Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1985/07/24 Tape 261 - Side 1 0-775 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers Wednesday, July 24, 1985 Public Services Building ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Cannon, Carson, Guiles, O'Neill and Tugenberg COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Wi th notification: Commissioners Green and Shipe STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Krempl, Principal Planner Lee, Assistant City Attorney Gill, Senior Civil Engineer Daoust PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Pro Tempore Cannon and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chairman Cannon reviewed the composition of the Planning Con~nission, its responsibilities and the format of the meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (O'Neill/Guiles) to approve the minutes of the meetings of May 8 and June 12, 1985, as mailed. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-85-22: REQUESTS PERMISSION TO RELOCATE AN EXISIING CARDROOM FROM ll THIRD AVENUE TO 631 "H" STREET VEGAS CLUB, INC. Principal Planner Lee stated that the applicant has requested a continuance to the meeting of August 14th and that staff is in concurrence. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened for anyone to speak to the matter of continuance only. No one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC {O'Neill/Carson) to continue this item to the meeting of August 14, 1985. Plannin9 Commission - 2 - July 24, 1985 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-85-12: REQUESTS PERMISSION TO CONSTRUCT 18 RESIDENTIAL UNITS FOR ALCOHOL RECOVERY PATIENTS AT 270 "C" STREET - SOUTH BAY PIONEERS Principal Planner Lee noted that the Planning Commission approved a request by the South Bay Pioneers for 24 units in February 1985; however, the Council denied the request. The applicant has now filed a new application for 18 units. This is an improvement over the previous request as the building density and mass have been reduced. As the previous plan provided, the single-family homes in the area do not face the applicant's property; in addition, access is to the west. The opposition states that the granting of this request would be an endorsement for higher density and might result in other rezoning requests. Staff's conclusion is that the proposed location is relatively isolated and idea for the extension of the operation. Staff supports the concept and maintains the same position as before stipulating that the project be limited to 12 units, one-story in nature. In reply to questions from the Commission, Mr. Lee stated that a single-story structure in this area would be partially screened from "C" Street with the second story being visible. He noted that five 2-story buildings could be erected legally in conformance with the R-1 density; however, there would be concerns raised about the dedication of streets with logical subdivision design because of the topography. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing as opened. James Johnson, 424 Stoneridge Ct., Bonita, 92002 - Secretary to the South Bay Pioneers' Board of Trustees, commented that this was an improved plan and much as they disliked having to reduce the unit size, they have done so. He noted that the combined density would be 25.2 people; the proposed two-story building would not be visible when the fence is in place, and stated his and Mr. Cody's willingness to answer any questions. In reply to questions from the Commission, Mr. Johnson said he felt the neighbors are objecting to the "program" rather than the building; that there had been some trouble the previous Sunday wi th a group of motorcyclists who made a lot of noise, but the episode had been taken are of; there is sufficient parking; and the project had been approved by the DRC on the 24th. The following people spoke in opposition: Susan Watry, 81 Second Avenue; Carol Smith, 275 Seavale Street; Herman A. Peacher, 202 Nixon Place; and R. L. Batterton, 209 Nixon Place. Their objections included that the neighbors, through the years, have had to protect themselves against proposals to install low-income apartments; a half-way house for disturbed teens; an alien detention center; a three-story care facility; and that an approval for the proposed 18-unit project will remove their protection against similar developments; (2) other options available to the Pioneers include renting from nearby facilities such as the senior center; (3) a park was originally promised on this site; {4) traffic would be increased; the location of the proposed driveway will compound already hea~ traffic; and (4) if the Pioneers leave, the structures would be suitable for apartments only. Plannin9 Commission - 3 - July 24, 1985 Joseph Cody, 4518 Patria Drive, San Diego, 92115, in a rebuttal for the South Bay Pioneers, spoke of the progress the Pioneers have made as a self-supporting group; their willingness to cooperate with the neighbors; their equal concern for safety; that existing residents will be able to look over the building tops as the original