HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1987/03/11 AGENDA
City Planning Commission
Chula Vista, California
Wednesday, March 11, 1987 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of February 11, 1987
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. Conditional Use Permit PCC-86-34M/P79-013: Consideration of action
to conditionally revoke major use permits for operation
of an auto dismantling firm at 3513 and 3527 Main Street
John and Carole Marquez (Continued)
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-87-31: Request to construct
a self-service gasoline island at the 7-Eleven Food
Store located at the southwest corner of Otay Valley
Road and Melrose Avenue - Southland Corporation
3. Workshop: Town Centre II, Chula Vista Shopping Center Expansion
and Fifth Avenue closure and the closure of a portion
of Fig Avenue
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
COMMISSION COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT AT to the Study Session Meeting of March 18, 1987 at 5:00 p.m.
in Conference Rooms 2 & 3
To: City Planning Commission
From: George Krempl, Planning Director~kO
Subject: Staff Report on Agenda Items for Planning Commission Meeting of
March ll, 1987
1. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-86-34M/P79-O13; consideration
of action to conditionally revoke major use permits for
operation of an auto dismantling firm at 3513 and 351/
Main Street - John and Carol Marquez
A. BACKGROUND
In November of 1986 the Planning Department initiated proceedings to
conditionally revoke the major use permits granted for J and C Auto
Wreckers, located at 3513 and 3517 Main Street, for failure to fulfill the
conditions of the permit. The following conditions had been violated or
unful filled:
Install all landscaping as shown on the approved landscape plan
including the watering system.
All landscaping shall be adequately watered and well maintained at
all times.
No dismantling or open storage shall be allowed within 400 feet of
the front property line.
At the hearing of January 14, 1987, the Commission voted to continue the
hearing to the meeting of February ll, 1978, in order to have five of the
seven Commissioners present to vote on the issue, should the Commission
wish to override the recommendation of the Montgomery Planning Committee
which voted to revoke the permit on January 7, 1987. The item was again
continued at the meeting of February ll, 1987, at the request of staff.
The request for continuance came in order to give the owners of the
property sufficient time to install landscaping according to the plan
submitted to the City Landscape Architect.
The owners of the property have been able to demonstrate that they have
ceased to use the front portion of the property for open storage, and have
installed the required landscaping according to a landscape plan approved
by the City Landscape Architect. Thus, the prior violations of the
conditions of the permit have been corrected and it is recommended that
this item be filed.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion to file this item.
WPC 3647P
MAIN sTREET -- ~r'~ ~
&~CURZA BR I TTON ' ST.
A-1-10)
IPCC 86-34M
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of March ll, 1987 Page 1
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-87-31; request to construct
a self-service gasoline island at the 7-Eleven Storu
located at the southwest corner of Otay Valley Road
and Melrose Avenue - Southland Corporation
A. BACKGROUND
This item involves a proposal to construct a single self-service gasoline
island with four pumps covered by a 24 ft. x 36 ft. canopy at the existinq
7-Eleven Store located at the southwest corner of Otay Valley Road and
Melrose Avenue in the C-N-P zone. By definition, this is considered a
"service station" and thus subject to the approval of a conditional use
permit.
An Initial Study, IS-87-39, of possible adverse environmental impacts of
the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on
February 27, 1987. 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-87-39.
2. Based on findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a
motion to approve the request, PCC-87-39, to construct a self-service
pump island at the southwest corner of Otay Valley Road and Melrose
Avenue subject to the following conditions:
a. Development of the site shall comply with the plans approved or
conditionally approved by the Design Review Committee.
b. The applicant shall receive approval of an adjustment plat for
the proposed lot line adjustment prior to the issuance of any
further City permits for the project.
C. DISCUSSION
Adjacent zoning and land use
North R-3-P-12 Multiple family
South R-3-G Single family attached
East C-N-P Commercial
West C-N-P Vacant
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of March ll, 1987 Page 2
Existing site characteristics
This corner site has 90 ft. of frontage on Otay Valley Road and 150 feet
of frontage on Melrose Avenue. The 2,500 sq. ft. 7-Eleven structure is
located on the rear of the site abutting the southerly and westerly
property lines. The parking area contains a total of 12 spaces--eight
fronting the building and an additional four spaces to the north on the
opposite side of the circulation drive.
Proposed use
The proposal is to add a self-service gas island and 24 ft. x 36 ft.
freestanding canopy on the northerly portion of the site, in the area
currently occupied by the four parking spaces noted above. The plan calls
for expanding the site by 40 ft. to the west in order to accommodate the
additional circulation needs and a revised parking layout. The proposed
site plan shows a total of 14 parking spaces--12 fronting the building and
two parallel spaces along the westerly property line. The landscape
buffer along Otay Valley Road is extended to the west and a new landscaped
area is proposed at the southwest corner of the expanded site.
