Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1979/08/08 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA August 8, 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: Pressutti, G. Johnson, R. Johnson, O'Neill, Stevenson and Williams. Absent, due to illness and with previous notification: Commissioner Smith. Also present: Director of Planning Peterson and Secretary Mapes. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Pro Tempore Pressutti, followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (R. Johnson-Stevenson) The minutes of the meeting of July 25, 1979 be approved as written, copies having been mailed to the Commission. Commissioners O'Neill and Pressutti abstained from voting due to their absence from that meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Pro Tem Pressutti called for oral communications and none were presented. 1. PUBLIC HEARING (continued): a. Conditional Use Permit PCC-79-22 - Request for gasoline sales in Conjunction with retail sales, 895 Broadway - the Southland Corporation b. Variance PCV-79-8 - Request for reduction of rear setback from 25' to zero, 895 Broadway - the Southland Corporation Director of Planning Peterson advised that a telephone call was received from the applicant requesting withdrawal of the conditional use permit application. It is therefore recommended that the application be filed without action. With reference to the variance application, Mr. Peterson noted that the public hearing was opened at the previous Commission meeting when only four Commissioners were present. The City Attorney has ruled that the Commissioners who were absent from that meeting could not vote on this item, unless the hearing is held de novo at this meeting with an opportunity for presentation of the testimony previously presented. If full testimony is received, the members who were previously absent will be qualified to vote. Mr. Peterson also pointed out that at the previous meeting there was some question as to the required rear yard setback. He advised that in the C-T zone the normal rear yard requirement is 10 feet, but if the site is adjacent to a residential zone, the setback is increased to 25 feet. However, another section of the code -2- August 8, 1979 provides that if there is an alley between the commercial and residential zones, half the width of the alley may be counted as rear yard setback. In this instance, a 30 ft. wide alley separates the two zones, so 15 feet can be counted as part of the setback and the required setback is therefore 10'. If the variance is granted the building can be constructed on the rear property line; it would then be 45 feet from any portion of the nearest single family home across the alley. It is the staff's conclusion that the intent of the ordinance requiring the increased setback for commercial development adjacent to residential use is met in this case by the existence of the alley and the setback of the homes on the adjacent lots. Findings to justify granting the variance are offered in the written report to the Commission and it is recommended that the variance applica- tion be approved. In response to a question raised by Commissioner O'Neill, Mr. Peterson advised that the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control has attached two conditions to the issuance of a license for the sale of alcoholic beverages: No. I is that there shall be no doorway or entryway in the rear wall of the proposed structure; and 2, that a cement block or masonry wall of the maximum height allowed by the City be constructed along the east property line except for the portion on which the rear wall of the structure is to be located, and except for an opening, not longer than 12 feet, for access from the alley to the trash enclosure. In this instance the maximum wall height permitted would be 9 feet. Chairman Pro Tem Pressutti reopened the public hearing for any testimony relevant to the variance request. William Parker, 874 Ash Avenue, objected to any building being put there because of increased traffic and the necessity for more police force. He contended the lighting is not good in that area and construction of a building would block his view up the alley. He expressed the opinion it would be a disservice to that part of town to have a building adjacent to the alley as it would create a blind alley and increase the hazard for cars exiting on to L Street. Ann Larsen, 898 Ash Avenue, expressed her concern over having a 17 ft. wall at a zero setback which would cut off the breeze from that direction. She expressed the opinion that having the building set back 10 feet from the property line with a concrete wall of lesser height adjacent to the alley would be preferable. She voiced concern over traffic racing up and down the alley, particularly with poor lighting in the alley as a result of having the building so close. She reported that the attitude on the part of the Southland Corporation has been bad from the beginning. Michael Murphy, owner of the property at 892 Ash, next to Mrs. Larsen's house, urged the Commission not to grant the variance. He expressed personal opposition to having a 7-Eleven store in that location and pointed out that there are presently 7-Eleven stores at Broadway and K and at Naples and Broadway. He did not think that immediate area needs to be served by three 7-Eleven stores within that short distance. Mr. Murphy advised that his opposition to a 7-Eleven store is due to things usually associated with 7-Eleven stores. He pointed out they are frequent targets for robberies and other types of crime, so there is a potential for danger for nearby residents of the community. -3- August 8, 1979 He noted that reference is made to the Veterans' Thrift Store located adjacent to the alley in the same block. He suggested that building may be removed at some time in the future due to its age, and if a variance is granted for the 7-Eleven store it would set a precedent for a future request. He contended that the ordinance requiring a setback was passed for the benefit of surrounding residents and it should be adhered to. Mr. Murphy expressed the opinion that while any business would have some impact on the surrounding neighbors, some types of business would have far less impact than