Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1978/08/23 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA August 23, 1978 A regular business 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, Smith, Pressutti, R. Johnson and G. Johnson. Absent (with previous notification): Commissioners O'Neill and Renneisen. Also present: Director of Planning Peterson, Current Planning Supervisor Lee, Assistant Director of Public Works Lippitt, Fire Marshall Monsell, and Secretary Mapes. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Chandler, followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (R. Johnson-Smith) The minutes of the meeting of August 9, 1978 be approved as written. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Chandler called for oral communications and none were presented. -- 1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-78-J, prezonin~ approximatels 21 acres at the northwest corner of "C" Street and North Second Avenue from R-2 (County) to R'l, R-2, or R-3-L Director of Planning Peterson reported that following a public hearing on July ll, 1978 to consider prezoning the subject 21 acres R-l, a motion for approval resulted in a 3-3 tie vote by the six Planning Commissioners present. As some of the Commissioners expressed support for higher density zoning, it was requested that the public hearing be readvertised to include consideration of R-2 zoning. Mr. Peterson advised that after reviewin~ the area again the staff's recommenda- tion remains the same--to prezone the ar~a R-1. He pointed out that the predominant land use in the area is single family homes, and that it is an an area of fine, well maintained homes and should be protected from higher density uses. Testimony given earlier that the multiple family development to the west, the mobile home park further west, and the R-3 development just beginning to the north, should play a role in determining development of this area, was taken into consid- eration. It was noted that those developments are separated from the area under consideration by natural topography. Mr. Peterson acknowledged that a portion of the subject area may be difficult to develop with conventional single family lots and suggested that the group dwelling provisions of the R-1 zone could be applied. Mr. Peterson reported the receipt of two petitions in support of R-1 zoning; one contains the signatures of 85 residents or owners in the subject area, and ~--. · the other is signed by 230 residents who live adjacent to the area. -2- Aug. 23, 1978 It is the staff recommendation that the property be prezoned R-1 with the "F" Flood Plain Modifying District attached to the portion in the northwest corner which is in the Sweetwater Valley flood plain. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Harriet Acton, 265 Nixon Place, resident and property owner since 1961, spoke of the changes in the neighborhood and the surrounding area during that time. She acknowledged the right of all property owners to develop their land but felt such development should not alter the lifestyle of established residents in the area. She supported R-1 prezoning for the area. R. L. Batterton, 209 Nixon Place, expressed agreement with the written report and with the presentation made by the Director of Planning. He felt the petition of 85 property owners in the area should bear more weight than the request of two owners of property who live elsewhere. Pauline Valone, 135 North Del Mar Avenue, expressed support of the R-1 zoning and pointed out that a headline in a local newspaper was misleading in indicating that the residents were not in support of R-1 zoning. Robert Vetrecin, speaking for his parents who have owned a large parcel in the area since 1938, called attention to his testimony given at the previous hearing and indicated he would not repeat that. He stressed that the important issue is making the best use of the property. He felt that many people do not understand what is intended for the use of the property and are making assumptions based on other apartment developments. John McAvoy, attorney, 1200 Third Avenue, San Diego, representing Mitchell Angus who proposes to develop a portion of the property, pointed out that the property has been zoned R-2 in the County and the Chula Vista General Plan designates the area for high density use. He contended that the particular parcel is not suited for single family development and that the slope of the property would separate the development from homes on Del Mar Avenue. He suggested that a condominium development could be designed with reduced ground coverage to be compatible with single family development. Frank Drake, 6676 Convoy Court, San Diego, architect-planner for Mr. Angus, pointed out that the characteristic of Mr. Angus' property is different from the presently subdivided land contiguous to this site. He asked for an opportunity to work with the staff in preparing plans for development which would preserve the existing character and lifestyle of the neighborhood and preserve the property rights endowed by ownership. He advised that their proposed development would not exceed 45% coverage of the land. He contended that R-3 development would offer a better opportunity for conserving the area. Dwane Sandoval, 152 North Del Mar, resident of the area for 10 years, spoke in favor of retaining the single family neighborhood, which he contended affords a more suitable lifestyle for children and young people. Anthony Valone, 135 North Del Mar, expressed his support of prezonin9 the 21 acres to R-1 in order to retain what has physically and historically been a single family neighborhood for the past 40 years. He contended that to change any part -3- Aug. 23, 1978 of the area to higher density zoning would not be compatible to the neighborhood or acceptable to the residents. He pointed out that 97% of the residents have expressed their preference by their signatures on the petition. He stressed that one of the goals of the General Plan is to preserve existing sound single family areas. Peter Watry, 81 Second Avenue, spoke of the united effort of residents of this area in opposing developments or changes in street patterns which would result in deterioration of the quality of the neighborhood. He reported that a visit to the assessor's office revealed that the R-2 zoning in the county has not been a determining factor in the assessed value or taxes; instead this is related to market value of properties sold within the area and the market value has reflected single family home values. He urged that the area be prezoned R-1. Alfred Welker, 168 North Del Mar Avenue, advised that they have their home and approximately 2 acres of vacant land. He is in favor of R-1 even though it might be worth more if zoned for multiple family development. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Pressutti suggested that the zoning of the 21 acres should not be divided at this time and it should be prezoned R-1. If in the future an owner presents a plan for development which would be compatible with the area, a change of zone for individual parcels could then be considered. Commissioner R. Johnson expressed agreement with prezoning the area R-1 since that is primarily the most suitable use. He felt that a properly designed apartment development with access only from C Street could be supported, but that prezoning the land R-3 without development plans would be premature. MSUC (Pressutti-R. Johnson) The Commission finds that in accordance with the Negative Declaration on IS-78-77 and the findings stated therein, this prezoning will have no significant adverse environmental impact, and certifies the Negative Declaration. MS (Pressutti-R. Johnson) Based on the findings stated in the staff report, the Commission recommends that the City Council prezone the area to R-1 and R-1-F as shown on the exhibit. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Pressutti, R. Johnson, Chandler and G. Johnson NOES: Commissioner Smith ABSENT: Commissioner O'Neill and Renneisen 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of request to extend hours of operation of Golden Donut, 1478 Melrose, in the C-N zone Current Planning Supervisor Lee reported that the ordinance establishes the hours · of operation in the Neighborhood Commercial zone as 7:00 a.m. to ll:O0 p.m., unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commission. As requests for extension of hours have been received quite often, the question of amending the ordinance -4- Aug. 23, 1978 was presented to the City Council. It was the Council's determination that the ordinance not be changed and that the Planning Commission handle individual requests as they are presented in order that the possible impact on surrounding residents can be considered in each case. Mr. Lee pointed out that in this case the commercial use is 200 feet from the nearest residence and the extended hours should have no adverse effect. In response to a question from Commissioner Smith, Mr. Lee affirmed that this is not a drive-through type of facility which employs the use of loud speakers for taking and acknowledging orders; all business is conducted within the building. He advised that monitoring the business as recommended as a condition of approval would be largely a case of checking on any complaints received concerning the night time operation. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. As no one present wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (R. Johnson-Pressutti) The Commission approves the request for the Golden Donut to remain open 24 hours a day, subject to monitoring by the staff and reconsideration by the Commission if complaints are received. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of precise plan for steel fabrication shop at 1869 Nirvana Avenue in I-P zone - Tower Structures, Inc. Curr6nt Planning Supervisor Lee pointed out that this 1~ acre site is part of a large industrial subdivision located north of Otay Valley Road. The proposed plan is for a steel fabricating shop and craneway to construct communication towers. The site is behind a 6 ft. high solid fence. According to the CC&R's the owner of the entire subdivision is responsible for the outside landscaping and maintenance. However, since the area has been dormant for some time there have been problems with maintaining the landscaping. Included in the recommenda- tion for approval of this plan is a condition to require that the landscaping in front is taken care of. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Ben Hopkins, president of Tower Structures, Inc., the applicant, contended that he should not be held responsible for the landscaping outside of his fence. He discussed problems of vandalism which have occurred constantly since the land- scaping and irrigation system were first installed. He felt he should not be singled out and held responsible for overcoming this problem. He asked about development and use of the site directly across the street from his own, which appears to be moving ahead without a building permit, and the property to his south which is utilizing a lot for lumber storage. Mr. Lee advised that the site across the street proposed to construct a small building which was processed at staff level and the storage lot did not require any permits. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. -5- Aug. 23, 1978 Commissioner G. Johnson sympathized with Mr. Hopkins concerning the landscaping problem as she had observed that half the sprinkler pipes are capped off due to destruction or removal of the necessary valves. She expressed the hope that as the area develops the problem can be abated. MSUC (G. Johnson-Pressutti) The Commission finds that in accordance with the Negative Declaration on IS-79-9 and the findings stated therein, the proposed plan will have no significant adverse environmental impact, and certifies the Negative Declaration. MSUC (G. Johnson-Pressutti) Based on the findings stated in the staff report, the Commission recommends that the City Council approve the precise plan for development of 1869 Nirvana Avenue, subject to the conditions contained in the staff report relating to signs and landscaping and irrigation. Commissioner Smith requested that the Planning Department investigate all of the properties in the industrial park and report to the Planning Commission so that a determination can be made as to whether it will be necessary to bring pressure on other owners to bring the entire area up to the standard of mainten- ance required by this developer. Director of Planning Peterson concurred with the advisability of such an inves- tigation. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Tentative subdivision map PCS-79-2, conversion of Park Way Villas~ 575 Park Was, to condominiums - David Eyres Director of Planning Peterson advised that this property measures 50' x 150' and is presently under construction as a multiple family development. The conditions usually attached to a condominium conversion are not included in the recommenda- tion for approval since the units have not been completed and occupied. Mr. Peterson noted that the Planning Commission and City Council have been con- cerned about the number of condominium conversions which have been requested in recent months and the Council held a study session on August 10 to consider the question of further regulating such conversions. The four Councilmen present attempted to give the staff some direction as to what regulation would be appropriate and asked that an ordinance be prepared for their consideration on September 5. They will possibly adopt such an ordinance on an emergency basis and refer it to the Planning Commission for normal review process. It appears to be the Council's desire that such regulations deal with buildings which have been constructed as apartments and occupied, and then converted to condominiums. Mr. Peterson recommended that this subdivision map be approved in accordance with the staff report. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. David Eyres, 2437 Bonita Woods Drive, Bonita, owner and developer of the project, asked that the tentative map for conversion to condominiums be approved. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. -6- Aug. 23, 1978 MSUC (R. Johnson-Smith) Based on the findings stated in the staff report, the Commission recommends that the Council approve the tentative subdivision map, PCS-79-2, for Park Way Villas. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Tentative subdivision map PCS-79-4 for Sk~view Condominiums, at 465 Fourth Avenue - South Bay Development Current Planning Supervisor Lee reported that the Design Review Committee approved the plans for this 21 unit project and the developer has filed the tentative map to meet State requirements. This project conforms to all requirements of the present code relating to open space. It is a well designed project which lends itself as desirable condominiums. The staff recommendation is for approval of the tentative map. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Tom Davis, speaking on behalf of South Bay Development, concurred with the findings of the staff and asked for approval of the map. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Smith-R. Johnson) Based on the findings stated in the staff report, the Commission recommends that the City Council approve the tentative subdivision map PCS-79-4 for Skyview Condominiums. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-79-1, consideration of amendment to zonin9 ordinance to regulate "adult recreation" and related uses Director of Planning Peterson advised that the Council asked the staff to draft an ordinance which would regulate this type of use. He reported that there has been considerable literature in recent years in planning organizations as to what type of regulations are legal. Two basic types of regulations are in use: The Boston Plan in which adult oriented recreation uses are encouraged to locate in one central location to avoid having the uses dispersed into the neighborhoods. The other approach is known as the Detroit Plan, which is a reverse approach, and attempts to disperse the uses to keep from having an adverse effect on any one area. The Detroit Plan has been adopted by most cities which attempt to regulate such use. Mr. Peterson noted that basically the draft ordinance defines the kinds of uses that constitute adult recreational uses and allows them as conditional uses in the C-C and C-T zones. It requires that such establishments be at least 500 feet from a residential zone, 1000 feet from any other adult recreational use. An additional phrase should be added to the ordinance to prohibit an adult recreational use with- in 500 feet of any residential zone which fronts on the same street as the proposed recreational use. Mr. Peterson advised that there does not appear to be a market for this type of use in Chula Vista and this ordinance is proposed as a safeguard procedure since the code does not presently specifically prohibit or regulate such use. -7- Aug. 23, 1978 Mr. Peterson also noted that the ordinance should be recodified from the form submitted to the Commissioners to list this use in the conditional use section of the C-C and C-T chapters of the ordinance, with the bulk of the regulations contained in the "Uses" chapter of the ordinance. Mr. Peterson further pointed out that one of the kinds of activity defined is a coin operated entertainment facility, which is defined as a place where three or more coin operated machines are in use. Since that definition might be con- trary to the incidental use of coin operated machines in 7-Eleven stores and cocktail lounges, he recommended that the definition be rewritten to indicate that if the coin operated machines are not the primary use, more than three may be allowed without obtaining a conditional use permit. Mr. Peterson suggested that the Commission could approve the ordinance with the minor changes that he mentioned. Commissioner Smith advised that while he is heartily in favor with developing an ordinance of this type, he was not comfortable with all aspects of it. He cited, as an example, the definition of the word cabaret which he contended did not agree with the definition of that word as contained in any of the four dic- tionaries he consulted. He also questioned the need of listing the ll titles of adult recreation in one section, and then in the next section repeating the titles with a definition of each. After some discussion the Commission determined that the ordinance should be redrafted and presented for consideration at a subsequent meeting. Mr. Peterson suggested that the public hearing be continued to the meeting of September 27, 1978. This being the time and place as advertised, the chairman opened the public hearing so that it could be continued. MSUC (Smith-Pressutti) The public hearing to consider an amendment to the zoning ordinance to regulate adult recreation uses be continued to the meeting of September 27, 1978. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director of Planning Peterson reminded the Commission that with five Wednesdays in this month the next meeting will be in three weeks, on September 13. COMMISSION COMMENTS No comments were offered by Commissioners. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Chandler adjourned the meeting at 8;35 p,m. Respectfully submitted, Helen Mapes, Secrei~ary