Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1986/01/22 Tape 269, Side 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers Wednesday, January 22, 1986 Public Services Building ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Cannon, Commissioners Carson, Grasser, Green Guiles, Shipe and Tugenberg COb~4ISSIONERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Krempl, Principal Planner Lee, Principal Planner Pass, Assistant City Attorney Gill, Senior Civil Engineer Daoust, City Traffic Engineer Glass, Assistant Planner Herrera PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER The pledge of allegiance to the fl ag was led by Chairman Cannon and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chairman Cannon reviewed the composition of the Planning Commission, its responsibilities and the format of the meeting. ORAL CO~IUNICATIONS None. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-86-16 REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO CONVERT EXISTING SERVICE STATION LOCATED AT 495 TELEGRAPH ROAD INTO A 24-HOUR MINI-MARKET WITH SELF-SERVICE GASOLINE SALES - ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY This 1/2 acre commercial site located on the northwest corner of Telegraph Canyon Road and Hillcrest was developed about 15 years ago. Arco's request is to discontinue the auto repair service, to remodel the facility and operate a convenience store. A similar request was denied by the Planning Commission and Council in 1981. The store has a high level of activity so the demand for auto repair is still high and no justification is seen for a mini-market with a Vons and a ?-ll located close by. Although conversions from full-service stations to self-service gasoline and mini-markets have been permitted in other locations, automotive service agencies were nearby; whereas the elimination of the auto repair service at its present location would be a Planning Commission -2- January 22, 1986 deprivation to the neighborhood residents and freeway travelers in need of auto repair. Denial of this request would leave the option to reopen the service bays if so desired. A petition signed by over lO0 residents opposed to the conversion was submitted to the Planning Department slightly before noon and copies have been given to the Commission. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. C. Samuel Blick, Fairbanks Ranch, Rancho Santa Fe, representing the owner/applicant, Don Chrislock, noted that the proposed conversion was not of a unique facility as other full-service stations were located in close proximity; $250,000 would be invested by Arco and Mr. Chrislock to eliminate the service bays, double the amount of landscaping and remodel the station including the expansion of the existing very small sales area to provide convenience foods. Mr. Blick maintained that Mr. Chrislock had a right to close the service bays; the proposed project is not inconsistent with either the General Plan or any specific plan; no evidence has been presented to support the statement that "there may not be a need"; on the contrary, a market survey shows overwhelming support of the contention that this is a good location for a convenience store. Don Chrislock, 349 East Moss Street, Chula Vista, stated he had been in the auto service for many years; it was a small business employing two others; however, the special schooling and extensive inventory needed to repair the increasingly sophisticated modern cars was expensive, and he would prefer the easier job of operating a convenience market and self-service gas station. Replying to questions, he stated that he would be handling the same products as now but would have a greater variety; cited the location of other full service stations in the locality; and voiced an opinion that traffic would not increase beyond the 1600 cars entering his station daily. Commissioner Cannon inquired why a conditional use permit for a convenience store was being considered if one was already in existence for the "mini-mart". Mr. Lee explained that the 1981 application was for a full conversion and when it was denied, permission was granted to utilize a small office area to sell various goods. By use of the overhead projector, Mr. Lee contrasted the existing small sales area with that proposed. He noted that the original conditional use permit allows sales as a secondary and accessory use to auto repair and gasoline sales which would not apply if the convenience store were permitted as only gas would be offered additionally. Frank Wells, a realtor with Atlantic-Richfield, in response to questions indicated that prohibition of liquor sales by ordinance would affect the convenience store only if the neighboring stores {such as 7-11) were permitted to continue selling take-out liquor. Speaking in opposition to the conversion, Gary O. Wilson, 490 Hale Street, Chula Vista, representing members of his residential area, and Jackie McQuade, 339 East J Street, Chula Vista, elaborated on the issues listed in the previously mentioned petition; namely, {1) traffic conditions are already Planning Commission -3- January 22, 1986 extremely hazardous at that site with 21,089 cars daily using 13 exits and entryways into Telegraph Canyon within a 1/4 mile strip; (2) the market is totally unnecessary because there are shopping centers on both sides of the site with Vons and 7-11 store open to all hours; (3) nearby residents object to the additional noise, lights, litter, potential crime possibilities and traffic congestion that the market would invite especially during normal sleeping hours. Robert Gilmore, 484 Hale Street, CV, presented a letter which he read into the record requesting denial of the conditional use permit based on these same factors plus the contention that there would be a detrimental effect on the resale value of his property, and the lack of contact by Arco of the neighboring land owners for their opinions. If the CUP were to be granted, he recommended it be conditioned that the applicant should purchase the adjacent hillside to act as a buffer zone and a 6-foot wall be constructed thereon to serve as a further deterrent to lights and noise. Sam Blick returned to the podium and stated that 753 similar sites function well under the proposed conditions; he did not anticipate a significant increase in traffic if conversion approved because 80 percent of the people frequenting this type of establishment came to purchase gas and only 20 percent to patronize the convenience store facility. Most purchases ensued from impulse buying when motorists entered the store to pay for their gasoline. He indicated the hours would not be extended; the noise and mess caused by the auto repair shop would be eliminated; the operators would be fully trained in security methods; and a 211 alarm system would be installed. This alarm system would ring directly into the Police Station thereby providing security both on-site and for any off-site disturbance which might be observed by the station operator. He pointed out that the noise, lights and other nuisance factors mentioned would be controllable by the CUP process; he did not have figures on the percentage of people using the facilities for repair purposes primarily; and, if Mr. Chrislock had wanted to present a petition in favor of the conversion, he undoubtedly could have secured over 1,000 signatures from the patrons of the establishment. