HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1981/07/08 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
July 8, 1981
A regular business meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista,
California was held on the above date beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue.
Commissioners present: Pressutti, G. Johnson, O'Neill, Williams, Stevenson
and Green
Commissioners absent: R. Johnson
Staff present: Director of Planninq Peterson and Secretary Mapes.
The pledge of allegiance to the flaq was led by Chairman Pressutti, and was
followed by a moment of silent prayer.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MSUC (Stevenson-O'Neill) The minutes of the meetinq of June 24, 1981 be approved
as mailed.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Chairman Pressutti called for oral communications and none were presented.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-81-H - Rezone and reprezone properties between Pepper
Tree Road and E1 Rancho Vista from R-1-10 to R-1-15 - CitS
initiated
Director of Planning Peterson noted that the Planning Commission approved a
tentative subdivision map for Pepper Tree Estates a few months ago. When the
City Council considered that tentative map they directed that it be revised to
reflect a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet and directed the staff to
consider changing the prezoning of the subject property and the immediately
surrounding properties to R-1-15.
In reviewing the sizes of all lots in the area it was determined that lots on
E1 Rancho Vista contain at least 15,000 sq. ft.~ lots on Jacaranda Drive vary
from 18,000 sq. ft. to 38,300 sq. ft.; and lots on Hilltop Drive vary from
16,000 sq. ft. to 28,500 sq. ft. Since there are no lots in the area smaller
than 15,000 sq. ft., the R-1-15 zone is appropriate.
Mr. Peterson displayed an exhibit showing the area to be rezoned and prezoned,
noting that it does not include property in the R-E zone to the north and east
of the subject area.
-2- July 8, 1981
He called attention to a letter from Dr. Mannis, which was forwarded to the
Commissioners, and which expressed Dr. Mannis' preference for one-half acre
zoning. If that was done, many of the lots would be substandard in size.
Only two lots in this area contain more than 30,000 sq. ft. and both are
developed in such a way that it is unlikely that they would be split into
two lots.
Mr. Peterson ackno~ledged receipt of two letters submitted this evening by
residents on E1 Rancho Vista North, as well as a letter received several days
ago from another property owner on E1 Rancho Vista North. All of these letters
expressed concern about retaining access to the lower portion of their lots.
He pointed out this concern is not germane to the issue of lot size but is
germane to the subdivision map and development of the property and that this
would be considered at the time of review of the final subdivision map for
the Pepper Tree Estates subdivision.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Richard Logsdon, 448 E1 Rancho Vista North, advised that he had written one of
the letters mentioned by Mr. Peterson and did not realize the problem was not
germane to the issue before the Commission at this meeting. He stressed the
need of having access to the rear portion of his property which is at a considerably
lower elevation than the front of the lot. He asserted he was given access
rights by Mrs. Cook in the original deed for the property in order to maintain
the lower portion of the property, and particularly the septic tank.
Mr. Peterson advised that he recently sent a reply to Mr. Logsdon and he
believed the problem could be worked out with the ADMA Company prior to develop-
ment of the now vacant land but that it is important to know whether legal access
rights exist or whether this was merely an informal arrangement with Mrs. Cook.
Aaron Mannis, 446 Jacaranda Drive, expressed his strong feeling that the area
should be zoned for no less than half acre lots. He asserted that when the
residents of Jacaranda Drive purchased their lots they were assured Jacaranda
was to be a private road and that there would be nothing smaller than half acre
lots. He pointed out that the newer subdivision along Via De Laurencia is not
oriented toward the valley and has no bearing on the area being rezoned. The
area to the north and east contains lots ranging from one-half acre to four
acres in size.
Chairman Pressutti noted that the City Council has approved a tentative map for
development of the area which decreased the number of lots from 15 to 14, and
stipulated that no lot contain less than 15,000 sq. ft. The action under
consideration at this time would preclude anyone from subdividing an existing
lot to anything smaller than 15,000 sq. ft.
Mr. Logsdon asked how the prezoning could be applied to the area on E1 Rancho
Vista North since those properties are all under County jurisdiction.
Mr. Peterson explained that prezoning applies only to properties that are
outside of the city limits, and upon annexation the zoning regulations become
effective.
-3- July 8, 1981
Mrs. Lawrence Lassman, 471 Jacaranda Drive, advised that their concern is with
the 7.2 acres which is going to be annexed to the City and which they feel should
be zoned for half acre lots to be in keeping with every other lot on Jacaranda.
