Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1983/08/17 STUDY SESSION AGENDA City Planning Commission Chula Vista, California Wednesday, August 17, 1983 - 5:00 p.m. Conference Rooms 2 & 3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of July 27, 1983 1. Consideration of request for extension of Tentative Map for Bonita Hills, Chula Vista Tract 80-14, 1400 Ridgeback 2. Consideration of an Amendment to the Land Use Chart to permit catering in the C-N zone 3. Discussion of standards applicable to amusement facilities and accessory amusement games 4. Discussion of parking and its affect on usable open space in multi- family developments 5. Adjourn to dinner at the San Diego Country Club To: City Planning Commission From: Bud Gray, Director of Planning Subject: Agenda Items for Planning Commission Study Session Meeting of August 17, 1983 1. Consideration of request for extension of Tentative Map for Bonita Hills, Chula Vista Tract 80-14, 1400 Rid~eback A. BACKGROUND 1. On August 5, 1980, the City Council approved the tentative subdivision map for Bonita Hills, Chula Vista Tract 80-14, for the conversion of a 94-unit apartment complex located at 1400 Ridgeback Road in the C-C-P zone into a one lot condominium project. The tentative map was extended in February 1982. 2. The developer is requesting a two-year extension of the tentative map (maximum time period available). B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion approving a two-year extension of the tentative subdivision map for Bonita Hills, Chula Vista Tract 80-14. The map will then expire on July 15, 1985. C. DISCUSSION There have been no significant physical changes in the immediate vicinity which affect the original conditions or findings of approval. Therefore, the approval of the extension is appropriate. No further extension is permitted and if the map is allowed to expire, a new tentative map will have to be submitted. WPC 0441P City Planning Commission Study Session Agenda Items for Meeting of August 17, 1983 Page 2 2. CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE CHART TO PERMIT CATERING SERVICE IN THE C-N ZONE A. BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission amend the Land Use Chart of the City of Chula Vista to permit catering services in the C-N (Neighborhood Commercial) zone in order to establish such an enterprise within the shopping center located at the southeast corner of Hilltop Drive and East Rienstra Street. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution amending the Land Use Chart permitting catering services in the C-N zone subject to the following limitations: 1. Catering services shall not occupy more than 2,000 square feet of floor area; and 2. Not more than one delivery vehicle (1-1/2 ton maximum capacity) shall be used. C. DISCUSSION 1. The Planning Commission recently amended the Land Use Chart to include additional uses in the C-N zone which represented activities previously considered to go beyond the neighborhood commercial concept of providing goods and services to the immediate area surrounding the center. This change in philosphy by the Commission represented a modification of the purpose and intent of the C-N zone, thereby allowing for the inclusion of other uses which would provide a service beyond the neighborhood area. Section 19.34.120 (C-N zone) of the Code reads as follows: "The number of employees in any business establishment in a C-N zone shall be limited to those necessary for the conduct of the onsite business and n~o person shall be engaged in the activity of processing, fabricating or repairing goods for delivery o~ sale at o~er locations." (Underlined for emphasis.) 2. A catering service will, of course, involve the preparation of food for delivery at another location which is contrary to the Code as written. However, the City has allowed some uses such as radio and T.V. repair services and restaurants to provide delivery service. The rationale for allowing deliveries being that the deliveries are on a small and limited basis and does City Planning Commission Study Session Agenda Items for Meeting of August 17, 1983 Page 3 provide a service to the immediate neighborhood. While it is possible that deliveries could be made outside the immediate area, the businesses have usually been relatively small and it would not be advantageous to expand the boundaries of their service area. 3. The Planning Commission has permitted small appliance repair shops in the C-N zone by limiting the amount of floor area devoted to the use of a maximum of 2,000 square feet which has the effect of keeping the business within a limited scope. D. CONCLUSION A catering service has the potential of providing a service beyond that of the immediate neighborhood. However, the Planning Commission has recently added a number of land uses to the C-N zone which also have the potential of serving an area greater than the immediate neighborhood and which may also provide delivery service. Therefore, it is the Planning Department's conclusion that it is the Commission's desire to broaden the concept of the C-N zone and that the proposed use is in keeping with this concept. In order that the