Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1982/08/11 A G E N D A City Planning Commission Chula Vista, California Wednesday, August 11, 1982 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of July 28, 1982 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Consideration of request for extension of tentative map for Charter Point, Chula Vista Tract 80-20 - Pacific Scenes 2. Consideration of request for extension of tentative subdivision map for Brightwood Village, Chula Vista Tract 80-24 - Wilson & Brennan 3. PUBLIC HEARING (cont.): Variance ZAV-83-1 request for reduction in minimum street frontage requirement in order to maintain a rooftop sign on the commercial building located at 639 Broadway - The Bedroom 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-83-4 to lease 10,000 sq. ft. of floor area in industrial complex at 680 "L" Street, I-L zone, for offices of Social Security Administration - Dan Company DIRECTOR'S REPORT COMMISSION COMMENTS To: City Planning Commission From: Bud Gray, Director of Planning Subject: Staff report on agenda items for Planning Commission Meeting of August 11, 1982 1. Consideration of request for extension of tentative subdivision map for Charter Point, Chula Vista Tract 80-20 (Revised) - Pacific Scenes, Inc. A. BACKGROUND 1. On September 30, 1980 the City Council approved the revised tentative subdivision map for Charter Point, Chula Vista Tract 80-20, for the purpose of subdividing approximately 42.5 acres located at the northwest corner of Telegraph Canyon and Otay Lakes Roads (South College Sectional Planning Area of the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan) into 274 residential lots and 9 common area lots. 2. On October 13, 1981 the City Council approved the final map for Charter Point Unit 1. The final maps for Charter Point Units 2 and 3 have not yet been final and the tentative map is due to expire on September 30, 1982. The developer has requested that the tentative map be extended for a period of two years. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion approving the two year extension of the tentative subdivision map for Charter Point, Chula Vista Tract 80-20 (Revised). The map will then expire on September 30, 1984. C. DISCUSSION There have been no significant changes in the immediate vicinity which affect the original conditions or findings of approval. The developer has already begun construction on Unit 1. In light of the current economic situation, the request for a two year extension is reasonable and approval justifiable. (~.THE CHARTER POIN'I CVT- 80-20 VACANT City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of August ll, 1982 Page 2 2. Consideration of [e~uest for extension of tentative subdivision map for Brightwood Village, Chula Vista Tract 80-24 - Wilson & Brennan A. BACKGROUND On September 16, 1980 the City Council approved the tentative subdivision map known as Brightwood Village, Chula Vista Tract 80-24, for the purpose of developing a 9 unit condominium project on a 0.35 acre parcel located at 163-165 Brightwood Avenue in the R-3 zone. The developer has requested that the tentative map be extended for a period of one year because of current economic conditions. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion approving a one-year extension of the tentative subdivision map known as Brightwood Village, Chula Vista Tract 80-24. The map will then expire on September 16, 1983. C. DISCUSSION There have been no significant physical changes in the imnediate vicinity which affect the original conditions or findings of approval, therefore, the approval of an extension of time is appropriate. CASSELMAN r~ -- JI I -Ii I I---' m FLOWER I I I vAc TDF I TDF IIa __ PARKING / CENTER o MFD I ! I CHURCH I r-~- -- - I SCHOOL I I ISFD SFDI iSFO I Pcs-80-24 City Planninq Commission Agenda Items for Meetinq of Auoust ll, 1982 Page 3 3. PUBLIC HEARING (cont.): Variance ZAV-83-1, request for reduction in minimum street frontage requirement in order to maintain a rooftop s__ign on the commercial building located at 639 Bro~_- The Bedroom This item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of July 28th at the request of the applicant. See attached July 28 staff report. City Planning Commiss~ Agenda Items for Meeti,,g of July 28, 1982 page 8 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance ZAV-83-1; request for a reduction in the minimum street frontage for a roof top sign from lO0 feet to 50 feet - The Bedroom A. BACKGROUND 1. The applicant is requesting a reduction in the minimum street frontage requirement from 100 feet to 50 feet in order to retain an existing 144 sQ. ft. rooftop sign on the commercial building located at 639 Broadway in the CT zone. 2. The project is exempt from environmental review as a Class ll(a) exemption. B. RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings contained in Section "E" of this report adopt a motion to deny the request. C. DISCUSSION 1. Existing Sign a. Approximately 4 years ago the Planning Department approved a building permit for the installation of a rooftop sign for The Bedroom establishment at 639 Broadway. The code requires a minimum lot