Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1983/07/27 Tape 237 - Side 1 0 - 1550 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Wednesday, July 27, 1983 Council Chambers 7:00 p.m. Public Services Buildin9 ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Vice Chairman O'Neill, Commissioners Cannon, Green, G. Johnson, Pressutti, and Shipe COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Chairman R. Johnson (with previous notification) STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Gray, Principal Planner Lee, Senior Civil Engineer Daoust, City Attorney Harron, Secretary Ruth Smith PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, SILENT PRAYER The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Vice Chairman O'Neill, acting as Chairman Pro Tem for the meeting, and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairman Pro Tem O'Neill asked that the minutes of June 22, 1983, page l0 be revised as he had not seconded the two motions as indicated in the minutes. Commissioner Cannon stated that he seconded both of the motions. MSUC (Shipe/Cannon) to approve the amended minutes as mailed. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCA-82-2 - CONSIDERATION OF VARIOUS AMENDMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO AMUSEMENT FACILITIES AND GAMES This item was continued by the Planning Commission from its meeting on June 22, 1983. As the public hearing was not closed, additional testimony may be received. Principal Planner Lee reviewed the suggestions made during the previous meeting and included in the revised staff report. He emphasized that the enforcement of regulations for businesses having fewer than four machines would be difficult. A 90-day period in which businesses might apply for a conditional use permit or comply with the new regulations was also proposed. Planning Commission 2 July 27, 1..9~ Richard Dentt, 1025 Rippey, E1 Cajon, 92020, speaking for Sears, expressed concern over the need for an "additional" conditional use permit for their arcade when all proposed regulations are already being met and the business has been in operation for some time. Mr. Lee answered that this would not be an additional CUP. At the time of the installation of the machines, the criteria used to determine whether the operation was accessory to the main store was based on the square footage of the entire Sears' building to the area of the game arcade. Therefore, Sears does not have a conditional use permit for the arcade. Clint Sadler, 47 Palomar Drive, Chula Vista, CA 92010, representing Fun-4-All Game Arcade located at "L" and I-5, commented that what is being proposed is the deregulation of businesses having fewer than four games. He cited incidents (in other cities) and showed an advertisement for a special box that enables the location of games outside stores and gas stations. He suggested that minors not be allowed to play during normal school hours and the lO00-foot school proximity stipulation be disregarded because of the ease of transportation. Mr. Lee noted that the ordinance does not represent any deregulation since three or fewer machines are presently allowed for any business as an accessory use. (City Attorney Harron arrived at 7:20 p.m.) Commissioner Green cited an article in the California Lawyer re game ordinances in Glendale, San Francisco, Sacramento County, Ojai', and Los Angeles. Generally, these areas regulate all games and require CUPs for businesses operating over a certain number of machines. Mr. Green maintained that the same rules should apply to all facilities not just the large establishments; no minors should be allowed to play during school hours; adult supervision and bike racks should be required, including for 7-11 stores; and no minors should be allowed to play in liquor stores or other facilities dispensing liquor. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Discussion among the Commissioners included that the ordinance presently proposed be strengthened to regulate operations with fewer than four machines; establishments maintaining only one machine will have to choose between retention or compliance with the regulations; regulations to be applicable to all establishments having game machines; a conditional use permit be required for more than three machines; elimination of the restroom provision (hardship) for businesses with fewer than four machines; and the difficulty of enforcing the lO00-foot school proximity stipulation. MS (Cannon/Shipe) to refer the item to staff for further input re businesses having fewer than four machines. ~ P. lan.nin~. Commission - 3 - Jul~ 27, 1983 Further discussion ensued about the guidelines to be given to staff - games to be located indoors only, minors not allowed to play during school hours, nor permitted to operate machines in liquor stores. Director of Planning Gray suggested that this be discussed at the Workshop meeting on August 17. Chairman Pro Tem O'Neill proposed that as part of the motion, the public hearing be reopened. MOTION AMENDED: Commissioner Cannon amended the motion to continue the public hearing for further input of the public and to continue the item to the first meeting in September. Commissioner Shipe agreed to the amendment. Chairman Pro Tem O'Neill declared the public hearing reopened and continued until the first meeting in September. Commissioner Pressutti asked that staff examine the possibility of including some grandfathering provisions of existing facilities and consideration of modified fees in recognition of years of operation without problems. The motion to refer the item to staff for further input re businesses having fewer than four machines, and to continue the public hearing for further input of the public at the first meeting of September (9/14/83) passed unanimously. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE ZAV-84-1 REQUEST FOR REDUCTION IN FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR' PARKING - APPEL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Principal Planner Lee stated the applicant intends to develop a two-story, 45-unit apartment complex on a 1.5 acre lot between Casselman and "D" Streets. He is requesting a reduction in the front yard setback to allow six off-street parking spaces along each street. This parking would be screened by a 3-1/2 foot high stucco wall. The Design Review Committee considered this project Thursday, 7/21/83, and was concerned about the setback requirements because of the relatively tight landscaping distance between the sidewalk and the wall; namely, 4 feet on Casselman and 2 feet on "D" Street. The project was approved subject to the outside parking spaces being removed. Thus, a total of three spaces each on "D" and Casselman could be provided in the setback with the remaining six spaces included within the project area. The applicant cited the presence of other properties in the immediate area which have parking within the front setback. (Slides shown.) However, these units were developed prior to the adoption of the present regulations. Staff recommended that the variance be denied as there is no justification on the basis of hardship nor achievement of parity with other recent developments. -- Plannin.