HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1983/02/09 Tape #228
Side l: 0-1945
MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Wednesday - February 9, 1983 Council Chambers
7:00 p.m. Public Services Building
ROLL CALL
Commissioners present: Chairman R. Johnson, Commissioners Cannon,
Green, G. Johnson, O'Neill, Pressutti, and Shipe
Commissioners absent: None
Staff Present: Director of Planning Gray, Principal Planner
Lee, Principal Planner Pass, Environmental
Review Coordinator Reid, Assistant City Attorney
Harron, Senior Civil Engineer Daoust, and
Secretary Smith
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, SILENT PRAYER
The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Johnson and followed
by a moment of silent prayer.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES for the meeting of January 12, 1983
MSUC (O'Neill/Shipe) to approve the minutes.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
1. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PCC-82-4,
FOR A 48-UNIT SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING PROJECT AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF FIFTH AND PARKWAY - BORDI,
SUTHERLAND, PALUMBO
Principal Planner Lee noted that the City Council approved this conditional
use permit in February, 1982, and applicant is now requesting a two-year
extension citing present economic conditions in the housing industry as the
reason for not beginning construction. There have been no significant changes
nor developments in the immediate area affecting the original findings and
conditions of approval.
MSUC (G. Johnson/O'Neill) to grant a two-year extension of PCC-82-4, the
permit to expire on February 2, 1985.
To: City Planning Commission
From: Bud Gray, Director of Planning
Subject: Staff report on agenda items for Planning Commission Meeting
of February 9, 1983
1. Consideration of request for extension of conditional use permit, PCC-82-4~
for a 48 unit senior citizen housinq project at the
northwest corner of 5th & Parkway - Bordi~ Sutherland, Palumbo
A. BACKGROUND
1. In February 1982, the City Council approved a conditional use permit
(PCC-82-4) for the construction of a 48 unit senior citizen housing project at
the northwest corner of 5th Avenue and Parkway in the R-3 zone.
2. The applicant has requested a two year extension of the conditional use
permit citing present economic conditions as the reason for not beginning
construction.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion to grant a two year extension of PCC-82-4, the permit to expire
on February 2, 1985.
C. ~ISCUSSION
There have been no significant changes or development in the immediate area
affecting the original findings and conditions of approval. Because of the
present economic situation in the housing industry, it is appropriate to extend
the permit for a period of two years to allow for a sufficient amount of time
for the project to begin construction.
VISTA SQUARE
ELEMENTARY ,
Planning Commission -2- February 9, 1983
2. PUBLIC HEARING: (Continued from the meeting of January 12, 1983)
EIR-79-6(a) SAMMIS PROPERTY, NORTH OF "E" STREET, WEST
OF I-5
Staff member Reid stated that the public hearing on this item was continued
from the meeting of January 12 to analyze new traffic information and enable
the applicant to further study the traffic generation factors. The conclusion
of this analysis was that although some levels of service were lowered, the
mitigation factors outlined in the draft EIR are adequate. All letters
previously submitted to the commission, including a response to each of the
comments germane to the draft EIR, are included in Section ll of the final
EIR. Also included is a letter from the Sammis Group received since the
January 12 meeting. The traffic and archaeological sections of the text,
which represent the major changes since the presentation of the draft EIR,
have been modified. The Commission was asked to consider any testimony
germane to the EIR, to close the public hearing, and to certify the final
EIR. Mr. Reid presented Tom Huffman of WESTEC Services and Bob Sargeant,
their traffic consultant, to answer any questions.
In response to a question from Con, missiOner G. Johnson, Mr. Sargeant stated
that both traffic surveys were accomplished in one-week periods.
This being the time and place as advertised, Chairman R. Johnson reopened the
continued public hearing. As no one wished to speak, the public hearing was
closed.
MSUC (O'Neill/Shipe) to certify that EIR-79-6(a) was prepared in accordance
with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the
City of Chula Vista and that the Planning Commission considered the
information in that document in reaching a decision on the project.
