Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1974/07/24 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA July 24, 1974 The 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, Wilson, Starr and Floto. Absent, with previous notification, Commissioners Rudolph and Rice. Also present: Director of Planning Peterson, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Current Planning Supervisor Lee, Assist- ant Director of Public Works Robens, Assistant City Attorney Beam and Acting Secretary Scholl. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Chandler followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Wilson-Floto) The minutes of the meeting of July 10, 1974 be approved as mailed. 1. Consideration of final EIR-74-5 for Plaza del Rey Environmental Review Coordinator Reid briefly reviewed the major issues which had been raised at the July 10th public hearing and were enumerated in the staff report. Extensive input and agency response have been incorporated in this document; it has been prepared in a manner exceeding the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and Mr. Reid recommended it be adopted. MSUC (Wilson-Floto) EIR-74-5 in the final form be adopted. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING PCZ-74-H - 11 acres west of Otay Lakes Road, 660 feet north of H Street, C-T-D to P-C or R-3 and C-T Director of Planning Peterson reported that the environmental review processing had not been completed; thus, it would be necessary to continue the hearing to the next meeting. MSUC (Wilson-Floto) Continue the hearing on PCZ-74-H to the meeting of August 14, 1974. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING PCZ-74-I - Rezone 381-383 D Street from R-1 to R-3, First Assembly of God Current Planning Supervisor Lee indicated the easterly half of the property, a 1.5 acre site located at the northeast corner of Fourth Avenue and D, which the applicant has requested be rezoned to R-3 for the purpose of allowing a pre- school operation in an existing building. The other half of the property, on -2- 7/24/74 which the sanctuary is located, has been zoned R-3 for many years. The appli- cant proposes to use an existing building on the property presently zoned R-1 for a preschool operation, which is permissible by conditional use permit in the R-3 zone. Mr. Lee noted that R-3 zoning would allow any use permitted in that zone, as well as the density, which is a 32 unit maximum; therefore the staff has deter- mined it would be more appropriate to attach the "G" category which reduces the density to a maximum of 17, and also attach the "P" District which limits development to an approved precise plan. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. M. L. Ashcraft, 943 Buena Vista Way, a Deacon on the Board of First Assembly of God Church and head of the Education Committee, believed that the proposed use would be of real benefit to the community. M. K. Anderson, 89 Glover Court, requested clarification regarding the possibility of future high density apartments on the site, as it was his understanding that the parking area would be insufficient for such use. Mr. Lee advised that attaching the G-P to the zone would restrict the maximum density to 17 units per acre in the event of a future proposal for multi-family development, and a precise plan for such development must come before the Com- mission for review and approval. Commissioner Starr asked if there were any means, under the present Ordinance, by which the adjacent property owners might be assured of notification if a proposed change in land use were brought before the Commission. Assistant City Attorney Beam thought it would not be a valid condition to attach to the approval of the zoning. However, if a new project were contemplated of a nature which would require environmental review, notice of such review would be posted in the area and the residents would be notified. In considering rezoning, it must be remembered that zoning contemplates present as well as future uses of land, and the owner will be able to use it for any purposes permitted within that zone as long as they meet the criteria set forth for that zone in the Zoning Ordinance. Robert Sack, 82 Glover Court, wished to go on record as objecting to the rezoning. Howard Ryan, Pastor of the Church, in order to alleviate the fears of adjacent property owners regarding future use of the church property, stated that the services of an architect have been engaged for the purpose of creating a master plan for the entire site to incorporate better usage of the land for church purposes. Chairman Chandler inquired if the property were leased, or if the Church owned it. Pastor Ryan replied that the Church owns the entire site. He expressed the desire to do everything necessary to work with the City to meet their requirements and to create a development which will be an asset to the community, and to this end -3- 7/24/74 have engaged the services of an architect, who is an expert in designing churches and church property. Commissioner Starr asked if he was aware of the long list of Code requirements for converting the existing building for classroom use and the expense involved in meeting these requirements. Pastor Ryan said they were fully prepared to make whatever changes in the building the City considered necessary to convert it to Day Care Center use. As no one else wished to speak the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Starr-Wilson) Recommend to the City Council change of zone from R~l to R-3-G-P for PCZ-74-I based on the findings contained in the staff report. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-74-19 - R?uest to operate preschool facility in existin~ building at 28~ 282 D Street~ Y~rst Assembly of GOd' Current Planning Supervisor Lee indicated the location of an existing 2100 sq. ft. building which is proposed for use as a day nursery school for a maximum of 60 children. The school operation would be limited from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. He noted that the number of children accommodated will be somewhat less than 60, according to initial investigation by the Fire Department. Staff is concerned with the proposed play area and has determined that such activity area should be confined to the side and rear of the parsonage, with appropriate fencing and screening, so as not to encroach into the parking area. This, too, will tend to limit the number of children which can be accommodated. The requirements of the Fire and Building Departments are largely a matter of bringing the building into conformance with the Code and are not necessarily of concern to the Commission in their consideration of the conditional use permit. Mr. Lee advised if there is some problem with the storage of buses on the property, and the applicant should be aware that the original conditional use permit granted for the church facility was based on the fact that these buses would not cause problems in the area due to noise, smoke, odor, etc., this is a matter which staff should discuss with the Zoning Enforcement Officer to find a suitable location for the buses. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Howard Ryan, Pastor of the Church, reported that the County agency which had inspected their premises for licensing indicated not more than 43 children could be accommodated by their facility. He agreed with Mr. Lee that the front yard of the parsonage should not be used for play area. He believed that the back yard could supply about 1/2 of the needed play area, with paved parking area providing the rest, and the surrounding fence provided with gates which could be opened on Sundays to allow for the necessary parking in connection with church services. He wished to point out that the children would not be outside playing all day long, but they would be in classes, with only short periods of outside recreation and supervised outside activity. -4- 7/24/74 Robert Sack, 82 Glover Court, inquired why the hours of operation would be from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., as that seemed rather long. Mr. Ryan referred the question to Robin Mitchell, the Director of the Day School, who said in order to meet the needs of the community they wished to be open for the working mothers or the single parents who must work, they set the opening hour for 6:00 a.m. Preschool hours are set from 9:00 to ll:30 and 1:30 to 3:30, but the Day Care Center hours are geared to enable the parents to leave the children during their working hours. Once they have begun operation, it may prove that these hours are not necessary, in which case they will be shortened. Chairman Chandler asked if the recreation would be organized. Mrs. Mitchell replied that it would be play time with supervision and physical education activity which is structured and programmed. Chairman Chandler inquired of Pastor Ryan if he had checked at all into renting other facilities in the community. Mr. Ryan stated that the cost would be prohibitive for the rental of other facil- ities; being church-oriented, with social and spiritual emphasis, it is hoped that this will be a self-sustaining program. Sarah Russell, 92 Glover Court, speaking for herself and her mother, Mrs. Alta Newkirk, of the same address, expressed concern about the buses which are parked next to her fence causing considerable air pollution, and also the fact that her fence has been damaged. She asked if the school would be the cause of additional buses being parked there, adding to the noise and air pollution, and also the littering. Pastor Ryan commented that the buses were moved up against the fence to prevent gas being stolen from the gas tanks, as they were unable to procure lock caps which would fit. He stated that any damage to the fence which was their responsi- bility would gladly be fixed. The buses are normally used twice on Sunday mornings and once on Wednesday evenings, totalling perhaps two hours each week, and he was of the opinion this was not polluting the air excessively. He was unaware of any littering, but was sorry for any inconvenience. He does not foresee an increase due to the school operation, since the activity will be supervised. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Assistant City Attorney Beam advised the Con~nission that recent restatements in the State Law have required that in a hearing for a conditional use permit or a variance, the four mandatory findings which must be made under the Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance, have to be directly related to the evidence the Commission has received. MSUC (Wilson-Floto) Approve Conditional Use Permit PCC-74-19 to operate a preschool facility at 381-383 D Street subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall bring the building into conformance with all local and state regulations prior to occupancy. -5- 7/24/74 2. A new site plan shall be submitted for staff approval The plan shall' a. Provide for proper alignment or widening of the westerly driveway. b. Embody directional arrows or signs to properly direct traffic flow. c. Include a fence plan which will confine the activity area to the side and rear of the parsonage. d. Show the removal of all miscellaneous buildings which now exist on the site. 3. All children shall be dropped off and picked up adjacent to the educa- tional building. Findings: 1. The proposed use at this location will provide a needed service in this section of the community which will contribute to the general well being of the area. The testimony received before the Planning Commission indicated that other similar facilities have substantial waiting lists indicating a need for additional facilities in the area. 2. The use will not be detrimental to the area because of the separation from adjacent residential uses and the available offstreet parking and circulation provided. 3. The use will comply with all local and state requirements for license purposes. 4. The proposed use is not in conflict with the adopted General Plan of Chula Vista. Chairman Chandler advised that any one desiring to appeal this decision to the City Council might do so within ten days. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-74-17 - Request for sale of beer and recreational facilities in CLN Zone, 937 Ota~ Lakes Road, Jack Blakeis Director of Planning Peterson noted that the application involves the construction of a new building which would contain the restaurant where the sale of beer as an incidental use is proposed in the C-N zone. In additon, pool tables, pinball machines and an outdoor horseshoe pit are also proposed as a part of that use. The C-N zone is not designed to accommodate recreational uses, and clearly prohibits the outdoor use such as the horseshoe pit. The Police Department has expressed some concern regarding the potential for this place becoming a gathering place for the young people from the junior college, high school and junior high school, which are all located in the immediate vicinity. The proposed hours of operation, 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m., seven days a week, are foreign to those normally considered appropriate in the C-N zone. He called attention to the findings offered by the staff in recom- mending approval of this request. -6- 7/24/74 This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Jack Blakely, 1451 Laurel Avenue, the applicant, felt the area in question is in need of a restaurant with beer and with amusements. He has been in this business for 15 years in the vicinity of a school, has not been prone to having problems with young people and has a good record with the Police Department. He contended the Canyon Club at Telegraph Canyon Road and L Street, which is also in the C-N zone, is open from 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m., has pool tables, a pinball machine and a juke box, has a conditional use permit for the sale of beer and they do not sell food. He called attention to the diversity of items proposed for his menu, and he pointed out that the cost of leasing a building and facilities is almost prohibitive without some of the recreational activities to help carry the expense. He intends to run a nice clean place, which is expected to be a center of attrac~ tion for the local community as well as a center of attraction for the young people. . Assistant City Attorney Beam observed that the concern of the staff and ommlsslon is that there are certain allowable uses in the C-N zone, and the inclusion of pool tables and pinball machines appear to be more of a recreational use than food use. Mr. Peterson agreed that there probably is a need for this type of facility in the community, but it is not the type of use that is contemplated by the District regulations. Mr. Blakely commented that he understands the horseshoe ' are against the law, but he understood that conditional use permits been granted on other occasions for the other proposed facilities, havePlts Commissioner Wilson asked if this use would be appropriate in one of the other commercial zones. Mr. Peterson acknowledged that it would be more appropriate in a C-C zone, a zone or a C-V zone. Chairman Chandler inquired regarding the operation of the Canyon Club. Mt. Peterson responded that if the Club were operating in accordance with Mr. Blakely's allegations, they were violating some of the conditions of their permits and should be investigated. However, the Canyon Club is not located near a school. Clancy Close, who lives in the area of the proposed restaurant and has two children in school, appreciated the need for such an establishment and would like to be on record as approving Mr. Blakely's request in principle, providing it is properly controlled. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Floto commented that he agreed with the limitations which the staff had recommended, but in good conscience he could not approve of an establishment that sells beer, next to another establishment selling beer, in an area where there are three schools in close proximity. -7- 7/24/74 Commissioner Starr was impressed with what the applicant said in regard to the operation of his business, but on general principles would have to object to this use so close to the schools. Chairman Chandler did not feel he could approve of the recreational aspects or the extended hours, but agreed with the staff recommendations in regard to the control of the sale of the beer with food. Assistant City Attorney Beam again reminded the Commission of the requirement that the granting of a conditional use permit be based upon the four mandatory findings contained in the Zoning Ordinance; and if it is the desire of the Com- mission to reject the applicant's proposal that it be based upon the inability to satisfy one or more of the four conditions. Commissioner Wilson stated that in his opinion the applicant's proposal does not meet the criteria outlined in the mandatory requirements and moved that PCC-74-17 be approved subject to the conditions outlined by the staff as con- sistent with the mandatory findings. Chairman Chandler seconded the motion. The motion failed to pass by the following vote: AYES: Members Wilson and Chandler NOES: Members Floto and Starr ABSENT: Members Rice and Rudolph Chairman Chandler advised the applicant of his right to appeal the decision to the City Council within ten days. The meeting recessed at 8:45 p.m. and reconvened at 8:57 p.m. 6. Consideration of site plan for E1 Rancho del Re~ Unit 3 - Otas Land Compans Current Planning Supervisor Lee explained that this area is included in the original Planned Unit Development area, which is comprised of 300 acres, and which was approved by the Planning Commission in July, 1971 with 20 conditions or development guidelines. The applicant is now requesting approval of a detailed site plan involving approximately 8.7 acres lying directly south of E1 Rancho del Rey Unit 1, west of Bonita Vista Way, and taking access off the western end of Buena Vista Court. The project proposes 38 condominium units in clustered buildings con- taining 3 to 7 condominiums, combinations of one and two story structures, on 6.6 acres. They are planned to be three and four bedroom combinations, each having a two-car garage containing storage area, with 1500 to 1900 square feet in the buildings. A recreation area includes a building and a swimming pool; and two full-size tennis courts will be built in the adjacent City parkland directly to the north, which benefits both the City and the subdivision. He pointed out that the other features of the project all conform to the standards adopted by the City for PUD projects, such as guest parking, patio areas, setbacks, etc. 7/24/74 He noted the only comments the staff had regarding the architecture was that a shake or cedar shingle is preferable to asphalt shingles where there is a mass of roof area such as that in the typical townhouse unit; of course, this must be weighed against the cost factor. Mr. Lee advised that the staff was recommending approval with 8 conditions, and it v~as his understanding that the applicant was objecting to an item which would make the City a party to the maintenance of the project. He believed the Assistant City Attorney had some comments on that particular recommendation. Mr. Beam reported that the applicant had discussed with the City Attorney the condition which provides the CC&R's should include the City of Chula Vista as a party to the maintenance of the project. The applicant objects both to the inclusion of the City as a party to any provisions in the CC&R's and also to the fact that the maintenance of the project is ambiguous and really doesn't define in what capacity the City would be a party to the CC&R's. The City Attorney has indicated that pursuant to Council Policy this is a condition which Council would endorse, but he has also indicated that this particular require, ment should be reworded; it is the intent of the City only to enter into the CC&R's insofar as it would effectuate maintenance of common open area. Carmen Pasquale, representing E1 Rancho del Rey, agreed with the report and recommendations made generally except for a couple of items: He objected to the developer being responsible for a period of one year for the alntenance m ' of the landscaping after the date of initial acceptance by the City, as once the lots are sold and the Homeowners Association takes over, the project becomes private property subject to the regulations of the Homeowners Association. He agreed with the City Attorney that the provision making the City of Chula Vista a party to the maintenance of the project should be re~orded. Dan Salerno, architect for the project, commented on Mr. Lee's fine coverage of the proposed project. He wished to respond to the point regarding the com- position shingle roofing. He referred to Mr. Pasquale's de~ire t~ try to provide good housing for as low a price as possible. Composition shingles is one of the ways to keep the cost down; in addition to being more fire retardant they are probably as permanent as wood shingles. In order to provide a more pleasing perspective, they have tried to stagger the units themselves as much as possible. Chairman Chandler asked Mr. Lee to respond to Mr. Pasquale's objection to the responsibility of the developer for maintenance of the landscaping for a one- year period. Mr. Lee advised that the Grading Ordinance adopted by the City Council requires active maintenance for 90 days on the graded slope that has been landscaped, and in addition to that requires a guarantee for one year. The staff has been utilizing a 90 day period as a minimum maintenance on all landscaping, depending upon plant materials. There have been problems with turning over the land- scaping maintenance to homeowners associations before growth