a 7-Eleven store which may be open 24 hours a day. He suggested that main- taining the 10 foot setback would keep the danger a little farther away from the residents, and asked the Commission to deny the request. Chairman Pro Tem Pressutti pointed out that if the variance is granted it will result in the building being located on the property line for a length of 120 feet with a concrete wall extending for the remaining length of the property. If the variance is denied, the wall would be constructed the entire length of the property with the building located 10 feet from the wall. Mr. Murphy expressed the hope that if the variance is denied, Southland will locate some place else. He indicated he would not object to another type of business at this location. Commissioner Stevenson expressed the opinion that a 10 foot area between the rear of the building and the boundary wall would create more of a hazard to the neighborhood than if the building were placed on the property line. Ann Larsen contended it would be easier to see down the alley if there were a 6 ft. wall on the property than if the building was placed on the property line. She hoped the owners of the property would be willing to take care of the 10 ft. area between the building and the fence. Mr. Peterson clarified the ABC's requirement saying that it addressed the case if the variance should be granted. If the variance is not granted and the building is set back 10' from the rear property line, it would not seem reason- able for the ABC to require an additional wall on the rear property line and he presumed that if the variance is not granted, the ABC would simply require a wall in line with the building and extending to the north property line. Brian McConville, 856 Ash, located at the north end of the alley directly behind Humphries, acknowledged that he will not be faced with looking directly at either a wall or building, but he is deeply concerned about increased traffic. He spoke about residential burglaries in the neighborhood and expressed objection to having a business in the area that would be open after 9:00 p.m. as this would tend to bring more traffic and people into the area. Donald Marsh, 862 Ash, stressed that due to the number of small children in the neighborhood it is important to lessen traffic problems as much as possible. He advised there are presently "no park there, parking" signs along the alley, but people still Barry Farnum, 886 Ash, indicated he has the same objection as expressed by Mrs, Larsen. He felt there should be a buffer zone between residential and -4- August 8, 1979 business uses and granting this variance will take that away. He contended that with a 9 foot wall there would be no light in the alley, and that this proposed use would bring down the value of the homes. He thought the 10 foot setback would provide some protection. James A. Berry, 885 Ash Avenue, reiterated his objection as presented two weeks ago when he advised the Commission he had been denied a request for an 18" vari- ance. He avowed that businesses should not be granted more privileges than individual citizens. Mark Ochs, 8803 Pebble Beach Court, construction coordinator for 7-Eleven stores, advised that they are in agreement with the findings of the staff. With reference to a question raised concerning any openings into the alley, he reported that the condition of the ABC provides a 12 ft. opening in the wall for access to the trash enclosure to permit pick up of the trash receptacle from the alley. In response to a question from Commissioner Pressutti as to whether denial of the variance would jeopardize construction of the store, Mr. Ochs advised that they had worked out a number of plans and could develop the site with the 10 foot setback. It would be a hindrance to construct a 9 foot wall the length of the site and then construct the building just 10 feet away. Commissioner R. Johnson inquired if there are plans for lighting at the rear of the building. Mr. Ochs advised that if there is an area between the building and the wall they would want lighting back there. Brian McConville voiced objection to having an opening for trash pick-up from the alley. He asserted that trash trucks are one piece of equipment they do not need in the alley. James Berry asked if the ABC dictates to the City of Chula Vista how buildings are built. Mr. Peterson advised that in matters of construction the ABC's regulations do not supersede those of the City. They may, however, attach conditions to the issuance of a license for the sale of liquor which they feel are necessary for safety or security. While the City may not agree with all of the State's conditions there is generally no conflict between the two jurisdictions. Ann Larsen supported the suggestion of having the area behind the store lighted up. She felt that would add to the security. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner G. Johnson advised that from her point of view it would be better for the adjacent neighbors to have the building adjacent to the alley rather than have a 10 foot space behind the building. If the building is set back it would permit more parking room in front of the stores and would keep parking out of the alley. -5- August 8. 1979 Commissioner Stevenson expressed mixed emotions after hearing the wishes of the people who testified. He pointed out that since the setback for commercial development adjacent to a residential zone is normally 25 feet, the Southland Corporation has automatically received a 15 foot reduction because of the alley, so they are not hurting. Commissioner R. Johnson suggested that the shallow depth of the commercial zoning should be taken into consideration. Commissioner Williams noted that one of the findings required for granting of a variance is that a hardship exists. Since Mr. Ochs indicated they could construct the building without the variance, he is disclaiming that there is a hardship, other than the financial aspect of constructing a fence. While there are points on both sides, he felt there is not enough substantiation to grant the variance request. In response to a question from Commissioner O'Neill, Mr. Peterson affirmed that ample testimony had been offered this evening to fultyapprise the two Commissioners of the issue and Commissioners O'Neill and Pressutti are qualified to vote on a motion concerning the variance. MSUC (R. Johnson-O'Neill) The Commission adopts the Negative Declaration on IS-80-1 and finds that the proposed project will have no significant environ- mental impact. MS (R. Johnson-G. Johnson) Based on the findings contained in the staff report, the Commission approves the variance request, PCV-79-8, to reduce the rear yard setback at 895 Broadway from 10 feet to zero. The motion failed to pass by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners R. Johnson, G. Johnson NOES: Commissioners O'Neill, Pressutti, Stevenson and Williams ABSENT: Commissioner Smith MS (Stevenson-O'Neill) The request for variance PCV-79-8 be denied. