Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1995/05/10 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Council Chambers 7:00 p.m. Public Services Building Wednesday, May 10, 1995 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Tuchscher, Commissioners Fuller, Ray, Salas, and Tarantino COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Willett (excused) STAFF PRESENT: Principal Planner Griffin, Associate Planner Reid, Senior Civil Engineer Thomas, Assistant Attorney Moore MOTION TO EXCUSE MSUC (Fuller/Ray) 5-0 to excuse Commissioner Willett who was ill. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Tuchscher led in the pledge of allegiance to the flag and a moment of silence. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chair Tuchscher reviewed the composition of the Planning Commission, its responsibilities and the format of the meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None Chair Tuchscher moved Item 3 to be considered first since it was recommended that it be continued. ITEM 3: PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-95-15 - CONSIDERATION OF THE ADOPTION OF THE EASTLAKE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM Principal Planner Griffin stated that further study was necessary before this item could be heard, and staff recommended continuance of this item to June 14, 1995. The applicant had concurred with the recommendation. PC Minutes -2- May 10, 1995 MSUC (Fuller/Ray) 5-0 (Commissioner Willett excused) to continue PCM-95-15 to the meeting of June 14, 1995. ITEM 1: PUBLIC HEARING: PCA-95-04 - CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCLUDE AUTOMOBILE MAINTENANCE AS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN THE C-C CENTRAL COMMERCIAL ZONE Principal Planner Griffin stated that the proposal had been submitted by Econo Lube 'n' Tune, Inc., and proceeded with the presentation of the staff report. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission endorse the amendment in accordance with Resolution PCA-95-04, which was included in their packets. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Marilyn Ponseggi, 2117 Jarama Ct., El Cajon 92019, representing the applicant, stated they were in concurrence with staff recommendation. She was available for questions. Commissioner Ray clarified that when the area was noticed, National City was also noticed. Mr. Griffin confirmed that National City had been noticed, as a matter of routine, using the same guidelines regardless of the jurisdiction. Replying to Commissioner Ray, Mr. Griffin stated there had been no negative feedback in writing; there may be someone present in opposition to the conditional use permit. There were no comments regarding the zoning text amendment or the conditional use permit prior to the hearing, unless there were some regarding the initial environmental study relating to both this item and the following. Associate Planner Reid stated there were no comments on the first item from representatives of National City; there was one inquiry on the second. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Fuller/Ray) 5-0 (Commissioner Willett excused) to approve Resolution PCA-95-04. Before the next item, Chair Tuchscher introduced the new Assistant City Attorney Ann Moore and welcomed her. ITEM 2: PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-95-22 - REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE AN AUTOMOBILE MAINTENANCE FACILITY AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 30TH AND EDGEMERE (NORTH 2ND AVENUE) WITHIN THE CENTRAL COMMERCIAL ZONE Principal Planner Griffin stated that without the endorsement of the first item, the Commission could not have considered the conditional use permit. The conditional use permit would not PC Minutes -3- May 10, 1995 become valid unless or until the City Council approved the zoning text amendment. Mr. Griffin noted that the site was surrounded by the Food-4-Less, vacant property zoned Limited Industrial, the Town & Country Shopping Center located in National City, and single-family homes on the north side of 30th Street also located in National City. Mr. Griffin then proceeded to present the staff report, noting that staff believed the site was well situated for this type of use, being compatible with the abutting commemial areas, convenient for motorists, and adequately separated from the residential areas to the north. As a result of concerns expressed to the Design Review Committee, the applicant had agreed to an additional condition that would require a specific noise assessment to be made before a building permit was issued. If any measures were determined necessary to meet the standards of the City of Chula Vista or the standards of National City, those measures would be incorporated into the project. The applicant had volunteered to do this noise study in order to provide some comfort to the neighbors regarding