Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1977/11/09 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA November 9, 1977 A regular meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California was held on the above date beginning at 7:00 p.m. with the following members present: Smith, G. Johnson, R. Johnson, Pressutti, Renneisen and O'Neill. Absent (with previous notification): Commissioner Chandler. Also present: Director of Planning Peterson, Current Planning Supervisor Lee, Assistant Director of Public Works Lippitt, Assistant City Attorney Harron, and Secretary Mapes. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Pro Tem Smith, followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Renneisen advised that during Commission Comments at the meeting of October 26, he had expressed concern over the report by some residents that they had not received notices of public hearing. He had asked that the staff investigate each of these reports and determine if the persons were within the area to receive notification. Commissioner Renneisen asked that the minutes of October 26, 1977 be amended to include that comment and moved that the minutes be approved as amended; the motion was seconded by Commissioner G. Johnson, and carried unanimously with Commissioner R. Johnson abstaining due to his absence from that meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Pro Tem Smith called for oral communications and none were offered. It was moved by Commissioner Renneisen, seconded by Commissioner Pressutti, that at the suggestion of the Director of Planning, items 1, 2 and 3 on the agenda be considered as consent calendar items. The motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Renneisen reported that several persons have indicated their desire to speak in the public hearing scheduled as item 9, but they have another meeting at the City Hall to attend at 7:30 and therefore asked if item 9 could be moved to the top of the agenda. It was moved by Commissioner Renneisen, seconded by Commissioner O'Neill, that item 9 be considered as the first item on the agenda. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Com~issioners Renneisen, O'Neill, G. Johnson, Smith and Pressutti NOES: Commissioner R. Johnson ABSENT: Commissioner Chandler -2- November 9, 1977 9. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance PCV-78-3 - Request for approval of rooftop si~n at 119 Broadwas in C-T zone - Katersna Grant Director of Planning Peterson reported that the operator of Smitty's Saloon at 119 Broadway recently painted the exterior of the building and placed a figure of a horse on the roof of the building, not realizing that under the City's zoning ordinance the horse constitutes a sign and the building does not have enough width to qualify for a rooftop sign. The ordinance restricts rooftop signs to buildings at least 50 feet wide and this building is about half that width. Mr. Peterson pointed out that the C-T zone is the only area in which rooftop signs are allowed and it is felt they should be stringently limited. Wall, freestanding or monument signs are preferable since they can be related to the architecture of the structure. He also noted that the building at this particular site enjoys good visibility by motorists along Broadway since it is only 2 feet back of the front property line, while other buildings in the vicinity are set further back. The building presently has wall signs as allowed by the ordinance. The site also qualifies for a freestanding sign but none has been requested or installed. Mr. Peterson advised that, while in his opinion the horse is not offensive, the staff was unable to make the findings required by the ordinance for approval of the variance request and therefore recommends that it be denied. Mr. Peterson passed to the Commission a display of photos of this building and sign, as well as a similar but much larger figure which was formerly located on a rooftop in Chula Vista but later moved to a tire store in National City. He pointed out that without restrictions such rooftop displays could become obtrusive. Commissioner Renneisen asked if there is any question as to whether this figure of a horse is a sign. Assistant City Attorney Harron stated that under the definition of a sign as contained in the Municipal Code there is no question but what this must be deemed a sign; since the ordinance defines signs so broadly as to cover such a symbol. Commissioner O'Neill asked where a freestanding sign could be placed on the site. Mr. Peterson advised that the most logical location would be to the south of the building in the parking area, since a sign would not fit between the building and the front property line. Commissioner O'Neill commented that he had noted a similarity with other signs in the area, particularly other rooftop signs on businesses which do not appear to have sufficient width. Mr. Peterson reported that the signs on the smaller buildings are nonconforming, were constructed prior to the adoption of the sign ordinance, and are subject to abatement. Commissioner O'Neill asked what means could be used to the get the large bill- board next to this site removed. Mr. Peterson advised that while the City's ordinance prohibits such billboards and would require its removal, the City is waiting for the state supreme court's decision as to whether the San Diego ordinance against billboards is legal. -3- November 9, 1977 