3. PUBLIC HEARING: (Continued from the meeting of 1/26/83) GPA-83-2
PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE PLAN DIAGRAM OF THE LAND USE
ELEMENT OF THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN BY THE
REDESIGNATION OF A CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND, LOCATED
WITHIN THE NORTHWESTERLY QUADRANT OF "E" STREET AND
BAY BOULEVARD, FROM "PARKS AND PUBLIC OPEN SPACE" TO
"VISITOR COMMERCIAL": AND, TO AMEND THE BAYFRONT
SPECIFIC AND REDEVELOPMENT PLANS AND THE DRAFT LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM IN ORDER TO BRING THEM INTO A STATE OF
CONSISTENCY WITH THE PROPOSED REDESIGNATION
Principal Planner Pass stated that the applicant intends to utilize lands
located within the northwesterly quadrant of "E" Street and Bay Boulevard for
off-street parking to serve the visitor-commercial commercial office complex
he plans to develop on the adjacent 7 acres of land to the east. He cited
that this particular parcel, containing approximately 4.30 acres of land, is
owned by SDG&E and is traversed by high-power transmission lines and towers.
He noted that the use of this land for parking will require an amendment; (1)
to the plan diagram of the Land Use Element of the Chula Vista General Plan by
a redesignation of this 4.30-acre parcel from "Parks and Public Open Space" to
"Visitor Commercial," (2) to the plan diagram and Land Use Chart of the Local
Coastal Plan by both the City Council and the Coastal Commission.
Planning Commission -3- February 9, 1983
Staff member Pass made a presentation in which he emphasized that the
reduction of public open space would be minimal and would not significantly
alter the project area's dominance by open space, which would continue to
occupy more than 36 percent of the Bayfront Community. He outlined the
benefits to be incurred including (1) economic viability of the Bay Boulevard
area by expansion of its commercial land usage and parking to support those
uses; (2) improvement in the public financial picture by allowing more
commercial development and thereby realizing more revenue; and (3) promotion
of land economy, in that the area is located under transmission power lines
which severely limit its potential use.
Commissioner Cannon asked if staff had knowledge of Sedway-Cooke's
recommendations for this area. He questioned the advisability of approving
projects piece-meal without seeing an overall plan for the area.
Planning Director Gray replied that the sequencing is unfortunate. However,
the council was aware of the Sedway-Cooke effort, that they have examined the
Sammis proposal on several occasions, and they have basically said "proceed"
to the applicant on this General Plan amendment. So far as the Planning
Commission is concerned, the City has not adopted a plan covering this area,
and the issue before the Commission is whether or not this 4-acre strip of
land, zoned O-S, under the high-power transmission lines, can be used for
parking for a project on the adjacent strip of land.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Jeff Wissler, 4349 North Palm Beach Drive, San Die~o, the Project Manager,
spoke in favor of the project affirming that this is the highest and best use
of this property, and Sammis wants the project to be in total conformity with
the City's General Plan before the Coastal Commission is approached.
There being no further speakers, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (O'Neill/Shipe) to recommend that the City Council approve and adopt the
proposal to amend the plan diagram of the Land Use Element of the Chula Vista
General Plan by the redesignation of a 4.30-acre parcel of land from "Parks
and Public Open Space" to "Visitor Commercial."
Commissioner Cannon stated that he would support the motion only because he
believes it is the highest and best use of the property. He voiced an
objection to the Planning Department's "failure to come up with an overall
plan prior to bringing other plans" before the Commission.
Commissioner O'Neill questioned the present status of the Local Coastal Plan.
Planning Director Gray explained that the Local Coastal Plan in operation is
one previously adopted by the Council and partially certified by the Coastal
Commission. Some issues were disputed and are not certified.
Commissioner O'Neill stated he would reword the second staff recommendation to
specify "previously approved" Local Coastal Plan when he made his motion.
Planning Commission -4- February 9, 1983
MSUC (O'Neill/Green) to recommend that the City Council approve and adopt the
proposed amendments to the plan diagram and Land Use Chart of the previously
approved Local Coastal Plan, and direct the Community Development Department
to submit such to the Coastal Commission for approval and certification.
4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-83-D, REZONING APPROXIMATELY 4 ACRES AT 321 RANCHO
DRIVE FROM R-3-P-11 to R-3-P-13 - CARL SALATINO
The applicant is requesting a change of zone for 3.89 acres from R-3-P-11 to
R-3-P-13 in order to construct eight additional units.
Staff member Lee pointed out that the site is just under 4 acres in size and
is presently zoned R-3-P-11 which allows a density of 42 units. The applicant
actually constructed 40 units because of economic reasons and the fact that
the remaining undeveloped 1 acre is encumbered by two 20-foot wide power line
easements. The developer would like to add eight additional units. They will
be identical to the units now existing on the property. This is consistent
with the General Plan of the area and approval is recommended subject to six
provisions outlined in the staff report.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Carl Salatino, 6218 Turnford Drive, San Diego, owner of the property, advised
that he accepted all the recommendations made in the staff report. He
explained that the rains had caused the emulsion from the roof to stain the
carport-garages. Gutters and rainspouts are being installed to prevent
recurrence. The driveways had been damaged by the trash trucks which are now
forbidden access to the driveways.