catering service be kept on a small scale, it is also recommended that a limitation be placed on the amount of floor area which may be devoted to said use and that only one delivery vehicle (1-1/2 ton capacity) be used as part of the operation. WPC 0442P City Planning Commission Study Session Agenda Items for Meeting of August 17, 1983 Page 4 3. Discussion of standards applicable to amusement facilities and accessory amusement games A. BACKGROUND On July 27, 1983, the Planning Commission considered various amendments to the Municipal Code relating to amusement games and facilities. After taking public testimony and discussion of the amendments, the matter was continued to the Commission workshop meeting of August 17, 1983, in order that changes suggested by the Commission could be placed in draft form for discussion. The suggested changes made by the Commission were primarily directed at the proposed accessory amusement uses (3 or fewer amusement games) with the intent of regulating accessory uses in a manner similar to that proposed for amusement facilities (arcades, etc.). Issues discussed by the Commission involved the following: 1. No game play by minors during normal school hours; 2. Requirement for adult supervision at all times; 3. Requirement for bike racks; 4. Prohibition of game play by minors in liquor stores and other establishments which dispense liquor; and 5. A requirement that all amusement games be located indoors. The Commission did indicate: 1. That accessory uses need not provide a public restroom because it would place an undue hardship on the owner. 2. That accessory amusement uses may be located within lO00 feet of a school. 3. They wished to consider a provision to modify the fee for a conditional use permit for existing facilities presently operating without benefit of a permit. B. PROPOSED REVISIONS As per Commission request, the following revision to Exhibit "B" (proposed amendment) has been prepared for Commission consideration. Add a new paragraph 5 to Section 19.58.040 to read as follows: "5. Amusement games as accessory uses shall be subject to the following: a. Except for mechanical rides, all amusement games shall be located within the establishment; City Planning Commission Study Session Agenda Items for Meeting of August 17, 1983 Page 5 b. Adult supervision shall be provided at all times; c. Game play (excepting mechanical rides) by minors is prohibited during normal school hours; d. A bike rack for at least three bicycles shall be provided at or near the entrance of the establishment; e. Game play by minors is prohibited in liquor stores and other estabilshments which dispense alcoholic beverages; and f. A zoning permit shall be obtained from the Planning Department and a business license issued by the Finance Department prior to the installation of any amusement game. The Zoning Administrator may modify or waive any of the above regulations upon a determination that the provision is being satisfied by another acceptable means. Any violation of the above regulations which has been substantiated shall be sufficient grounds for the Zoning Administrator to revoke the zoning permit and removal of the games from the premises. C. DISCUSSION The Planning Department is still of the opinion that accessory amusement uses need not be regulated in the same manner as amusement arcades and the additional controls represent a potential enforcement problem for the staff. In support of this position, the staff offers the following comments on the provisions proposed for accessory use: 1. No game play by minors during normal school hours. Comment: It is quite conceivable that a minor may no longer be a student. Year round schools have children on vacation when other schools are in session. 2. Require adult supervision at all times. Comment: Some establishments have no employees on the premises (e.g., laundromats) or employees who would function as adult supervision, thus games would be prohibited in such establishments. 3. Require bike racks. Comment: A bar would be required to provide a bike rack even though minors would not be allowed on the premises. 4. Prohibit game play by minors in liquor stores and other establishments which dispense liquor. City Planning Commission Study Session Agenda Items for Meeting of August 17, 1983 Page 6 Comment: There are a number of food stores and "family" type restaurants which have machines and yet sell alcoholic beverages (e.g., 7-11, Chuck E. Cheese, Square Pan Pizza). Play by minors would be prohibited unless a CUP were granted with a waiver of the conditions. 5. All games to be located indoors. Comments: Many mechanical rides are located outdoors. However rides can easily be excluded. 6. The staff has no objection to modifying the fee for existing establishments which have more than three machines. This can be can be accomplished by allowing the Zoning Administrator to process a conditional use permit (without public hearing) which would save time and money (Planning Commission hearing $750.00 deposit versus $175.00 for Zoning Administrator action) and less time (2 to 3 weeks Zoning Administrator versus 3 to 5 weeks - Planning Commission). WPC 0449P