Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1995/04/12 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Council Chambers 7:03 p.m. Public Services Building Wednesday, April 12, 1995 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Tuchscher, Commissioners Fuller, Ray, Salas, and Willett COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Tarantino (excused) STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Planning Director Lee, Principal Planner Griffin, Associate Planner Hernandez, Senior Civil Engineer Thomas, Contract Attorney Basil MOTION TO EXCUSE MSUC (Fuller/Ray) 5-0 to excuse Commissioner Tarantino who was on vacation. (Secretary's note: Commissioner Martin had resigned prior to this meeting, so there is a total of 6 Commissioners at this time.) 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 PC Minutes -2- April 12, 1995 ITEM 1: PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-94-09; REQUEST TO EXTEND APPROVAL FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL FOR APPROXIMATELY THREE YEARS (THROUGH SEPTEMBER 1999) AND TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF SAID SCHOOL FACILITIES INTO THE SECOND STORY OF THE BUILDING LOCATED AT 2400 FENTON STREET WITHIN THE EASTLAKE BUSINESS CENTER - Covenant Christian School Principal Planner Griffin presented the staff report, noting that staff recoinmended that the Planning Commission approve the expansion to the second story, and deny the request to extend the term of the conditional use permit. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Dan Malcolm, 3252 Holiday Ct., La Jolla 92037, speaking in favor of Covenant Christian School, noted that the Planning Commission had approved by a 5-2 vote the conditional use permit in October 1993. At that time the Commission knew the biotech zone was coming, and it was part of the discussion when the Commission recommended a five-year CUP. Regarding the requirement for a hazardous waste materials test in a biotech zone, Mr. Malcolm stated that the Hazardous Materials Division had told him that no biotech company in San Diego had ever been required to do the test. From that standpoint, the school would not have any potential impact on any biotech company coming into the park. Regarding a school deterring biotech companies from locating in the park, Mr. Malcolm stated he was in disagreement with that. Mr. Stephenson of EastLake had approved a five-year extension of the permit. The building had operated as a school for five years. He felt that considerable weight should be given to Mr. Stephenson's endorsement. Mr. Malcolm noted that adjacent to the site and to the west, there were two community facility zones which allowed churches, daycare centers, and schools. He felt it was ironic that 200 feet away, it was a major impact on the biotech center. He did not believe that was valid. Mr. Malcolm asked the Commission to reaff'mn the October 1993 decision. Hank Gotthelf, 2339 Calle de la Garza, San Diego, a principal of California Land Associates, stated they had marketed the property since it was built; it had been built for a special use--to house a rehabilitation center for LASER. LASER had signed a lease, but had been denied the right to occupy the building. The building is different from an ordinary office building in that it has larger space occupancy requirements, with an area to be primarily used as a kitchen area. It is set up for teaching. He asked the Commission to look at the benefits and detriments. The building had been occupied as a school and as a house of worship. He asked the Commission to reconfirm the use at least for the extended period, because they did not have biotech tenants in the community. The property had been marketed by several agencies which had not been successful. Mr. Gotthelf stated that Covenant Christian School was a wonderful operation, a credit to the community and themselves, and a desirable tenant. He reiterated that EastLake, PC Minutes -3- April 12, 1995 as the developer of the community, stood in their favor and the Commission should listen to them. EastLake and California Land Associates had a huge financial risk. Mrs. Roger Wagner, 331 Quince Place, Chula Vista, the High School Principal of Covenant Christian School, stated the school had been in Chula Vista since 1976, has a good reputation in the City for academics as well as for meeting the needs of the children in the community. The students are reputable students who grow up to be good citizens of the City. The students are involved in the boys and girls clubs of "L" Street and Oleander by refereeing, coaching, volunteer work; also involved in the police athletic league and Birch Patrick Convalescent Center. Before moving into the present facility, Covenant Christian School had searched for two years to find a facility; they are not in a position to buy land and build a building. The building meets all their needs, and in an area of Chula Vista where the school needs to be--in Eastern Chula Vista. She encouraged the Commission to allow them to stay. Nevins McBride, 6480 Weathers Place, San Diego 92121, a principal in the California Land Associates, and the owner of the building at 2400 Fenton Street, stated there had been concern that a school would scare away a prospect R&D high tech/bio tech user. Mr. McBride then read a letter from Ivor Royston, founder and Chief Executive Officer of San Diego Regional Cancer Center and several other bio-tech companies in San Diego, who commented on the importance of nearby schools and daycare in the decision-making process of a typical high tech/bio tech user looking for new piece of land to build. Mr. McBride summarized Mr. Royston's comments to be that a community which attracted the best people needed facilities such as schools, daycare, shopping, restaurants in close proximity to the facility. The high tech/bio tech zone allows unpremised daycare with no approval from the City. Mr. McBride stated that the school was not an abnormal use, and that the high tech/bio tech user was not worried about a school down the street. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Chair Tuchscher asked the Commissioners if they had questions for the applicant. Commissioner Willett noted that he had heard nothing about recreational programs for the children. He was concerned about traffic, and also the educational aspect of the school. Mrs. Wagner stated that there were only older students using the school, and they used Scobee Park for recreation. It was very safe for them; there were crosswalks, and they were under supervision at all times. The property adjacent to them was undeveloped. They planned to work with EastLake to utilize that property for play, if they moved the elementary students. They had not attempted to finalize anything until they knew if they could expand their usage of the building. Commissioner Salas asked Mrs. Wagner what happened if a business wanted to use the park for recreational activities and the students were not allowed to play in the playground. Mrs. Wagner stated that had not happened in the year they had been there. The park is used by the other PC Minutes -4- April 12, 1995 property owners mostly on the weekends. Occasionally, there are individuals in the park on their lunch hour, but the school only used the park from 2:00-3:00 when people are in their offices. It had not been a problem. In order for a property owner to use the park for a company picnic, it had to be reserved through EastLake Development. Any conflict that would arise would be worked out. There had been no conflict, and no complaints from any property owner about the children. Commissioner Salas was concerned about ill-meaning people visiting the park who could not be screened out during the time the children were using the park. Mrs. Wagner stated that EastLake Development Company hires a security company which roves the park during the day. In addition, there was always a minimum of two teachers present. A problem had not arisen; having security there had helped. Commissioner Fuller asked the school's long-range goals as to finding a permanent location. Mrs. Wagner replied that they would like to stay in the City of Chula Vista. She was the High School Principal and not on the school board. They would like a facility where they could house their entire campus; they did not intend to get enormous; they did not want to try to compete with a public school. Their maximum class size was 25, with one class per grade. Commissioner Fuller questioned whether there was an established policy now in existence by the Board to continue to look for a permanent location. Mrs. Wagner answered affirmatively. She noted they would like to get their campuses back together. Chair Tuchscher asked if there was a program in place to do that. Mrs. Wagner said that all their energy had been directed towards getting the conditional use permit extended. They could not go beyond that until they knew what was going to happen. Commissioner Willett queried Mrs. Wagner about the hour per day the school used Scobee Park. For the number of students and split of grade levels, he was concerned about recreation being only an hour per day. Mrs. Wagner explained that in junior and senior high school, they did not have recess. They had a college-preparatory program with seven periods per day, with a break in the morning, lunch, and then a physical education class. Commissioner Ray questioned staff regarding any inquiries regarding sites in the high tech zone. Mr. Griffin stated that the zones were very recently established and the regulations had been put in place, with promotional efforts being handled through the Community Development Department. He was not personally aware of any interest at this time. A memo was included in the Commission packet from Community Development which supported staff's recommendation. Commissioner Ray asked if City staff was aware if any additional time had been granted in terms of written authorization to use Scobee Park for an extended time. Mr. Griffin understood there was no objection from EastLake. Commissioner Ray was concerned that there had been a condition in the original conditional use permit that the applicant would provide proof PC Minutes -5- April 12, 1995 satisfactory to the Director of Planning that legally enforceable rights to suitable outdoor recreation or physical education facilities have been obtained for the duration of the permit. Loss of such of facilities shall be revocation of permit. Mr. Ray asked if that requirement had been fulfilled. Mr. Griffin did not know if that written permission had been obtained for the extended period. Mr. Malcolm returned to the podium to state that the School's long-term plans did not include use of Scobee Park. They had been in contact with EastLake regarding leasing the adjacent space on area 1, which was contiguous to the school property. Mr. Stephenson was in support of it. In a letter from Mr. Stephenson, he stated there had been no ascertainable wear and tear on the park, and he did not foresee any problem extending Scobee Park for existing years. He noted there was a year left on the current agreement, with an additional 2-acre site on the existing church campus which the school had been allowed to use, in addition to the Boys & Girls Club. They did not have to use Scobee Park. Chair Tuchscher noted that in the public