HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 2008/08/13MINUTES OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. 278 Fourth Avenue
August 13, 2008 Chula Vista, California
CALL TO ORDER: 6:13:13 PM
ROLL CALL /MOTIONS TO EXCUSE:
Members Present: Tripp, Felber, Moctezuma, Vinson, Bensoussan, Clayton,
Spethman
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Read into the record by Chair Tripp
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
MSC (FelberNinson)(5-0-1-1) to approve minutes of June 25, 2008 as submitted with
clarification made by Cmr. Felber. Motion carried with Cmr. Spethman abstaining and
Cmr. Moctezuma absent for the vote.
MSC (SpethmanNinson) (6-0-0-1) to approve minutes of July 9, 2008 as submitted.
Motion carried with Cmr. Moctezuma absent for the vote.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: No public input.
CONSENT AGENDA: No items placed on Consent Agenda.
PUBLIC HEARING:
Chair Tripp moved item #1 (Office Vacancy Rates) under Commission Comments to be heard
concurrently with Public Hearing #1 to enable a broader discussion on these two related items.
1. Public Hearing: PCC 08-29; Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to
allow the operation of a private bilingual school at 880
Kuhn Drive in the Eastlake Business Center.
Background: Jeff Steichen reported that this is a request for a Conditional Use Permit to
operate a private language academy within an existing vacant 16,754 sf office building. The
school would have a maximum enrollment of 180 students between the ages of 6-17 years
(grades 1-12) during the weekday and 80 adult students in the evening and on Saturdays.
The CUP would be subject to a five-year time limit.
Planning Commission Minutes - 2 -
August 13, 2008
The building would contain approximately 2,058 sf of indoor recreational area and
approximately 770 sf of outdoor play area utilizing 5 of the 61 parking spaces provided on
site. Additionally, Scobee Park, located within walking distance, offers volleyball, tennis,
basketball courts and outdoor fitness equipment and is a private park operated by the
Business Center Association solely for use by the tenants within the business park.
Although educational institutions are a permitted use via a CUP, one of the primary
concerns of allowing anon-industrial use in an industrial-designated portion of the Business
Center relates to compatibility with surrounding land uses i.e. office and commercial uses.
Another concern is that the land use district regulations allow uses that may store and
handle hazardous material; these include high technology, biotechnology and biomedical
facilities. By co-locating next to sensitive receptors i.e. schools, hospitals and senior care
facilities, a conflict could potentially arise because they would require assisted evacuation in
the event of an accident or spill. Staff has anticipated this and is requiring the school to
prepare an assisted evacuation plan per Fire Department Condition 1.6.3.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt the Resolution approving
the Conditional Use Permit for a private school based on the findings contained therein.
Commission Questions 6:15:30 PM
Cmr. Felber asked for clarification that approving this CUP would not preclude in the future
an allowed Industrial Use to be located in the business center.
Nancy Lytle responded that it wouldn't have any bearing on the city's approval, however,
where certain requirements are triggered is when a use involves hazardous materials in
close proximity to a sensitive receptors as stated earlier.
Cmr. Bensoussan asked if this CUP is renewable after the five-year period expires.
Mr. Steichen stated that it is renewable and the applicant would have to request a time
extension, however, they've indicated they would be looking for a permanent location
elsewhere and fully expect to be there within the next five years.
Cmr. Spethman asked what types of equipment and activities would take place in the indoor
recreation area, and also expressed safety concerns with walking to and from Scobee Park
and potential conflicts in use of the park with other employees of the business park.
Cmr. Clayton expressed concern with children playing in an area of high traffic volume and
being exposed to car exhaust, and asked what effect does a use such as this have on taking
away tax revenue and on other businesses that went into this center expecting to provide a
service to blue-collar industry workers. If this space is taken up, where will the blue-collar
employment go that was designated to be in that area, and what kind of impact will it have
on the existing tenants who had an expectation of future growth based on the leasing out of
that space as it was intended.
Mr. Steichen responded that the play area is located in the southwest corner closest to
Eastlake Parkway and away from Kuhn Dr. and the building pad is at a higher elevation with
a high sloped bank down to the street level, so the play area is pretty much isolated.
Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - August 13, 2008
Responding to Cmr. Clayton's comments, Ms. Lytle stated that these are the policy issues that
this application raises. By placing an educational facility at this location, it does displace the
opportunity to be used for the primary purpose that was envisioned for that building. The fact
that it's a temporary use allows us to make the General Plan consistency findings.
Cmr. Vinson asked if this school impacts the school district's figures as it relates to student
enrollment and State funding.
Denny Stone stated that the impact on the schools would be the same regardless of where the
school was located, similar to any other private school.
Cmr. Tripp stated the vacancy rate is a regional issue. The data seems to point that a
contributor to this situation is that the market may have been over-built. Cmr. Tripp asked how
competitive are rental rates in Chula Vista compared to other jurisdictions and how much
Industrially designated land would we need to have a balanced General Plan.
Steve Power responded that it would be approximately 800 acres. Ms. Lytle added that we're
greatly imbalanced towards housing and away from jobs, so we're at a deficit.
Denny Stone stated that comparing the rental rates with Otay Mesa, Chula Vista is slightly
higher, but the gap is closing because the rates are starting to come down.
Cmr. Felber asked if a biotech company wished to locate in the center, would there be another
location they could occupy that is not right next door to the school.
Mr. Stone stated there is no shortage of space and they could be accommodated elsewhere.
Public Hearing Opened. 7:03:43 PM
Allen Hoffman, with IRA stated he has been actively marketing this location since it was vacated
in 2006 and have brought down their rental rates down from $2.35 sf to $1.35 sf. They've
spoken to one interested party, Highland Prince Academy, and have signed alive-year lease
with them. Mr. Hoffman confirmed that there is no shortage of available space with the
availability of the 103,000 sf space that Leviton vacated, ahigh-tech research center of 90,000
sf and others.
Cmr. Felber inquired if the applicant is fully aware and comfortable with having another use that
is allowed in the General Plan, i.e. a biochemical company to be located near them.
Ms. Hernandez responded that they are fully comfortable with it because they are prepared with
any contingency plan, not just a chemical spill, to ensure the safety of their children and will
comply with any other requirements i.e. from the APCD. Their building is also large enough to
be used as a shelter should the need arise to remain indoors instead of evacuate.
Cmr. Spethman asked:
what provisions are available for parking for high schools students who drive cars
what types of activities are envisioned in the indoor recreation area
expressed concern with the use of Scobee Park and there being a conflict between
children and adults who are tenants of the center.
Planning Commission Minutes - 4 - August 13, 2008
Ms. Hernandez stated that the students will not be allowed to drive their cars to school and this
regulation that is in their school handbook which parents must sign agreeing to the conditions
contained in it.
With regard to the indoor recreation area, Ms. Hernandez stated that the first use will be as an
assembly hall for students and parentlteacher meetings. Secondly, it will be used as an
alternate play area during inclement weather for the smaller children, and thirdly, it will be
primarily for use of the older students and will have some couches and play tables i.e. ping-
pong and fuzz ball.
Mr. Hoffman stated that he sits on the HOA board for the business park and he has spoken to
them about the school using the park, to which there is no opposition, and pointed out that the
park is underutilized by the tenants.
Cmr. Tripp asked Mr. Hoffman if he could give his best estimate on how long this cycle will last.
Mr. Hoffman stated that it's difficult to answer, but if you look at San Diego County as a whole
you're going to get a different answer than if you look at Eastlake sub-market by itself. In all of
his 13+ years in this industry, he has never experienced so many tenants defaulting on their
lease and these are not just the financial and real estate tenants, but tenants who cater to
families and the community, i.e. dance studios and boxing studios. Their client-base is declining
because people no longer have disposable income and are struggling to keep their homes.
Cmr. Tripp asked if, in his opinion, the way the Eastlake Business Park was built, if its no longer
a fit.
Mr. Hoffman stated that his observation is that it was designed to be an industrial park, but
doesn't see it as such any longer and sees it more as being an area that caters to families; the
build-out of Eastlake now demands the services.
Cmr. Clayton stated that since Scobee Park will be used by children, she asked if the business
park HOA has enough insurance to cover catastrophic accidents.