the operation of the facility. Based upon the conditions and factors noted, staff recommended approval in accordance with Resolution PCC-95-22, as amended by the memos directed to the Commission. Commissioner Tarantino thanked staff for including a set of the plans in the packet, noting they were very helpful. Commissioner Fuller stated she had driven to the site and asked if that was the total site. It looked very small. Mr. Griffin replied that it was a modest sized site, but often when it is seen before the buildings and paving are installed, it looks too small to hold the plans. Commissioner Fuller asked the purpose of the large retaining wall of Food-4-Less facing the Sweetwater Town & Country Shopping Center. She asked if there were as many noise restrictions placed on that project, since the back area was the loading dock for Food-4-Less. She felt the sound would bounce back onto 30th Street. The loading area was being screened from view as much as possible using the wall and landscaping. The neighbors had pointed out, and the properly had confirmed, that Food-4-Less had been loading during the evening and into the early morning hours, creating a disturbance to the neighbors to the north. After the issue had been brought before the Design Review Commission, staff pointed out there was a restriction on the hours for loading and unloading. Food-4-Less had been contacted by the property owner, and Food-4-Less would be complying with that restriction henceforth. Commissioner Tarantino noted that in the design of the building, the applicant had tried to match the architecture of Food-4-Less. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Kathleen Mosley Smith, 2928 N Avenue, National City 91950, who resided north of the project, stated the noise funneled up the street into her home. The residents were concerned with the type of noise that would be generated by the proposed project, with the use of pneumatic tools, air compression, the sound of the doors, etc., which was a different type of noise from street noise. She suggested that the noise study be done on Saturday or Sunday morning when there was very little traffic between 7 a.m. and 10 a.m. She invited the noise PC Minutes -4- May 10, 1995 analyst to come to her home to do the noise study. She gave the Secretary letters from the following property owners who objected to the same type of noise suggested by Mrs. Smith: · Alfred J. Hlaswatich, 1239 East 30th, National City 91950-2514 · Leathel Fitzwater, 2926 N Avenue, National City 91950 · Azalia Kiefer, 2929 N Avenue, National City 91950 · Myrtle Rudesill, 1319 E. 30th, National City 91950 · Sallie Colombo, 1405 E. 30th, National City 91950 · Hildegard L. Jansen, 2929 M Avenue, National City The letters will on file in the project file. Marilyn Ponseggi, 2117 Jarama Ct., El Cajon 92019, representing the applicant, concurred with the staff recommendation. She requested that the wording of Condition E be changed to read that "a building permit not be issued until a sewer agreement has been approved by the City of National City." They would like to have the building under construction while the attorneys' offices determine the wording to be used in the agreement. She pointed out that the wall behind Food-4-Less was a noise wall, and the brake work and the work with the diagnostic tools would be done in the back bays where the noise would be blocked. A noise study had been prepared for one of the applicant's sites in Mission Viejo. They use low-noise impact tools, and the noise levels shown for the site in Mission Viejo were low. The applicant would implement whatever mitigation measures required by the noise study in order to bring them into compliance. The Food-4-Less initial noise study was taken on a Sunday morning at 9 a.m. They are typically done at the lowest traffic. Commissioner Salas asked Ms. Ponseggi if starting and revving the engines would be done inside the building. Ms. Ponseggi said everything was done inside the building; the doors were opened in the morning and stayed open. The smog checking and brake work would be done in the back bays. The only things done in the thru bays were the oil changes and lubes. The back bays would be screened by landscaping and the noise wall, and is approximately 200 feet away from the houses on 30th Street, with 30th Street heavily travelled in between. In her experience, she felt it was unlikely that the noise study would show that the noise from the Lube 'n Tune would be louder than the 60 dBA already created by the traffic. However, the mitigations reconunended would be incorporated into the project. Commissioner Salas asked if the thru bay had openings in the front and back. Ms. Ponseggi explained it was a little tunnel, restricted to oil change, with a pit underneath where the work was done, with the oil draining down through hoses. Commissioner Ray was concerned with the internal