Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1979/06/27 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA June 27, 1979 A regular meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California was held on the above date beginning at 7:00 p.m. with the following members present: Smith, Pressutti, G. Johnson, O'Neill, Williams and Stevenson. Absent (with previous notification): Commissioner R. Johnson. Also present: Director of Planning Peterson, Supervisor of Current Planning Lee, City Engineer Lippitt, Assistant City Attorney Harron and Secretary Mapes. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Smith, followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Stevenson-Williams) The minutes of the meeting of June 13, 1979 be approved as written, copies having been mailed to the Commissioners. Commissioner Smith abstained from voting due to his absence on June 13th. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Smith called for oral communications and none were presented. l. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance PCV-79-6 - Consideration of request for reduction in lot size, rear Nard and lot depth, 720 Fourth Avenue, Donald and Martha Causton Supervisor of Current Planning Lee noted the location of the subject property at the northwest corner of Fourth Avenue and James Court, which contains approximately 15,450 square feet. An existing single family residence is located toward the Fourth Avenue frontage. The applicant's proposal to split the property into two lots would require the installation of street improvements and the dedication of additional right-of-way for the street which amounts to nearly 20% of the lot area. That dedication would leave the lot area just over 12,000 square feet which, if divided, would result in two 6,000 square foot lots. As the longest dimension of the westerly lot is adjacent to James Court, the lot depth measures 60 feet, and a reduction in rear yard setback along this north propertly line is necessary in order to site a residence on the lot. Under a proposed development plan the west portion of the lot would function as the rear yard. The applicant submitted a site plan showing the placement of a two story structure on the undeveloped lot, and the staff has prepared an alternate plan to show the use of a single story structure of approxi- mately 1900 square feet which would not exceed the permitted 40% coverage of the lot. -2- June 27, 1979 Mr. Lee pointed out that if this variance is granted and the applicant develops the second lot and provides street improvement adjacent to his property, the street frontage of the adjacent lot to the west would be the only portion of James Court not fully improved and the City could require installation of those improvements to complete the street. Mr. Lee acknowledged receipt of a petition signed by 31 property owners in the vicinity of this property expressing opposition to the granting of the variance. The petition indicates the signers are opposed because it would create two sub-standard lots. Each lot will contain a minimum of 6,000 square feet, after dedication for the street and an easement for sidewalk, and the Municipal Code allows a percentage of 6,000 square feet lots in a development in the R-I zone under the subdivision process. This parcel is level with the total area usable. In the staff's opinion the proposed development would be an asset to the area rather than a detriment. Mr. Lee displayed photos showing the condition of James Court at the intersection and the existing house fronting on Fourth Avenue, which is being remodeled. He recommended approval of the variance request subject to five conditions as stated in the staff report. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Sam McQueen, 438 James Court, spoke against granting the variance, pointing out that the south side of James Court was carefully planned and developed twenty years ago with one family on each adequately sized lot. Room additions and swimming pools have been installed on some of those properties and additional homes have been built on the north side of James Court, but each improvement observed the zoning regulations. He contended that a deviation from those regulations for the subject property would create substandard sized lots. He felt the applicant should acquire additional area from adjacent lots to provide for standard sized lots that would not require a variance. Walter Chisholm, 844 Coum~y Club Drive, owner of the property adjacent on the west, asked about their liability in providing street improvements. City Engineer Lippitt explained the various alternatives for requiring improvement of the remaining section of James Court. The cost of this would be borne by the property owner across whose frontage the street is extended. Mr. Chisholm indicated he was not opposed to the street improvements but wanted to know the alternatives and whether they must pay for the cost at the present time. Paul Yeager, 414 "J" Street, owner of abutting property to the north, raised strong objection to the reduction in rear yard setback, contending that it would be an invasion to their privacy. He suggested the require- ment of a 6 foot cement block wall on the north and west property lines if the variance is granted. -3- June 27, 1979 Mr. Lee pointed out that as the property now exists the required setback from the north property line is 5 feet. In addition he noted that Mr. Yeager's house is located approximately 75' away from that line. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner O'Neill expressed the opinion that in view of the requirement for dedication of 20% of the property to the City for street improvements, the applicant is entitled to consideration for a means of making full use of the property. He felt the requirement of a 6 foot cement block wall would be excessive. The Commission discussed the setbacks on other lots in the area and the possibility of dividing other properties that front on James Court. MS(Pressutti-Williams) Based on the findings stated in the staff report, the Commission approved the variance request, PCV-79-6, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. MS(O'Neill-Stevenson) The motion be amended by modifying condition 2.d by striking the last portion of the sentence, following the words "northerly property line," and modifying condition 3 to state, "Development on the west parcel shall be a single story structure, subject to architectural approval of the Zoning Administrator." The amendment to the motion passed by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners O'Neill, Stevenson, G. Johnson, Smith NOES: Commissioners Pressutti and Williams ABSENT: Commissioner R. Johnson The motion as amended passed by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners