Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1984/05/23 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 7:00 Council Cha~ers Wednesday, May 23, 1984 Public Services Building ROLL CALL COI~ISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman O'Neill, Commissioners Cannon, Green, Guiles, Pressutti and Shipe CO~IISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Johnson - without prior notification STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Krempl, Principal Planner Lee, Senior Civil Engineer Daoust, Assistant City Attorney Gill, Associate Planner Liuag, Secretary Ruth Smith, Zoning Enforcement Officer Hodge, Planning Technician II Hernandez (interpreter) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman O'Neill and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSC (Cannon/Shipe) to approve the minutes of April ll, 1984. Commissioner Green abstained because of absence from the meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP, DAVID, RIGDON AND ST. MARIE, CHULA VISTA TRACT 81-2, 564 "J" Street - CONSTANT DAVID Associate Planner Liaug stated the tentative map to convert 32 units of a 34-unit apartment complex located at 564 "J" Street into a one-lot condominium project had been approved by Council on June 9, 1981. As there have been no significant changes to affect the original conditions or findings, staff is recommending a 3-year extension of the tentative map which will then expire on June 9, 1987. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission -2- 5/23/84 MSC (Shipe/Pressutti) - O'Neill voted "no" - to approve a 3-year extension of the tentative map for David, Rigdon and St. Marie, Chula Vista Tract 81-2, the map to then expire on June 9, 1987. Chairman O'Neill said he had voted "no" in conformance with his policy of voting against condominium conversions as long as there is a low vacancy factor in the Chula Vista rental market. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: (CONTINUED) PCZ-84-H CONSIDERATION TO REZONE THE EASTERLY 293 FEET OF A 2.95 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER BROADWAY AND MOSS STREET FROM C-T TO R-3 Principal Planner Lee stated this item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of )~y 9, 1984, by the applicant and is a request to rezone tile easterly 293 feet of a 2.95 acre parcel to Multiple Family Residential from Commercial Thoroughfare. The 1972 Broadway Study recommended in general that commercial depth along the east side of Broadway between Arizona and Moss Streets be increased and commercial uses on corner lots be oriented toward Broadway. The property has a lot depth of 443 feet from Broadway with several potential access points on Moss Street which could impact the residential land uses along ti~at street. The applicant requests the C-T zone be established at a depth of 150 feet and has submitted a conceptual plan showing such a development. The Planning Department, I~owever, recommends a depth of 200 feet because this corresponds with adjacent northerly property; allows more flexibility in development; and is in conformity with the minimum 200-foot established depth for apartment development on commercially zoned property. Mr. Lee cautioned the Commission that when viewing tile slides to be presented by the applicant showing possible development schemes that they should assume tile property would be developed with the 292-foot frontage remaining intact and rear-loading would not be required. Tilis being tile time and the place as advertised, tile public hearing was opened. Jack Duncan, 2700 Adams Avenue, San Diego, 92116, the Project Coordinator, stated that the application for a senior housing conditional use permit had been withdrawn; they agreed in principle with the staff report regarding Moss Street being a residential street; however, a commercial depth of 150 feet was sufficient. He continued that (1) the abutting property immediately to tile north is cut off by Telegraph Canyon Creek and is really a 140-foot depth; the next two properties are 200-feet but the balance of the other properties are 130 feet deep ~ith one at 150 feet; ti)erefore, the staff's "conform to property" relates really to only two pieces of property; (2) there is a distance of 230 feet to the nearest apartment, not 200; (3) the P-zone could be imposed which could prohibit splitting the parcel into areas with smaller frontage unless approved by the Commission; (4) there is a need for moderate affordable housing which could be developed without detracting from the commercial property along Broadway. Planning Commission -3- 5/23/84 Bill Hedenkamp, 1331 India Street, San Diego, 92101, the architect, made a slide presentation showing the site plan for the residential project demonstrating the footage, perimeter parking, and loading areas. In reply to the Commission, Principal Planner Lee explained the property to the north was the result of a previous development which occurred years ago in the County and presented problems with development and orientation; however, a new development on file north side of Arizona Street adhered to the 200-foot depth with parking provided on both sides of the building. Further discussion by the Commission included the flexibility and options offered by attachment of the P-zone to either commercial, residential or both; the need for specificity of guidelines and findings when attaching a P modifier. Commissioner Cannon expressed concern about attaching a P zone at this time in view of the lack of opportunity for either staff or the applicant to present their opinions of such provisions more fully. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Tile public hearing was reopened for further questioning about the P modifier and file amenability of the applicant toward its attachment with three conditions: l) a prohibition against subdividing the property until after a precise plan is approved; 2) limiting the building height to one story; 3) establishing a 25' separation between the proposed commercial buildings and new residential structures. The applicant replied that their only concern would be with attachment of the condition relating to the residential separation if substantial changes were required to their proposed design. Mr. Lee indicated attachment of the P zone to the residential could be avoided by the applicant's agreement to a 25-foot separation between residential and commercial (as presently delineated in tile Code) as this would clarify any future development plans in the commercial area. The public hearing was again closed. MSUC (Green/Shipe) to adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-84-24. MSUC (Green/Cannon) that based on the findings that the attachment of the P Modifying District will allow the placement of development standards to ensure that the residential area will not be adversely affected by the reduced depth of the commercial designation not presently inherent in the provisions of the Planning Commission -4- 5/23/84 Municipal Code to recommend that Council enact an Ordinance to rezone the easterly 293 feet of the 2.95 acre parcel located at the northeasterly corner of Broadway and Moss Street from C-T to R-3 and that the P Modifying District be attached to the remaining C-T area (150 feet) subject to the following precise plan aevelopment standards: 1. The property shall not be divided until a precise plan is approved and the property developed. 2. No buildings shall exceed one story in height. 3. There shall be a minimum separation of 25 feet between the commercial and residential structures. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: (CONTINUED) PCC-84-16 - REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 136-UNIT SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BROADWAY AND MOSS STREET - WAYNE BRIENHOFF This item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of May 9, 1984. The applicant has withdrawn his application for a conditional use permit which should be filed with no action. Letter from applicant submitted to Commission. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-84-6 - CONSIDERATION OF TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION ~UkP FOR THE NINE - CHULA VISIA TRACT (91-6 - WIL CORP Associate Planner Liuag informed the Commission that Negative Declaration IS-81-40 had been provided to replace the incorrect Negative Declaration IS-81-4, which had been delivered in their packets. He also noted that the Initial Study referred to in the staff report as IS-81-4 should be IS-81-40. Mr. Liuag stated the applicant is requesting conversion of a 9-unit multiple family project presently under construction at 385-391 "G" Street into a one lot condominium project. The project was approved by the Design Review Committee and consists of six two-bedroom townhouse units and three one-bedroom flat units in a co~ination two and three-story structure with six garages located on the ground floor of the building. Also provided is a three-car garage and eight open spaces. He presented slides of the project illustrating the contemporary architecture, location and egress/ingress into the property. Mr. Liuag added the proposed project meets the condominium requirements relating to private open space, storage and parking as well as those of the underlying zone and that staff recommends approval subject to the conditions in tile staff report. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Planning Commission -5- 5/23/84 Xavier Wiechers, WIL Corporation, 424 Broadway, Chula Vista, 92010, the applicant, commented that the complex is built for people who like to live downtown and provides three condominiums on the ground ~oor for use by older people. He indicated his willingness to answer any questions. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Pressutti/Guiles) to adopt Negative Declaration IS-81-40. MSUC (Pressutti/Cannon) that based on findings contained in Section "E" of the staff report, to recommend the City Council approve the tentative subdivision map for The Nine, Chula Vista Tract 84-6, subject to the conditions outlined in the staff report. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-84-21 REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A SELF-SERVE GAS STATION, FO~D MART AND CA~ WASH AT 1291 THIRD AVENUE - TEXACO, INC. Principal Planner Lee stated that the item involves replacement of an existing service station located at 1291 Third Avenue with a self-serve gas station, food mart and car wash. Three of the driveways would be retained and the fourth removed. Mr. Lee presented slides shewing the original development, the proposed canopy area and car wash, and the new color con~ination adopted by Texaco. Also shown were slides of freestanding pole signs of the type proposed by the applicant, and of the monument signs preferred by the Planning staff. Principal Planner Lee stated the site design was approved by the Design Review Committee subject to the submittal of a total sign program including a revision to the proposed 30-foot high freestanding pole sign. The Committee suggested lowering the sign and reducing the square footage by placing the pricing information into a separate signing program. The applicant has indicated they are willing to review the suggested program. This being tile time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. David Matson, Texaco, Inc., 3350 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles, stated he was in agreement with staff's recommendations with the exception of the signing. His concerns included pedestrian safety caused by visibility being impaired by the co~ination of the monument sign, the slight street incline and passengers waiting for the bus stop. Additional concerns were vandalization of monument signs and their upkeep expense. Commission discussion followed regarding identification across the canopy area; the tendency to hang additional information underneath freestanding signs; location of other freestanding signs in the area; visibility at the intersection but not when approaching the intersection; the reaction of the applicant if a monument sign was made a condition of approval. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission -6- 5/23/84 MSUC (Cannon/Pressutti) based on findings contained in Section "E" of the staff report, to approve the request, PCC-84-21, to establish a self-serve gas station, food mart and automatic car wash at 1291 Third Avenue subject to the following conditions: 1. That the applicant, the Design Review Committee, and the staff mutually agree upon a sign program for ~e entire site. If such an agreement is not possible, the item will be returned to the Planning Commission for further consideration. 2. That tile new driveway on Palomar Street shall be an alley-type approach. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-83-14: SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY CONVALESCENT HOSPITAL, 713 DORA LANE - COMMUNITY HOSPITAL Associate Planner Liuag reminded the Commission that a conditional use permit had been granted in Marcl~ 1983 for the construction of a 138-bed skilled nursing facility on the hospital site at 751 Dora Lane. At that time, the Commission also approved tile relocation of the existing heliport. The revised plans include a 128-bed skilled nursing facility in essentially the same location as previously proposed, but the building has been completely redesigned and so has the parking and on-site circulation. The building has been increased in size, and the parking increased from 56 to 202 with the bulk of the parking located east of the building. An enclosed pedestrian walkway is proposed between the main hospital and the new facility which wilt necessitate closing the driveway presently serving the easterly portion of the site. The location of the helispot remains the same until details are resolved wi th the Federal Aviation Agency. Mr. Liuag continued the three items of concern for staff include the architecture whicll is somewhat institutional in appearance, the proposed parking layout and circulation which will need redesign for tile second phase of construction to proceed. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Doug Mayoras, Stichler Design Group, 1450 Frazee Road, San Diego 92108, tile architect, speaking in opposition to staff recommendations, asked for exemption from Design Review Committee consideration as the original design had not been reviewed by that body; that the project be approved as a 128-bed facility provided the arcllitectural vernacular as established be maintained; and the road not be moved until the juncture of adding Phase II to the project. Using slides and the three-dimensional model of the first phase of construction, Mr. Mayoras summarized the proposed design changes in the facility; namely, the fl at roof an~ simple building are more in context with other buildings on the campus; the curved expression of the building allows response to natural site facilities, can be broken up with a central dining room (having a view of the ocean instead of the rear of the hospital), adds variety to the facade, and provides a front door close to Dora Lane; the columns on the veranda provide a buffer from the road and make patients feel Planning Commission -7- 5/23/84 more secure and less exposed; the 250-foot long corridor appearance of the previous design is eliminated; and the proposed road will be for emergency vehicles only. ~m. Mayoras stressed that the rapid changes in health care make it difficult to predict the additional services to be required within 5 years which mi~t require further relocation(s) of the road. David Jarrett, Community Hospital, 751 Dora Lane, Director of Building and Grounds, stated the