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Stevenson, O'Neill, Williams and Pressutti NOES: Commissioners R. Johnson, G. Johnson ABSENT: Commissioner Smith MSUC (Stevenson-Williams) The application for conditional use permit PCC-79-22 be filed without action, pursuant to the applicant's request. Chain~an Pro Tem Pressutti advised the applicant of the right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council within ten days. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of precise plan for office building at 646 Telegraph Canyon Road in C-O-P zone - V & V Development Director of Planning Peterson advised that the applicant has asked that this hearing be continued to the meeting of August 22nd. Since there are a number -6- August 8, 1979 of problems that remain to be worked out, the staff is not certain this can be accomplished in a two week continuance, but will try since that is the applicant's desire. Staff may have to come back in two weeks and ask for a further continuance. Chairman Pro Tem Pressutti declared the public hearing open to entertain a motion for continuance. MSUC (R. Johnson-G. Johnson) The public hearing for consideration of a precise plan for an office building at 646 Telegraph Canyon Road in the C-O-P zone is continued to the meeting of August 22, 1979. 3. Election of Officers for the fiscal sear 1979-1980 Commissioner O'Neill nominated Commissioner Smith to serve as Chairman for the coming year. Commissioner Stevenson seconded the nomination. Director of Planning Peterson advised that he had discussed this matter with Commissioner Smith who indicated he felt it was preferable to rotate the position of Chairman among the various Commissioners on an annual basis. Commissioner G. Johnson expressed support for that suggestion. Commissioner O'Neill expressed the opinion that Commissioner Smith has done an admirable job of chairing the meetings for the past year and is highly qualified to serve in that position. It was affirmed that Commissioner Smith had not actually declined to serve another year as Chairman. Commissioner O'Neill advised that he felt strongly about the nomination and wished it to stand. The motion to elect Commissioner Smith as Chairman for the coming year carried by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners O'Neill, Stevenson, Pressutti, R. Johnson and Williams NO: Commissioner G. Johnson ABSENT: Commissioner Smith Chairman Pro Tem Pressutti called for nominations for the position of Vice- Chairman for the coming year. MSUC (G. Johnson-Stevenson) Commissioner Pressutti be elected to fill the position of Vice-Chairman for the coming year. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director of Planning Peterson reported that he will be on vacation for the next two weeks and will not be present for the study session scheduled for August 15 or the regular business meeting on August 22. He advised that it was planned to devote the study session to another briefing on the Watt plan for development of the Rice Canyon area at the intersection of 1-805 and East H Street. A briefing on that plan was presented at the last study session, however, only four Commissioners were present. The proposed plan will be considered in a public hearing before the Planning Commission on October 17, so it could be reviewed at the study session in September rather than next week if the Commission desires. -7- August 8, 1979 Commissioner G. Johnson advised that she will be on vacation next week. It was determined that the staff has no alternative items to present at a study session in August and the suggestion was made that the August study session be cancel:led. It was the concurrence of the Planning Commission that review of the Watt plan be postponed to the September study session and the August study session be cancelled. COMMISSION COMMENTS Chairman Pro Tem Pressutti called attention to the announcement of two conferences to be held in the future and asked about the policy of the city with regard to payment of expenses. Mr. Peterson advised that the City pays the full cost of transportation, room, meals, incidentals and registration fee for any Commissioner authorized to attend a budgeted conference. A spouse may go along at the Commissioner's expense. Commissioner R. Johnson advised that he had attended the League of California Cities Planning Commissioners' Conference in Monterey last year and found it to be the most well prepared and worthwhile conference he had ever attended. He recommended attendance at that conference for any Commissioners who have time available. Commissioner R. Johnson inquired about the latest report on Commissioner Smith's health and the Commission expressed gratification to hear that surgery will probably not be required and that Commissioner Smith should return to active service after a period of bed rest. Commissioner Stevenson commented on the poor condition of landscaping along 1-805 and "L" Street through the city limits of Chula Vista and National City, as compared with beautiful landscaping further to the north. He felt that the South Bay area has been short changed in the matter of landscaping freeways and suggested that the City attempt to have this situation remedied. Mr. Peterson advised that the Department of Public Works is more active in dealing with Cal Trans and he would bring this need to their attention again. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Pro Tem Pressutti adjourned the meeting at 8:25 p.m. Respectful ly submitted, Helen Mapes, Secretary