HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1987/04/08 AGENDA
City Planning Commission
Chula Vista, California
Wednesday, April 8, 1987 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chamber
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of March 25, 1987
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-87-16 Consideration of an appeal of the City Zoning
Administrator decision disapproving a conceptual site
plan for the southwest corner of Broadway and Flower -
Appel Development
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-87-35M: Request to construct
a recreational vehicle storage lot located at 1450 Jayken
Way - Gardner/Gretler Construction
3. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance ZAV-87-21M: Request to allow the reoccupation
of a nonconforming house and a reduction in the rear yard
setback at 606 Crested Butte - Carlos Lavenant
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
COMMISSION COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT AT to the Study Session Meeting of April 15, 1987 at 5:00 p.m.
in Conference Rooms 2 & 3
TO: City Planning Commission
FROM: George Krempl, Director of Planning
SUBJECT: Staff Report on Agenda Items for Planning Commission Meeting of
April 8, 1987
1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-87-16: Consideration of an appeal of the City
Zoning Administrator decision disapproving ~
conceptual site plan for the southwest corner oF
Broadway and Flower - Appel Development
A. BACKGROUND
This item is an appeal by Appel Development from a decision of the City
Zoning Administrator disapproving a conceptual site plan for a 1.38 acre
retail commercial center at the southwest corner of Broadway and Flower
Street in the C-T zone. The plan has been submitted for the sole purpose
of resolving the issue of whether or not development can proceed on the
1.38 acres fronting on Broadway without regard to the adjoining 2.55 acres
to the west.
The Zoning Administrator's decision was rendered under the authority and
principles established by the Site Plan and Architectural Approval
provisions of the Municipal Code (Section 19.14.420 et seQ.). The plan is
not subject to Design Review Committee approval.
An Initial Study, IS-87-44, of possible environmental impacts of the
project was conducted on March 27, 1987. The Environmental Review
coordinator concluded 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-87-44.
2. Adopt a motion to uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator and
deny the appeal.
C. DISCUSSION
The principles for site plan and architectural approval enumerated in
Section 19.14.470 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code provide, in part, that
the siting of other structures in the immediate neighborhood shall be
considered in the siting of any structure on the property; that ingress,
egress and internal traffic circulation shall be so designed as to promote
convenience and safety; and that these factors shall be related to the
setting or established character of the neighborhood or surrounding area.
It is the determination of the Zoning Administrator that these principles,
when coupled with the existing zoning pattern in the area, require
coordination in site planning between the subject site and the adjoining
property.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of April 8, 1987 Page 2
The site plan in question proposes a single structure arranged from north
to south along the entire length of the site and thus fails to provide
vehicular and visual access to Broadway for the C-T zoned acreage located
directly to the west. While the property to the west has street frontage
on Flower and Jefferson Streets, the proposed building location would
preclude access and exposure to Broadway, the primary commercial
thoroughfare. Therefore, it was the opinion of the Zoning Administrator,
that with the adjacent building design, the abutting 2.55 acres had little
if any potential to serve its intended commercial purpose as stated in
Section 19.40.010 of the Municipal Code:
"The purpose of the C-T zone is to provide for areas in
appropriate locations adjacent to thoroughfares where activities
dependent upon or catering to thoroughfare traffic may be
established, maintained and protected. The regulations of this
district are designed to encourage centers for retail
commercial, entertainment, automotive and other appropriate
highway-related activities. C-T zones are to be established in
zones of one acre or larger, and shall be located only in the
immediate vicinity of thoroughfares, or the service drives
thereof."
As stated in part previously, if commercial development of this adjoining
area did subsequently occur, vehicular access would be required from
Flower Street and/or Jefferson Avenue, which are local streets serving
residential properties and a public elementary school, and thus are not
intended nor designed to accommodate commercial traffic. In consideration
of these resulting adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of adjacent
areas, the Zoning Administrator has been unable to find that the
conceptual site plan meets the principles for site plan approval and
therefore disapproved the plan as submitted.
