Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1975/08/27 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF - CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA August 27, 1975 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: Chandler, Rudolph, Floto, Pressutti, Smith, Starr and ex-officio member Pat Keith of the Environmental Control Commission. Absent (with previous notification): Commissioner Rice. Also present: Director of Planning Peterson, Assistant Dir- ector of Public Works Lippitt, Assistant City Attorney Beam, and Secretary Mapes. Chairman Chandler led in the pledge of allegiance to the flag, followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Smith referred to the seventh paragraph on page 4 of the minutes of August 13, 1975, which related to Commissioner Pressutti's question about the possibility of developing a policy statement to cover all interchanges. He felt the minutes should indicate that a request was made for a report from the staff on the possibility of adopting such policy statement. Commissioner Pressutti concurred that it was his feeling that there would be a reply from the staff on that question. MSUC (Smith-Rudolph) The minutes of the meeting of August 13, 1975 be approved with the correction as requested. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The Chairman called for oral communications and none were presented. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-75-G - Prezoning 4.46 acres to R-l, southeast corner of L Street and Country Club Drive - City initiated Director of Planning Peterson advised that this prezoning action was initiated by the City, prompted by annexation requests made by some of the property owners in that area. Their interest was due to the cessation of fire protection service by the County for this unincorporated area. It is customary to prezone property prior to annexation. Mr. Peterson pointed out there are a number of two-family dwellings existing in this area and the staff considered whether it should be rezoned to R-2 or perhaps higher density. Careful study led to the conclusion that the character of this property and the surrounding properties is basically a single family area. Therefore the recommendation is for prezoning to the R-1 category. Mr. Peterson reported the receipt of a letter from the Chula Vista Presbyterian Church protesting the prezoning although their reasons are not clearly defined. -2- August 27, 1975 He further noted that the proposed action is categorically exempt from any environmental review requirements under CEQA. Commissioner Pressutti asked for clarification of the effect this prezoning would have on the two-family dwellings if the property is annexed. Mr. Peterson advised there would be no financial burden as a result of this prezoning, and also that the uses presently existing that do not conform to the R-1 zoning regulations would be preexisting nonconforming uses which could con- tinue to exist as long as there is no physical change in the use. He confirmed that the sale of a property for the same use does not constitute a change. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. As no one spoke, the hearing was closed. MSUC (Pressutti-Floto) Recommend that the City Council prezone 4.46 acres south of L Street, east of Country Club Drive, to R-l. A gentleman in the audience then expressed a desire to speak concerning the pre- zoning of that property and it was moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Floto, and unanimously carried that the public hearing be reopened for testimony. R. Hammond Dudderar, speaking in behalf of the Chula Vista Presbyterian Church, advised that they wished to request a continuance of the hearing because they have not had sufficient time to present the matter for committee and session action, and because three of the men familiar with the problems the church has had related to this property are presently on vacation. He asked if a decision on the question of prezoning could be postponed until the elders have met to determine their position. Mr. Peterson advised that this prezoning would have no effect on the church property which is already within the city limits and is zoned R-1. Mr. Dudderar asked if the proposed action was prompted by complaints from ad- joining property owners about runoff water going on their property. Mr. Peterson affirmed it was not and added that he was not aware of such a problem. Roger Wilkinson, representing the Presbyterian Church, discussed at more length the problem of drainage in the area. He reported that when the property under consideration was first improved, a wall was constructed between that property and the church's land and at that time an 8" or 6" drain tile was placed under the wall. He pointed out there is natural drainage from Hilltop Drive, across the church's property, through the subject property and into the golf course. For years the church has sought cooperation of the property owners to enlarge that drainage to handle the flow of water. The church has installed a 14" culvert on their property to handle the volume of water, but it is then backed up due to the insufficient opening to carry the water beyond the wall. The Commission and staff discussed the problem of drainage at some length and concluded that it is not related to the prezoning of the property; it should be resolved by the affected property owners, or considered by the City if and when the property is annexed to the City. -3- August 27, 1975 MSUC (Smith-Floto) The public hearing be closed and the previous motion ap- proving the prezoning of the property be reaffirmed. Director of Planning Peterson invited the representatives of the church to come and discuss the problems raised with the Department of Public Works prior to the public hearing before the City Council for consideration of the prezoning application. 