~ Commission - 4 - . Jul~ 27, 1983 This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Kevin Knox, 1944 N. Tustin, Suite 118, Orange, CA 92665, representing the Appel Development Corporation, introduced himself as one of the principals of The Fifth Day, the designer of the project. Mr. Knox made a presentation to the Planning Commission showing a model of the proposed building and a series of slides illustrating on-site parking and setback parking in neighboring developments. He described the proposed parking design pointing out that 50 percent of the parking was underneath the buildings themselves; the four main on-site parking locations were sheltered by the buildings from the exterior; and the setback parking is screened by a wall, located at the entrance to the parking complex and designed for guest parking. He elaborated on the safety factor for pedestrians because of the lack of vehicular traffic and expressed concern over the zoning ordinance which "seemingly only allows parking within the common area where people live, play and communicate." Raul Padilla, 645 Beech Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010, stated that he owned apartments nearby and was concerned about the parking for his tenants. Mr. Lee explained that the action would affect only the parking of the applicant. Earl Ehrenberg, 3012 Denver Street, San Diego CA 92117, stated he owned the apartment project immediately west of the site on "D" Street and expressed concern that parking in the front setback would detract from the appearance of his property. He also pointed out that his property was at a lower level and additional cement on the applicant's property would aggravate the water run-off he is already experiencing and create a hardship for him. The Commissioners discussed the difficulty of supporting a finding of hardship in this case; the supposition that the need of the owner to construct a building which gives occupants a chance to meet and be safe from vehicular traffic within the development might be interpreted as a "practical difficulty" when the designer tries to reconcile this goal with the parking requirements and thus constitute a "hardship"; the reduction of the number of units necessary to comply with the setback regulations; recommendations of the DRC; the attractiveness of the design; and the need for space for people. The Commission complimented Mr. Knox on his design and on his presentation. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MS (G. Johnson/Pressutti) that based on the findings contained in Section "E" of the staff report, to deny the request for reduction in the front yard setback parking. The following votes were recorded: AYES: Commissioners Cannon, G. Johnson, Pressutti NOES: Commissioners Green, O'Neill, Shipe ABSENT: R. Johnson A 3 to 3 vote being a negative vote, the Chairman declared the request for variance be denied. - Planning. Commission - 5 - July 27, .1.~8~ The applicant was informed of his right to appeal to the City Council within 10 days from the date of decision. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-83-23 - REQUEST TO EXPAND DAY-CARE NURSERY ONTO 610 FOURTH AVENUE - LOUISE AND CLIFFORD PETERSON Principal Panner Lee stated that the applicants are requesting permission to expand the existing facility to a parcel located immediately to the south at 610 Fourth Avenue. This will enable the applicant who has been in operation for approxiately ten years to expand the level of service without relocation. Letters have been received from neighbors requesting the installation of a masonry wall along the common property line on the the west to reduce the noise level. Staff recommends that the area west of the building not be used as a play area until the applicant secures the services of a qualified acoustician to determine anticipated noise level and make recommendations to minimize any impacts on the adjacent properties. Commissioner Shipe asked if staff had received any complaints on the noise level of the facility and was informed that there had been none. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Louise Peterson, 212 Ash Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010, owner and operator of the "I" Corner Preschool and Day Care Facility, volunteered that they never have received any complaints regarding noise. The requested expansion is the result of a demand for care involving older children of working parents. These children will arrive after school at 2:30 in the afternoon. Mrs. Peterson had no objections to any of the staff recommendations but declared the driveway space was needed for a play area because a mandatory separation between the area for the older and younger children prohibits removing the fence between the two properties. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Cannon/Pressutti) to find this project will have no significant environmental impact and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-83-31. MSUC (Cannon/Shipe) that based on findings contained in Section "E" of the staff report, to approve the request, PCC-83-23, to establish a day-care facility to 610 Fourth Avenue subject to the conditions outlined in the staff report. DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS: Director of Planning Gray informed the Commission that after much consideration, the City Council filed the accessory unit ordinance until an application is actually received. Council expressed concern about the age enforceability aspect, the CC&R's, parking, and lack of information available in terms of numbers of applications anticipated. Planning Commission - 6 - Jul~ 27, 1983 Principal Planner Lee: Requested cancellation of the August lO meeting for lack of agenda material. The Commission agreed. Stated the meeting scheduled for August 17 is a dinner/workshop meeting which will commence at 5:00 in Conference Rooms 2 and 3. In addition to the amusement facility ordinance discussed earlier, the agenda will include a request to amend the Land Use Chart to permit catering service in the C-N zone. Commmissioner Green suggested that the ideas on density in the R-3 zone as expressed by Mr. Knox also be discussed at the workshop session. COMMISSION COMMENTS: In reply to her question, Commissioner G. Johnson was informed that it has been 8 to 10 years since the apartment/condo parking provisions have been reviewed, that the review was scheduled but had been deferred because of the need to respond to Council referrals. The Commissioner then suggested that this matter might be discussed at the Workshop meeting if time were available. Chairman Pro Tem O'Neill informed the Commission that he will be out of town - on August 10. ADJOURNMENT at 9:00 to the Workshop Meeting of August 17, 1983, at 5:00 p.m. in Conference Rooms 2 and 3 and the Regular Business Meeting of August 24, 1983, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Ruth M. Smith, Secretary Planning Commission WPC 0448P