D. ANALYSIS
The applicant's position is that the adjoining property is not suitable
for commercial development and therefore access from Broadway is
unnecessa[v (see attached letter). They hope to develop the 2.55 acres
with a multiple family project, and have submitted an application to amend
the General Plan and rezone the site from Thoroughfare Commercial (C-T) to
High Density Residential (R-3) to be considered by the Planning Commission
on June 24, 1987. The plan for the Broadway frontage, however, will in
essence render the adjoining acreage unsuitable for thoroughfare
commercial use despite any position the Commission or Council may take
with regard to the General Plan amendment/rezoning.
In support of their position, the applicant also cites an earlier proposal
for multiple family development on the 2.55 acres which was supported by
staff and the Commission. The proposal was submitted in 1985 under the
conditional use permit process which was then available for the
establishment of multiple family developments in the C-T zone provided the
project was located at least 200 ft. back from the street frontage.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of April 8, 1987 Page 3
Both the staff and Commission (6-0) found the earlier proposal suitable
for the site and recommended approval. The Council later denied the
request, however, and then amended the Code so that the conditional use
pemit process could no longer be used for this purpose. The Council
indicated concern with additional residential density in the area and the
loss of a relatively large tract of commercial acreage. They al so
believed that any proposal to use commercial property for residential uses
should be evaluated under the broader context of the General Plan and
rezoning process rather than by way of a conditional use permit.
E. CONCLUSION
For the reasons noted in Section C above, we recommend that the Commission
uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator and deny the appeal.
Based upon the present zoning pattern, the site in question should provide
access to Broadway for the adjoining commercial property.
The appropriate manner in which to address the land use issues advanced by
the applicant are through the legislative process by way of a General Plan
amendment and rezoning rather than by way of a site plan. The applicant's
request for a General Plan amendment and rezoning is scheduled for
consideration by the Commission in June and by the Council shortly
thereafter.
WPC 3741 P
CHULA VISTA STF --ET
'--~-~ ;~ -- ~Z --- ~-- :ASSELMAN STREET
~~ PCM-87-16
APPEL
2oo' 4oo~ DEVELOPMENT CORP.
negative declaration:
PROJECT NAME: Broadway/Flower Shopping Center
PROJECT LOCATION: Southwest Corner of Broadway and Flower Street
PROJECT APPLICANT: Appel Development Corp.
CASE NO: IS-87-44 DATE: March 27, 1987
A. Project Setting
The project is located within the urbanized area of Chula Vista at the
southwest corner of Broadway and Flower Street. The project site was the
operation of various automobile sales and mobile home related sales.
The site, like many areas of Chula Vista, is likely to contain expansive
soils, this is a condition that can be treated through remedial grading.
Because the site and surrounding area have been previously urbanized,
there are no sensitive natural nor cultural resources present. All urban
infrastructure systems are present to serve the project.
B. Project Description
The project involves the construction of a one story retail commercial
building with 17,080 sq. ft. of floor area. Eighty-eight parking spaces
are provided on the Broadway side and to the rear of the structure, access
would be from both Flower Street and Broadway. The parking would be
screened with landscaping. Precise land uses are not know at this time.
C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans
The proposed project is in 'conformance with both the zoning of the
property (C-T} and the General Plan.
D. Identification of Environmental Effects
The only potentially significant environmental impact which may result
from this project is the probable presence of expansive soils. This
impact can and will be mitigated through remedial grading of the property.
E. Findings of Insignificant Impact
1. The project site is currently urbanized and no sensitive resources
will be impacted. All infrastructure components are available to
serve the project.
city of chula vista planning department
environmental review section (~HUI.~ Vl~l'Af.
2. The project conforms to the General Plan and zoning, and therefore,
will not achieve any short-term goals to the disadvantage of
long-term goals.
3. Because of the scale of project and the urbanized nature of the
project area there will be no significant cumulative impact.
4. Standard development regulations and performance standards will
preclude any adverse impact on human beings.
F. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista: Mando Liuag, Associate Planner
Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer
Duane Bazzel, Associate Planner
William Wheeler, Building and Housing
Department
Carol Gore, Fire Marshal
Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer
Steve Griffin,'Associate Planner
2. Documents
Chula Vista General Plan
Chula Vista Municipal Code
IS-78-5
IS-78-17
IS-78-69
IS-79-16,
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~ENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
WPC 3740P
EN 6 (Rev. 5/85)
city of chula vista planning department CI~OF
environmental review section CHUIA VIS-i'A,
Appel Development
CORPORATION
March 12, 1987
Mr. George Krempl
Director of Planning/Zoning Administrative
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, CA 92010
RE: APPEAL OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION OF
MARCH 10, 1987
Dear Mr. Krempl:
This letter shall constitute our written Notice of
Appeal to the Zoning Administrator's decision of
March 10, 1987, relating to the conceptual Site Plan
for the 1.38 site at the southwest corner of Broadway
and Flower Street ("the Site").
The decision apparently relies on the stated desire
to require coordination in site planning "between the
subject site and the adjoining acreage." This desire
is further explained in the decision by noting that
the C-T zoned acreage to the west must have access
through the Site in order to serve its "intended
commercial purpose." We respectfully suggest that
the authority provided to the Zoning Administrator by
Chapter 19.14 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, to
promote the orderly and harmonious development of the
City, will be better served by approving the Site
Plan as submitted.
The Site Plan is consistent with the requirements of
the zone, the conditionally approved Tentative Map
and the recommendations of the Planning Department
during hearings for the Multiple Residential Permit
Application considered for the western portion of the
property last year. As noted by the Planning
Department, the western portion is not an appropriate
location for commercial use due to its proximity to
the school, the adjoining residences and the lack of
access to a thoroughfare. The proposed Site Plan
does not alter the -existing constraints on the
property's use.
The Chula Vista Muncipal Code Site Plan requirements
are intended to address development, through design
and architectural review, of individual sites. A
review of Section 19.14.470 reveals an intent to
construct well designed structures harmonious to the
2254 San Diego Avenue, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92110-2925 (619) 291-7647
established character of the surrounding area. The
decision by the zoning Administrator attempts to use
the Site Plan requirement as a mechanism to rectify
past planning mistakes on property adjoining the site
under consideration and to insure that an
inappropriately planned parcel remain vacant and
unusable. In addition, the adverse impact of
providing access through the Site would be
significant and contrary to the planning principles
stated above.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the
issues raised in the Notice of March 10, 1987. We
look forward to resolving the difference of opinion
at the Planning Commi'ssion hearing of April 8, 1987.
Sincerely,
Project Manager ~
RB/ci
cc: Charles Gill
Tony Ambrose
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of April 8, 1987 Page I
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-87-35M: Request to establish
a recreational vehicle storage yard on leased property
within the San Diego Gas and Electric right-of-was at
1450 Jayken Way - John Gardner and William Gretler
The applicant for this project has requested that the hearing to consider this
request be continued to the meeting of April 22, 1987, to allow time to resolve
outstanding planning and engineering issues associated with the project. Staff
is in concurrence with continuance of the hearing.
Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of April 8, 1987 Page 1
3. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance ZAV 87-21M; request for a variance from
zoning regulations to allow the reoccupation of d
nonconforming house an~ a reduction ~n ~he required
rear yard setback from 15 feet to 5 feet from thc
property line ~or a auto sales o~tice at ~ub Crested
Butte - Carlos Lavenant
A. BACKGROUND
The applicant proposes to purchase the subject property located at 606
Crested Butte for the purpose of residing within an existing house located
on the western half of the lot while operating a used car lot over the
eastern portion of the property. The underlying zone for the site is C-36
general commercial, which permits the operation of a used car lot but
prohibits single family residential uses. Nonconforming use regulations
specify that once a legal nonconforming use, in this case the existing
residence, is vacant for a period of 12 months or longer, new uses must
comply with the current zoning regulations. The house at this site has
been vacant for approximately 3 years.