hospital would agree with staff's recommendation that the primary road not be relocated and a circulation route be provided on the east end of the parking lot in event of expansion of the project. He explained the architect was under the impression the staff recommendation was to remove the access road to the outer perimeter of the parking lot. Considerable discussion ensued in an effort to clarify the confusion regarding this topic. Associate Planner Liuag explained that two separate items were involved - that (1) the final access road should be shown on the present plans so the second phase will not necessitate rerouting the road; for example, if the access road was located along the easterly boundary line, it would not )lave to be rerouted to gain access to the parking area east of the main structure when Phase II starts; (2) circulation can be improved wi th this existing parking layout by the addition of another lane along the easterly side of the parking lot. Mr. Jarrett replied that he would then decline to show the new access road in light of the fact that the exact configuration of the expansion project is unknown because of possible changes to health care requirements in the next 5 years. He would, however, include a circulation loop on the parking lot at this time. Director of Planning Krempl commented that the Design Review Committee is the appropriate body to review a facility of this magnitude and general impact which has made design issue changes. It is extremely difficult for staff to evaluate and respond to the parking proposal because of the applicant's non-commitment regarding the design or site location of the Phase II development. He questioned the possibility of approving the modification of the conditional use permit for 98 beds at this time, and the applicant returning wi th firm plans for evaluation as a real proposal 5 years from now. He al so expressed his appreciation for the penetration between those parking lots along the easterly border. Commissioner Green expressed the opinion that the Commission need not be overly concerned about the parking as it will be to the hospital's advantage to adjust the parking. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Pressutti/Green) to readopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-83-17 and adopt the addendum to the Negative Declaration which states that the original document is adequate for the proposed project. Planning Commission -8- 5/23/84 MSU (Pressutti/Green) to approve the modification to the conditional use permit, PCC-83-14, subject to the following conditions: 1. A landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitteU for approval by the City's Landscape Architect prior to construction. 2. llne interior circulation of the parking area shall include a road along the eastern periphery portion of the parking area. Commissioner O'Neill stated that he fully approved the project and his negative vote was because the project was not being reviewed by the Design Review Committee. A RECESS WAS CALLED FROM 9:00 TO 9:05 P.M. 7. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF PCM-84-8: REVOCATION OF HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT AT 724 NOLAN AVENUE, LAURO L. PARRA Assistant City Attorney Gill read Section 19.14.90 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code relating to home occupations. He pointed out that the decision of the Planning Commission was final and not appealable to tile City Council. He requested that anyone making a presentation of evidence before the Commission be sworn in. The Chairman then requested all persons intending to give testimony to stand, raise their right hand, and the Secretary read the oath. Attorney Gill additionally cautioned the Chairman that he should confirm with each speaker that they have taken the oath. Principal Planner Lee stated the City became aware of the illegal operation of a business after receiving complaints from neighbors about the use of phones within an accessory building. Mr. Parra was informed by mail in October 1982 of these complaints; the requirement of a home occupation permit which would be approved only if all business calls were received in the residence and not in the accessory building; and that this decision could be appealed to the Planning Commission. On February 8, 1983, the Zoning Enforcement Officer notified Mr. Parra by mail to cease conducting business within 10 days whereupon a home occupation permit and business license were applied for and issued on March 24, 1983, for a mail-and-phone business for property management (although the business actually involves a trucking operation in Mexico). As a result of continuing complaints from neighbors of business being conducted in the accessory building, a meeting was held with Mr. Parra on May 3, 1984. Through an interpreter, he indicated two phones and two desks were located in the accessory building which constitutes a violation of the home occupation permit as issued. Written and verbal complaints have also been received regarding the large nun~aer of cars, trucks, people and phone calls with resulting disturbance to the neighbors. Mr. Lee then introduced Roy Hodge. In answer to a query from the Commission, Assistant City