traffic, believing it would be an awkward turn to go through the bay and back out on the north side. Ms. Ponseggi stated that the site plans had been looked at extensively and had been revised many times. Econo Lube had standard staging areas and lane widths, and this site met their standard widths. PC Minutes -5- May 10, 1995 Commissioner Ray asked how much driving room was between the southwest comer of the building and the landscaping. Mr. Griffin replied that there had to be a minimum of 20 feet. He was not sure if the customers drove the cars out, or if someone familiar with the site drove them. Ms. Ponseggi stated the area was 25 feet across, and Econo Lube's store employees drove the cars into the bay and drove them back out to the staging area. Commissioner Ray asked if that was a standard practice. Ms. Ponseggi replied that it was the standard practice at most of the Econo Lubes. Commissioner Ray questioned whether that could be a condition. Mr. Griffin and Assistant City Attorney Moore stated that could be added. Ms. Ponseggi concurred. Commissioner Fuller stated that the letters submitted by Mrs. Smith showed concern regarding the tunneling effect of the noise from the back area bouncing off the back wall of Food-4-Less and tunneling up 30th Street and those homes off of 30th. They suggested a noise study be done in that area. Ms. Fuller asked if that would be done simulating the level of noise that would be created by this kind of facility. Mr. Griffin replied that the consultant from a City-approved list generally went out and set up equipment adjacent to a similar facility, took the readings from various distances. It was an actual reading; not a theoretical situation. Commissioner Fuller asked if that reading would be on-site or another site. Mr. Griffin stated it would be at another site, because it would be required before a building permit was issued. If there was something that needed to be done, it could be incorporated into the plans before the facility was constructed. Commissioner Fuller was concerned that there would not be the same conditions at another site. Mr. Griffin replied that the consultant would have to try to duplicate those conditions. There would be some assumptions that would have to be made based on the lay of the land, etc. Ms. Ponseggi stated that they took into account barriers that may be there, the actual lay of the land, and are put through a computer model which factored in all of the various conditions, with and without walls, with landscaping and without. She noted that the Food-4-Less loading dock was further over and faced straight up to the properties in question. It was a different situation. The loading of a truck at 2:00 a.m. was more of a nuisance than air tools at 2:00 p.m. Colmnissioner Fuller noted that most of the homes on the opposite side of 30th Street were at a higher elevation, and a majority of them were well screened. The location of where they sit was of concern to her. She hoped that the noise study would address their concerns. Ms. Ponseggi noted that the Food-4-Less noise study found that at 9:00 a.m. on Sunday the dBA was 60, prior to the construction of Food-4-Less. The standard residential dBA is 55. From the existing traffic noise, it was already above what would currently be allowed, and the study found that the noise that would be generated would be below the 60 dBA. PC Minutes -6- May 10, 1995 Associate Planner Reid stated that there was no reason why the acoustician could not be asked to conduct some readings north of 30th in the area of the residences. Commissioner Fuller felt it was a matter of trying to be good neighbors. She felt that should be included in the sound study. Ms. Ponseggi stated she had spolcen to Bob Cahan, the owner of the property, who had not been aware of the noise problem. He had immediately spoken to Food-4-Less, and the residents had been asked to contact either Mr. Cahan or her if they had the problem again. They felt the neighbors had legitimate concerns, and wanted to make sure they were addressed. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Griffin stated that staff would have no opposition to the amendment to Condition E. Senior Civil Engineer Thomas of the Engineering Department had pointed out to Mr. Griffin that the final sewer agreement would have to be completed before occupancy was granted, but in terms of the amendment proposed by the applicant, there was no concern. Attorney Moore also agreed. MS (Ray/Fuller) to adopt Resolution PCC-95-22 approving the permit, in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions therein, as amended by staff memos dated May 5 and May 9, 1995, and with the amendments to Items E and G, and an additional Condition H to read that the applicant's employees will exclusively drive the vehicles into the bays and from the bays to the designated staging areas. Commissioner Tarantino asked if having the