has been fully established. For this reason the Department has been strongly recommending the maintenance period of one year in the approval of all subdivisions. He believed it is a matter of the developer contracting for one landscaper to -9- 7/24/74 maintain it for a full year, rather than for a period of three months. The staff is convinced that a better finished product in the landscaping scheme is provided in this manner. Commissioner Wilson asked the Assistant City Attorney if he agreed that it is within the authority of the City to make this requirement. Mr. Beam agreed that it was within the authority of the City, but whether or not it might be a reasonable request in terms of providing that the growth of the planting is of a continuing nature and does survive is a decision that the Planning Commission must make. Mr. Lee commented that the time period of one year has been a recommendation of the landscape architect. MSUC (Wilson-Floto) Recommend to the City Council approval of the site plan PUD-74-2 for E1 Rancho del Rey Unit 3 West, in accordance with the recommendations in the staff report, with the modification submitted by Assistant City Attorney Beam. 1. The PUD site plan shall be modified to conform in boundaries and features to the tentative map. The site plan shall also be corrected to show minor modifications with regard to parking and driveways. 2. Submission and approval of the subdivision map, grading and improvement plans, subject to the conditions attached thereto shall be required. 3. The landscaping and irrigation plan shall conform to the guidelines set forth in PUD-71-2, the PUD Policy and the City landscaping policy, as well as the following guidelines: ' a. Usable common open space shall be landscaped predominantly in grass or other ground cover capable of accommodating pedestrian traffic. b. Slope banks may be hydroseeded provided there is an emphasis on trees and shrubs in the seed mixture. c. Specimen trees and shrubs shall be emphasized in the following locations: (1) Entrance to the project. (2) Recreation area. (3) Landscaped strips between driveways throughout the project. (4) On the sides of buildings which do not carry the architectural theme. The composition of specimen plant sizes shall conform to PUD Policy Resolution No. 7077. d. The landscaped areas shall include the slope south of the units down to Buena Vista Way. The landscape theme shall conform to that -1 O- 7/24/74 existing. The irrigation system shall be designed so that the slope is watered by a system on a separate meter than that serving the PUD itself. e. All irrigation systems shall be fully automatic. Hose bibs shall be placed strategically throughout the project to reach planted areas not covered by the automatic system. f. The developer shall be responsible for a period of one year for the maintenance of the landscaping after the date of initial acceptance by the City. At the end of one year the City shall reinspect the project to determine if the level of growth and maintenance has been satisfactory. If the reinspection is satisfactory, the responsibility for maintenance shall be turned over to the homeowners association. If the reinspection is not satisfactory, the Planning Commission may by resolution extend the maintenance responsibility of the development for an additional length of time. 4. The developer shall be responsible for submission of fencing and wall details and lighting details in conformance with PUD-71-2. 5. Because of their proximity to existing single family homes, the tennis courts shall not be night lighted. Specifications for construction of tennis courts on City-owned property shall be similar to those most recently constructed at General Roca Park. All construction details shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation. 6. On the site plan and buildinq plans provisions shall be made to provide a storage shed or room and a res~room for the maintenance crews working on the site. . 7. A final copy of the CC&R's shall be submitted for staff approval prior to approval of the final map. CC&R's shall include the following: a. Regulations for patio covers and room additions. b. Prohibition of garage conversions. c. Prohibition of resident parking in guest spaces. d. Prohibition of overnight parking in driveways. e. Prohibition of recreational vehicle parking in the parking bays or driveways. f. Prohibition of outdoor antennas. g. Provisions making the City of Chula Vista a party to the maintenance of common open areas. 8. Concurrent with application for certificate of occupancy for the first production model the developer shall submit to the Planning Department a complete set of reproducible maps as follows ("as built" changes to be approved by staff): ' -ll- 7/24/74 a. Landscape and irrigation plans and specifications (also one print with "as built" changes). b. Electrical plan for lighting (also one print of "as built" changes). c. Grading plan. d. Recorded final map and set of CC&R's. 7. Consideration of tentative map PCS-74-4 for E1 Rancho del ReS Unit 3, 38 'unit condominium, Otas Land Company Current Planning Supervisor Lee reported that the tentative map was filed as a five lot subdivision; however, that is being revised, and the development itself with all of the units would be a single lot (the area to the south with the oresent slope bank would encompass an open space easement to be granted to the City), and 1 lot for a future park area. A minimal amount of grading is involved--ll,O00 cu. yds.