The applicant, to reoccupy the house as a single family residence, must
request a variance from nonconforming use regulations section 6865. In
addition to this, since the applicant proposes to construct an auto sales
office on the property within the 15 foot rear yard setback, a variance
from setback regulations is also required to place the sales office 5 feet
from the rear property line.
The Montgomery Planning Committee, at their meeting of April l, 1987,
voted to recommend approval of the variance subject to revisions of
conditions of approval recommended by staff. Those revisions have been
incorporated into the proposed conditions of approval included in this
report.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Based on findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a
motion to approve the request, ZAV 87-21M, to resume a nonconforming
residential use within a commercial zone and reduce the required rear
yard setback from 15 feet to 5 feet for construction of an auto sales
office, subject to the following conditions:
a. A landscape and irrigation plan of the auto sales lot shall be
submitted for review and approval by the City Landscape
Architect, and landscaping installed per the approved plans
prior to commencement of the auto sales use. Landscaping shall
be maintained in accordance with the City Landscape Manual.
Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of April 8, 1987 Page 2
b. Prior to occupancy of the existing residence, the applicant
shall request a compliance survey of the structure by the
Department of Building and Housing to insure that the residence
remains as a habitable structure. Deficiencies noted within the
structure which in the opinion of the Building and Housing
Department threaten the habitability of the residence shall be
corrected prior to occupancy.
c. The proposed garage addition to the residence shall be completed
prior to occupancy of the property.
d. Elevations of the proposed 6 foot block wall separating the
residence from the auto sales lot shall and a paving plan for
the auto sales lot be submitted for review and approval by the
Planning Department. Plans approved must be implemented prior
to use of the property as an auto sales lot.
e. Failure to comply with all conditions of the variance shall be
grounds for review by the Planning Commission and possible
revocation.
The following items are not conditions of approval but are reguired under
the authority of the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code:
1. The proposed driveway must comply with the City of Chula Vista
Construction Standard Number one. In addition, a 24 foot minimum
width driveway is reguired for two way traffic.
2. A construction permit will be required for any work performed in the
street right-of-way.
3. Windows within 10 feet of the property line must be protected.
4. Walls within 20 feet of the property line must be 1 hour construction
firewalls.
5. The proposed sales office and rest room must comply with current
handicap regulations.
6. One handicap parking space must be proved on-site for the auto sales
use.
C. DISCUSSION
Adjacent zoning and land use
North C-36 veterinary hospital
South R-S-7 single family residences
East C-36 commercial and retail offices
West R-S-7 single family residences
Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of April 8, 1987 Page 3
Existing site characteristics
The project site is a 16,000 square foot rectangular lot of a relatively
shallow depth of 80 feet. An existing residence and a detached garage
currently occupy the site. A slope bank exists along the front of the
property adjacent to the right-of-way, which increases from 1 foot to 3
feet from the eastern corner of the front of the lot to the west.
Portions of the slope are contained within a retaining wall whose maximum
height is 3 feet.
Proposed use
The proposed project would include demolition of the detached garage and
construction of an auto sales lot accommodating approximately 19
vehicles. A replacement garage is proposed to be constructed as an
attached addition to the residence. A 224 square foot sales office would
be placed in the northeast corner of the lot 5 feet from the rear and side
property line. The auto sales lot located on the easterly half of the lot
would be separated from the residence by a 6 foot block wall to be located
five feet from the residence structure.
D. ANALYSIS
The variance request to reoccupy the residence and construct an auto sales
office within the rear yard was originally filed as a request for approval
by the Zoning Administrator. However, a written protest against the
project was received prior to consideration by the Zoning Administrator
along with a petition asking for denial of the variance signed by 30
residents of Crested Butte, Broadway and Jefferson Avenue. The principal
objection made by the residents in the vicinity of the project was to the
establishment of the used car lot on the property. Photos were submitted
of auto sales lots along Broadway in the general vicinity of the project
which the residents consider to be aesthetically unpleasing and marginally
viable commercial uses. The written protest states that auto sales lots
must be located along busy thoroughfares to be economically viable;
however, the proposed project is 75' to 100 feet away from Broadway and
would be located on a residential street.