Mr. Hoffman stated that the lease agreement is designed in such a way that the tenant must
indemnify the landlord for any accidents that may occur.
Cmr. Clayton asked for further elaboration of the activities and make-up of the outdoor play
area.
Ms. Hernandez stated that the play area will be for small children to use during recess and
consists of afoam-padded playground with basic equipment and in the parking there will be
four-square and hop-scotch painted on the parking lot area.
Discussion. 7:29:14 PM
Cmr. Tripp stated that the Commission has gone to great lengths to ensure the success of the
Eastlake Business Center, by re-designating it for heavier retail use to accommodate the Design
Center. Although he has some concern with other uses being excluded if they wanted to go in
there, he is satisfied that there are other options where they could be located. The proposed
CUP may not be a perfect fit, however, it is a temporary use for a term of five years.
Planning Commission Minutes - 5 -
August t3, 2008
Cmr. Felber stated he has the same concerns as Cmr. Tripp and this wouldn't be his favorite
thing to put there, however, it would serve the community, is a temporary and believes the
findings for approval can be met.
Cmr. Vinson stated that the Eastlake Business Center is properly designed and unfortunately is
caught up in this down economic cycle, but as with the real estate industry, it will survive and
thrive once again. He is excited to welcome this school to the community.
Cmr. Bensoussan stated the school is a perfect fit for the community and supports the proposal.
The build-out of that area has created a need to have more establishments that support a
growing community and perhaps this natural change may be shifting the center's emphasis and
is evolving into a business park as opposed to an industrial park.
Cmr. Moctezuma stated the concerns have been well articulated and is confident they will be
properly address, therefore, she is in support of granting a five-year Conditional Use Permit.
Cmr. Spethman stated he is excited about the prospect of having a bilingual educational facility
in town and although the location is not ideal and he had some concerns with the park usage he
is confident that those issues can be worked out.
Cmr. Clayton stated that the school is a valuable resource to the community, however, this
location is inappropriate and would preclude the intended use of a future tenant to be located
there, nonetheless, she can support the approval of the CUP based on the tenant and property
owner's word that this is only afive-year temporary use permit and are not seeking to make it
permanent.
7:40:41 PM MSC (Felber/Moctezuma)(?-0) that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
PCC 08-29 approving the Conditional Use Permit for a private school, based on the
findings contained therein. Motion carried.
2. Second Accessory Unit Ordinance7:43:25 PM
Steve Power reported that on May 2007 the City Council adopted a modified second unit
ordinance that went into effect in July 2007. They requested that staff report back to the
Planning Commission and City Council at 12 and 18-month intervals to report back upon activity
or effect of the new ordinance. Significant aspects of the ordinance include the following:
• ADU's can have a maximum size of 650 sf or 750 sf depending on lot area
• The size of the ADU is determined by the size of the lot's buildable pad area
• ADU's are not permitted on lots less than 5,000 sf or that have less than 5,000 sf of
buildable pad area
• ADU's can be attached above, behind or below the primary residence or on larger lots
be detached behind primary residence
• Detached ADU's are only allowed on parcels greater than 7,000 sf
• The property owner must live in one of the units that wilt exist on the site
Staff prepared aseven-year history of ADU construction, which indicated that the peak of
construction was in 2005 with 39 units finaled to 1 unit finaled in 2008. The reduction in
construction may be due to the present economic downturn.
Planning Commission Minutes - 6 - August 13, 2008
Public Hearing Opened. 7:46:16 PM
Harold West stated that in his opinion the ordinance is poorly written and is too restrictive for
what is an allowed use by right. The ordinance is written in such a way that it is better suited for
the newer communities in the east where the lots are perfectly plotted, and it doesn't work for
western Chula Vista, which has many irregular lot sizes. Mr. West urged the commission to
consider sending a recommendation to the City Council directing staff to revisit the language in
the ordinance.
Cmr. Bensoussan pointed out it would be interesting to know if the decline in building ADU's is a
reflection of the ordinance or the economy.
Mr. Power stated that in his opinion it's due to the economy because as real estate values are
down and foreclosures are up, people are not spending the money; hopefully as home equities
increase, people would then have the resources to take out a second loan to build an ADU.