2. Consideration of ~_e ~Um~,e~st~r ¥~cation of the ~rl...l? ~eet of Fi Avenue, South of Davidson Stree~ ---~ity initiated Director of Planning Peterson advised that this action would vacate the portion of Fig Avenue behind the City Hall which is presently used for offstreet parking by the City employees. The rationale behind this request is that the area is not now open for public use and it is contemplated that it will continue to be used for employee parking, so it is appropriate to take the legal action to vacate it so that it is clear that the area is not available for general public use. This would not involve a physical change in the street or in the use that presently exists. In response to a question from Commissioner Starr, Mr. Peterson confirmed that the property on the west side of Fig Avenue is in private ownership and that side of the street is open to public parking. Assistant City Attorney Beam advised that the problem of parking for City officials and for the Health Department vehicles has become more acute with the - opening of the new court facility here. Commissioner Smith pointed out that will be alleviated within the next couple of years with the building of a new court house and he did not feel it is proper to close off this portion of a public street that serves private properties. Commissioner Smith asked if a street vacation does not require a public hearing. Mr. Beam advised that he did not believe it does under this circumstance, but that this would proceed under the summary vacation statute. He noted that a public hearing is required where access is being denied to adjacent property owners on a previously dedicated street, and those are not the facts in this particular circumstance. Assistant Director of Public Works Lippitt reported that if a public hearing is required it is held before the City Council, who actually grant the vacation. Commissioner Smith moved that the item be tabled. The motion died for lack of a second. It was moved by Commissioner Pressutti, seconded by Commissioner Chandler, that the Commission recommends that the City Council vacate the 19 ft. portion of Fig Avenue as described in the report to the Commission. The motion failed to pass by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Pressutti, Chandler, Floto NOES: Commissioners Smith, Starr, Rudolph ABSENT: Commissioner Rice -4- August 27, 1975 Commissioner Starr asked Commissioner Smith if his intent in moving to table the item was to postpone or to deny. Commissioner Smith advised that his understanding of tabling a motion is that it is indefinitely postponed. MSC (Smith-Starr Consideration of the vacation of a portion of Fig Avenue be tabled. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Smith, Starr, Rudolph, Floto NOES: Commissioners Pressutti, Chandler ABSENT: Commissioner Rice Mr. Peterson asked if it would not be appropriate for the Commission to recommend that the Council not vacate the street, so that a report could be forwarded to the Council. Since all decisions on street vacation are made by the Council, he felt this should be forwarded for Council consideration with whatever recom- mendation the Commission wishes to make. Commissioner Rudolph moved that the request for vacation be denied. Commissioner Smith asked for the City Attorney's interpretation on this point. He contended that if it's tabled, it's tabled. Attorney Beam concurred that upon a motion to table, a question can only be brought forward again by affirmative vote of the Commission. He questioned, however, whether on a question of this type--on which the Commission does not take final action but rather makes a recommendation--if the Commission has the authority to table the question indefinitely. He expressed the opinion the Council could bring it up without the Commission's recommendation. The Attorney then requested a short recess to check the Code requirements on this issue. The meeting recessed at 7:40 p.m. and was reconvened at 7:45 p.m. Attorney Beam confirmed that vacation of streets does not require a public hear- ing before the Planning Commission, but does require a public hearing by the Council. He felt the Commission is given the right to make a recommendation to the Council as a matter of courtesy. He suggested that the Commission let the matter ride until the next meeting, at which time the Commission can indicate their desire to recommend approval or denial of the vacation. He indicated that he would research the procedures further and if the Commission does not have the power to dispose of such an item, the staff would bring it back to inform the Commission of that fact, to determine at that time if the Commission wished to take some action. 3. Consideration of request for approval of plans for Rohr Industries Federal Credit Union building in the Bayfront Redevelopment Project area It was noted that neither Chairman Chandler nor Vice-Chairman Rudolph could participate in discussion or action on this item due to their connections, -5- August 27, 1975 through employment, with the Rohr Industries. It was ruled that Chairman Chandler could continue to chair the meeting. Director of Planning Peterson advised that the Commission's role with regard to this item is one of reviewing the development plan and making a recommendation to the Redevelopment Agency. He called attention to the rendering of the build- ing on display which depicts a two-story structure, containing just under 12,000 sq. ft., located on the west side of Bay Boulevard. He called attention to the proposed landscaping and circulation around the building, noting that there would not be direct access to the site from Bay Boulevard. He pointed out that "I" Street has been vacated west of Bay Boulevard and should be deleted from the blueline print submitted. Access would then be shown by a private driveway out to Bay Boulevard. Mr. Peterson affirmed that the location for a sign is shown on the exhibit; such sign would direct Rohr employees to the building. Height and dimensions of the sign have not been submitted. MSUC (Pressutti-Floto) The Commission finds that the Rohr Federal Credit Union building would not have any possible significant impact on the environment and certifies the Negative Declaration. Commissioners Chandler and Rudolph abstained from voting. MSUC (Pressutti-Floto) The Commission recommends to the Redevelopment Agency the approval of the Rohr Federal Credit Union precise plan as shown on Exhibit A, subject to the conditions set forth in the report to the Commission. Commissioners Chandler and Rudolph abstained from voting. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director of Planning Peterson asked the Commission's desires concerning a dinner meeting on September 17th, preceded by the study session at 5:00 p.m. The Commission concurred and asked that the meeting be so scheduled. COMMISSION COMMENTS Chairman Chandler reported that he will be on vacation from September 15th through the 26th, and asked that he be excused from the meetings of September 17th and 24th. Mr. Chandler also called attention to the need for election of officers, which has been delayed awaiting attendance of all Commissioners at a meeting. It was agreed to further delay this election until the next meeting, to be held on September lOth. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Chandler adjourned the meeting at 8:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Helen Mapes Secretary