Commissioner Smith inquired if this horse was placed on a pole would it be a legal sign. Mr. Peterson affinned that under the ordinance it would be legal. Th~s being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Kateryna Grant, owner of the business at 119 Broadway, contended that she was not aware that the horse statue would be classified as a sign; she considered it a piece of art to go with the western decor of the structure. She also asserted that due to other large billboards in the area her small building becomes obscure. She expressed the opinion that other businesses in the city have signs which are far more obtrusive than the horse. She reported that she has a petition bearing over 800 signatures in support of her request. Joe Scannicchio, past president of the Chamber of Commerce, appeared on behalf of Mrs. Grant, the Chamber of Commerce and the business community. He felt the City should be more concerned with the welfare of the small business person. He asserted that in view of the pride Mrs. Grant had shown the community through the remodeling of the building at considerable expense, her request should be granted, and that this would not constitute a special privilege. He contended that the sign ordinance is not a law but is meant to be a guideline. Mrs. Grant has demonstrated her desire to beautify the community and her belief that the addition of the horse enhanced the decor of the building, and since it has been installed at some expense, it would result in a hardhip if it must be removed. Roland Cattall, 4 Broadway, retired U.S. Navy, praised Mrs. Grant's place of business and asserted that she did not intend to break the law. Bill Snedecor, 517 D Street, owner of Del Taco at 414 Broadway and President of the Broadway Association, stressed the improvement in the appearance of the building as a result of the remodeling which has taken place. The Chamber of Commerce recommended this building for a beautification award. He contended that the horse goes well with the decor of the building, is not obtrusive and should not be classified as a sign. Lyle Carlson, 288 Broadway, praised the attractiveness of the building and the site and felt the horse blends with the motiff of the building. A1 Polacci, 502 Anita Street, expressed praise for the beautification of the site which Mrs. Grant has accomplished. He contended that the only purpose of the horse is to beautify the building and felt it should be approved. As nobody else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Pressutti pointed out that the purpose of a sign is to communicate something and he did not feel that the horse served that function as it merely appears as part of the decor. He expressed the opinion that the findings as stated in the staff report are not applicable, and moved that the request be approved. Commissioner Renneisen seconded the motion, indicating that the horse does not serve the purpose of a sign. Commissioner R. Johnson voiced the opinion that the sign ordinance is misunder- stood which is an unfortunate thing. The sign ordinance is here to help the city, and more and bigger signs are not necessarily more beautiful nor do they -4- November 9, 1977 necessarily result in more business. He felt it is unfortunate that so many nonconforming signs still remain. He advised that this particular figure on the roof is not objectionable to him because of its small size; he would object if the horse were 15 feet tall. Commissioner Renneisen contended that decisions on matters of this type should be reached on a case by case basis. Mr. Peterson reported that the staff felt bound by the interpretation of the City Attorney as to what constitutes a sign. He also took exception to Mr. Scannicchio's comment that the sign ordinance is not the law. He pointed out that policies are adopted by the City Council by resolution and become guidelines, but regulations which are adopted by ordinance into the Municipal Code then become law and cannot be regarded as only a guideline. Commissioner G. Johnson affirmed that she considers the horse as a rooftop sign, but feels that in this case it is preferable to have it mounted on the roof rather than on a pole, and for that reason she would support the variance request. The motion carried unanimously by the Commissioners present. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Consideration of boundaries of the 805 Properties Annexation - Gene York This annexation consists of 1.36 acres located in the southwest quadrant of 1-805 and Bonita Road. It is included within the area covered by the Bonita Glen Specific Plan which was adopted by the City Council in June, 1977. It is recommended that the boundaries of the annexation be approved and the staff authorized to file the application with LAFCO. 2. Consideration of chan~e of boundaries of Open Space Maintenance District No. 5 The area considered for~acation is 416 square feet located at the end of Entrade Place. The vacation will leave a 14 ft. pedestrian access way from the street into the open space area. It is recommended that the vacation be approved subject to the relocation, by the applicant, of the irrigation lines. 