Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1986/10/22 AGENDA City Planning Commission Chula Vista, California Wednesday, October 22, 1986 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER INTRODUCTORY REMARKS APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of September 17, 1986 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCA-86-7: Consideration of amendments to Title 10 and Title 19 of the Municipal Code by including boats, trailers, campers, and items of a similar nature in the definition of "vehicle" as it relates to existing regulations regarding the parking, storage and repair of vehicles on public and private property 2. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-87-A(M): Consideration to adjust zone boundary at the southwest corner of Third Avenue and Orange Avenue, between C-36 General Commercial and RU-29 Residential Bob Spriggs (continued) 3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-87-B: Reconsideration to rezone approximately 0.19 acres located at 618 Fourth Avenue - Educare Children's Center 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-87-12: Requests permission to establish a recreational vehicle storage yard at the northerly terminus of Trenton Avenue, between Industrial Boulevard and Walnut Avenue - John Gardner and Bill Gretler 5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-86-7M: Consideration of a tentative subdivision map for Weisser Subdivision, Chula Vista Tract 86-7M, located south of Naples Street between Fourth and Fifth Avenues - Victor Weisser 6, PUBLIC HEARING: Variance ZAV-87-7: Requests permission to convert an existing garage into a therapy room without a replacement garage at 692 Second Avenue - Walter and Marilyn Williams DIRECTOR'S REPORT COMMISSION COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT AT to the Regular Business Meeting of November 5, 1986 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers To: City Planning Commission From: George Krempl, Director of Planning Subject: Staff Report on Agenda Items for Planning Commission Meeting of October 22, 1986 1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCA-86-7: Consideration of amendments to Title lO and Title 19 of the Municipal Code regarding the parking, storage and repair of vehicles on public and private property A. BACKGROUND 1. In 1983, the City Council adopted a general community appearance policy and program for the City of Chula Vista. The idea was to address aesthetic enhancement by controlling where vehicles might park in the front yards of homes and businesses both on public and private property. Vehicles included cars, trucks, boats, campers and camper shells, and recreational vehicles. In 1985, the Council expressed concern as to whether current ordinances were adequate, if any enforcement was occurring, and whether the program was effective. Issues raised included cars and recreational vehicles. Staff acknowledged that present regulations were in some cases vague, inconsistent and/or difficult to enforce. As a result, several draft amendments to the Municipal Code were presented to the Council and subsequently referred to the Planning Commission for public hearing and recommendation. The Commission originally considered the proposed amendments in workshop session on July 10, 1985. 2. On February 5, 1986, the Montgomery Planning Committee, by a vote of 6-0, recommended that (1) the proposed amendments to Title 10, the Chula Vista Municipal Code, be continued until the Committee can convene a workshop to further consider their effect on Montgomery, and (2) the proposed amendments to Title 19, the Zoning Ordinance portion of the Municipal Code, not be considered for application to Montgomery until a specific plan is adopted for the area. As you may recall, until a specific plan is adopted for the area, the Montgomery Community is subject to the County rather than the City Zoning Ordinance (Title 19). The subject amendments to Title 19 would not apply to the Montgomery Community, unless conflicts with County ordinances were created. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 2 3. On February 26, 1986, the Planning Commission held a hearing of the proposed draft ordinance and concluded that it was unacceptable as written. The City Council subsequently continued the item and asked that a task force be formed. The purpose of the task force was to work with City staff and see if a compromise could be reached which might enhance community appearance and at the same time be more acceptable to all factions of the community vehicle users as well as adjoining neighbors. A workshop group of 15 citizens was appointed to review the draft, define and discuss the issues and look at alternatives. As input, the Committee considered the resident views expressed at the prior public hearing, the views of those residents who monitored the meetings of the task force, and Planning, Police and Traffic Engineering staff. The Committee has met twice a month since the end of June. Each item of the ordinance was discussed and language offered. Exhibit "A" attached represents the efforts of staff and the Committee to reach an acceptable compromise ordinance. The Committee held a public hearing of their own on September 22, 1986, before formulating their final recommendations. 4. An Initial Study, IS-86-29, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project, was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on February 16, 1986. The Environmental Review Coordinator concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommend that the Negative Declaration be adopted. The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the latest draft (Exhibit A) and has again concluded that no significant environmental effects would result, thus a recommendation to adopt the Negative Declaration. B. RECO~MENDATION 1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-86-29. 2. Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council enact an ordinance amending Title 10 and Title 19 of the Municipal Code as shown in Exhibit A attached hereto. C. DISCUSSION 1. The sections of the Municipal Code that relate to the parking of vehicles in the front yard setback are found under Title 10 and Title 19. These sections are presently confusing and difficult to enforce because they neither define what constitutes a vehicle nor who (City staff, Planning Commission, Council, or homeowner) may designate an area to be improved and used for parking. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 3 The City Attorney has indicated that under current Code provisions, the general definition of a vehicle as a "self-propelled conveyance" has to be used. This would exclude boat trailers, camping trailers, etc. As an alternative, the City Attorney recommends that rather than using the word vehicle, that specific words like vehicle, boat, vacation trailer, camping trailer, boat trailer, camper, recreational vehicle, etc. be inserted. In addition, he suggests that the term "designated area" be changed to "area designated and approved by the Zoning Administrator. Thus, the proposed amendments would more clearly define what may or may not be parked or placed in front yard areas and the limits of such areas used for these purposes. Trailers, boats, recreational and camping trailers, would be permitted in such areas along with automobiles and recreational vehicles (see parking synopsis attached for comparison with other agencies). On the other hand, non-mounted camper shells would be prohibited from being stored in front yard areas for more than 72 hours regardless of whether that area is paved or not. These items would have to be stored within a garage or carport, in rear or side yard areas (fenced exterior yards) or in off-site storage yards. Another issue that has not been addressed previously, but that is equally significant, is the parking of semi-truck tractors on residential driveways. Until recently, it was generally believed that the Code did not prohibit parking. However, the City Attorney has recently ruled that Section 10.52.090, which prohibits parking of commercial vehicles (with a gross weight in excess of 10,000 lbs.) in residential areas for more than five hours, includes parking on driveways. A proposed amendment has been added to clarify a prohibition of vehicles in excess of 12,000 lbs. and used for commercial purposes would be limited to 5 hours within a residential district. It is also proposed that our zoning enforcement personnel be given citation authority in order to make our enforcement of various regulations more efficient. Citations could be issued 72 hours after warnings were given to correct the violation. The current practice of giving repeated letters of warning, followed by a formal complaint through the City Attorney's office, is time consuming and inefficient. A number of cities in San Diego County (Imperial Beach, National City, 0ceanside, Vista, Santee, and San Diego) and most of the cities in Los Angeles and Orange Counties have instituted the citation process and have founded it much more effective. Finally, it is proposed that existing locational criteria which apply to the repair of vehicles would also apply to other vehicles such as boats, campers, trailers. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 4 2. The following represents a brief synopsis of the present Code requirements and proposed changes. Section 10.52.040 Stopping, standing, or parking within or on parkways prohibited. Present ordinance permits parking of a vehicle but doesn't cover other private property located within this public right-of-way area. Ordinance change will clarify and prohibit such parking; no changes from original draft. Section 19.52.090 Commercial vehicles parking in residential districts prohibited when. Present Code restricts commercial vehicles in excess of lO,O00 lbs. from parking in a residential district for more than 5 hours. Since majority of trucks used for pleasure secure commercial license plates, the Committee recommended the language be clarified to prohibit any vehicle used primarily for commercial purposes. Note: Weight increased to 12,000 lbs. and exempt vehicles providing a service or loading/unloading. Section 10.84.020 Parking prohibited on portions of private property. Present ordinance requires a vehicle to be parked on a paved surface designated for parking if located within front setback area. Proposed ordinance adds trailers, boats and recreational vehicles to the section but allows parking to occur on dust-free areas within lO feet of a paved driveway or as authorized by the City's Zoning Administrator. The Section goes on to state that unmounted campers and camper shells may not be placed in the front yard for more than 72 hours. The proposed amendment would make it legal to locate several vehicles and/or boats/trailers within the front yard or on adjacent to the driveway. Section 19.62.150 of the Municipal Code limits the maximum area to be used to 50% of the lot width. Further, any proposal to park on the opposite side of the drive would take separate site plan approval by the City's Zoning Administrator. The significance of this ordinance amendment is the prohibition of a vehicle parking lengthwise across the front of a lot, or multiple vehicles parking indiscriminately on the property, or the placing of unmounted camper shells in the front yard for any extended period of time. Section 10.84.030 Citation of vehicles parked in prohibited areas. Citation authority expanded from issuing citations of vehicles on private property to those parked within parkway area. Warning period extended from 24 hours to 72 hours. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 5 Section 19.58.260 Repair of vehicles. This section covers repair of vehicles on private property. Ordinance expanded to include boats, trailer, campers. The present Ordinance restricts repair to inside of a totally enclosed garage. Ordinance modified to include carport and delete total enclosed garage plus clean up, simplify and consolidate the language in this section. Storage outside of garage or carport authorized for a 72 hour period. Section 19.62.110 Limitations on areas to be used. Section clarified by Ref. 10.84.020 and 19.62.150 with authorization specified by the Zoning Administrator. This would allow the Zoning Administrator, subject to review of a plot plan, to authorize without charge, parking of vehicles on the opposite side of the lot. Vehicles otherwise in violation of the Code would have to comply or apply for variance relief. Section 19.62.150 Residential parking front/exterior setback restrictions - generally. Clarification only, retain 50% maximum use of front yard or exterior for parking. Section 19.62.200 Enforcement of this chapter. ~ew chapter adds citation power to Zoning Enforcement Officers after 72 hour warning issuance. This section will save the City considerable time and money now spent by the City Attorney's office in trying to achieve ordinance compliance. The citation procedure is used by a number of municipalities in the county, including San Diego County. 3. Montgomery Area Earlier this year, the original draft ordinance was presented to the Montgomery Planning Committee noting that Section 10 of the Municipal Code would apply to Montgomery whereas changes to Section 19 (the Zoning Regulations) would not apply since Montgomery is still governed by the County Zoning Regulations. Since that presentation, staff has had the opportunity to research the effects of the proposed amendments to Section 19 and have found that they should apply to Montgomery to avoid conflicts with existing County sections. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 6 For example, Section 6799 of the County Zoning Regulations presently prohibits the parking of commercially licensed vehicles in excess of one ton capacity in residential zones and Section 6787(c) prohibits any parking in the front or exterior side yard. The County presently has citation power. To avoid any conflicts and to ensure consistent zonin9 enforcement on a city-wide basis, we are proposing to repeal both sections and impose the City regulations in their place (see copy of ordinance attached). WPC 3236P PARKING SYNOPSIS (Boats, Trailers, RVs) On-Site Allowed Agency Not Allowed Allowed (Limited Period) On-Street City of San Diego X 72 hrs. County of San Diego X No limit Carlsbad X 72 hrs. (no boats, trailers Coronado X 72 hrs. (7 days (no boats, trailers) motor home) Del Mar X No limit Escondido X No limit E1 Cajon X 72 hrs. Impe-ial Beach X Not allowed La Mesa X 72 hrs. Lemon Grove X 72 hrs. National City X 72 hrs. (no boats, trailers) Oceanside X (48 hrs.) 72 hrs. Poway X 72 hrs. Santee X temporary No limit San Marcos X 72 hrs. Vista X Not allowed TOTAL - 16 Agencies 5 8 3 lO - 72 hrs. 4 - No limit 2 - Not allowed WPC 3106P ORDINANCE 6799 PARKING OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL AND AGRICULTURAL ZONES No person shall park any commercially-licensed vehicle in excess of one ton capacity on private property in Residential and Agricultural Zones except as follows: a. When loading or unloading property, or b. When such vehicle is parking on connection with, and in aid of, the performance of a service to or on property in the block in which such vehicle is parked. Notwithstanding the above provisions, no vehicle shall remain parked in excess of five consecutive hours. This provision is not intended to apply to recreational vehicles or farm vehicles or equipment necessary for agricultural production on the property where the vehicles and equipment are parked. c. Open Parking. Except as provided in Paragraph "d", open parking spaces shall be outside the ultimate right-of-way of any street and shall be located as follows: ZONE/USE REGULATION PERMITTED LOCATION Residential & Agricultural Zones Anywhere except in a required S80, S87, S88, S90, S92 Use front or exterior side yard. Regulations May be in interior side yard only when separated from abutting property by a 6-foot high solid fence or wall. C30, C31, C46 Use Regulations Anywhere except in a required front yard. Other Commercial Zones, Industrial Anywhere except in a required Zones, S82, S86, and S94 Use landscaped area. Regulations. WPC 3237P COMMUNITY APPEARANCE AMENDMENTS EXHIBIT "A" ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING CHAPTERS 10.52, 10.84, 19.58, 19.62, and 19.70 RELATING TO COMMUNITY APPEARANCE AND PARKING The City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby ordains as follows: SECTION I: That Section 10.52.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: Section 10.52.040 Stopping, standing or parking-within or on parkways-prohibited. / / No person shall stop, stand, park, or place a vehicle, boat, trailer, camper or any other ~roperty, within any parkway. SECTION II: That Section 10.52.090 is amended to read as follows: Section 10.52.090 Commercial vehicles -- Parking in residential districts prohibited when. No person shall park any ~$~I vehicle whose prima[y use is for commercial purposes having a manufacturer s gross vehicle weight rating of ~ twelve thousand pounds or more for more than five hours in any residential district (which includes parking on private property) except: A. While loading or unloading property, which requires time in addition to such five hour period to complete such work; or B. When such vehicle is parked in connection with, and in aid of, the performance of a service to or on property in the block in which such vehicle is parked and time in addition to such five hour period is reasonably necessary to complete such service. SECTION III: That Section 10.84.020 is amended to read as follows: Section 10.84.020 Parking prohibited on portions of private property. ~d l l~dtt~dYd l /~a/yl l /b/e/ l ~/a/r/~/a/d/ l ~£~l l £~l l ~l l~ ~ll~dW//drll~ll~ll~d~lldfll/bh~ll~//~$~t~ ~llf~lla/p~afd~dd~l~~Nl~ll~d~l/p/a/r/Kli/~t~l~llll~ ~S ~ l ~/ A~W~ / ~/ /~W~dd / ~l~/ / ~ / /e/x/~dWi/o/r/ / ~l ~/ /~W~ / /s/eltfa/a/c~/ / ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ / /s/c/r/e/e/n/d~ / W ~ ~ ~ / ~/ / ~ d~ f ~ / $ ~ ~ ~ ~ / /a/n~d / ~ ~ ~ ~ / /~t~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ / /t~h/a/n~ / ~ ~ ~ No vehicle, vacation trailer, camping trailer, boat, boat trailer, camper or recreational vehicle may be parked or placed within the front yard or exterior side yard (i.e. street side of a corner lot) setback, except as follows: 1. In a garage or carport. 2. On a paved driveway. 3__~. On a dust free area adjacent to a paved driveway. Adjacent shall mean within ten feet of the edge of the driveway. (Refer to Section 19.~2.1bu for further limitations). *Note: Dust free shall mean grass or decomposed granite/paving per City standards adopted to accomplish a dust free surface. 4. When parking is not available under 1-3 above, then consideration should be given by the Zoning Administrator for parking allowance on the opposite side of the lot as per Section 19.62.110. Unmounted campers and camper shells may not be placed in the front yard, driveway or unscreened {by solid six (6) foot high fence or hedge) exterior side yard setback area for a period of more than seventy-two (72) hours. SECTION IV: That Section 10.84.030 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: Section 10.84.030 Citation of vehicles parked in prohibited areas. -2- ~ I IddC,~l~ffl~l I ~I ~1 I~N~ I ~1 ~I ~1 Idflf/ilddd I ~! I itN~ Any police officer of the City of Chula Vista or other employee with citation authority may cite a vehicle for a v~o~ation o~ Sections ~u.bz.u~u and ~U.~.UZU; provloe~, ~owever, a warnin~ in the form provided by the Police Department of the City shall first be placed upon the vehicle. Seventy-two hours after the placement of such warning, the citation may be issued. SECTION V: Section 19.58.260 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: Section 19.58.260 Repair of vehicles. A. Repair except as stated in Paragraph B) of ~ motorcycles, motor trucks and motor vehicles, as defined in the Vehicle Code of the State of California, as well as boats, campers, and trailers is prohibited in any residential zone unless all of the following conditions are met: 1. All repair (except as stated in paragraph B) of vehicles boats, campers and trailers shall be conducted within a garage or carport or behind a solid fence, gate or wall not less than six feet in height; 2. No more than one vehicle, or one boat, or one camper, or one trailer, shall be in a state of disrepair or in inoperable condition at any one time on any lot; 3. No repair of vehicles, boats, campers and trailers shall be conducted as a business; 4. No vehicle in a state of disrepair or in an inoperable condition may be located outside of a ~ll~//~ garage or carport or solid fence, ~ate or wall not less than six feet in height, for a period of more than $~$~/~1 seventy-two ~72) hours; 5. No repair of vehicles, boats, campers and trailers shall take place between the hours of ten p.m. and eight a.m.; -3- 6. No storage for a period of more than seventy-two 172) hours of parts of a vehicle, )~()~, boat, camper or trailer, shall be located in any place where repair of vehicles, boats, campers and trailers is prohibited herein. ~ ~ ~ l l l l Y~ ~ /cl l /e/x~/e/e/d/ l ldn/el l l)t dF/ d ~ d d/ l l ~ ~( ~ ~ ~ d l l ~ ~ ~ ~ B. Nothing in this section is intended to prohibit the making of minor repairs, such as tire changing or repair, replacement of spark plugs and minor engine adjustments or re~air, lubrication, battery and brake adjustments or re air by an owner of the vehicle on sa~ ~s lot, where said vehicle may be legally parked as determined by other sections of this code. SECTION VI: That Section 19.62.110 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: Section 19.62.110 Limitation on areas to be used. No part of any front yard or exterior side yard (i.e. street side of a corner lot) shall be used for off-street parking or access, except #dd~/~f~//a~f//s/a/i/d//~/d~l~//a/r/e//dd~i/~F/WV~l~ ~}m/p/r/oA~/e/d//~)t~$~ as noted in Sections 10.84.020 and 19.62.150 unless so authorized by the Zoning Administrator, pursuant to an approved site plan. SECTION VII: That Section 19.62.150 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: Section 19.62.150 Residential parking-Front/ Exterior setback restrictions ~Fly. No required parking spaces or required maneuvering area may be located in the front or exterior setback area (except as noted in Section 10.84.020) ; ~/~d~/i/dddl/n/o/,~/e/v/e/rl,//~)q~ the total combination of driveways and adjacent parking areas ~l lv/ktitdkt l /d/al l ~l lddd~i~i/t~l~d l /a/ / ~)~$ ~l /dtl l /da/al / ~$ ~ ~X~)~///a/d/o/p/ob./d///~/~////c~/e///C/i/l~y/,///~ shall not occupy ~t~(X~tW~t//d~ more than fifty percent of ~W$~ the front or exterior yard. -4- SECTION VIII: That Section 19.62.200 is added to the Chula Vista Municipal Code to read as follows: Section 19.62.200 Enforcement of this chapter. For purposes of enforcement of this chapter, authorized City employees may issue citations to vehicles or property owners as appropriate, when violations of the chapter occurs; provided however, a warning shall first be issued, allowing seventy-two hours to correct the matter. This seventy-two period shall apply to the first violation on any single piece of property and not to subsequent infractions on the same property. Section 19.70.021 Adoption of County Ordinance Exceptions Section 6799 and 6787(c) of the County Zoning Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section 19.58.260 Repair of vehicles; Section l~.b2.