--since the southerly portion of the site is already graded and the northerly portion is relatively level. The onsite sewer will be a private system. He noted that no letters have been received from the School Districts, and that issue must be settled before the final map can be approved. Mr. Lee called attention to the nine conditions contained in the staff report, and recommended that item one relative to the slope bank lot being deeded to the City be modified to grant an open space easement to the City. Carmen Pasquale, representing E1 Rancho del Rey, agreed with the points which Mr. Lee had covered. ' MSUC (Wilson-Starr) Recommend to the City Council the approval of PCS-74-4 subject to the nine conditions in the staff report and the modifications sub- mitted by Mr. Lee. 8. Consideration of request for extension of conditional use permit C-66-~ · to use' fron~set'back for play area, 710 Third Avenue, First United ~ethodist Church Current Planning Supervisor Lee pointed out the area adjacent to J Street which was originally requested for a permanent play area in 1966. Based on the size of the site and the inappropriateness of the children's play area next to a busy street, approval was granted for a period of 5 years. In 1971 approval was granted for a 3 year extension on condition that upon review of the next development phase of the church master plan, the play ~ard would be relocated to an interior portion of the site and the present playground relandscaped. In the current request the church states that due to existing contracts with the Sweetwater Union High School District Adult School, they are delaying relocation of the preschool to another existing building and thus request extension of the permit for an unspecified period. June Close, Director of the Preschool, representing the Church and the Preschool, requested the Commission's consideration for making the playground area a -12- 7/24/74 permanent site, but expressed willingness to have the permit extended for one year. She said the building is licensed by the State Department of Health, and there is not another building on the premises which could be used. The only other suitable building is housing adult classes at present. The expense of con- structing another building is prohibitive at this time, so even a year's exten- sion of the permit would be welcome. Commissioner Wilson requested clarification as to whether the Commission was restricted to consideration of a one-year extension or if they might comply with the request for an unspecified period of time. Mr. Lee advised that the request is essentially for an approval of a permanent location, and that may be considered if it is the desire of the Commission. MSUC (Wilson-Floto) Approve extension of Conditional Use Permit C-66-5 for an unspecified period of time. 9. Consideration of request for freestandin~ pole si~n in C-C zone at 795 Third ~venue - EcOnon!v F~rniture Director of Planning Peterson advised this request is for approval of a 30' hlgh~ 200 sq. ft. freestanding pole sign. The pole would be mounted in a hole in the ground, but would come up through a canopy so it would tend to read much as a roof sign. Roof signs are not allowed in the C-C zone, but pole signs are per- mitted by authorization of the Planning Commission, provided the Commission resolves that a freestanding pole sign is necessary to adequately identify the business. He reported that staff has reached the conclusion that a pole sign is justified for identification of the building, since the proposed wall sign facing Third Avenue would not well identify the building to north-south traffic and a wall sign could not be placed on the south side of the building due to the exis- tence of a small building on the corner. Mr. Peterson indicated a site at the north side of the building where a pole sign might be placed in a planter area; however, due to other vertical elements such as trees, a utility pole and another pole sign immediately adjacent, this would prove to be confusing. He observed that under the existing Zoning Ordinance a 30' high sign would be allowed an area of 125 sq. ft. It is staff's opinion that 200 sq. ft. is out of scale with the building, and have recommended a sign 120 sq. ft. in area subject to four conditions. Commissioner Starr inquired if the proposed wall sign conforms to the Zoning Ordinance and Mr. Peterson assured him that it does. · Fran Berger, Pacific Sign Construction, representing the applicant, noted that the proposed pole sign is actually only 8' x 20', which is ]60 sq. ft. The Planning staff suggested that a mansard roof be put on the too of the sign to tie it in with the roof of the building. He protested that the size of the letters on a 6' x 16' sign would not be legible for any distance, and the smaller sized sign would be inconsistent with the size of the canopy and the length of the building. -13- 7/24/74 Commissioner Wilson determined by questioning Mr. Berger that the only condition of the staff opposed by the applicant was the one relative to the question of the size and height of the pole sign. Mark Fishauf, the applicant, stated that his building is 222 feet long and was of the opinion that the larger sign would be more in scale with it. Assistant City Attorney Beam inquired if the Ordinance provides a maximum size and height, or if that is completely at the discretion of the Commission. Mr. Peterson reminded the Commissioners