3. Consideration of request to move a house onto 209 Alvarado Street The applicant proposed to demolish the existing residence at 209 Alvarado Street and to move onto the lot a single family residence from 510 Third Avenue. The structure to be moved is architecturally compatible with the residences adjacent to the site and the conditions recommended by the Department of Building and Housing and in the staff report will resul~in an upgrading of the site. MSUC (Renneisen-Pressutti) The Commission approves the three items on the consent calendar in accordance with the recommendations contained in the staff report. -5- November 9, 1977 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-78-9 - Request for two offsite subdivision directional signs at 350 Camino Elevado- Motivational Systems, Inc. Current Planning Supervisor Lee reported that these signs are requested to direct potential buyers to the homes in Bonita Ridge Estates Unit No. 4. This unit of the subdivision is located adjacent to Country Club Estates (formerly known as Bonita Bel Aire) and directing the traffic to enter via Camino del Cerro Grande results in a shorter and more direct route than going via Rid§eview Way which is the main entrance to Bonita Ridge Estates. The request to place two directional signs on the corners of the property at 350 Camino Elevado was originally set for consideration by the Zoning Administrator; however, the receipt of two letters of protest from nearby residents make it necessary to consider the request in a public hearing before the Planning Commission. The letters of protest referred to a proliferation of subdivision signs in the Bonita area, with which the staff concurs, but the majority of those signs are in the Couty portion of Bonita where directional signs 7½ times the size of those allowed by Chula Vista are permitted by the County. Since this is a relatively small unit of the development and the route pointed out by the signs would be the most direct, it is recommended that the request for the signing be approved. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No testimony was offered and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner G. Johnson noted that the houses now being built are all on Greenwood Place and it would be far out of the way for traffic to go down to Ridgeview Way. MSUC (G. Johnson-R. Johnson) Based on the findings as stated in the staff report the Commission approves conditional use permit PCC-78-9 for the location of two offsite ~ubdivision directional signs at 350 Camino Elevado. 5, PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-78-12 - Request to use commercial trailer for temporary office use at 535 "I" Street - Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company Director of Planning Peterson reported that a request has been received for the location of a 12' x 30' trailer to the rear of the Telephone Company office building for a period of six to nine months while the building is being remodeled. This is allowed for in the code to minimize inconvenience to the public during the remodeling of an existing business. It is recommended that the request be approved. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Ed Mapes, 422 Camino Elevado, representing Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, expressed his willingness to answer any questions the Commission may have. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Pressutti-Renneisen) Based on the findings stated in the staff report, the Commission approves conditional use permit PCC-78-12 for a period of one year. -6- November 9, 1977 6. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-78-6 - Request for retail food sales with operation of service station, 196 Broadway- Atlantic Richfield Company Director of Planning Peterson advised that this application has two purposes. The existing service station is a nonconforming use since it was built before the ordinance was adopted and the ordinance requires a conditional use permit for all service stations. One purpose of the application is to render the station into a conforming status. The second purpose is to authorize the sale of merchandise within the service station office building which is not related to the servicing or repair of automobiles. Their request is for the sale of soft drinks, snacks, candy and beer. Many service stations now contain vending machines which sell soft drinks and cigarettes and these have been considered incidental to the service station. The staff feels that if the sales activities and the merchandise is confined to the small office area it can be found incidental to the operation. One concern of the staff is that the sale of additional items might prolong the length of time a car would be parked at the pump island, which could have the potential of backing cars on to the sidewalk or into the street. It is recommended that the sale of nonautomotive items be approved for a period of six months in order that it may be evaluated before approval on a permanent basis. Mr. Peterson advised that the staff does have reservations about including the sale of beer since this item is not typically sold at service stations. It is illegal to open and drink it at the service station. Also, if beer is available at stations which remain open 24 hours a day the station could become known as a place to buy beer after other stores are closed. The recommended conditions of approval prohibit the sale of alcoholic beverages, and the display of signs advertising other than automotive items. In response to a question from the Commission, Mr. Peterson explained that the applicant has indicated that the pumps would be controlled by a computer in the sales area and would be manned by the