~lU - Limitations of areas to be used; and Section 19.62.150 Residential parking front/ exterior shall be applicable to the Montgomery area identified in Section 19.70.010. SECTION IX: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirty-first day from and after its adoption. Presented by Approved as to form by George Krempl Charles R. Gill Director of Planning Assistant City Attorney WPC 3238P -5- City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 1 2. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ 87-A(M) Adjust zone boundary at the southwest corner of Third Avenue and Orange Avenue, between C-3b general commercial and RU-29 residential - Bob Spriggs A. BACKGROUND 1. The applicant proposes to adjust the zone boundary which presently divides a 4.43 acre parcel into two zones to match the proposed lot line plotted in tentative parcel map TPM 86-19, which has been conditionally approved for the property. The zone boundary between the existing C-36 general commercial zone and RU-29 residential (29 dwellings per acre) would be relocated 12 feet west of its present location. 2. An Initial Study, IS-87-11M of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on September 17, 1986, who concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommended that the Negative Declaration be adopted. 3. The Montgomery Planning Committee at their meeting of October l, 1986, voted to recommend approval of the rezone request as presented by staff, and as shown in Exhibit A of this report. 4. This item was automatically continued from the meeting of October 8, 1986, due to lack of a quorem to consider the request. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-87-11M. 2. Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council enact an ordinance to adjust the zone boundary between the existing C-36 and RU-29 zone for the 4.43 acre parcel located at the southwest corner of Third Avenue and Orange Avenue, to the location coinciding with the property line approved as part of TPM 86-19, as shown in Exhibit A of this report. C. q~SCUSSION Adjacent zoning and land use. North RS-7, C-36, RU-29 Single-family homes, commercial, apartments South RMH-IO Mobilehome park, utility easement East C-36, RMH-IO Car lots, mobilehome park West RU-15, S-94 Mobilehome park, utility easement, residences City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 8, 1986 Page 2 Existing site characteristics. The project site consists of 4.43 acres of property located at the southwest corner of Third Avenue and Orange Avenue. A tentative parcel map has been conditionally approved separating the western portion of the property (3.480 acres) which contains a 124 unit apartment complex from the eastern portion of the property (.96 acres) which is vacant. The property is level, and contains a drainage culvert along the southern boundary of the property. General plan. The proposed zone boundary adjustment has no effect on the compliance of the affected zones with the General Plan designation of Thoroughfare Commercial and High Density Residential for the property. In terms of land use, the property under commercial zoning is vacant, and the adjusted boundary will not encroach onto the area developed for residential uses. Therefore, the proposed rezoning will not adversely affect or reduce the property's compliance with the Chula Vista General Plan. D. ANALYSIS Prior to the last General Plan Amendment completed by the County of San Diego for the Montgomery Area on May 15, 1985, the subject property was split into two zones. The western portion of the lot was zoned RC, a residential/commercial zone allowing residential densities of up to 40 dwellings per acre, while the eastern portion of the lot was zoned C-36 General Commercial. The applicant began construction of a 124-unit apartment complex situated on the western portion of the lot, with the intention of constructing a convenience commercial center on the eastern portion of the lot. The apartment project was designed using a zone boundary located 230 feet from centerline of Third Avenue. Upon completion of the last General Plan Amendment, the property was zoned RU-29 and C-36; the boundary between the two zones remained at its previous location. Upon annexation to the City of Chula Vista, a tentative parcel map was filed in order to separate the property into two lots so that commercial uses could be pursued on that portion of the property zoned C-36. It was discovered at that time that the zone boundary separating the RU-29 and C-36 zone is located 242 feet from the centerline of Third Avenue, not 230 feet as the applicant originally thought. The applicant is requesting the zone boundary adjustment to conform with the existing as-built location of the apartment complex. After review of the applicant's request and the zoning history of the property, staff is recommending approval of the zone boundary adjustment. The adjustment is City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 8, 1986 Page 3 minor in nature, would move the boundary 12 feet to align with the proposed property line separating the two parcels, and would not encroach into the existing apartment use. At this time there is no specific commercial project proposed. Consideration of public improvements and public safety requirements will be done through the Design Review process when a specific commercial proposal is brought forward. WPC 3162P EXHIBIT A negative declaration PROJECT NAME: Spriggs Rezone PROJECT LOCATION: Southwest Corner of Third Avenue and Orange Avenue PROJECT APPLICANT: Western Communities Doug Brundage CASE NO: IS-87-111q DATE: September 16, 1986 A. Project Setting The project site consists of 4.43 acres of property located at the southwest corner of Third Avenue and Orange Avenue. A tentative parcel map has been conditionally approved separating the western portion of the property -(3.480 acres) which contains a 125 unit apartment complex from the eastern portion of the property (9.6 acres) which is vacant. The property is level, and contains a drainage culvert along ..the southern boundary of the property. Adjacent land uses consist of residential single family, apartment residential and commercial uses to the north, a mobile home park, and electric utility easement to the south, commercial establishments and a mobile home park to the east, and residential dwellings and a mobile home park to the west. B. Project Description The applicant proposes to construct a convenience commercial center on the vacant portion of the property. There is no specific project proposed at this time. A tentative parcel map has been approved to separate the property into two parcels with the eastern parcel under an existing C-36 commercial zone and the western parcel containing the apartment complex under existing RU-29 residential zoning. The applicant is requesting a change in the zone boundary between the commercial and residential zones, to coincide with the property line between the two proposed parcels. The rezone request would adjust the zone boundary line 12 feet west of its present location. C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans The request to adjust the zone boundary will not encroach into the existing residential apartment complex, and is compatible with the Chula Vista General Plan which designates the area of the adjustment for thoroughfare commercial uses. city of chula vista planning department CFIYOF environmental review section £HIJI VISTA -2- D. Identification of Environmental Effects Drainag~ The project site was originally subject to inundation from drainage along the southern boundary of the property. The site is included in a part of zone 4 of the San Diego County Hydrology Study (Hirsch, 1975). A previously approved box culvert currently being constructed as part of on-site improvements eliminates any potential adverse environmental effects resulting from drainage through the property. Aesthetics It is not known at this time whether construction of the convenience center will result in the degradation of community aesthetics. However, any new commercial project proposed for this site is subject to approval by the Design Review Committee prior to construction. Additional environmental review of the specific project proposed will be required as part of the design review process. Fire Protection The Fire Department is requiring the applicant to satisfy the standard development regulations outlined in the Municipal Code for fire protection prior to approval of the final map or issuance of building permits. These requirements serve to eliminate the potential fod deterioration of fire protection services to the area resulting from this project. Public Roads The Engineering Department requires full road improvements for the site in accordance with 1986 City of Chula Vista Design Standards. These are standard development regulations required as part of the final map process and issuance of building permits. E. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. The proposed zone boundary adjustment will not result in the degradation of the environment, since no specific project is proposed at this time. Future construction of commercial uses on the site will require additional environmental review. 2. The zone boundary adjustment does not conflict with the existing General Plan and as currently proposed, will not result in long-term adverse environmental impacts. 3. The zone boundary adjustment does not involve construction of a project at this time and, therefore, will not result in significant cumulative environmental impacts. -3- 4. In the process of fulfilling standard development regulations required prior to recordation of a final map and/or issuance of building permits, the project will not result in significant traffic or fire protection impacts that will adversely affect human beings. G. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista: Steve Griffin, Associate Planner Duane Bazzel, Associate Planner Julie Schilling, Assistant Planner Frank Herrera, Assistant Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer William Wheeler, Building and Housing Department Carol Gove, Fire Marshal Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer Applicant's Agent: Algert Engineering, Inc. 428 Broadway Chula Vista, CA 92U10 2. Documents General Plan, City of Chula Vista Chapter 19.70 Title 19 (Zoning) of Chula Vista Municipal Code San Diego County Hydrology Study 1975 (Hirsch) 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 Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010. WPC 3160P EN 6 (Rev. 5/85) city of chula vista planning department CI~YOF environmental review section CHUL~VISTA, EN 6 (Rev. 12/82) " R-3 QUINTARD P, R-3 H- 10 Project Area .~~ .ol~ SPmGGS ~ ILOCATOR · ,~ PCC-87-A(M) ~WC THIRD AND ORANGE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT iAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES. The following information must be disclosed: ). List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application. list the names of all persons having an~ ownership interest in the property involved. 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, )ist the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of C~ty staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Counci! within the past twe)ve months? Yes No__ If yes, please indicate person/s) ~s defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, I~?~ial ~lub, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, Ith!~..an~ any other county, city and county, city, municipality, district ~r other lpo)itical subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as.