As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Stevenson-Williams) The Commission recommends that the City Council adopt
an ordinance changing the zoning and prezoning for properties located at the
southeast quadrant of Pepper Tree Road and Hilltop Drive from R-1-10 to R-1-15.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-81-16 to operate an amusement
arcade at 4360 OtaS Valley Road in C-N-P zone, Donald C.
Jackson
Director of Planning Peterson pointed out the location of this proposal for an
amusement arcade in a relatively new and small shopping center on the south side
of Otay Valley Road just east of Melrose. Condominiums are located to the south
and east of this site; a 7-Eleven store is on the west side of Melrose and a
fast food restaurant at the southeast corner of the intersection of Melrose and
Otay Valley Road.
Mr. Peterson advised that after discussing with the Chula Vista Police Department
the problems they have experienced with this type of use, and after talking
with other cities about their experiences and listening to the testimony offered
at a previous meeting, he reached the conclusion that this type of use does not
belong in the neighborhood commercial zones, but should be in heavier commercial
centers. He pointed out that since this is a new and largely vacant shopping
center there is not a great deal of pedestrian activity to afford observation
or surveillance of the area by adults, and the existence of vacant stores could
be a target for vandalism. He, therefore, recommended denial of the application.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Beth Rezner, resident at 1720 Melrose Avenue, advised that their unit is the
closest to the site. She stated they have not experienced problems from the
operation of the 7-Eleven store, but since the fast food restaurant opened there
has been an increase in vandalism in the neighborhood and she feared that an
amusement arcade would create an even greater problem of vandalism.
Donald C. Jackson, the applicant, stated that he would scale back the hours to
close at 10:00 p.m. to coincide with the curfew hour, because their games are
geared toward the younger children. He contended this is a good activity to
occupy young teenagers. He described the operation of two other amusement
arcades with which he is connected as being clean and well supervised to prohibit
any loitering or rowdiness. He contended that an arcade does not generate nearly
as many calls to the police as a grocery store. He requested that instead of
denying the application outright, the Commission consider issuing a temporary
permit for six months or a year and if it does not work out the permit could be
rescinded.
In response to a question from the Commission, Mr. Jackson advised that he
personally does not work at the arcades but hires a manager for each arcade who
works full time, and a security guard who takes care of it at night.
-4- July 8, 1981
Mr. Gall Bucciarelli with John Burnham, advised that they are willing to give
Mr. Jackson the prime space in the building as they feel it will be a good
operation.
Robert H. Ellis, representing the owner and developer of Valle Verde Associates,
reported that they carefully checked Mr. Jackson and found that his business
operations are good and would provide a service to the residents of the condominiums
in the immediate area.
As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Stevenson commented that without some indication from the residents
of the area that they want such an amusement center, it is difficult for the
Commission to make the finding that it is a necessity in that particular location.
MSUC (Stevenson-G. Johnson) The Commission denies conditional use permit applica-
tion PCC-81-16 to operate an amusement arcade at 4360 Otay Valley Road in the C-N-P
zone based on the following findings:
1. While the proposed use may provide a service to the youthful residents of
the area, its proximity to the condominium development to the south would
be disruptive and detrimental to that residential area.
2. The proposed location, in a sparsely occupied shopping center, would
provide an opportunity for congregations of young people to indulge in
vandalism and other inappropriate behavior with little possibility of
being deterred by the presence of adult shoppers or pedestrians.
Chairman Pressutti advised the applicant of his right to appeal this decision to
the City Council within ten days.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Director of Planning Peterson informed the Commission that he will be on vacation
next week. That would normally be the time for a study session and if there are
items the Commission wishes to discuss he will arrange for another staff member
to attend the meeting; or the Commission may wish to cancel the study session.
With the concurrence of the Commission, Chairman Pressutti announced that the
study session of July 15th is cancelled.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Stevenson called attention to the memo received from the Director
of Planning concerning the conflict of holidays with the regular meeting schedule
in November. He felt the suggestion of holding just one business meeting in
November was a good idea.
MSUC (Stevenson-G. Johnson) The regular Planning Commission meetings normally
scheduled for November 11 and 25, 1981 shall be cancelled and in lieu thereof
a regular business meeting shall be scheduled for Wednesday, November 18, 1981.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Pressutti adjourned the meeting at 8:20 p.m. to the next regular meeting
on July 22, 1981.
Respectfully submitted,
Helen Mapes,