Cmr. Spethman stated he shares the same sentiments with Mr. West's comments and believes
the ordinance is restrictive and punitive, and would like to know if this is an appropriate time and
place to request that the language in the ordinance be re-examined.
Nancy Lytle stated that the Commission has the ability to initiate a request to re-examine any
portion of the zoning ordinance.
Cmr. Vinson stated he too feels the ordinance is too restrictive and disagrees with the owner
occupancy requirement.
Comments. 8:04:17 PM
Cmr. Moctezuma stated she understands the State of California ruling, but categorically
opposes changing the R-1 zone into an R-2 zone, which is why she supports the owner-
occupancy requirement.
Cmr. Bensoussan stated that the ordinance is an attempt to preserve the integrity of the SF
zone and pointed out that there is a lot of support for the owner-occupancy requirement; many
who spoke at the public hearings had first-hand experience having an ADU next door to them
and were of the opinion that it does change the neighborhood.
Cmr. Spethman stated he believes that ADU's serve an important need in our communities and
are a viable product that can co-exist in a residential neighborhood provided they conform to
first-rate building standards.
Cmr. Clayton stated that her main concern with the ordinance is the owner-occupancy
requirement and asked if there might be an opportunity for someone in a hardship situation to
get a variance so that they don't have to sell their property in a distressed market like we're in.
Mr. Power stated that there is hardship provision language in the ordinance, i.e. "property owner
is required to live outside of San Diego", or "property owner is required to live outside San Diego
to care for an immediate family member".
Planning Commission Minutes - 7 - August 13, 2008
Cmr. Felber stated he supports revisiting the ordinance to ensure that there are reasonable
restrictions to preserve the integrity of the R-1 zone and at the same time refine the language to
so that it's not excessively restrictive.
Mr. West stated that since the State of California has determined that they are allowed by right,
as a builder, his desire is that the ordinance be crafted with sound guidelines and incentives to
produce a quality product that is compatible with the neighborhood and will bring property
values up.
Cmr. Tripp asked the Commission members if they wished to give staff any new directive to
changing the ordinance.
Cmr. Bensoussan stated that not enough time has transpired to be able to gather enough data
to substantiate making any changes to it and there is not adequate data to indicate how these
units are being used, therefore, she does not support changing anything or making any
recommendation to the City Council at this time.
Cmr. Moctezuma stated she supports the ordinance as written with regard to the owner-
occupancy requirement, but would agree that the language in the ordinance could be clarified to
incorporate sound guidelines in order ensure that a quality product will be constructed.
Cmrs. Spethman, Moctezuma, Vinson and Clayton agree that they are ready to direct staff to
revisit the language in the ordinance.
Cmrs. Tripp and Felber stated they are comfortable with the status quo and don't feel compelled
one way or the other to give staff any further direction at this time.
MSC (Clayton/ )directing staff to come back in 30 days. Motion failed due to lack of a
second.
Cmr. Spethman stated he was ready to make a motion directing staff to modify and clean-up the
ordinance and bring it back within 90 days for the Commission's consideration.
Cmr. Bensoussan asked for clarification on what is the Commission's directive to staff.
Cmr. Spethman stated that based on the comments made tonight, the majority of the
Commissioners would like to see some statistics, perhaps on the ratio of owner-occupied vs.
non-owner occupied, and more data that would shed light on why these units are not being built;
is it the restrictiveness of the ordinance or economics.
Ms. Lytle stated that Council's directive was to review at 12 and 18 month intervals, therefore,
it's in staff's work program to bring this back in six months. Due to a reduction in workforce,
accelerating the timeline could create some problems and asked for the Commission's
indulgence in sticking to the six months.
MSC (SpethmanNinson) (5-2) to bring back in 6 months for consideration of possible
modifications to the ordinance. Motion carried with Cmrs. Bensoussan and Clayton
voting against it.
Adjourned to a regular Planning Commission meeting on August 27, 2008. 8:49:42 PM
Planning Commission Minutes - 8 -
August 13, 2008
Submitted by:
Diana Vargas, Secreta to the Planning Commission