law provides that the
Planning Commission is required to review the Capital Improvement Program
for projects contemplated during the next fiscal year to determine the
conformance of the program with the General Plan. The enclosed material,
prepared by the Public Works Department, represents the Capital Improvement
Program for fiscal year 1979-80 through fiscal year 1984-85. However, the
Planning Commission's responsibility is simply to determine whether the
program for fiscal year 1979-80 conforms to the General Plan.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion finding that the Capital Improvement Program for fiscal year
1979-80 conforms to the Chula Vista General Plan.
C. ANALYSIS
1. Most of the projects in the Capital Improvement Program for fiscal
year 1979-80 are at a level of detail which is not addressed by the General
Plan. However, staff has reviewed each of the projects and determined that
none are in conflict with the General Plan. Accordingly, a finding of con-
formance can be made.
2. This determination is categorically exempt from the provisions of
CEQA, 1970 as amended.
City Planning Commission Page 12
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 9, 1979
6. Consideration of staff recommendation for implementin9 Booz, Allen and
Hamilton Report
A. BACKGROUND
1. At the April 25th meeting Mr. Jack Lohman of the Design Review
Committee addressed the Planning Commission and expressed the willingness
of the Design Review Committee to assume responsibility for review of
precise plans in the commercial and industrial zones in accordance with the
third recommendation contained in the City Manager's memo to the Council.
2. Due to the lateness of the meeting and other urgent agenda items,
this item was continued to the meeting of May 9 for further discussion by
the Planning Commission.
3. The April 25th report on this item is attached for your convenience.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of April 25, 1979 page 16
9. Consideration of staff recommendation for implementin9 Booz, Allen and Hamilton
Report
A. BACKGROUND
The attached memo from the City Manager was considered by the Council on March 20,
1979. Council referred the matter to the Planning Commission and determined to
take it up in a Council Conference after the Commission had evaluated it and
formulated a recommendation.
B. DISCUSSION
1. The most significant portion of the memo is the Recommendation Section on the
last page of the memo. Implementation of the recommendations would relieve the
Planning Commission from the responsibility of acting on the following types of
applications:
a. Variances.
b. Precise Plans in the commercial and industrial zones.
c. Requests for deferral of public improvements.
d. Determining architectural compatibility of structures to be moved
into a new location within the city.
2. While implementation of the recommendations would alleviate the work load of
the Planning Commission and in some (if not all) cases expedite the processing of
applications, it probably would not significantly reduce the work load of the
staff. Thus, while the Planning Commission would have more time to devote to
long range planning matters and policy considerations, the staff would not be
similarly relieved so that it is unlikely that substantial progress could be
made in such areas as revising the General Plan.
C. RECOMMENDATION
1. Discuss the recommendations.
2. Formulate a recommendation to Council on each of the five recommendations
contained on page 4 of the City Manager's memo of March 20, 1979 to the City
Council. At this point staff would recommend adoption of all five of the recom-
mentations.
March 20, 1979
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Lane F. Cole, City Managerial-'
St'bject: Implementation of the recommendations of the Booz, Allen & Hamilton
Report
A. The Booz, Allen & Hamilton Report and Conclusions
The Booz, Allen & Hamilton report made nine basic recommendations, some of
which overlap. Each recommendation was considered by a task force, consisting
of the City Manager, the Director of Public Works, the Director of Planning and
a representative of the Planning Commission (Jack O'Neill). In general, the
task force reached two conclusions:
1. The size of the community and the level of land development activity are
such that Council should continue to make final decisions on such impor-
tant matters as rezonings and tentative subdivision maps.
2. Several types of items which do not involve broad discretionary decisions
or matters of substantial significance can be delegated from the Council
to the Planning Commission or Design Review Committee, or from the
Planning Commission to the staff.
B. Discussion of Booz, Allen & Hamilton Recommendations
The Booz, Allen & Hamilton recommendations deal with the kind of processing
now required by the various types of applications, the organization and manage-
ment of the Planning Department, and related matters. Many of the recommendations
are designed to expedite the processing of various types of applications. A dis-
cussion of each of the recommendations is presented below.
1. THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SHOULD TAKE THE LEAD IN COORDINATING THE PREPARA-
TION OF A NEW GENERAL PLAN.
There is no disagreement with this recommendation. The problem is
finding a way to accomplish it with existing staff. This is being
evaluated as part of the larger reorganization involving Public Works,
Community Development, Building and Housing, and Planning. A proposal
on this recommendation will be submitted at a later date.
2. T~tE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SHOULD BE GIVEN MORE RESPONSIBILITY FOR RULING
ON CURRENT PLANNING PROPOSALS.
The City Manager's task force recommended that decisions on variance
applications be assigned to the Zoning Administrator rather than to the
Planning Commission. The present language in the Zoning Ordinance
provides for action by the Zoning Administrator on some but not all types
of variances without a public hearing. Items requiring a public hearing
are acted on by the Planning Commission. The findings required in order
to approve a variance are well spelled out in both State law and our own
Zoning Ordinance. On the other hand, the task force recommended that
conditional use permits remain with the Planning Commission as these
decisions are quite discretionary and the findings are more judgmental.
3. THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS SHOULD BE SIMPLIFIED.
This is a laudable objective but most planning items are quite complex
and require the preparation of an interdepartmental comprehensive report
which leads to a logical conclusion and recommendation. Separate, uncoor-
dinated reports from the individual departments on a given application,
as suggested by Booz, Allen & Hamilton, would make it more difficult and
and time consuming for the Planning Commission and City Council to digest
the information and make a decision.
4. CERTAIN CHANGES SHOULD BE MADE IN THE STRUCTURE AND ASSIGNMENT OF RESPON-
SIBILITIES WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT.