buildings and those now proposed are 21 feet high; the site is surrounded by apartments; and there could be no better use for the property than proposed. He concluded by saying that the written minutes of the Planning Commission since 1974 had been reviewed but there was nothing noted regarding a commitment for a park. Mrs. Watry questioned vacant property on "C" and Del Mar being shown as R-3 on the locator map. Staff explained that the City boundary needs to be adjusted on that particular map; that the property had been prezoned R-1 before its annexation to the City. In response to the Commission's question, Mr. Lee replied that staff had found no reference to a park in staff's review of the minutes. Mrs. Watry testified that she and Mr. Watry had also reviewed the tapes and found no reference regarding a park but found reference to landscaping for the neighborhood. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner O'Neill expressed concern over the position taken by the staff and the neighbors; remarked that R-3 zoning is not, per se, being granted for the property as the five buildings proposed are very much the same as residential R-1 units that could be put in with essentially the same occupancy and minimal visibility; and that perhaps it was the "program" and not the density or visibility to which the neighbors are objecting. He concluded that he was unable to see any objection when he considered what could be legally placed on that property. Commissioner Tugenberg commented that the project does not intrude on the neighborhood because of the topography and the screening; there is a zoning problem in this location because two neighborhoods are involved - one on the west side of Del Mar with a westerly orientation which is commercial and a mobile home park - the other residential. He concluded his remarks by saying the project area is relatively isolated and has no relationship to the rest of the neighborhood. Commisioner Cannon noted his agreement with Commissioner Tugenberg about the particular neighborhood; that it is not an intrusion in a R-1 zone; that, as Commissioner O'Neill stated, similar units could be built anyway and not be for rehabilitation purposes which he considers a special circumstance. He noted that there is much R-3 zoning in addition to the mobile home park so current usage is not being greatly changed. MSUC (Guiles/O'Neill) to find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-85-23. Plannin9 Commission - 4 - July 24, 1985 Principal Planner Lee stated that because Section "E" of the staff report did not contain any findings, the Commission might want to read the findings from the previous Planning Commission resolution into the record. At the request of the Commission, Mr. Lee read the findings as follows: 1. That the proposed use at the location is necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or the community. The project meets a community need by providing an expansion of an existing facility and a new program component in the treatment of alcoholism. 2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. The project site is depressed in elevation and buffered from surrounding uses by terrain, landscaping and lot orientation, and activities will be monitored by South Bay Pioneers staff. 3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the code for such use. The project shall comply with all applicable codes and regulations. 4. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely affect the general plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency. The project is permitted by conditional use permit, and conditions have been imposed which should ensure its retention in this use. MSUC (Guiles/O' Neill) that based on the findings read by Mr. Lee, the Commission approves a request to construct 18 residential units at 270 "C" Street subject to the conditions listed in the staff report with the dele- tion of "a", "b" and "d", and the addition of a condition that the number of units shall be limited to 18 one-bedroom apartments {minimum 500 square feet each). A RECESS WAS CALLED FROM 8:01 to 8:07 p.m. Upon return from the recess, Commissioner Cannon made an additional comment regarding the previous item saying that he is in agreement with Commissioner O'Neill that this is not a rezoning of the area but a conditional use permit; he can foresee problems for the South Bay Pioneers if they ever want to vacate the property; he can foresee problems in marketing the property under those circumstances; however, if the South Bay Pioneers wish to take that risk, they are the ones making the investment and they are not intruding in a R-1 zone. Plannin9 Commission - 5 - July 24, 1985 3. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PUD-85-1; REQUEST TO ELIMINATE RV STORAGE YARD AND DEVELOP A 48 UNIT APAR1MENT COMPLEX AT 1665-1667 BRANDYWINE AVENUE, DONALD AND JACQUELINE GOSS Chairman Pro Tem Cannon stated that because of a potential conflict of interest he would abstain from voting on this item and appointed Commissioner O'Neill to serve as Chairman Pro Tempore. Commissioner Cannon then left the dais and the room. Principal Planner Lee informed the Commission that a request had been received to continue the hearing on this item until the meeting of August 14, 1985, as there was there was concern that the majority of the residents within the Point Robinhood area were unaware that the sale of the property for multi-family usage reflected a 48-unit project rather than the 14-unit one originally approved. Also, only three residents of Point Robinhood had received notices of the meeting and the Homeowner's Association address was incorrectly listed by the Assessor's office. A letter was received from Mr. Kuta regarding the proposed sale. This letter was then read by Mr. Lee to the Commission. Mr. Lee noted that four votes would be needed to move forward to Council; and the Commission had three choices: {1) proceed, {2) continue the hearing to August 14th {applicant scheduled for Council on the 27th), or (3) continue for a longer period and revise the Council date. Staff is prepared to proceed with the hearing. A discussion between staff and the Commission included information by the City Attorney that the advertising and notice requirements have been met by the Commission, and it is unnecessary for the City to become involved in any dispute between the Association and members of the Board. Principal Planner Lee stated that the combination of not having the correct address listed with the Assessor and only three property owners receiving notices makes the situation unusual. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened for the purpose of addressing the point of continuation only. William Hedenkamp, Hedenkamp & Associates, 1331 India Street, San Diego, architects representing Don and Jacqueline Goss, stated that Mr. Goss would like to go forward with the hearing as the item must proceed through DRC and on to Council. A.W. Hall, 1675 Pt. Reyes Ct., 92011, a Point Robinhood homeowner, expressed concern that the Pt. Robinhood Board had prior knowledge of the development but the membership of the Association did not; that, in 1981, the membership had been informed of the sale of the RV lot but not the conditions involved. To his knowledge, he said, only the Board, himself, and Mr. Gomez of 1574 Pt. Reyes Court had received notification of the project. The agreement from the City has not been brought up before the membership, only the notice to "allow sale of RV storage lots" Planning Commission - 6 - July 24, 1985 Also speaking in favor of continuance was Hugh E. Winthrop, 1564 Diablo Point Court; and Joyce Haas, 1535 Pt. Hueneme Court; and Oscar Gomez, 1574 Pt. Reyes Court. Their remarks included information that the Board was reluctant to discuss the issue with the Association members; of the 194 members only approximately 25-30 were in attendance; proxy votes for absentees will be secured prior to the next meeting; and the continuance would allow sufficient time for the Board and the members of the Association to discuss the issues involved. For clarification purposes, Assistant City Attorney Gill informed the Commission that the City does not become involved in the legal transaction of the sale of the property. The Planning Commission will be considering the planned unit development, it is involved only in the use of the property once it changes hands. William Hedenkamp declared their agreement to the continuance in order that they have the opportunity to speak with the Homeowner's Association. Mr. Gomez declared that he paid extra money for the view when he purchased the house, and was very concerned about the type of development that would be on the site. Chairman Pro Tempore O'Neill remarked that the confusion is sufficient to warrant a continuance. MSC {TUGENBERG/Carson), Cannon abstained, to continue consideration of PUD-85-1 to the meeting of August 14, 1985. Chairman Pro Tempore O'Neill declared the item continued and the public hearing continued to August 14, 1985. Commissioner Cannon returned to the dais and resumed the duties of Chairman. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Planning Director Krempl informed the Commission that their business cards were on order. - He reminded them of the upcoming SANDAG workshop to be held on both the 14th and 20th of September, that the cost would be defrayed by the City, and requested that they inform the Secretary as soon as possible if they wished to attend. - Reminded them that the appointment of a new Chairman and Vice Chairman was on the agenda for the following meeting. Planning Commission - 7 - July 24, 1985 CO~IISSION COMMENTS: Commissioner O'Neill said he would be on vacation from 8/12 through 8/26/85. Commissioner Carson said she would be on vacation from 8/12 through 8/22/85. Principal Planner Lee noted that it would be necessary to check with Commissioner Green re§arding any possible conflict of interest on the continued hearing for Mr. Goss, otherwise there will not be a quorum. ADJOURNED AT 8:40 p.m. to the Regular Business Meeting of August 14, 1985 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Ruth M. Smith, Secretary WPC 2106P