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Shipe indicated he would support staff's recommendation for denial because he saw only one positive feature (enhancing sales) as opposed to the negative features of lights, traffic, overall noise and people in the area. Commissioner Cannon said he also would support staff's recommendation of denial based on the traffic conditions in the area particularly because of the potential for stacking at this location. MSC (Guiles/Shipe) to deny PCC-86-16. Commissioner Green voted no. Commissioner Green explained that he had not changed his mind from his vote in support of the facility in 1981 and that a number of similar conversions had been approved, not only on Broadway but in other locations, with the necessary findings having been made in those cases. The City Traffic Engineer left the Chambers at 7:50 p.m. Planning Commission -4- January 22, 1986 2. PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-86-3 AND PCZ-86-A; CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN FOR THE REDESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY 566 ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN THE CENTERLINE OF THE OTAY RIVER AND THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF PALM AVENUE, AND BETWEEN 1-805 AND THE WESTERLY LINE OF RANCHO OTAY, IN THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO Commissioner Green cited a potential conflict of interest in that his clients own some of the property within the area and left the Chambers at 7:51. Principal Planner Pass noted that staff supported (1) certification of the Otay Mesa Community Plan/EIR and (2) the Commission's recommendation of Council approval of the redesignation and prezoning of the territory under discussion. He stated that the subject property is partially within the floodway and flood plain of the Otay River; is presently a territorial component of the Otay Mesa Community of the City of San Diego and carries an agricultural classification. The prezoning of the 566 acres is a prerequisite to deannexation from San Diego and annexation to Chula Vista as much of the land to the north and south of the Otay Valley Road and the easterly extension of Palm Avenue is held by the same owner. Further, the reorganization would unify the holdings within a single municipality; flood control planning and management would be simplified by inclusion of the north and south banks of the Otay River within the City of Chula Vista; and the zoning by Chula Vista would be consistent with that of San Diego; and the proposed GPA and prezoning would allow planning of the involved territory orderly and judiciously. Mr. Pass referenced the letter distributed to the Commission at the beginning of the meeting expressing the concerns of Walker Scott Property/Palm regarding: (1) the 40 acres adjacent to their property not included in the proposed deannexation and (2) the lack of water and sewer services by Chula Vista as are currently provided by San Diego. Mr. Pass identified the area on the overhead projector and stated the property owner had not wanted to annex to the City of Chula Vista and was not a party to this agreement. Director Krempl further explained that the property is owned by Robinhood Homes who own additional property in that area; and that the City Council of San Diego has indicated no opposition to the proposed organization at the present time. They did, however, request additional analysis and information prior to making a definitive recommendation. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Paul Robinson, 600 "B" Street, Suite llO0, San Diego, 92101, representing Otay Rio Business Park, spoke in support of the reorganization but noted that the referenced 40 acres wished to remain with the bulk of the Robinhood property in the City of San Diego. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission -5- January 22, 1986 MSC (Shipe/Carson) Green abstained - to certify that the Otay Mesa Community Plan/EIR has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and that the Planning Commission is considering the EIR as it reaches a decision on the project. MSC (Shipe/Carson) Green abstained to recommend that Council approve GPA-86-3 and PCZ-86-A to designate and prezone the subject territory to "Low Density Residential", "Medium Density Residential", and Parks and Public Open Space" and "F-l" and "A-8" in accordance with exhibits A and B. 8:04 p.m. - Commissioner Green returned to the Chambers and the dais. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-86-4 AND PCZ-86-B: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN FOR THE REDESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY 63 ACRES LOCATED WESTERLY OF BAY BOULEVARD, NORTHERLY OF PALOMAR STREET, AND ALONG THE EASTERLY SHORELINE OF SAN DIEGO BAY, IN THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO Commissioner Guiles cited a potential conflict of interest in that his present employer owns part of the property and left the Chambers and the meeting at 8:04 p.m. Principal Planner Pass stated that staff supported approval of the redesignation and prezoning of the territory under discussion. He noted that {1) the subject parcel is bounded by National City and Chula Vista; contains salt evaporation ponds, a vacant industrial structure and two SDG&E sites; is geographically, visually and economically part of Chula Vista's planning area constituting a southerly extension of the Bayfront Community Industrial Zone; {2) as a significant portion is owned by SDG&E, it should be planned in conjunction with the adjacent SDG&E industrial facility located in Chula Vista; (3) the proposed prezoning would be consistent with the land's existing use, San Diego's existing City plans, and the land-use pattern sanctioned by the Local Coastal Program. {4) General planning and prezoning would facilitate coordination of the territory with that of the Bayfront Community thus better guiding the orderly growth, environmental protection and economic development of the entire southerly waterfront. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSC {Tugenberg/Grasser) Guiles abstained - to recommend that Council approve GPA-86-4 and PCZ-86-B to designate and prezone the subject territory to "Research and Limited Industrial" and "l-L-P" in accordance with exhibits A and B. Planning Commission -6- January 22, 1986 DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS: Director Krempl - Reminded the Commission of the joint DRC/PC/Council tour and workshop starting at 2:00 p.m., on Saturday, 1/25/86. - Additional information regarding the LCC Planning Commission Institute to be held in San Diego from March 13-15, 1986 will be forwarded to them shortly. CO~ISSION COMMENTS: Commissioner Cannon will not be present at the meeting of January 25th or at the meeting of February 13, 1986. Commissioner Grasser said she would also be absent from the meeting of February 13, 1986. ADJOURNMENT AT 8:10 p.m. to the Joint Council, Design Review Committee and Planning Commission tour and workshop meeting at 2:00 p.m. on Saturday, 1/25/86, and to the Business Meeting of February 13th at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers Ruth M. Smith, Recording Secretary WPC 2496P