D. ANALYSIS
Section 19.58.280 of the Municipal Code provides that service stations
shall clearly be required by public convenience, that they shall not cause
traffic hazards or undue congestion, and that they shall not result in a
nuisance to residences or other surrounding uses.
The requirement to find a clear need based upon public convenience is
designed to provide some control over the tendency of conventional service
stations to sprout on every available commercial corner. This is a less
important consideration when, as in the present case, gas is simply one of
the items offered by a convenience store. Nevertheless, there are no
other gas facilities within the immediate area, and the closest service
station is on the east side of 1-805 approximately 1/4 mile from the
site. Thus the proposal would appear to satisfy the public convenience
requirement.
In terms of traffic hazards and congestion, the Traffic Engineer estimates
that the proposal will generate 750 one-way trips per day. The 40 ft.
expansion of the site to the west should provide the necessary area to
accommodate the circulation and stacking needs created by this level of
activity. The landscape planter along Melrose Avenue has also been
modified somewhat to facilitate circulation. With no expectation of
traffic congestion and no on-site repair activities, the proposal should
have no adverse impact on adjacent residents or uses.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of March ll, 1987 Page 3
The design of the site would allow for the incorporation of this property
into any future commercial expansion to the west. If that were to occur,
the two parallel parking spaces on the westerly property line would have
to make way for an extended circulation drive and parking area. Since the
use requires only 13 rather than the 14 parking spaces as shown, however,
only one of the two spaces would have to be replaced to meet Code and this
could be accommodated by adjusting the width of the planters on either end
of the row of 12 spaces fronting the building. This issue along with
other details of the site plan and design of the proposal are subject to
the approval of the Design Review Committee.
For the reasons noted above, we believe it is appropriate to recommend
approval of the proposal based upon 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 conmnunity.
The self-service gas facility will provide a convenience to motorists
in the vicinity of Otay Valley Road and Melrose Avenue. There are no
other gas facilities within 1/4 mile of the site.
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 site will be expanded to accommodate the use without creating
traffic hazards or congestion. The pump island is located away from
residential areas to the south and separated therefrom by the
existing convenience store structure.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and
conditions specified in the code for such use.
The proposal complies with all conditions specified in the Zoning
Ordinance for service stations. Compliance with all applicable
Codes, regulations and conditions will be required prior to the
issuance of development permits for the project.
4, That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely
affect the general plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government
agency.
The General Plan recognizes the need for service station facilities
at appropriate locations convenient to the motoring public. The
proposal in question is such a facility.
WPC 3642P/2652P
negative declaration
PROJECT NAME: ?-ll Self Service Gas Station
PROJECT LOCATION: 4300 Otay Valley Road
PROJECT APPLICANT: The Southland Corporation
77?7 Alvarado Road, Suite 417
La Mesa, CA 92041
CASE NO: IS-87-39 DATE: February 27, 1987
A. Project Setting
The project site is located within an existing convenience market parking
lot which' would be expanded to the west. The entire site is highly
disturbed with no native vegetation present nor any cultural resources.
There are also no substandard material or man-made hazards on or near the
project site.
B. Project Description
The project consists of the installation of a new 4-dual self service
gasoline dispenser island with a 24'x26' canopy. The parking/circulation
area would be expanded by 40' to the west adding new parking and
landscaping. The Otay Valley Road curb cut would be relocated and the
landscaping configuration modified.
C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans
The project conforms to the C-N-P zoning and the General Plan.
D. Identification of Environmental, Effects
The Initial Study for this project concluded that there would be no
potential for significant 'environmental impacts.
E. Findings of Insignificant Impact
1. The project site is void of any natural or man-made resources. There
are no hazards in the vicinity of the project.
2. There are no projects which could, together with this project, result
in a cumulatively significant impact.
3. The project conforms to the long-term goals of the City of Chula
Vista and will therefore not achieve any short-term goals to the
disadvantage of long-term goals.
4. The project will not result in any noise, emissions or other hazards
which could adversely impact human beings.
city of chula vista planning department CI~t'OF
environmental review section CHUL~
G. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista: Mando Liuag, Associate Planner Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer
Len Hansell, Building and Housing Department
Carol Gore, Fire Marshal
Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer
Applicant's Agent: Stephen R. Ray & Associates
4215 Spring Street, Suite 210
La Mesa, CA 92041
2. Documents
EIR-78-7
EIR-78-10
EIR-78-12
IS-78-50
IS-78-51
IS-79-16
IS-81-49
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 3648P ~~ ~ ' ENVIRONMENTAL ~/VIEW COORDINATOR
EN 6 (Rev. 5/85) ,,~.~{f~,
city of chula vista planning department ¢l~oF
environmental review section CHU[./~ VJ~'A,
o~'~¥
PROPOSED AREA'
DR.