Some adjustments in the work done by the Director of Planning and Assistant
Director of Planning were accomplished, but with the resignation of the
Assistant Director of Planning and the larger multi-departmental reorgan-
ization, further assessment will be required.
5. THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE SHOULD BE INVOLVED IN MAKING THE INTERNAL CHANGES
TO THE DEPARTMENT AND CONTINUE TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE DURING THE TRANSITION
PERIOD.
The City Manager's office, together with the new Deputy City Manager in
charge of the Public Services Departments, will be evaluatinm possible
changes in the light of the resignation of the Assistant Director of
Planning and other alternatives available due to the resignation and
reorganization.
6. THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SHOULD ESTABLISH SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES FOR GUIDING
ITS DAY TO DAY ACTIVITIES.
7. SEVERAL CHAHGES SHOULD BE MADE TO THE PROJECT ACCOUNTING SYSTEM IF IT IS
TO BE USED AS A CONTROL TOOL.
These two recommendations by Booz, Allen & Hamilton are related and will
be discussed together. Essentially, Booz, Allen & Hamilton were
recomniending that the Planning Department attempt to predict the number
and type of applications and special studies that would be filed or
requested in a given fiscal year, and the number of man hours that would
be required to complete each item. Then, during the fiscal year, the
number of actual items and the man hours required to complete the work
would be evaluated and compared with the estimate. Also, at the end of
the fiscal year, the number of items and hours required for completion
would be conlpared with the earlier predictions. This information would
then be used to evaluate work performance and to formulate the work
program for the next fiscal year.
For several years the Planning Department operated under a system similar
to that suggested by Booz, Allen & Hamilton. It was found that the
number and type of applications and special studies that would come up
in a given fiscal year is not very predictable and that even applications
of the same type may require widely varying times to complete. The
Department discontinued the system of predicting, but continues to monitor
the number of man hours spent on the various applications and studies.
Items which have required more time than would normally be expected are
evaluated. It has been found that faulty submittals by applicants, con-
tinuances by the Planning Commission and City Council, and the time
required for inter-departmental and inter-agency coordination are the
most common factors which contribute to delays in completing an item.
We have concluded that while greater effort will be spent in developing
specific annual work programs, predictions of numbers, types and man
hours required to complete the various work items is not of sufficient
value to warrant spending the time it takes.
8. THE CITY SHOULD REGULARLY EVALUATE AND MONITOR THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ITS
PHYSICAL PLA~i?IING AND CONTROL ACTIVITIES.
Under this recommendation, the Booz, Allen & Hamilton report listed a
number of criteria for measuring the effectiveness of the planning program.
In staff's opinion the criteria were mostly irrelevant. By evaluating
the Department's reports and recommendations to Council and Council's
reaction to them, and the Department's record of meeting deadlines, the
City Manager's office has adequate knowledge of the effectiveness of the
planning program.
9. THE ROLE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHOULD BE EXPANDED AND STRENGTHENED.
Booz, Allen & Hamilton's primary recommendation in this area is that the
Planning Commission should make final decisions on tentative subdivision
maps and rezonings unless items are appealed to Council. The City Manager's
task force felt that these are important decisions which deserve consider-
ation by the Council. However, the task force felt that some types of
items which now require review by both the Planning Commission and City
Council (notably, precise plans in commercial and industrial zones) can
be delegated to either the Planning Commission or Design Review Committee,
with appeals to be heard by the City Council. Because of the architectural
expertise on the Design Review Committee, I feel that this review should
be handled by them.
10. Aside from the Booz, Allen & Hamilton report, staff has been concerned
about the amount of processing required of a condominium development in
the redevelopment area. At present, the Design Review Board reviews the
site plan and architectural treatment, the Redevelopment Agency approves
the owner participation agreement, and both the Planning Commission and
City Council review the tentative map. While staff does not expect many
condominium developments in the redevelopment area, the required
processing is burdensome. Two improv~]ents are possible:
(a) Time the consideration of the owner participation agreement by the
Redevelopment Agency so that it occurs on the same evening Council
considers the tentative map.
(b) Delegate approval of one lot subdivisions (condolninium developments)
to the Planning Commission. However, staff recommends that Council not
delegate this to the Planning Commission until additional experience is
gained with the new condominium development and apartment conversion
ordinance and Council policy solidifies to the point where it can provide
guidance to the staff and Planning Commission.
C. Recommendation.
It is my recommendation that the operations of the Planning Department and
its use of the project accounting system continue to be evaluated. Under the
new organization the Deputy City Manager will have more time to evaluate and
coordinate the activities of the four departments under him than was available
under the old organizational structure.
In addition, I recommend tha't Council authorize the preparation of the
necessary ordinances to effect the following changes in the processing of
several items:
1. Make the Zoning Administrator rather than the Planning Commission
responsible for acting on all variances.
2. Make the City Engineer rather than the Planning Commission responsible
for acting on requests for deferral of public improvements. Requests
for waivers would remain with the Planning Commission. Decisions on
requests for deferral or waiver of the requirement to underground
utilities would remain with the City Council.
3. Make the Design Review Committee responsible for review of precise
plans in commercial and industrial zones in addition to their present
authority in the R-3 zones. It is recommended that this authority
not be extended to the review of developments in the P-C zone at this
time.'
4. Make the Zoning Administrator responsible for the site planning and
architectural compatibility aspects of the moving of structures within
the city and the Director of Building and Housing responsible for seeing
to it that such structures meet present codes.
5. For condominium developments within the redevelopment area, direct staff
to schedule owner participation agreements so that they can be considered
by the Agency the same evening the Council considers the tentative map,
where the applicant desires such dual consideration.
DJP:hm