Attorney Gill replied that the permit and all issues pertaining to it were under consideration, not just the 1 ocation of the phones in the accessory building. Planning Commission -9- 5/23/84 Roy Hodge, Zoning Enforcement Officer for tile City of Chula Vista, reviewed a chronology of zoning violations at 724 Nolan Avenue from April 17, 1980, through April 3, 1984. Armando Ramirez, 729 Nolan, Chula Vista, affirmed he had been sworn in and declared he is a close neighbor of Mr. Parra and has acted as an interpreter between Mr. Parra and tile Zoning Enforcement Officer and as an intermediary with the neighbors. He stated Mr. Parra does not seem to comprehend the policy of tile R-1 zone or the requirements of tile City; there is much traffic in and out of Mr. Parra's property including trucks, cars and groups of people coming and going at all hours of the day and night; Mr. Parra has one of the largest trucking operations in Mexico and when he leaves on vacation, the business operation continues in his absence; when the drivers of the large trucks (semis) are in with Mr. Parra, the engines are left running and the whole street vibrates; Mr. Parra was selling cars out of L.A., however, he no longer sells used cars but still manages his personal property and hotels from his home; long distance calls were received in both the accessory building and in the house; the employees live on the premises and also do domestic chores. In response to questions, Mr. Ramirez added that tlealth and the language may be the reason wily Mr. Parra prefers to work from his home rather than a normal office. Ne requested revocation of tile license. W. Gene Smith, 8950 Villa La Jolla Ave., La Jolla 92037, the attorney representing Mr. Parra, affirmed lie had been sworn in. He testified that Mr. Parra was not licensed to operate trucks in this county; the employees mentioned are Mr. Parra's niece and her husband; Mr. Parra does not wish to disturb the neighborhood and will eliminate the "ringing" and substitute a buzzer in the house; Mr. Parra is undergoing surgery tomorrow and needs this home office; he has an office in National City but the license is for office space only. He asked that the home occupation permit not be revoked. In answer to the Commission, Assistant City Attorney Gill stated that if "guests" are coming in a business capacity, then there is a violation as the purpose of the visit sets the criteria; if the Commission is convinced a violation has taken place, the permit may be revoked. Additional testimony was given by the following: Dan Toomey, 718 Nolan; Jean Kearley, 729 Mission Avenue; Paul Kincade, 715 Nolan; and Mary Kaye, 735 Nolan. All affirmed they had been sworn in except Mary Kaye to whom the oath was then administered. Their testimony included the length of time (4 years) the condition has existed; the large cement parking area for cars and its possible enlargement; the disturbance to the neighborhood with strangers knocking on doors; the windows of accessory dwelling built on the property line look into neighbor's house; noise of loud voices and phones perpetually; house sale fell through because of noise from accessory dwelling; property value lowered; unable to enlarge home; intrusion of Parra family business into private lives; police called repeatedly; possibility of illegal aliens; license plates changed; twenty cars parked on the block; photos of large trucks and copies of police patrol figures available; use of a police scanner by "truckers"; semi-trucks from Nevada, California, and Mexico; names painted over; trucking business not appropriate for a home occupation permit because of the complexityand 24-hour duty. Planning Commission -10- 5/23/84 Mrs. Parra, through an interpreter, )~. Hernandez, stated (against the advice of her lawyer) that she felt discrimination was being shown because of their Mexican national ity. No one else wishing to testify, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Shipe expressed the opinion that it was difficult to comprehend that a man who operated such a large business was unable to understand when he ~as breaking the law. MSUC (Cannon/Ship e) to revoke the license based on the finding that the Parra operation had: 1. Altered U~e residential character of the neighborhood. 2. Created an appreciable increase in traffic. 3. Created a need for additional parking. 4. Created employment on site. 5. Created an increase in noise related to the operation. - 6. Created a need for storage of vehicles on site. 7. llnere was a trucking business in operation on site. The Commission discussed the legality of the structure in back but were informed that it was a legal building. Commissioner Green expressed the hope that any o~er such violations would be brought to the attention of the Planning Commission before such a long lapse of time. He also stated that he resented the remark made by Mrs. Parra that discrimination was involved. DIRECTORS' REPORT: None COMMISSION COMMENTS: The Commission requested that the Zoning Enforcement Officer report back on the conditions at 724 Nolan Avenue in 30 days. ADJOUR~4ENT AT 10:28 to the Regular Business Meeting of June 13, 1984, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Ruth M. Smith, Secretary WPC 1033P