James R. Quinn, 219 D Rancho Drive, Chula Vista, representing the Rio East
Homeowners' Association, affirmed that the Association is trying to maintain a
semi-urban area and after viewing the plans has no objection to the rezonin9.
Commissioner G. Johnson asked if the gutters and rainspouts could be required
on other developments. She was informed that they could be considered by the
DRC if so requested by the Planning Copmmission.
No one else wishin§ to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (G. Johnson/O'Neill) to find that this project will have no significant
environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-83-14.
MSUC (G. Johnson/O'Neill) to recommend that the City Council approve the
change of zone for 3.89 acres at 321 Rancho Drive from R-3-P-11 to R-3-P-13
subject to the precise plan guidelines in the staff report and, further, that
Item "c" be amended to include gutters and rainspouts.
Planning Commission -5- February 9, 1983
5. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE BONITA GLEN
SPECIFIC PLAN - SHELL OIL COMPANY - PCM-83-2
Principal Planner Lee explained the proposed amendment by Shell Oil to add
service stations and car washes to the list of permitted uses. He noted that
Shell Oil has owned a 17,000-square foot parcel at the southeast corner of
Bonita Road and Bonita Glen for approximately 16 years. They were granted a
conditional use permit for a station in 1966 but it was allowed to expire and
the subsequent request made in 1975 was denied. The land use for this
particular area is controlled by the Bonita Glen Specific Plan which was
adopted in 1977 and does not include service stations and car washes as
allowable uses. Staff Member Lee outlined the history of the service stations
in this area including the several applications and/or extensions which were
denied.
Shell 0il has supplied the Planning Commission with a market analysis of the
area and a traffic count to support their request to provide this area with a
third service station. In checking these fi9ures, the Planning Department
finds that the traffic counts on 1-805 have not chan§ed substantially between
1981 and 1982, remaining at approximately 71,000 vehicles per day. The SANDAG
projection showing approximately 130,000 cars traversing 1-805 in 1990 is
based on the second border crossing and the full development of Otay Mesa
area. It is felt that the present economy of the area does not substantiate
this projection. In addition, the traffic count on Bonita Road west of 1-805
has not substantially increased from the 1977 figures, and therefore the
motorist's needs can be served by the two existing service stations. Further
objections to designating the corner lot for a service station/car wash
include little or no enhancement of the architecture in the area as a
self-service station typically has limited landscaping, excessive curb cuts
and a preponderance of asphalt paving. For these reasons, the Planning
Department recommends denial of the amendment.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Charles Hart, 511 No. Brookhurst, Anaheim, representing Shell Oil Company,
stated that Shell proposes to build an automatic, self-service station/car
wash similar in design and operation to the facility presently located at
Broadway and "E" Street. This type of operation does not require a
multiplicity of cars or employees on the premises at one time. There will be
little noise involved as there are no car repair facilities planned. He
maintained that Shell is willing to make this site as aesthetically pleasing
as the City and the Design Review Committee wish. In response to questions,
he stated there is no intention of operating a mini-market and that
construction would commence in the next six or seven months. With regard to
excessive blacktopping, Mr. Hart reiterated that Shell has been cooperative in
acceding to the landscaping requirements of the City. He introduced Frank
Facadi, Shell's area engineer, who reminded the Commission that decorative
concrete had been added to the facility at Broadway and "E" at the
Commission's request. Mr. Hart then requested time to make a rebuttal to
persons speaking against the project.
Planning Commission -6- February 9, 1983
Speaking against the project were Mr. Don O'Neal, 91 Bonita Road, Chula Vista,
representing Love's BBQ, Ramada Inn Hotel, and Texaco Self-Service Station.
Also, Mr. Paul Gibson, 1259 Calle Candelero, Chula Vista, owner of the Union
76 Service Station. They objected on the grounds of the poor image created by
such a use of this site, the traffic problem, lack of freeway oriented signs
to entice travelers from 1-805, multiplicity of service stations on "E"
Street, decrease in traffic on Bonita Road when "H" Street is completed, and
the fact that the present economic situation prevents them from operating at
capacity at the present time.