noise levels read on the properties should be included. Ms. Reid stated it could be done by staff, or it could be included in the motion. Assistant City Attorney Moore stated it was preferable that it be added into the condition. AMENDMENT TO MOTION That noise studies would also be conducted north of 30th Street close to the properties of residents who live in the area. The second concurred. Ms. Ponseggi asked how many locations would be included, and which locations? In the Food- 4-Less study, one study had been done across the street on 30th Street; they were not done on private property. She requested that a maximum study be done on two or three locations. There were three locations directly opposite the site. She suggested that the one in the middle, or the one closest to the project have a noise study. She thought two studies would be enough. Commissioner Fuller commented that the key was to go up to the property level. They were elevated. Ms. Ponseggi noted also that the acoustician would need permission to go onto the PC Minutes -7- May 10, 1995 properties. Commissioner Tarantino stated that there were 15' retaining walls on most of those properties. Chair Tuchscher asked staff for advice as to how to handle the noise study. Mr. Griffin replied that usually the residence which was closest would be studied, because the impacts would be less for those farther away. However, there could be some conditions of landscaping, screening, etc., so he felt it would be appropriate to take a reading at the closest residence and, if that residence was heavily screened and there was another residence which was not heavily screened with landscaping, the reading could be taken there. There could be a differential. Chair Tuchscher questioned whether the number of readings could be taken to satisfy the Zoning Administrator. He felt staff could make the judgment based on its knowledge of the site and the Planning Commissioner's direction better than they could at the dias. At the request of the Chair, Assistant City Attorney Moore restated the motion. RESTATEMENT OF MOTION To adopt Resolution PCC-95-22 approving the permit, in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions therein, as amended by staff memos dated May 5 and May 9, 1995, and with the amendments to Items E and G, and additional conditions as follows: Condition II. That the applicant's employees will exclusively drive the vehicles into the bays and from the bays to the designated staging areas. Condition I. That noise studies will be conducted by the consultant, the number and locations to be chosen by the Zoning Administrator. The maker of the motion and the second concurred. VOTE: 5-0 to approve Resolution PCC-95-22 with the amendments. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Principal Planner Griffin reported the actions of the City Council on projects which had been before the Planning Commission. He noted that USA Volleyball was considering three locations in Chula Vista. It had not been before the Planning Commission. He commented on the upcoming meeting agenda. The workshop meeting on May 17 would be a dinner meeting. There would be an update on the Multiple Species Conservation Program and the Otay Ranch Project. The meeting would be at 5:30 p.m. with dinner at 7:00 or 7:30. The meeting of May 24th would be in the City Hall Building in the Council Conference Room, because the Council would be using the Council Chambers for budget hearings. On June 14, there would be a special joint GMOC/Planning Commission dinner meeting. The dinner would PC Minutes -8- May 10, 1995 be brought in at 5:30, with a regular Planning Commission meeting at 7:00 p.m. The joint meeting would be in Conference Room 2/3. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Commissioner Ray asked when Commissioner Fuller's last meeting would be. She stated it would probably be on the 28th, since the term expired at the end of June. Chair Tuchscher stated that he had had several conversations with the Mayor and had encouraged her to fill the existing vacancy from Tom Martin's resignation, so that two new Commissioners could be phased in rather than have two new ones at the same time. He would be following up with a memo to the entire Council regarding that. He had also asked staff to look into the Charter to see if perhaps Commissioner Fuller could stay on a little longer in light of the vacancies and the turn-over. Her experience was needed on the Commission. Chair Tuchscher expressed his hope that John Willett would get well soon. Chair Tuchscher announced his upcoming wedding the following Friday. ADJOIJRNMENT at 8:15 p.m. to the Dinner Workshop Meeting of May 17, 1995 at 5:30 p.m. in Conference Rooms 2/3, and to the Regular Business Meeting of May 24, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room located at the north end of the City Hall Building. Nan~y Ri~ley, ~edTretar~ Planning Commission