. | =i~ ts.[ , I . 2- ,.~,I ,-,I ! .. :. ~: ~
~/ :,--.:: ,,:,:: .... : :: · -:,, ,:; ~::i ;i:, iii
:~]~ ~' ~, ~' :,~i,-~-,: - , ~,~;,,~!~;~~
-~.LVtOO'SSV 9 AVI:I '1:1 N::IHd3.L=i ~! seJo:l.S pood UBA3'13-Z.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
IAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS I
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
I
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.
THE SOUTHLAND CORPORATION DBA 7-ELEVEN FOOD STORES
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
THE SOUTHLAND CORPORATION DBA 7-ELEVEN FOOD STORES
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.
JOHN THOMPSON
JERE THOMPSON
JOE THOMPSON
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 X If yes, please indicate person(s)
IPerson is defined as: "Any indiv!dual, firm, c. opartnership, joint ventu.re, ass°c!.ati.°n, )
~ club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, tru.st., rec. e. lv. er.,.syn~c.a.~e,
this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, OlS~rlc~ or other
I political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a un t.
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)/~.- ~ ~- ~----~~"~-~'- '. '..' -f~-f~~'~'
WPC 0701P STEPHEN R. RAY
A-110 /~'rint or type name of applicant
March 6, 1987
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
VIA: George Krempl, Director of Planning ~
FROM: Paul Desrochers, Community Development Directo~-~
SUBJECT: Chula Vista Shopping Center Expansion Town Centre II
Redevelopment Project
On February 25, the Planning Commission and City Council discussed the
expansion of the Chula Vista Shopping Center. From this meeting it was
suggested that the Planning Commission hold a workshop on this date, March 11,
relative to the proposal of Homart so as to discuss ideas expressed by the
Council, the Commission and the community. The purpose of this memo is to
inform commissioners of the proposal as submitted by Homart and of the
relevant information that we as staff have gathered to date.
DISCUSSION:
The Homart Development Company, a subsidiary of Sears Roebuck & Co. of
Chicago, proposes to redevelop the Chula Vista Shopping Center. They will
commit to expend +$36 million along with a City contribution of approximately
$6 million so as to provide for a 144,000 square feet of additional tenant
space. The projected sales increase is estimated at $60 to $70 million
annually. At present the Center is doing in the low $90 million a year and
sales have been not keeping up with inflation and have been on a decline since
the opening of the Plaza Bonita Shopping Center.
The Homart proposal is based on the closure of Fifth Avenue. According to the
EIR that was submitted and certified by the Planning Commission, mitigation
measures will be provided so as to facilitate the traffic in the vicinity of
the Center if the street is closed. In addition, a ring road within the
parking lot of the Center will be provided so as to lessen congestion on
peripheral streets. Homart's reasons for not wishing to tunnel or bridge
Fifth Avenue were discussed in the EIR.
The Redevelopment Agency and the City Council will be asked by Homart to enter
into a Disposition and Development Agreement, financing agreements and to
close the street. The public hearing to consider the street closure is set
for next Tuesday, March 17. The Council has asked that they receive an
independent analysis of two major points relative to Homart's proposal. These
two points are sales tax projections and parking lot configuration. The firm
of Gruen Gruen + Associates, economic consultants to the City for many years,
has been retained to provide their evaluation of sales projections. In
addition, Mr. Richard Roti of International Parking Design, Inc., L.A, has
been asked to review the physical layout of the parking lot. Their report is
not available for inclusion with this memorandum but will be provided at the
workshop.
Chula Vista Shopping ~
Center Expansion -2- March 6, 1987
A Disposition and Development Agreement with certain stipulations will be
prepared for execution between Homart and the Agency, if the street is closed
and Homart proceeds. The Agency will want security for its share of the cost
to expand the Center by asking Homart to guarantee that the project will be
built as stated. In addition, the newly generated sales tax revenue to the
City should be just that, new and not a relocation of other stores within the
City to the new Center. The agreement will also stipulate the standard of
quality to be adhered to and provide for an additional fourth department store
to the Center.
It is all conjecture as to what would happen if the Shopping Center did not
redevelop. At the present time, we know of no other developer interested in
unifying and upgrading the Center. We do know that free standing Sears Stores
have been closed. The Carter, Hawley, Hale Company which operates the
Broad~ay Department Store has indicated that they may not remain if the
Shopping Center is not upgraded and expanded. The future, therefore, of the
other present mall shops including Penneys remains unclear. Representatives
of Homart Development Company will be in attendance to respond to questions
and make a short presentation.
Members of the Planning Commission may wish to make a recommendation to the
City Council with regards to this matter at the conclusion of the workshop.
PD/sc/mag
WPC 2745H