Speaking in favor of the service station/car wash was Mr. Frank E. Ferreira,
270 Bonita Glen, Chula Vista, who declared that as the largest property owner
within the Bonita Glen Specific Plan Area, he is the most directly affected by
the project and that a car wash was needed in the area.
There being no additional speakers, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Green/Cannon) to find that EIR-77-2 is adequate and satisfies CEQA
requirements for the proposed amendment and to certify the EIR.
MS (Green/Cannon) to approve the request to add service stations and car
washes as permitted uses within the Bonita Glen Specific Plan.
Commissioner Pressutti stated he was voting against the motion because it was
not the type of development that seemed appropriate for that location.
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Cannon, Green, G. Johnson, and Shipe
NOES: Commissioners Pressutti, O'Neill and R. Johnson
ABSENT: None
Staff member Lee stated that an appeal to the City Council may be filed by
anyone wishing to do so within ten days.
6. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE'S
DENIAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN FOR FOUR
TWO-BEDROOM UNITS AT 494 "F" STREET - MICHAEL AND
NELLIE ANASTASI - DRC-83-5
Staff member Lee informed the Commission that the applicant proposes to remove
the existing single-family dwelling and detached garage and construct four
two-bedroom multiple-family units. The Design Review Committee continued
review of the project from the 11/4/82 meeting to allow the applicant's
designer time to incorporate the Committee's suggestions and review their
concerns regarding the exterior elevations and building bulk.
Planning Commission -7- February 9, 1983
On December 2, 1982, by a vote of 4-0, the Design Review Committee denied the
revised application as, aside from the roof, little substantive change had
been made to the building elevations. Mr. Lee emphasized that the proposed
structure had been designed to fully extend to the maximum limits of the
building setbacks which created the box-like, straight-line facade along the
westerly property line. Slides were shown illustrating possible design
solutions. Mr. Lee stressed that if the applicant chooses not to revise the
proposed project to address the long, plain, wall and the other problems, then
the project should be disapproved. In event of approval by the Commission,
the applicant should still address and comply with the site plan problems
identified in the staff report to the DRC, dated December 2, 1982.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Chuck Koon, 3517 Camino del Rio South, San Diego, representing the owners,
referred to their efforts at compliance, citing the changes made, the number
of plans submitted, and the number of meetings (three) held with a
subcommittee and the DRC.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
The Commission commented on some of the solutions shown in the slides and
expressed the belief that with a little more effort on the part of the
designer a better design solution could be evolved. The Commission discussed
continuing the item and then decided that the item should be returned through
the DRC for their contribution on any amended design solutions.
MS (G. Johnson/Pressutti) to support the work of the Design Review Committee
to deny the applicant's appeal and recommend that the applicant resubmit their
revised plan to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Pressutti amended the motion to stipulate that the item be
resubmitted to the Design Review Committee instead of the Planning Commission.
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners G. Johnson, R. Johnson, Pressutti, O'Neill and Shipe
NOES: Commissioners Cannon and Green
ABSENT: None
7. PUBLIC HEARING: PCA-83-1 - CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY
Staff member Lee stated that the Municipal Code presently limits the number of
unrelated persons in a single dwelling unit to three persons. Since the court
ruling against this limitation, the City has been attempting to revise the
Code as well as determining the standards that would not be at odds with the
decision of the courts. Several possibilities including a
square-footage-per-person ratio, and a parking-to-person ratio were
Planning Commission -8- February 9, 1983
considered. It is therefore recommended that an ordinance amending the
Municipal Code be adopted as set forth in the staff recommendation.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Mrs. Joy Short, 839 Halecrest Drive, Chula Vista, spoke against the proposed
amendment and read a prepared statement in which she defined a family as "an
individual or a collective body of persons living together as a single
housekeeping unit in a permanent domestic relationship based on birth,
marriage, or other domestic bond of social, economic and pyscholo§ical
commitment to each other."
MSUC (Cannon/O'Neill) to continue the matter for 30 days and leave the public
hearing open for other definitions that might be brought to the Planning
Commission.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
Planning Director Gray reminded the Commission of the upcoming workshop
scheduled with the Design Review Committee.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner G. Johnson suggested the use of the name "Senior Cottages" in
place of the term "Granny Flats."
ADJOURNMENT at 9:40 p.m. to the joint Planning Commission/Design Review
Committee meeting on February 16, 1982, at 5:00 p.m., in Conference Room 1.
Ruth M. Smith, Secretary
Planning Commission
WPC 0235P