~a unit.,, (~OTE: Attach additional pages as necessar~} ~o~ ~-~s Signature of applicant/da~e '' ' WPC 0701P A-110 ~rint or type name of app)icant " City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 1 3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-87-B - Reconsideration to rezone 0.19 acres at 618 Fourth Avenue from R-1 to R-3-P-5 - Educare Children's Center A. BACKGROUND 1. This item involves a request to rezone 0.19 acres located at 618 Fourth Avenue from R-1 (single family residential) to R-3-P-5 (multiple family residential/5 dwelling units per acre). The purpose of the rezoning is to allow the property to be used as a preschool. 2. The item was initially considered on October 8, 1986, at which time the Commission vote 3-2 (with two Commissioner's absent) to approve the rezoning. The Municipal Code, however, requires an affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the seven-member Commission, or four votes, in order to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council. Thus, the application has been scheduled for reconsideration. 3. On October 8, 1986, the Commission, by a vote of 5-0, adopted the Negative Declaration issued on the Initial Study, IS-87-12, conducted on the proposal. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion to deny PCZ-87-B to rezone 0.19 acres at 618 Fourth Avenue from R-1 to R-3-P-5. C. DISCUSSION adjacent zonin9 and land use. North R-3 Preschool South R-1 Single family dwelling East R-1 Single family dwelling West R-1 Single family dwelling Existing site characteristics. The site consists of an 8,500 sq. ft. lot containing one single family dwelling located on the west side of Fourth Avenue 145 feet south of "I" Street. An existing preschool and daycare center are located to the north at 606 and 610 "I" Street, and single family dwellings are located to the west, south, and east across Fourth Avenue. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 2 General plan. The General Plan designates this and adjacent properties for Medium Density Residential (4-12 dwelling units per acre). The requested R-3 zone with the P-5 modifying district density limitation (5 dw~ling units per acre) would conform with the General Plan designation. Project description. The property would be used to expand the preschool located directly to the north of the site. The single family dwelling would be retained and converted to preschool use to accommodate approximately 24 preschoolers and two employees. The playground area would be located in the front yard area on the easterly side of the structure. Hours of operation would be 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. As noted above, the sole purpose of the rezoning is to allow the preschool expansion. The present R-1 zoning does not allow for large-scale preschools, but they may be established in the R-3 zone upon the approval of a conditional use permit. Thus, if the rezoning were granted the applicant would then have to apply for a CUP to authorize the use. The following analysis is limited to the broader issues and implications of the proposed rezoning from single family to multiple family residential. The issues related to the establishment of a conditional use on the site, such as the necessity or desirability of the proposed preschool use and its potential impact on adjacent areas, are questions generally reserved for the use permit process when and if the underlying zoning is approved. D. ANALYSIS The R-3 zone boundary on the south side of "I" Street is established at a depth of 145 feet in this area; 145 feet being the depth of the majority of parcels which front on the south side of "I" Street. This boundary represents a logical and consistent demarcation between those parcels zoned for multiple family development which generally front on "I" Street and the single family areas to the south. Consequently, from the outset staff has discouraged any extension of multiple family zoning to the south. In order to facilitate the request, the applicant has proposed that the R-3 rezone carry a P-5 modifying district density limitation (5 dwelling units per acre). Five dwelling units per acre equates to the density that can be achieved in the R-1 zone and would allow no more than one unit on the 0.19 acre site. The result being an R-3 zoned parcel which could accommodate only one single family dwelling, consistent with R-1 zoned properties to the west, south and east. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 3 We oppose this approach for two reasons. First, despite the density control, this would represent an extension of R-3 zoning inconsistent with the adjacent zoning patterns. The stated purpose of the R-3 zone is to encourage multiple family development. It is not designed to be used as a device to circumvent unrelated use restrictions of the Code. The existing zone boundary is logical and consistent. Secondly, once the R-3 zone is established it becomes more difficult to argue against a future request for an increase in density or a further extension of the zone. For example, since this parcel could be held in common and consolidated with one or more of the R-3 parcels to the north, a request for an increase in density could come in the form of a density averaging concept. Likewise, a rezone would tend to encourage future requests for multiple family zoning to the south and east along Fourth Avenue. For these reasons, we recommend denial of the request. WPC 3249P '1' Street I I I L _lr _t_- ' 9F ~dF PL. Halsey St ! I I _j I I I l Street /PCZ~87-B negative declaration_- PROJECT NAME: Educare Children's Center PROJECT LOCATION: 618 Fourth Avenue PROJECT APPLICANT: Rosemary J. Hirsch CASE NO: IS-87-12 DATE: September 25, 1986 A. Project Setting The project site consists of an 8,500 sq. ft. lot containing one single family dwelling. An existing preschool and daycare center are located to the north at 606 and 610 "I" Street, and single family dwellings are located to the west, south and east across Fourth Avenue. B. Project Description The project is an expansion of the preschool located directly to the north of the site. The single family dwelling would be retained and converted to preschool use to accommodate approximately 24 preschool ers and two employees. The playground area would be located in the front yard area on the easterly side of the structure. Hours of operation would be 6:30 a.m.-6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans The site is presently zoned R-1 single family residential which does not allow for preschools. The applicant has consequently applied for a rezoning to R-3-P(5) which will require approval by the City Council. If the zoning request is granted, the applicant would then apply for a conditional use permit subject to approval of the Planning Commission. The Building and Housing and Fire departments have submitted comments regarding certain standards that will have to be met with the conversion from single family to 'preschool use. These are not discretionary standards and must be met. D. Identification of Environmental Effects Noise The applicant was required to submit an acoustical analysis based upon information that the rear yard area would be used for play activities. This study indicated that no mitigation measures would be necessary if this area was restricted to children ages 2-4 years and no play equipment other than a sandbox, tf older children were permitted to use the rear yard area, the study indicated the need for a six foot high solid masonry ~vall along the entire length of the western property line. city of chula vista planning department CITY OF · environmental review section.CHULAVlSTAi The applicant has since stated that play activities will be restricted to the front yard area only. Due to the orientation of the front yard play area, the screeening effect of existing structures, the masking effect of Fourth Avenue traffic noise and the distance of the front yard to the nearest property line to the west and south, the study has found that all preschool play activity can occur without exceeding the standards established by the Chula Vista Noise Ordinance. E. Mitigation necessary to avoid significant effects The Initial Study has not identified any potentially significant impacts requiring mitigation. F. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. The site is void of any significant natural or manmade resources, and there are no geologic hazards present on or near the site. 2. The proposed preschool and day care center expansion would be compatible with the General Plan upon the approval of a rezoning and the issuance of a conditional use permit, and thus is consistent with long-term environmental goals assuming these approvals. 3. No impacts are anticipated to occur which could interact to create a substantial cumulative effect on the environment. 4. The project will not cause the emission of any harmful substance or create any significant traffic hazards. Play activities will be restricted to the front yard area, thus eliminating any potential for adverse noise impacts. G. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista: Mando Liuag, Associate Planner Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer Duane Bazzel, Associate Planner Bill Wheeler, Building and Housin~ Department Carol Gove, Fire Marshal Mike Donnelly, Traffic Engineering Steve Griffin, Associate Planner Applicant's Agent: Harold R. Hirsch 2. Documents EA-72-10, Peterson Preschool IS-83-31, "I" Corner Preschool Expansion Chula Vista General Plan The Initial Study applicaticn and evaluation forms documenting the findings of no significant impact are on file and available for public review at the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010. ENVIRO~NTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR WPC 3175P EN 6 (Rev. 5/85) city of chula vista planning department CI~Y OF environmental review section (~HUL,~ VJ~'['X,, ~N 6 (Rev. 12/82) - -;- ..... ,'-'.~-.:~I".'0- x. ~ ), .....r-'--~ ..... I '~, ~/~*"~-- ......... 1 -- ,'z,,'q'`':' ':'- r i-l'~-' ~- ..... : .... --,,-,1~ - [ / , ¥ L_'~ ~ · I:;--:-- :-: < '2_.L~., ex'- ~%. Cd: ~' ~.p~ ~ L: ,_, ,Q.~.c,_.~-- ~ ~· ¢ !:['ill II-..-:, ,.~ ..... ,,: ....... ,..':.~,-.,., · t1,.~ I P,o:~ I1" %' .- . .... ,'-' · , ', , Chuia Vista. Calitornia OctoDer 1, 1986 TO: Environmental Review Coordinator City Of chula Vista, Planning Commission P.O. Box 1087 Chula Vista, CA. 92012. RE: Expansion of existing day care facility at 618 4th Ave. In regards to the proposed zone change of 0.19 acres located at 618 4th Ave.~ for the expansion of Edu-Care Chlldrens Center, we feel the following should be considered: 1. We are definitely opposed to the said rezonlnq. There is enough commercialization in this once quiet residential neighborhood. 2. Three years ago this same Da¥care Center was permitte~ to expand its facilities to PlO 4tn. Avenue, which considerably lncrease~ the noise level. FuMthermore~ we feel that the existing facilities of Edu--Care ten%er are more than sufficiently acceptable for the surrounding neighborhood of single family homes. 5. Also, as a final thought to ponder. If this zoning change is permitted what guarantee is there that, in the not too distant future, the owners of this business will not request another variance and this neighborhood made up of single family dwellings would end up with an apartment complex. Mr. ~ Mrs. Herman Pankau &15 Guava Avenue Chula Vista, CA. 92010 OCT 08 September 24, 1986 =// - P' 17 PLANNING DEPARTME ff city of Chula Vista CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Planning Department Douglas D. Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator On September 6, 1986 we received Notice of Initial Study (IS) regarding environmental consequences and possible impact on the neighborhood due to expansion of the exist- ing daycare facility into an existing single family dwel- ling located at 618 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, by adjacent I Corner Pre-School, located at 406 I Street. We are long time residents of this.neighborhood and we are pleased to say that the existing Pre-School, which has been in operation since 1975, is a very good example of a school which any neighborhood in San Diego County would be proud to have. The former owners of the Pre-School were very polite, con- scientious, law abiding citizens. Teachers there have had complete control over the children. Apparently, the school has had a very good schedule of dropping-off and picking-up the childreB therefore traffic is always very minimal at the premises. We prefer the presence of the school in the area and do not object the expansion of the daycare facility, because to our knowledge, there is demand for these services in the com- munity. We prefer the school as opposed to the regular tenant, be- cause the school operates Monday thru Friday until 6:00 p.m. only being closed on Saturdays, Sundays and major holidays. Day time activities of the children on the playground is overwhelmed by the street traffic noise. My Grandchildren went to I Corner Pr~-School and I would recomend this school to any parents. New owners of the school are very anxious to continue good traditions of the I Corner Pre-School and to serve the Chula Vista Community. Please let them do so. Thank you. /~ctfully, Carole Marquez ~ Chula Vista, Ca. 92010 CHILDREN'S CENTER (619) 426-92~2 258 Fifth Avenue (between E & F) Chula Vis~a, California 92010 Mr. Thomas Shipe Commissioner of the Planning Commission 1408 Melrose Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 Dear Mr. Shipe: On October 8, 1986 you are going to be involved in the decision making process which is vitally important for the Chula Vista Community. I am writing this letter on behalf of the working parents, children and teachers. Undoubtedly, you know that many, many more women with small children are working today than did just five years ago. You may also know that the supply of child care facilities has not kept up with the demand. You may not know, however, that this problem has grown to crisis proportions. In California alone, one million more children need care than can be handled by existing child care facilities. Perhaps one of these children are part of your family. Clearly, steps need to be taken to bring the supply of quality, affordable child care in line with the demand. At Educate I Corner Children's Center, we are offering these qualities to the Chula Vista Community. Recently we became owners of the I Corner Preschool located at 406 "I" Street. This school, wich has been in operation since 1973, has a very good reputation in the Community and is rated by the Pre-School Association (PSA) of California as one of the best in San Diego County. Although the school is licensed for 57 children, it cannot accommodate all the children who would like to be a part of our Educational programs. This has resulted in a long waiting list at our school. To address this problem, we recently took constructive steps to expand the existing school facilities in order to accommodate this essential community service. We rented adjacent to the school, a single family dwelling (618 4th Avenue) and went through all the requirements and ordinances of the City of Chula Vista for rezoning of the subject property. - = ~ - - CHILDREN'S CENTER (619) 426-9212 258 Fifth Avenue (between E & F) Chula Vista, California 92010 We are requesting a zoning change from R-1 to R-3 (P) 5 - lowest possible density for R-3 zoning. It is our understanding that in reality, it is still R-1 zoning. But in order to operate a child care facility, a change of zoning is required by City Ordinance. Our main goal and objective is to license this building for more students. We want to accommodate the children of the working parents throughout the Chula Vista Community and particularly from Rohr Industries and the Bay Hospital. We are not planning to make any changes, remodeling, additions, construction, etc. on the property. Since our dropping-off and picking-up time is spread within about 3 hours - mornings, from 6:00 to 9:00 AM and evenings from 3:30 to 6:30 PM - we are not anticipating any increase in traffic on the premises. Choosing and supporting the best child care arrangements became an important part of every day work of the political and civil leaders who understand the realities of the family life in America in the 1980's. Community groups have already had some success. San Francisco pioneered a business-government-community partnership to expand child care. Los Angeles and other California cities are starting similar programs. Here in Chula Vista we would like to be among the leaders who support public policies in education for our children. I urge you to support the expansion of the Educare I Corner Children's Center. Thank you, Rosemary J. Hirsch Executive Director Educare I Corner Children's Center CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application. Harold R. Hirsch Rosemary J. Hirsch Brigitte E. Stutz List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Carole Marquez 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. Harold R. Hirsch R~am~ry J. Hirsch BriEitte E, Stutz 3. If any person identified pursuant to (l) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No × If yes, please indicate person(s) inedas: "Any indivi~"uual, firm. conartner~hin ~^~ ........ fraternal organization, corporation, esta't'~['t~ ~%~,aS~yndicate°C~atl°n~ Ith!~..an~ aqy other county, city and county, city, municipality, dis%riot  ical subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit. _.. Attach additional pages as necessary.) // ~-F'2 //- ' t S'ign~'ture of applicant/date' / ' . - WPC 0701~ Rosemary J. Hirscn A-110 Print or type name of applicant City ~lanning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 1 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-87-12; request to establish recreational vehicle storage yard at the northerly terminus of Trenton Avenue between Industrial Boulevard and Walnut Avenue John Gardner & Bill Gretler A. BACKGROUND This item involves a request to establish a recreational vehicle storage yard on approximately 3.3 acres within the SDG&E right-of-way at the northerly terminus of Trenton Avenue between Industrial Boulevard and Walnut Avenue in the R-3 zone. An Initial Study, IS-87-17, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on October 10, 1986. The Environmental Review Coordinator concluded that there would be no significant environmental 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-87-17. Based on findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a motion to approve the request, PCC-87-12, to establish a recreational vehicle storage yard on 3.3 acres at the northerly terminus of Trenton Avenue subject to the following conditions: a. Hours of operation shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday, and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Friday through Sunday. On-site security shall be provided 24 hours a day. The security lighting system shall be located and/or screened to avoid glare onto adjacent residential properties. b. Items eligible for storage without prior written permission of the Director of Planning shall be limited to recreational vehicles, automobiles, trucks, boats, trailers, and motorcycles. No stored item shall exceed 10 feet in height at its highest point. All items shall be in sound operating condition, and no on-site repair of stored items shall be allowed. c. Pavin§ shall conform to City standards for a permanent surface. d. The office structure shall maintain a 10 foot separation from adjacent structures. The design and details of the office structure shall be subject to site plan and architectural review and approval. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 2 e. At least ten of the lO'x20' spaces adjacent to the office building shall be designated for temporary customer parking. f. A landscape and irrigation plan to include the public parkway on Industrial Blvd. fronting the site, shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Landscape Architect, g. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted for all property lines, including a decorative fencing scheme for the portion of the southerly property line visible from Trenton Avenue and Industrial Blvd. The decorative treatment shall be consistent with that required by the Code for exterior side yards. h. A turn-around for fire apparatus and an additional standpipe shall be provided subject to review and approval of the Fire Marshal. The access drive shall be widened to 24 feet. i. The Zoning Administrator shall approve the final site plan subject to providing adequate parking and access to the residential lots located on Trenton Avenue. j. Failure to comply with these conditions or complaints filed concerning the operation will cause the application to be reviewed by the Planning Commission for possible revocation or the addition of conditions after conducting a public hearing. k. This permit shall be valid for a period of 5 years subjet to two 5-year extensions by the Planning Commission without a hearing. C. DISCUSSION Adjacent zonin9 and land use North: MHP Mobile home park South: R-3 Single/multiple family East: I-L-P Vacant West: I-L-P RV storage yard Existin~ site characteristics the site consists of approximately 3.3 vacant acres within the SDG&E transmission line right-of-way. The property has over 400 feet of frontage on the westerly side of Industrial Blvd. just to the north of Palomar Street, and extends in a northwesterly direction to a point midway between Walnut and Trenton Avenues. An existing RV storage facility occupies the remainder of the SDG&E right-of-way between this site and the I-5 freeway. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 3 Proposed use The proposal involves paving and fencing the site for the storage of recreational vehicles and related items. The lot would be stripped for a total of 252 spaces (71-10'x20', 131-10'x30', and 50-10'x40'), with access to the site from Industrial Blvd. A small prefabricated office building along with customer parking would be located on the southerly portion of the property. The facility would be open 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday, and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Friday through Sunday. The application states that security shall be provided on-site 24 hours daily. The site would be enclosed with 8-foot high solid wood fencing (dog eared cedar is called out for the southerly property line), with a 10 foot maximum height limit for stored items. A 15 foot wide landscape planting buffer would be established along the entire Industrial Blvd. frontage, and five tree wells are shown on the inboard side of the southerly fence line in order to eventually soften the unrelieved 8 foot fencing exposed to Trenton Avenue. Items eligible for storage would be limited to recreational vehicles, automobiles, trucks, boats, trailers, and motorcycles. Two low pressure sodium vapor lamps would be used to illuminate the sight at night; one in the central portion of the property, and one in the vicinity of the office building. A 16 foot high, 32 sq. ft. freestanding identification sign would be placed in the landscape planter adjacent to Industrial Blvd. Review Process This application is the first to be processed under the new ordinance treatin§ RV storage yards as an "unclassified use" subject to location in any zone upon the approval of a conditional use permit. This ordinance requires each applicant to address several site development issues, and also requires the Commission to determine on a case-by-case basis if a particular facility represents a "permanent" or "interim" use. If a storage facility is classified as an interim use of land, it is subject to annual review and an initial five-year approval period with extensions subject to rehearing before the Commission. D. ANALYSIS We believe the location of the site, within the SDG&E right-of-way and adjacent to an existing RV storage facility, and within a transition area surrounded by light industrial, multiple family and mobile home park development and zoning patterns makes it suitable for the use. Although RV storage yards can have an imposing visual impact, if not properly screened, they are generally passive operations in terms of noise and traffic. Thus, with proper screening, this facility should coexist comfortably with the adjacent residential and light industrial uses. For these same reasons, we recommend the Commission consider this a long-term rather than an interim use of the land, and thus the facility would not be City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 4 subject to the review and rehearing requirements noted above. However, in order in insure that the long term land use remains compatible with the area, ~ 5-year limit with extensions authorized by the Planning Commission is proposed. The application has addressed all of the required issues (which are summarized above under "Proposed Use" with the exception of the type of paving proposed for the lot. A condition of approval has been recommended to require a surface conforming with the permanent pavement standards of the City. In regard to the proposed list of eligible storage items, this seems to be a rather typical combination of items stored in such facilities. The keys being both the height limit of l0 feet so as not to defeat the screening measures, and the provision of a substantial number of larger storage spaces to serve the need to accommodate the larger recreational vehicles ,hich cannot be conveniently stored on residential properties. In the present case, 52% of the spaces are lO'x30' and 20% of the spaces are lO'x40', while 28% of the spaces are dimensioned for an automobile at lO'x20'. A condition of approval has been recommended which would require all stored items to be in operating condition with no on"site repair activities allowed. The office structure should be relocated so as to provide at least a l0 ft. separation from the dwelling immediately to the south. Also, several of the parking spaces to the west of the office should be reserved and designated for temporary customer parking. These items, as well as a detailed landscaping and irrigation program for on-site areas and the parkway along Industrial Blvd., have been incorporated into the recommended conditions of approval. It is not totally clear from the plans as to what type of solid wood fencing is proposed along the northerly and easterly property lines. Also, some provision should be made for decorative fencing along that portion of the southerly property line exposed to the Trenton Avenue public right-of-way and along Industrial Blvd. A fence plan, including a decorative treatment (consistent with that required by Code for exterior si de yards) for the portion of the southerly property line exposed to Trenton Avenue and Industrial Blvd. is recommended for staff review and approval. The Fire Department has reviewed the plans and has indicated that an approved turn-around for fire apparatus will be required at the ~orthwesterly portion of the site, and an additional standpipe will be required in the central portion of their property. The Code also requires that two-way access drives be a minimum width of 24 feet rather than the 20 foot driveway indicated on the plans. These items can be addressed prior to the issuance of a development permit. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 5 One significant access issue has surfaced involving three lots under a single ownership on the west side of Trenton. The properties have been using a portion of the SDG&E property for parking and/or access for a number of years. The proposed site layout would virtually eliminate the present residential parking, therefore, an alternative solution must be ~roposed. A condition of approval has been recommended giving the Zoning Administrator final approval. However, a meeting has been scheduled with SDG&E, the proposed user of the site and the adjacent land owner to develop a solution prior to the public hearing. Accordingly, with the conditions noted above, we recommend approval of PCC-87-12 based on the following findings. 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. An RV storage facility at this location will provide a convenience to area residents requiring an off-site storage area for recreational vehicles. There appears to be a significant demand for RV storage areas as evidenced by the lack of vacancies in existing facilities. 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 property is located on the SDG&E right-of-way adjacent to an existing RV storage facility. With proper visual screening as has been ensured in this case, the facility will not have a detrimental impact on adjacent residential and light industrial areas. 3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the code for such use. Compliance with all applicable conditions and regulations will be required prior to the issuance of permits to develop the property. 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. Unclassified uses such as RV storage yards may be considered for location within any plan designation of zone upon the issuance of a conditional use permit. WPC 3253P L 4 R~ I negative declaration PROJECT NAME: Toy Storage PROJECT LOCATION: North of Palomar Street, west of Industrial Blvd., within the SDG&E transmission line corridor PROJECT APPLICANT: John W. Gardner and William Gretler, 1140 Walnut Avenue, Chula Vista, CA CASE NO: IS-87-17 DATE: October 10, 1986 A. Project Setting The project site involves approximately 3.3 acres of land presently within the SDG&E transmission line corridor located north of Palomar Street and west of Industrial Blvd. The property is presently vacant with one transmission line tower located on it. Adjacent land uses consist of a mobilehome park to the north, single family dwellings to the south, a recreational vehicle storage yard to the west and Industrial Blvd. to the east. B. Project Description The project consists of the paving of 3.3 acres of property for the storage of recreation vehicles, cars, trucks, and boats. A commercial coach will be provided at the southeast corner of the site as the office. C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans The proposed RV storage yard will require the approval of a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission and is compatible with the General Plan. D. ~dentification of Environmental Effects 1. Transportation The project will result in approximately 504 vehicle trips per day but no change in the current level of service (LOS "A") on Industrial Blvd. The City's Traffic Engineer indicates that as a standard development requirement the applicant will be required to dedicate 2 feet of street right-of-way along Industrial Blvd. No environmental mitigation measures will be required. 2. Aesthetics As a standard development requirement, all storage lot lighting shall be shielded from residential areas and public right-of-ways. The applicant proposes to install an 8-ft. high wood fence adjacent to residential areas on the north and south side of the project visually screen storage items. city of chula vista planning department CIIYOF environmental review section_CHUL~ VI~['A~,, 3. Drainage Standard engineering requirements will ensure that adequate drainage facilities are installed. No significant drainage impacts are anticipated. E. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. There are no significant natural or manmade resources located that will be affected by project implementation. 2. The proposed conditional use permit is conformance with the General Plan and will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. 3. No impacts are anticipated to interact and cause a cumulative effect on the environment. 4. The RV storage yard will not result in significant hazards to human beings. G. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista: Mando Liuag, Associate Planner Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer Duane Bazzel, Associate Planner Len Hansell, Building and Housing Department Carol Gove, Fire Marshal Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer Applicant's Agent: James Algert, Applicant's Engineer 2. Documents IS-85-3, RV Storage Walnut Avenue 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 Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010. ENVIRO~I~NTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR WPC 3252P EN 6 {Rev. 5/85) ',~.~f~.. city of chula vista planning department CI~OF environmental review section CHUba VISTA EN 6 (Rev. 12/82) CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interes~ in the application. List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No ,~ If yes, please indicate person(s) Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, ~ club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, district or other political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit." (NOTE: Attach additional pages as. necessary.) ~, ) p~- ~/~ ~ SignatUre cn~al~p~Fi~a-ht-/date ~ - WPC 0701P A-110 Print or type name of applicant City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 1 5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-86-7M - Consideration of tentative subdivision map for Weisser Subdivision, Chula Vista Tract 86-7, Victor Weisser A. BACKGROUND 1. The applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map known as Weisser Subdivision, Chula Vista Tract 86-7, in order to subdivide 3.8 acres of property located south of Naples Street between Fourth and Fifth Avenue in the R-S-7 zone into 18 single family residential lots. 2. An Initial Study, IS-86-55M, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on September 12, 1986. The Environmental Review Coordinator concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommended adoption of the Negative Declaration. 3. The ~ontgomery Planning Committee had no comments on the map when it was presented to them for information only on October l, 1986. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-86-55M. 2. 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 Weisser Subdivision, Chula Vista Tract 86-7, subject to the following conditions: a. The subdivider shall be required to pay Park Acquisition and Development in lieu fees prior to recordation of the final map. RCT fees will be required prior to issuance of building permits. b. Prior to action by Council, the school districts shall notify the City in writing that they have reached an equitable agreement with the subdivider regarding school facilities. c. The retaining wall along the northerly right-of-way of the cul-de-sac shall be constructed of split-faced block or equivalent and topped with a 5 ft. high capped fence and interspersed with 2 ft. wide pilasters. A wall of consistent design shall be carried westerly to the front setback line of Lot #2. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 2 d. A landscape and irrigation plan, including details on the design and extension of the wall noted above, shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Landscape Architect prior to the approval of a final map. The CC&R's shall provide for a homeowners association to maintain the landscaping, irrigation systems, and wall. A copy of the CC&R's shall be filed with the City making the City a party thereto prior to the recordation of the final map. e. All garages approximately perpendicular to the front property line shall maintain a setback of 22 ft. from the inside edge of the sidewalk. f. All driveways shall be PCC in accordance with City standards. g. A fencing plan for the rear of all lots shall be submitted prior to the issuance of building permits. Where applicable, the plan shall provide for maintenance access to down-slope portions of rear yards. h. A minimum of two fire hydrants shall be required: hydrant ~l to be located at the southwest corner of Naples Street and Weisser Way; hydrant #2 to be located on the south side of Weisser Way between lot nos. 11 and 12. i. The developer shall dedicate to the City the street shown on the Tentative Map within the subdivision boundary for public use. j. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of full street improvements in the street shown on the Tentative Map within the subdivision boundary. Said improvements shall include but not limited to: A.C. pavement, base, concrete monolithic curb, gutter and sidewalk, sewer and water utilities, drainage facilities, fire hydrants and sewer lights and signs. k. The developer shall dedicate to the City additional right-of-way along Naples Street to maintain a 42' half width of the street adjacent to the subdivision for public use. 1. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of street improvements along Naples Street adjacent to the subdivision. Said improvements shall include but not be limited to: A.C. pavement, base, concrete monolithic curb, gutter and sidewalk, sidewalk ramps, sewer and water utilities, drainage facilities, fire hydrants, street lights and signs. The developer shall also be responsible for constructing transitions to the existing improvements in Naples Street to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 3 m. All work within the public right-of-way shall be done in accordance with the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, the San Diego Area Regional Standard Drawings and the Design and Construction Standards of the City of Chula Vista. n. Lots shall be so graded as to drain to the street. Drainage shall not flow over slopes. o. Sewers serving 10 or less units shall have a minimum grade of 1%. p. An erosion and sedimentation control plan shall be prepared as part of the grading plans. q. The knuckle and cul-de-sac shall be designed and built in accordance with City standards. r. Access rights of Lot "A" to Fourth Avenue shall be relinquished on the Final Map. s. Parking shall be prohibited on the north side of the internal street. t. A 7.5 ft. street tree and maintenance easement shall be established along the street frontage of all lots. u. Lot #16 shall be developed with a two-story dwelling in conformance with the plot plan submitted by the subdivider. C. DISCUSSION Existing site characteristics The project site consists of 3.8 acres of land located south of Naples Street between Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue within the Montgomery Community of Chula Vista. There is an existing single family dwelling located on the northern portion of the property facing Naples Street. The site contains some trees along the northeasternmost corner of the property, with the balance containing groundcover of annual grasses. The site slopes from 65 feet above mean sea level in the western end of the site, to 85 feet mean sea level at the eastern end. Adjacent land uses consist of residential single family dwellings completely surrounding the property. To the east on the east side of Feurth Avenue are apartments and a mobilehome park. To the west on the west side of Fifth Avenue is the Sweetwater Union High School District office, along with some two family dwellings. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 4 Proposed development The tentative map proposes the creation of 18 single-family lots served by an L-shaped cul-de-sac off Naples Street. All of the lots will conform to the 6,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size required by the underlying R-S-7 zone, and will accommodate three- and four-bedroom, two-story dwellings with two-car garages. The cul-de-sac will be single-loaded with sidewalk and on-street parking on the south side only. A 4 ft. retaining wall with planting strip will separate the street from the properties to the north that front on Naples Street. We have recommended a condition of approval which would require the wall to be topped with a minimum 5 ft. high capped fence with pilasters and would extend the wall westerly to the front setback of Lot #2 in order to maintain a consistent appearance along the northerly boundary of the street. A homeowners association would maintain the wall, fencing and landscaping. Lot #16 on the map represents a difficult building site due to the necessity to maintain certain building setbacks. The subdivider has submitted a site plan showing how a two-story dwelling can be fitted to the parcel, and this has also been made a condition of approval. An additional condition has been recommended which would establish garage setbacks consistent with the County Code but measured from the inside edge of sidewalk to conform with City procedure. Also concrete driveways would be required, as well as access to rear yard areas with downslopes in order to allow maintenance of these areas. The subdivider will attempt to deed Parcel "A" to one or both of the abutting property owners to the north and south of the parcel once the final map is recorded. D. FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the tentative subdivision map for Weisser Subdivision, Chula Vista Tract 86-7, is found to be in conformance with the various elements of the City's General Plan based on the following: 1. The site is physically suitable for the residential development and the proposal conforms to all standards established by the City for such projects. 2. The design of the subdivision will not affect the existing improvements -- streets, sewers, etc. -- which have been designed to avoid any serious problems. 3. The project is in substantial conformance with the Chula Vista General Plan Elements as follows: City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 5 a. Land Use The General Plan designation is Medium Density Residential (4-12 dwelling units per acre). The project density of 4.7 dwelling units per acre is compatible with both the R-S-7 zone and the General Plan designation. b. Circulation - Full street improvements will be required in conjunction with the subdivision. The subdivider will be required to dedicate and improve additional right-of-way to maintain a 42 ft. half width for Naples Street. c. Housing - The project will provide additional single family home ownership opportunities, consistent with the area. d. Conservation - One local pair of breeding Red-shouldered Hawks have in the past occupied the site for breeding. An ornithological report states, however, that the project site represents only 2% of the normal breeding range of this species, and they are not considered threatened or endangered. e. Park and Recreation, Open Space - The developer is required to pay Park Acquisition and Development fees in lieu of dedicating and improving parkland. f. Seismic Safety - The site is not located adjacent to an identified or inferred geologic fault. g. Safety - The site is within the response time of both police and fire services. h. Noise - The resulting single family units will be required to meet U.B.C. standards in terms of acceptable interior noise levels. i. Scenic Highway - The site does not abut a scenic route or gateway. j. Bicycle Routes - Adjoining streets have not been designated as bicycle routes. k. Public Buildings No public buildings are planned for the property. 4. Pursuant to Section 66412.2 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Commission certifies that it has considered the effect of this approval on the housing needs of the region and has balanced those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City and the available fiscal and environmental resources. WPC 3169P/2659P D~.L REY HIGHSCHOOL '~~!1~,, ,., ~ - - NAPLES STREET I ' PCS 86-7M negative declaration PROJECT NAME: Weisser Subdivision PROJECT LOCATION: South of Naples Street between Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue PROJECT APPLICANT: Victor Weisser CASE NO: IS-86-55M DATE: September 12, 1986 A. Project Setting The project site consists of 3.8 acres of land located south of Naples Street between Fourth Avenue and Fifth Avenue within the Montgomery Community 'of Cnula Vista. There is an existing single family dwelling located on the northern portion of the property facing Naples Street. The site contains some trees along the northeasternmost corner of the property, with the balance containing groundcover of annual grasses. The site slopes from 65 feet above mean sea level in the western end of the site, to 85 feet mean sea level at the eastern end. Adjacent land uses consist of residential single family dwellings completely surrounding the property. To the east on the east side of Fourth Avenue are apartments and a mobilehome park. To the west on the west side of Fifth Avenue is the Sweetwater Union High School District office, along with some two family dwellings. B. Project Description The project consists of subdivision of the property and construction of 18 three and four bedroom detached homes. Tile structures will be accessed by an L-shaped cul-de-sac with a w. idth of 46 feet. The project will provide a total of 74 on-site parking spaces. C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans Zoning on the project site is RS-7, a residential single family zone with a density of 7.26 dwellings per acre. The General Plan designation is Medium Density Residential (4-12 dwellings per acre). The project density of 4.7 dwelli~lgs per acre is compatible with both the zone and general plan designation. D. Identification of Environmental Effects 1. Drainage Comments received from the public indicate that the project site constitutes a natural drain and was once a part of a stream which flowed through the area. city of chula vista planning department CI~'OF environmental review section CHUL~ -2- The project area is not identified as part of the Telegraph Canyon Creek Floodplain, and zoning regulations for the property indicate no floodplain regulations apply to the property. The site is, however, part of an urban storm drain system and is subject to inundation. Water flows onto the property from Fourth Avenue storm drains and leaves the property to join the Telegraph Canyon Creek system at the approximate intersection of Fifth Avenue and Naples Street. Engineering development regulations required as part of the grading permit process serve to mitigate potential environmental impacts from drainage on the property to a level below significance. 