sales person. The customer would leave the pump island and go into the office to pay for the gas and would then see the other items for sale. The addition of signs for such items would have the effect of causing them not to be incidental to the operation of the service station. Chairman Pro Tempore Smith reopened the continued public hearing. Sam Blick attorney with Higgs, Fletcher and Mack, representing the applicant, expressed the concern that originally there was a misunderstanding as to the scope of the request. He pointed out the sales area is very small and the intent of this request is to get rid of the vending machine and move the items for sale into the building. He pointed out that some oil companies have done this in some locations without going through the request procedure. With regard to the saleof beer, he pointed out that the State of California, through the A.B.C., regulates the sale of all alcoholic beverages, and if such sale is prohibited in a particular zone the A.B.C. will uphold that restriction. The State law also prohibits the sale of beer between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 ~.m. and any violation of that restriction would result in the loss of license. With reference to traffic backing up, Mr. Blick asserted that the additional time involved for the sale of such items is very small and other stations that have installed this service have not found a need for additional parking and it has not been required. -7- November 9, 1977 In response to aquestionfrom Commissioner Renneisen, Mr. Blick affirmed that beer is not now sold in vending machines at service stations as the other items listed in the application are. Commissioner Renneisen expressed the opinion that the sale of beer should not be included in the conditional use permit if it is not incidental to the operation of a service station. Frank Rodriguez, 754 Cedar Avenue, operator of the ARCO station at 196 Broadway, reported that he is not going into the grocery store business, but through the installation of the computer controls for the gas pumps he can eliminate some of the employees at the station. The person operating the computer would also sell the other items. He expressed indecision as to whether he would install this method if the sale of beer is not allowed. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner G. Johnson voiced her concern over the six months trial period and also suggested that at a service station in a residential area such an operation might suffer from considerable shoplifting. In a discussion of what itemsare incidental to the operation of a service station, Commissioner Renneisen expressed his belief that the sale of beer, wine, or any form of alcoholic beverage is not incidental to a service station. Mr. Peterson affirmed that while the sale of alcoholic beverages is regulated by the A.B.C. that body contacts the local jurisdiction to determine if it is an allowed use at a particular location. MSUC (G. Johnson-Renneisen) The Commission finds that in a accordance with the Negative Declaration on IS-78-17 and the findings stated therein, approval of the conditional use permit will have no significant adverse environmental impact, and certifies the Negative Declaration. MSUC (G. Johnson- Renneisen) Based on the findings stated in the staff report, the Commission approves the conditional use permit application, PCC-78-6, for the operation of a service station at 196 Broadway, subject to the three conditions enumerated in the staff report. MSUC (G. Johnson~ Renneisen) The Commission approves the sale of previously prepared foods, snacks and soft drinks in conjunction with the operation of the service station, subject to three conditions (deleting the first and last conditions recommended in the staff report, which would limit the operation to a six months trial period before granting permanent approval.) 7. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): Conditional use permit PCC-78-3 - Request for retail food sales with operation of service station, 898 Third Avenue- Atlantic Richfield Company Director of Planning Peterson advised this request is similar to the application just approved by the Commission but the site is considerably smaller--it is about half the size normally required for a service station. This causes greater concern with regard to the potential of backing traffic into the street. It is the staff recommendation that the request for food sales be denied until some experience -8- November 9, 1977 is gained by the operation at Broadway and E. Chairman Pro Tem Smith reopened the continued public hearing on this application. Sam Blick, Higgs, Fletcher and Mack of San Diego, representing the applicant, expressed his opinion that it is not a valid argument to deny this request since approval of the other location was not limited to a trial period. He urged that this application be approved. Gary Sadler, 1717 Wind River Road, E1 Cajon, owner of the ARCO station at Third and L, reported that he also owns a station in E1 Centro which handles fast snack items and it has proven very successful. He reported that there are no parking problems at the E1 Centro station and affirmed that the site is about twice the size of the one located at Third and L. Their sales area is also much larger and acco~nodates a larger variety of items, including beer, which was allowed by the A.B.C. He indicated he would like approval of the fast food items even if they do not get a license to sell beer. He elaborated on the advantages of using the computer controls, mainly that it reduces the losses which result from persons putting gas in their car and leaving without paying for it. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Renneisen-O'Neill) The Commission finds that in accordance with the Negative Declaration on IS-78-10 and the findings stated therein, this service station operation will have no significant adverse environmental impact, and certifies the Negative Declaration. It was moved by Commissioner Renneisen that the Commission approve conditional use permit PCC-78-3 and allow the sale of incidental items, subject to the following conditions: 1. Food merchandise is limited to previously prepared foodstuffs and shall not include the use of cooking or warming devices, or the sale of alcoholic beverages. 2. No space outside the sales office shall be used for the display of merchandise. 3. No signs advertising the sale of merchandise not related to automobile operation shall be posted. Mr. Peterson pointed out that the staff recommendation for approval of the service station operation included a condition to require a landscaped area on the westerly side of the site and the area adjacent to the telephone booth. Commissioner Renneisen amended his motion to include the condition requiring land- scaping. The motion was seconded by Commissioner O'Neill, and carried unanimously by those present. 8. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-78-11 - Request to operate card room at 771 Third Avenue in C-C zone - Paul Pilla Current Planning Supervisor Lee advised that, if approved, this will be the third card room to be established in Chula Vista since the Council amended the Municipal Code to allow a total of four cardrooms. This facility would be adjacent to an existing restaurant on the south and next door to a dental office to the north. -9- November 9, 1977 The applicant has leased 19 parking spaces located at the rear of the medical clinic located north of the dental office. This will provide parking at the ratio of one space for each 2½ seats proposed for the card room. It is recommended that the application be approved subject to four conditions, including a two year time limit that may be extended if leased parking is available for a longer time. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Paul Pilla, applicant, advised that he has a two year lease on both the site of the card room and the necessary parking spaces, with an option for two more years. He concurred with the four conditions recommended in the staff report. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Pressutti--Renneisen) The Commission finds that in accordance with the Negative Declaration on IS-78-28 and the findings stated therein, this project will have no significant adverse environmental impact, and certifies the Negative Declaration. MSUC (Pressutti-Renneisen) Based on the findings as stated in the staff report, the Commission approves conditional use permit PCC-78-11 for the operation of a cardroom at 771 Third Avenue, subject to the four conditions listed in the staff report. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director of Planning Peterson noted that at his request the Commission set a special meeting for December 7th to consider the E1 Rancho del Rey General Development Plan. Subsequent to that action the City Council extended the deadline for the study and recommendation on that plan, thus eliminating the need for the added meeting in December. It is possible that a special meeting Will be required to consider that matter on either the first or third Wednesday in January. It is suggested that the Commission take action to cancel the meeting scheduled for December 7th. MSUC (Renneisen-R. Johnson) The special meeting set for the Planning Commission on December 7, 1977 be cancelled. Mr. Peterson reminded the Commission of the joint meeting with the City Council and members of ACCORD scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on Thursday, November 17, to be held in Story Hour Room of the children's section of the Chula Vista City Library. A study session has also been scheduled for Wednesday evening, November 16 to consider plans for the 450 acre Rice Canyon area. Mr. Peterson felt the purpose of the study session would be fulfilled on the next night and suggested cancelling the study session if that be the Commission's desire. MSUC (Pres~utti-G. Johnson) The study session scheduled for the Planning Commission on November 16 be cancelled. -10- November 9, 1977 COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner O'Neill asked for a clarification of the time table for considera- tion of the General Development Plan of E1 Rancho del Rey. Mr. Peterson advised that would depend on the work of the engineering consultant which the Council has agreed to hire. The schedule calls for the consultant to complete his work within four weeks, so that should be done by early January. Consideration of the plan by the Planning Commission should be scheduled for either January 4th or January 18th. Co~issioner Pressutti requested that a future study session be devoted to an update on the County Center to be built at Third Avenue and H Street. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Pro Tempore Smith adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted Helen Mape~ ~-~ Secretary