frontage of lO0 feet and a minimum building frontage of 50' for rooftop signs. The applicant, at that time, had a lot frontage of 150' and a building frontage of 85'. He was allowed to erect the sign because he met the code requirements. At the time of approval, the applicant submitted a letter of agreement that in the event that the business no longer occupied at least lO0 linear feet of lot frontage the sign would be removed (see attached letter of May 4, 1978). b. Earlier this year it was noted that The Bedroom no longer occupied as much lot frontage and on April 30, 1982 the applicant was directed to remove the sign as originally agreed upon. The applicant responded on May 13, 1981 asking that they be allowed to postpone removal of the sign for a period of 60 days because the applicant was involved in a Chapter ll Reorganization Proceedings in the courts and permission for removal would have to be granted by the courts. The additional time was granted by the City. 2. Other Existing Signs Within the immediate vicinity there are a number of businesses with rooftop signs, many of which are nonconforming for a variety of reasons. Two businesses immediately to the north of the subject property (Bob Coffman and Golden Pagoda) have nonconforming rooftop signs. The signs are subject to removal in 1989 based on the 15 year (abatement) period established in 1974. City Planning Commiss'~' Agenda Items for Meet,..~ of July 28, 1982 page 9 3. Existing Conditions The building which the applicant presently occupies is constructed on the front property line (zero setback) as are the adjacent structures on either side. Aside from the rooftop sign, the only other sign identifying the business is a 4' x 15' 60-sq. ft. sign located on the canvas awning which extends across the full width of the building. D. ANALYSIS 1. There are three types of signs which can be oriented perpendicular to the street. Those signs are: l) a freestanding sign, 2) projecting sign, and, 3) a rooftop sign. The fact that the building is located on the front property line precludes the use of a freestanding sign and unless the awning is removed (altering the appearance of building), a projecting sign could not be used. Therefore, the existing rooftop sign is the only type of sign capable of being constructed perpendicular to the street without changing the existing conditions. 2. There is no doubt that on a street such as Broadway a sign which is perpendicular to traffic has greater visibility than one which is parallel as in the case of wall signs. There are many other businesses along Broadway and other commercial areas which do not have signs perpendicular to the street. 3. There are non-conforming rooftop signs in the immediate area which must be removed at the end of the abatement period in September, 1989. However, the intent of the variance procedure is not to provide parity with a nonconforming situation which is under an abatement time. (Note: A conforming rooftop sign on a 50-foot wide building would be allowed a maximum of 50 sq. ft.) In this instance the existing sign is nearly three times larger than the maximum size allowed for a 50' wide building. Clearly the intent of this sign ordinance is to minimize the number of rooftop signs in commercial areas. 4. It is important to note that the applicant was well aware of the sign regulations and agreed to remove the sign if and when it no longer met the requirements of the Code. The last correspondence received from the applicant indicated a desire to comply with the City's regulation. E. FINDINGS 1. Does the hardship peculiar to the property exist - because of its size, shape, location, topography or relationship to surrounding properties - it was not created by any act of the owner? (Hardship does not include personal, family, or financial problems or loss of profit.) The location of the existing building in its relationship to surrounding properties is not an unusual circumstance in the zone or other commercial areas. The applicant was aware of the sign regulations and agreed to remove the sign when it no longer complied. -2- City Planning Commiss Agenda Items for Meeting of July 28, 1982 page 10 2. Is this variance necessary for the preservation and enjo~aent of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same zone and in the vicinity of the subject property or will the applicant be granted a special priviledge if this request is approved? Parity is not intended to permit an applicant to duplicate a nonconforming situation. ML:dl WPC 0133P -3- I I I I ~J~ V/ST~ ',, ~ .~/-/~c~cy~ ~NT~-~-L ..... "1"' STREET Oonu! I I ! ! I l Shop !l I I I I I -- '1-- ~- - 'i · I I z A~'o HAL SEY II City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of August ll, 1982 Page 4 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC 83-4; request, to lease lO,O00 sq.ft.. of floor area in industrial comp]ex at 680 "L" Street, I-L zone, for offices of Social Securit~ Administration - DAN Company A. BACKGROUND 1. The applicant intends to lease 10,000 sQ. ft. of floor space of an industrial complex to be constructed at 680 "L" Street to the General Services Administration Branch of the Federal Government who will use the space as offices for the Social Security Administration. The property is zoned I-L. 2. An Initial Study, IS-80-9, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Committee on July 29, 1982. The Committee concluded that there would be no significant environmetal effects and recommended that the Negative Declaration be adopted. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-80-9. 2. Based on findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a motion to approve the request, PCC-83-4, to establish a Social Security office at 680 "L" Street subject to the following conditions: a. All signs shall be subject to Zoning Administrator approval. b. The parking spaces leased from the Ratner Clothes Industrial Building shall be clearly marked for the proposed use. c. Any increase in the number of employees or clientele which is determined by the Director of Planning to create a parking problem shall be reason for review of the conditional use permit by the Planning Commission for possible revocation or modification of conditions. C. DISCUSSION 1. Adjacent zoning and land use. North R-1 and R-3 Single Family Dwellings and Apartments South I-L Manufacturing (Ratner) East I-L Manufacturing (Ratner) West M-54 (County) W~olesale Lumber City Planning Commissi~.. Agenda Items for Meeting of August ll, 1982 Page 5 2. Existing site characteristics. The project site consists of three vacant level parcels totaling 4.25 acres located on the south side of "L" Street immediately adjacent to the Ratner Clothing Plant. Except for sidewalks, all of the street improvements have been installed. An adjustment plat has been submitted for the consolidation of the three parcels. 3. Proposed development. The applicant has applied for a building permit for the construction of an industrial complex on the 4.25 acres. The development, which is to be constructed in two phases, consists of two single-story (20 feet in height) buildings each containing 41,334 sq. ft. of floor area (82,674 sq. ft. total). A total of 177 parking spaces will be provided on site. The Code requires one parking space per 800 sq. ft. of floor area or a total of 105 spaces. The easterly half of the development will be built first. At this time the development plans are still being reviewed for possible changes regarding driveway locations, on-site circulation, and landscaping. 4. Proposed use. a. The applicant intends to lease the easterly 10,000 sq. ft. of the easterly building to the General Services Administration of the Federal Government, who in turn will use the space for the Social Security Administration Branch. The offices will employ 30 to 35 persons and will operate between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friaay. The office will serve approximately 90 clients per day. b. In addition to 56 parking spaces on the subject site being reserved for the General Services Administration operation, the applicant will lease 40 spaces from the adjoining Ratner's Clothing Plant giving them a total of 96 spaces. The Ratner building is also occupied by Bekin's Van & Storage (record storage). The total square footage of the Ratner plant is approximately 310,000 sq. ft. Rather occupies 230,000 sq. ft. (531 employees) and Bekin 80,000 sq. ft. (15 employees). The Rather site has 882 parking spaces available and at present requires less than 400 spaces, leaving a surplus of parking of over 400 spaces (see attached letters). D. ANALYSIS 1. The present Social Security offices are located at 336 Oxford Street within a commercial center. The requested move from this location is for the purpose of increasing their present floor space and increasing the level of efficiency and service. 2. The 96 parking spaces being provided should be more than adequate to accommodate the 35 employees and 90 clients using the office on a daily basis. City Planning Commissi Agenda Items for ~leeting of August ll, 1982 Page 6 3. The site is located on a major thoroughfare within walking distance of Broadway where bus service is available. The use is compatible with the adjacent industrial/warehouse activities. E. FINDINGS 1. That the proposed use at the 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. Approval of this request will enable the applicant to continue this service within the South Bay area. 2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. The proposed use provide 96 parking spaces. Therefore, the future industrial users within the inOustrial complex will not be adversely affected by the Social Security offices within the building. 3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the code for such use. The industrial complex is in the building permit process. Therefore, the structure will meet all of the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. All interior work will be subject to additional review by the Building and Housing Department. 4. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely affect the general plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency. The granting of this request will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. WPC O139P/OO15Z AVE. AVE. AVE. .1. July 19~ 1982 Mr. Bennet Greenwald The following is the information you requested concerning facilities at 660 L Street in Chula Vista. The building is 310~000 square feet Rather usage: 230~000 square feet Bekins usage (record storage): 80,000 square feet Ratner employment: 531 Bekins employment: 15 Total parking spaces available: 882 We estimate a surplus of approximately ~00 spaces. Regards, ?- / ' ·-~ er 730 13th Street, San Diego, California 92112 / Phone (714) 234-0111 3uly 1~, 1982 The D.A.N. Company P.O. Box 2It2 SanDiego, CA 92112 Gentlemen: This letter will confirm our granting to you of the rights to use q0 parking spaces adjacent to the property owned by the D.A.N. Company on "L" Street in Chula Vista, California. The lease on these q0 parking spaces will run concurrently with a lease being executed by the D.A.N. Company and the General Services Administration of the United States Government. President SEF/ds 730 13th Street, San Diego, California 92112 / Phone (714) 234-0111 NEGATIVE DECLAR. ,TION PROJECT TITLE: Chula Vista Commerce Center Project Location: South side of "L" Street between Industrial Blvd. and Broadway - west and north of 660 "L" Street Project Proponent: D.A.N. Company c/o Ratner Corporation CASE NO. IS-80-9 DATE: September 6, 1979 A. Project Setting The project involves approximately 4.3 acres of vacant property located on the south side of "L" Street between Broadway and Interstate-5. Adjacent land uses consist of mixed residential units to the north, Ratner's industrial plant to the east and south, and a lumber storage yard to the west. The San Diego, Arizona & Eastern Railroad line is also located to the west. A portion of the site was previously developed with a single-family dwelling. For the most part, the land area has been disturbed; and, it does not support any significant vegetation or wildlife. There are no known geologic hazards within the immediate area. However, expansive soils may be present on-site. B. Pro~ect Description The applicant proposes to construct two industrial buildings which will.accommodate a total of 82,000 sq. ft. of floor area, each building consisting of 41,000 sq. ft. The structures will be con- structed of concrete tilt-up walls with wood roofs and will be 20 ft. in height. Loading facilities will be located along the southern building line facing Ratner's loading area. Approximately 200 parking sPaces will be provided as well as 16,000 sq. ft. of landscaping. C. Compatibility with Zoning and ~lans The proposed industrial buildings are consistent with the on-site I-L zone and limited industrial land use designation on the general plan. A zoning permit will be required for specific tenant occupancy which will ensure land use compatibility. The project site is located adjacent to a designated scenic gateway as defined in the Scenic Routes Element of the General Plan; however, the precise plan modifying district does not apply on this particular property. D. Identification of Environmental Effects Soils Expansive soils may be present on-site. To ensure stable con- struction, a soils report will be prepared by a qualified soils engineer and subsequent recommendations implemented. Landscaping The project site is located adjacent to a designated scenic gateway to Chula Vista. To ensure scenic quality along this road- way, landscape plans will be subject to the City's Landscape Architect. E. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impact 1. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified soils engineer and subsequent recommendations incorporated into the project. 2. Landscape plans shall ensure scenic quality and shall be approved by the City's Landscape Architect. F. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. The project site is void of any significant natural or man- made resources and there are no known geologic hazards within the immediate area. Potential impact due to expansive soils can be mitigated as discussed in Section D of this Negative Declaration. 2. The proposed industrial park is not at variance with the land use plan of the General Plan and will not achieve short- term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. Proposed mitigation will ensure scenic quality of the "L" Street gateway. 3. Potential impacts can be mitigated and none are anticipated to occur which could interact to create a substantial cumulative effect on the environment. 4. The project will not increase vehicle traffic significantly nor will a significant increase in traffic-related noise or pollutants occur. G. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista - D. J. Peterson Director of Planning Bob Sennett Landscape Architect Bill Ullrich Associate Engineer Ted Monsell Fire Marshal Thomas Dyke Building and Housing Department Greg Alabado Administrative Analyst I Stanley Foster - Agent for D.A.N. Company Bennet B. Greenwald - Applicant Jeff Harris, Initial Studies Coordinator - County of San Diego Dennis Strucker - County of San Diego, Department of Planning and Land Use, Transportation Planning Section 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. ENVIRO~4ENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR EN 3 (rev. 5/77)