2. Biology Comments received from the public indicate that a family of hawks has been nesting on the project site, raising chicks in the trees adjacent to an open field, and using the field as a primary food source. An ornithological survey of the Naples Subdivision property was performed by RBR and Associates, Inc. to evaluate any significant harmful impacts that could occur to the nesting hawks resulting from development of the property. The resulting report concluded that one local pair of breeding Red-shouldered Hawks had occupied the site and used the property as a food source during nesting, but that nesting is not occurring at present, due to the fact that the breeding season is over. Buteo lineatus is not considered threatened or endangered, nor is it ~ ~y considered for such listing. It is also not considered a bird species of special concern by the California Department of Fish and Game. According to the report, although development of the site may cause the breeding pair to relocate for future breeding and nesting activities, relocation does not present a significant problem since the project site represents only 2 percent of the normal breeding range of the species. Further discussion is included in the report, attached and a part of the initial study. 3. Fire Protection The Fire Department has indicated that the proposed project will be required to provide the following: a. The fire flow of 1000 gpm at 20 psi residual for the project. b. A minimum of two fire hydrants, hydrant #1 to be located at the southwest corner of Naples Street and proposed "A" Street, and fire hydrant #2 to be located on "B" Street, between lots 11 and 12. c. The proposed roadway cul-de-sac shall have a turning radius sufficient to provide for fire apparatus turnaround. These are standard development regulations to ensure adequate maintenance of fire protection services within the area. 4. Schools The proposed project will contribute students to Lauderbach Elementary School, Chula Vista Junior High School and Chula Vista Senior High School. Each of these schools have current enrollment of students in excess of their current capacity. Payment of school fees as a standard development requirement will mitigate any potential adverse impacts from additional students to a level below significance. 5. Public Roads Development of 18 single-family homes with primary road access to Naples Street will result in the addition of 216 one-way auto trips per day to that street system. Comments from the public expressed concern that increased traffic levels from the proposed project will result in significant adverse impacts to the surrounding area. However, increases in traffic levels from the proposed project will not result in any degradation to the present level of service for Naples Street (currently at level of service "B"). In addition, provision of a fully improved public cul-de-sac accessing the 18 residential lots, and requirements made by the Engineering Department to widen Naples Street within the boundaries of the project, including construction of curb, gutters, sidewalks, and street lights serve to further mitigate any potential adverse impacts. E. Mitigation necessary to avoid significant effects 1. Provision of a storm drain system on site as per development regulations required of the Engineering Department ensure that potential adverse environmental impacts from inundation of the area are mitigated below a level of significance. 3. Standard development regulations enforced by the Fire Department during the development process ensures that no significant adverse impacts occur due to deterioration of fire protection services to the area. 4. Standard development regulations requiring payment of school fees set by the school district serve to ensure that no significant adverse impacts occur resulting from over enrollment of the schools serving the project area. 5. Provision of a public cul-de-sac access to the 18 residential lots proposed, and requirements for widening and improving Naples Street within the boundaries of the project will mitigate any adverse impacts from increased traffic below a level of significance. F. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. The proposed residential project, incorporating standard development requirements will not result in the degradation of the environment. 2. The project does not represent a significant percentage of the average breeding area of Red-shouldered Hawks found on the property. Therefore, loss of the habitat will not result in long-term adverse environmental impacts. 3. The proposed residential project is an in-fill development complying with existing zoning an~ general plans and occurring in a previously urbanized area. Therefore, it will not result in significant cumulative environmental impacts. 4. The project as designed will not result in significant traffic impacts that will adversely affect human beings. G. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista: Steve Griffin, Associate Planner Duane Bazzel, Associate Planner Julie Schilling, Assistant Planner Frank Herrera, Assistant Planner Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer William Wheeler, Building and Housing Department Carol Gove, Fire Marshal Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer Applicant's Agent: Associated Professional Engineering Corporation 2341 Fifth Avenue San Die§o, CA ~2101 2. Documents Chapter 19.70 of Title 19 (Zoning) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code Chula Vista General Plan -5- "An Ornithological Survey of the Naples Subdivision Property, Chula Vista, California," RBR and Associates, Inc., August 12, 1986 National Flood Insurance Progranl Flood Boundary and Floodway Map, San Diego County, California (Unincorporated Areas) Panel 2152 of 2375, June 15, 1984. 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 Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR W?C 3142P ~{~.. EN 6 (Rev. 5/85) ~ city of chula vista planning department C[~'OF environmental review section CHLIL~ VJ~FA, EN 6 (Rev. 12/82) WEISSER. W AY TWO STORY ~'~ ~---- --~ 5' AREA=6018. S.F. E X H I B I T Engineering Corporation (61e) 224-2465 LOT 16 OF WEISSER SUBDIVISION' CNULA VISTA TRACT NO. 86-7 DRAWN 5D DRAWING NO. DATE ,=/ '.?I-L-Z ,, · la L--I I I ~ __~ I I I I L Ii Ii ' !1 I ' A CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATE~NT IAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application. Victor Weisser List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Shizue Yamamoto 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No If yes, please indicate person{s) IPersonis defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association. I ~ club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate~ this and any other county, city and county, ~ity, municipality, district or other political subdivision, or any other group or comb~natj.on acting as a unit." (NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)~/~ ~h ~ ~"~ Signature of applicant/date WPC 0701P victor O. Weisser, Jr. A-1lO Print or type name of applicant City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 1 6. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance ZAV-87-7; request to convert an existing ~arage to a physical therapy room without construction of a replacement ~ara~e, 692 Second Avenue, within an R-1 residential zone - Walter and Marilyn Williams A. BACKGROUND 1. The applicants wish to convert an existing one-car garage located at the rear of the property to a physical therapy and hydro bath room for their 30-year-old brain injured son, who requires a high level of acute care. They are requesting a variance from the Zoning Ordinance Section 19.62.190 which requires that prior to issuance of a building permit for the conversion of an existing garage for living purposes, a new enclosed two-car garage shall be provided to replace the one converted. A two-car garage is required even when the existing structure undergoing conversion is a lean garage or carport. 2. The project is exempt from environmental review as a Class ll(b) exemption. B. RECOMMENDATION Based on findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a motion to deny the applicants' request and require construction of a replacement garage. C. DISCUSSION Adjacent zoning and land use. North R-1 Single-family dwelling South R-1 Single-family dwelling East R-1 Single-family dwelling West R-1 Single-family dwelling Existing site characteristics. The subject property is a lot of approximately 21,844 square feet, with a single-family dwelling located on the northwest corner of Second Avenue and "J" Street. The house is situated 103 feet from the property line abutting Second Avenue and 54 feet from "J" Street. A pool is located within the rear yard. A detached single-car garage is located in the northwest corner of the lot; the rear of the garage is at the rear property line. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 22, 1986 Page 2 Proposed request. The applicant is requesting a variance from Zoning Ordinance Section 19.62.190 in order to remodel the existing single-car garage into a therapy room without construction of a replacement garage. The proposal is to convert the 364 square foot garage to a room where the Williams' son can undergo physical therapy, and where the equipment used for this purpose can be stored. Mr. Williams has stated that his son, who is currently in a special care facility in Orange County, will reside in the house. D. ANALYSIS After reviewing the subject property, the existing house and detached garage and the substance of the applicants' request, staff is of the opinion that the findings for granting of the variance cannot be made and the variance should be denied. The central issue concerning the variance request is whether there is a physical hardship peculiar to the property which makes construction of a replacement garage infeasible. The applicant has stated that the floor plan of the existing house and the location of windows and doors make adding a room onto the house very difficult. In addition, the applicant has indicated that constructing a detached garage in the front portion of the lot is financially infeasible due to the considerable costs associated with the long-term care of their son, and the limited amount of funds for remodeling made available from partial settlement of a lawsuit. The house, situated 103 feet from Second Avenue and 54 feet from "J" Street, is completely screened from surrounding properties and from passing traffic by tall, fully grown hedges, trees and other mature landscaping. The existing garage is not utilized for parking; at present cars are parked on the lot adjacent to the north side of the driveway. Parking on site is not visible to neighbors or passersby. The hardship encountered by the applicant, however, is a personal and financial one and, in staff's opinion, cannot be considered grounds for granting of a variance. There still exists ample room in the front portion of the lot where a two-car garage meeting the standards of 19.62.170 could be located. Because this option is still physically available to the applicant, granting of a variance would not be appropriate at this time. WPC 3248P/O426P -- q- HALSEY S~ iiiiii Iiiiii I-- ~ MURRAY L -- __ KING r-'¥ -- - ~F ,' I~ I I '~J" 'BEET __~__ I ___ ____ ~ KEARNEY I ~ ~ I ~ I ~ I 54' 57' SCALE 1'= 20' CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT IAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application. ~lter L. & Narilyn~. ~illia~ List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. W~lter L, & N~ri!,ynM, $/i!1i~n~ 2~ If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than I0% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. Not a~plicab!e 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. Not applicable 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No I If yes, please indicate person(s) IPerson is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, ~ club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, district or other political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit." (NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)-- ~'~'~.-~-~-~-~(~'~'- Signature of applicant/date WPC 0701P Walter L. Williams A-110 ~rint or type name of applicant