O'Neill, Stevenson, G. Johnson and Smith NOES: Commissioners Pressutti and Williams ABSENT: Commissioner R. Johnson Chairman Smith advised that this action may be appealed to the City Council within ten days. The meeting was recessed at 8:15 p.m. and reconvened at 8:25 p.m. -4- June 27, 1979 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 79-17, Kimball Terrace, 80 Third Avenue, conversion of 5 unit apartment complex to condominiums Supervisor of Current Planning Lee reported that in June 1977 a precise plan was approved for a five unit apartment development for this site. Construc- tion of the project has not been started and the applicant has submitted a subdivision map to sell the units as a condominium project. The only change in design details from the original plan is the addition of storage space to be constructed along one side of each garage. Due to the narrow width of the garages the staff is concerned that this may create problems in getting in and out of vehicles. It is recommended that the storage be modified to provide part of the space overhead at the front of the garage and also to provide 40 to 80 cubic feet of storage space in the patio area adjacent to each unit. In considering condominium development or conversion the City Council has expressed concern over having part of the storage space adjacent to the units. It is recommended that the tentative map be approved subject five conditions listed in the staff report. Commissioner O'Neill questioned the adequacy of 40 to 80 cubic feet of storage adjacent to each unit and suggested that requirements be changed to 80 to 120 cubic feet. Commissioner G. Johnson asked if storage in enclosed garages would not be considered as adjacent to the units. Mr. Lee felt this would depend on the location of the garages and whether they were on the same ground level as the living units. In this multi-story structure the garages are below the living units. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Michael Roark, 241 "H" Street, advised their site plan is the same as that approved as a precise plan. Since their decision to construct the project as condominiums they have added plans for elevators from the garage to the level of the living units. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Chairman Smith suggested that the wording in the first condition be changed to state that the easements for drainage purposes be 5 feet and 5.5 feet on each side of the drainage pipes rather than on either side. MSUC (G. Johnson-Stevenson) Based on the findings as stated in the report, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the tenta- tive subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 79-17, Kimball Terraces, subject to the conditions in the report with condition 1 modified to state "on each side." -5- June 27, 1979 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of PCA-79-12 to amend the Municipal Code relatin~ to storage requirements for condominiums and adoption of a storage policy for condominium units Director of Planning Peterson pointed out that the first part of this proposal is for an amendment to the Municipal Code which would specify the volume of storage space required for condominium units based on the number of bedrooms in the unit, ranging from 150 cubic feet for a studio or one bedroom unit up to 300 cubic feet for four bedrooms or more. The second part of the proposal is for a policy covering additional criteria for such storage and deals with location, adjacency to the units, security and architectural compatibility with the rest of the buildings. Mr. Peterson felt that the requirement to have storage adjacent and easily accessible to the living unit is important although it may be difficult to meet this requirement in many of the older apartment complexes which might be considered for conversion. He suggested that an additional sentence be added to item 9 to state: "Where attic storage is provided, it shall be enclosed with one hour fire resistant construction." Chairman Smith inquired why the requirements are recommended as a policy rather than an ordinance. Mr. Peterson advised adoption of the criteria as policies will permit more freedom of interpretation and flexibility in applying them to each project. Each condominium project must come before the Planning Commission for tentative map approval and the policy approach would permit a greater amount of discretion by the Planning Commission to evaluate each case on its own merits. In discussion, Commissioners O'Neill, Stevenson, Smith and Pressutti expressed their opinions that the various criteria should be mandatory. Assistant City Attorney Harron advised that if it is the Commission's desire to make the requirements mandatory they should be included in the ordinance. If the Commission wishes to have some discretion in considering each condo- minium proposal the criteria should be adopted as policy. Commissioner Stevenson expressed the opinion that the amount of storage to be required by ordinance is too small and that each category should be increased by 50 cubic feet. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Gene York, 160 Brightwood, advised that he is not concerned over the requirements as they exist today or as proposed to be amended for condominiums planned as such, but he felt some aspects of the proposed ordinance and policy requirements would preclude the conversion of 99% of the existing apartments in Chula Vista to condominiums. He felt one of the reasons the Council has asked for requirements concerning storage was that in many proposals for conversion the storage was being shoe-horned in where it did not properly fit. In some cases providing the storage as stipulated would detract from the architectural attractiveness of a building. He expressed the opinion it would be preferable to have some flexibility in applying the requirements for each proposal, and urged that the requirements not be more mandatory than at the present time. -6- June 27, 1979 Dick Kau, 452 Third Avenue, expressed the opinion it is not a good idea to include all requirements in a stringent ordinance because there are cases when the Commission should have some flexibility. He pointed out that the conversion of apartments makes it possible for some people to buy housing when they would not otherwise be able to do so. He felt the City should have some discretion as to whether to allow or not allow each proposal for conversion rather than being locked in by stringent requirements. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Chairman Smith advised that he did not wish to make the requirements totally inflexible, but felt it should be a definite set of specifications which, if met, would assure automatic approval of the plan, without con- sideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. It was pointed out that because a tentative map is required, each condominium project is required to have both Planning Commission and City Council approval. Mr. Smith also suggested that as a matter of clarity, the wording should be changed to "enclosed storage space," rather than storage area, since it represents a cubic measurement. Commissioner O'Neill stressed that the same standards should apply to condominiums converted from existing apartment buildings as for condominiums initially constructed as such. Any complex that could not meet the require- ments should not be approved for conversion. Commissioner Pressutti contended that each requirement should be definite as indicated by the word "shall," with a clause to require review of each proposal and permit departure from the stated standards when good cause can be shown. Commissioner G. Johnson asked for comment from the Attorney regarding attic storage and its accessibility. Assistant City Attorney Harron discussed his concern over provisions relating to the location of the storage because there is no case law or statutory law to authorize the kind of regulations being proposed. There must be some authority for any regulations adopted and in the absence of that authority being specifically granted by the state, the City falls back on police power which permits regulations to protect the safety, health, and welfare of citizens. The requirement of storage space is probably defensible because it protects the safety and enhances the esthetic appearance of an area. Commissioner Williams asked about the possibility of removing these regula- tions from the building code section and placing thom in the zoning ordinance, so the Commission could establish some definite guidelines or requirements and then use the variance procedure where it was warranted. Mr. Harron indicated that staff would look at that possibility. He then discussed social zoning which has been upheld by the courts, and which could be used to limit the conversion of apartments to condominiums. -7- June 27, 1979 In discussion it was the general consensus that, not only the amount of storage space, but the regulation of its location should be covered by an ordinance to become a part of the Municipal Code. It was suggested that the wording of such provisions should not be attempted in this meeting but the hearing should be continued to the next meeting and the staff asked to rewrite the requirements in ordinance form, and also that consideration be given to moving it to a section of the zoning ordinance. MS (O'Neill-Williams) Consideration of an amendment to the Municipal Code relating to storage requirements for condominiums be continued to the next meeting. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners O'Neill, Williams, Stevenson, Smith and Pressutti NOES: Commissioner G. Johnson ABSENT: Commissioner R. Johnson Mr. Gene York asked if this would come back as a public hearing. Mr. Harron advised that the public hearing could be reopened at this time and continued to a certain date. Chairman Smith declared the public hearing reopened. MSUC (Pressutti-Stevenson) The public hearing for consideration of an amendment to the Municipal Code relating to storage requirements for condominiums be continued to the meeting of July 11, 1979. 4. PUBLIC HEARING (cont.): Consideration of PCA-79-9 to amend the Municipal Code relatin~ to dwelling 9roups in R-E and R-1 zones Director of Planning Peterson noted that a dwelling group is defined in the ordinance as a group of two or more dwellings on a parcel under one ownership and having a yard or court area in common. Dwelling groups are listed as conditional uses in the R-E and R-1 zones and are principle permitted uses in the R-2 zone. This provision of the ordinance has not been widely used as it has been more common to subdivide a large lot and sell the individual parcels. Mr. Peterson pointed out there is some ambiguity in the present language in the code in that it does not specify the type of dwelling structures that can be included in a dwelling group. Under the amendment proposed at this time, dwelling groups would continue to be a conditional use in the R-E and R-1 zones, subject to Planning Commission approval, and will be a principle permitted use only in the R-2 zone. The proposed ordinance also clarifies the existing language and stipulates that a dwelling group must consist of the dwelling types allowed in the underlying zone. -8- June 27, 1979 Chairman Smith declared the continued public hearing reopened. As no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Pressutti-O'Neill) The Commission finds that this amendment will have no significant environmental impact and adopts the Negative Declaration on IS-79-50. MSUC (Pressutti-Stevenson) The Commission recommends that the City Council enact an ordinance amending Section 19.58.130 of the Municipal Code relating to dwelling groups, as written in Exhibit "A" attached to the staff report. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Winston Caine, 166 Third Avenue, reported that this is the last meeting of the Planning Commission that he will be covering as a Star News reporter, as he will begin covering the education beat for the paper next week. He expressed his enjoyment in covering the Commission meetings for the past 13 months and his efforts in being fair in his reporting of Commission actions and opinions expressed. As a citizen he complimented the Commission on their efforts to assure housing for low income residents and on enactment of the mobile home park zone. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Pressutti asked about the status of social zoning in Chula Vista. Assistant City Attorney Harron expressed the opinion that the City is not even on the threshold of adopting social zoning. If the Commission feels such legislation should be enacted to control the conversion of apartment units to condominiums, the Commission should make such a recommendation to the City Council. Director of Planning Peterson reported that the City Council had discussed numerous ways of regulating conversion to condominiums at the time of considering the present ordinance and had decided they did not wish to place a limitation on the number of conversions, but rather to adopt standards that would assure good condominium development. Commissioner Stevenson asked about the lack of air conditioning in the Council Chambers. Mr. Peterson reported that one of the three air conditioning units which serves the chambers has not been operating, and that a part for its repair is on order and should arrive by next week. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Smith adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Secrety~