that in the C-C zone they must find that the building cannot be adequately identified without the pole sign, and the size of the sign is limited in proportion to the height. Commissioner Starr inquired if there were a height limitation. Mr. Lee responded that the height limitation in this zone is 50 feet. He acknowledged that this is a pole sign, but it functions basically as a rooftop sign, and the maximum square footage for a rooftop sign is 150. In analyzing the proportions of the sign and the building, theappropriate height of the sign would seem to be 32 feet. Commissioner Wilson asked if the pole sign were located in the planter area would the staff agree to the greater height and area. Mr. Lee believed the staff would still object to the maximum height and area. Commissioner Starr asked if the sign the applicant has proposed is a conforming sign. Mr. Lee replied that it would not be conforming at the height proposed. Chairman Chandler wished to know what area would be allowed at a heiqht of 35 feet, and Mr. Lee replied that an area of 150 sq. ft. would be permissible. Mr. Peterson observed that no discussion has been held with the City Attorney regarding whether, since any pole sign requires Planning Commission review, the Commission is bound by the formula i~ the Ordinance, or if they may have some discretion in trying to relate the size of the sign to the size of the building. Mr. Beam was of the opinion that if the sign is classified as a pole sign it would be limited by the requirements that are normally affixed to a pole sign, Mr. Berger asked if he were correct in believing that the maximum square footage permitted in the C-C zone is 225, and Mr. Lee assured him that it is, Mr. Fishauf expressed willingness to erect the sign at a greater height. Mr. Peterson commented that inasmuch as the applicant is attempting to recycle the cabinet of a used sign at a substantial savings, if the Commission is in favor of a larger sign, the staff sees no objection to removing the proposed tile roof on the sign and utilizing the area for sign copy at a height of 35 feet and an area of 150 sq. ft. -14- 7/24/74 MSUC (Wilson-Starr) Approve freestanding pole sign PCM-74-17 for Economy Furniture at 795 Third Avenue~ subject to the following conditions: 1. The sign shall conform to Exhibit A (without the roof) and shall not exceed 35 feet in height and 150 sq. ft. in area. 2. The lower pole and base of the sign shall be enclosed within the building. 3. Existing nonconforming signs shall be removed prior to issuance of a sign permit. 4. Inasmuch as the pole sign authorized by this approval substitutes for signs that might otherwise be placed on the north and south walls of the building, no wall signs shall be allowed on those walls. 10. Consideration of request to extend hours of operation for 7-Eleven Food stor~~ i~ ~'N zone - charles Ree~ Dfstric~ Manager Director of Planning Peterson reported that this is a proposal to allow five 7-Eleven Stores in the C-N zone to remain open on a 24-hour basis. The CNN zone regulations specify that the normal hours of operation should be 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., allowing the Planning Commission the discretion to extend these hours. He believed the most persuasive argument for allowing this request is the survey taken by the applicant which resulted in an overwhelming response in favor of the 24-hour operation by the adjoining residents, since one of the purposes of the C-N zone is to serve the needs of the surrounding community. Charles Reed, District Manager of 7-Eleven Stores, commented that the main reason for requesting the longer hours was to better serve the communities where they are located. It has been the company's experience that fewer robberies and muggings occur in the 24-hour stores than in those with the 7 to ll hours. MSUC (Starr-Wilson) Approve the request for 24-hour operation at the five 7-Eleven Stores listed in Resolution PCM-74~16 with the condition that if problems arise at any of the five locations the staff may reschedule this matter so that the Planning Commission may reconsider and possibly rescind this action at any or all of the locations. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director of Planning Peterson reported that the newly appointed Commissioner, Alex Pressutti, expected to join the Commission at the meeting of August 28, 1974. Assistant City Attorney Beam advised that the Commissioners will be required to file Disclosure Statements, under provisions of the Moscone Bill, within the month of September. The City Council is expected to set a date for a Workshop Meeting in order for the City Attorney to counsel everyone collectively on the requirements of the law. Mr. Beam will also provide separate counseling for anyone who has special problems, and suggested calling the City Clerk to set up such an appointment. -15- 7/24/74 COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Wilson asked if the only meetings scheduled for August were on the 14th and the 28th. Mr. Peterson advised that there had been a dinner meeting tentatively scheduled for August 21st. Commissioner Starr asked what would be the next step on the Sign Ordinance. Mr. Peterson expected it would go before the Council probably sometime around the middle of August. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Chandler declared the meeting adjourned at 10:22 p.m. Respectfully submitted, .~q_eoda Scholl Acting Secretary