While staff agrees that this may be an unwise business location for a used
car lot, the variance request does not include the question of whether a
car lot should be allowed at this location since it is already a permitted
use in a C-36 zone. Should the variance be denied, a car lot could still
occur as long as the existing house is not reoccupied as a residence and
the sales office is in compliance with the required 15 foot rear yard
setback.
With respect to reoccupation of the residence on the property, and
encroachment into the rear yard setback, staff is of the opinion that
findings for approval of the variance request can be made and recommend
approval of the variance. The house is adjacent to a single family
residential neighborhood and would serve as a buffer to a certain extent
between the commercial and residential uses permitted along that zone
boundary.
Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of April 8, 1987 Page 4
The house is in significant disrepair; however, as a result of its vacant
status for approximately three years, and may require extensive work to
make it a habitable structure. For this reason, staff is recommending
that a compliance survey be completed by the Building and Housing
Department, and that the applicant make any required repairs to insure
that the house is structurally sound prior to occupancy. This
recommendation is contained in Condition B.
Since the project proposes demolition of the existing detached garage and
relocation of on-site parking to an attached garage addition, staff is
also recommending in Condition C that a time limit of one year be placed
on completion of that addition so that adequate provision for on-site
parking will not be interrupted for a protracted length of time.
The auto sales lot is subject to Planning Department review for design
criteria as a new commercial use within Montgomery subject to the Design
Review process. In this respect, Conditions A and D, which require
departmental review of landscaping and fencing reflect that requirement.
Finally, the request to encroach into the rear yard setback of the lot can
be accommodated in staff's opinion since the shallow depth of the lot
makes placement of the sales office in conjunction with adequate internal
traffic circulation within the car lot difficult to design. The property
adjacent to the rear of the subject property contains a veterinary
hospital, and potentially conflicting residential uses, which are located
south and west of the sales office, would be separated from the office by
over 100 feet. Encroachment into the rear yard setback to construct the
sales office allows for adequate circulation to occur without conflicting
with uses occurring on adjacent properties.
E. FINDINGS
1. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act
of the owner exists.
The property is shallow in depth so that design of an adequate
internal circulation system for the proposed car lot is not possible
without encroachment into the rear yard setback for placement of the
auto sales lot.
2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment
of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same
zoning district and in the same vicinity, and that a variance, if granted,
would not constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his
neighbors.
The existing house was constructed legally under previous residential
zoning and was all owed to continue as a legal nonconforming use under
the present C-36 commercial zone. Continuation of the residential
use as a legal nonconforming use would be in keeping with the
prevailing residential uses adjacent to the subject property.
Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of April 8, 1987 Page 5
3. That the authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial
detriment to adjacent property, and will not materially impair the purposes of
zoning ordinance Chapter 19.70 or the public interest.
Authorization of the variance request to reoccupy a nonconforming
residential use and reduce the required rear yard setback for
construction of a sales office, will serve to buffer neighboring
residential uses from commercial uses by continuing residential uses
contiguous with the boundary between the commercial and residential
zones. Placement of the sales office five feet from the rear
property line will serve to provide adequate internal circulation
from the car lot while affording maximum separation between the sales
office building and any conflicting residential land uses.
4. That the authorizing of such variance will not adversely affect the
general plan of the city or the adopted plan of any governmental agency.
The variance request as proposed will not adversely affect the Chula
Vista General Plan.
WPC 3719P/2652P
"'Ca'I°'S- La~enant ] ZAV;'87'2 :I,'M
]'l LOCATOR
~.606 CRESTED BUTTE
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.
CARLOS LAVENANT ( BUYER )
2545 PCIFIC AVE.
LONG BEACH Ca. 90806
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
BETTY MAINWARING ROSALIE BOWERS
716 G. STREET 633 E. NAPLES
CHULA VISTA Ca. 92011 CHULA VISTA Ca. 9021i
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)
IPerson is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, )
soc--6~-F~T 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 ~pplicant/date
WPC 0701P CARLOS LAVENANT
A-110 Print or type name of applicant