hearing before the Planning Commission, Mr. Stephenson had represented that the park was controlled by the users of the business park, and he needed their approval to grant use for the school. He asked if that had been achieved. Regardless to whether there were alternatives for providing recreation for the students, the only one within the Planning Commission's control was the park, or some substantive evidence of contractual obligations to provide those services outside the park. Mr. Griffin stated that may have been an oversight of staff; it should have been confirmed that the Business Center Owners Association had granted extended use of the park for those activities. Staff could work with the School to make sure that condition was satisfied, or attempted to be satisfied, before a final decision is reached on the permit. In addition, he noted that simply grading and using the area next door for a recreation area could not be accomplished without a modification to the permit. It would have to again come before the Planning Commission and Council, because it would modify the parameters of the use. Chair Tuchscher asked the applicant if they were aware that EastLake had gained approval from the business park users for use of the park for the School's purposes. Mr. Gotthelf stated he had spoken with Mr. Stephenson within the past 24 hours, and they had not gained that vote. However, Mr. Stephenson had indicated that it would be his position on behalf of EastLake to gain that recognition and positive vote. Mr. Gotthelf thought that could be a condition to the approval for the extension to 1999. Commissioner Fuller clarified that Mr. Gotthelf was speaking to the use of Scobee Park, and asked if he would speak to the fact that there would have to be an additional conditional use permit for the use of the area #1. Mr. Gotthelf stated he agreed with that. Commissioner Fuller commented that the City was working currently on an application for a high tech use. The concern of the Redevelopment Agency was that any extension of what was considered an interim use by a school was in conflict with what they were trying to establish PC Minutes -6- April 12, 1995 with a biotech zone. She agreed that since the interim use was acknowledged in the original application, she did not feel comfortable with the School's presentation of information that there was a current long-range plan for permanent location in place. She felt an extension of five years would establish them in their current location; she did not feel comfortable that they were actively seeking another location. Commissioner Ray asked how it could be worked into the resolution that staff would work with the School in finding a permanent location in the EastLake Planning Area III. Mr. Griffin stated it could be included in the motion recommending that staff be directed to work with the School and EastLake in finding an appropriate location. However, on an unofficial basis, staff would be glad to work with the School to find a site. Chair Tuchscher commented that this was an issue of basic land use. He did not think it had direct correlation to the biotech zone question. There was interest from some biotech firms. He was not sure it was in conflict with this use. He was concerned with the permanency associated with a long-term conditional use permit in a business center. He felt it was in conflict in general with the uses that were ideal for the long-term benefit of the City and the Center. The potential of some limited extension if the School were working diligently to find a new site or a new building or relocate would be appropriate. Commissioner Salas stated that the first time the matter came before the Commission, she had deep concerns about the appropriateness of a school being in the area. Those reservations still stood; she shared Commissioner Fuller's concerns regarding another five-year extension; there did not appear that the School had any formal plan to look for other sites. Therefore, she would vote as she did the first time the matter came before the Commission. MSUC (Ray/Fuller) 5-0 (Commissioner Tarantino excused) to adopt Resolution PCC-94- 09M recommending denial of the extension to the CUP but accepting the expansion for Covenant Christian School to operate a private school at 2400 Fenton Street within the EastLake Business Center, and also recommending that staff be directed to work jointly with Covenant Christian School to find a more permanent location in Chula Vista or, specifically, EastLake III, and adopting the balance of the paragraph in the staff report on page 4, paragraph 3, namely, that staff be given the ability near the expiration date of the permit to grant a modest extension of perhaps six to twelve months provided the school can document that they are actively pursuing a permanent site. ITEM 2: PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-95-26; REQUEST TO ESTABLISH THE MOOSE LODGE AT 25/33 NAPLES STREET - Loyal Order of the Moose Chula Vista Lodge//192 Associate Planner Hernandez presented the staff report, noting that the land use was compatible with the surrounding residential and commercial uses. Staff recommended that the Planning PC Minutes -7- April 12, 1995 Commission approve the project in accordance with the Planning Commission resolution and subject to the conditions contained in the draft City Council resolution. Commissioner Willett asked if the parking was perpendicular or diagonal. He felt the diagonal parking would allow easier backing, which would prevent accidents. Mr. Hernandez noted that it was typically the decision of the applicant. Staff's basic concern was that there was sufficient parking. In this case, there were 73 spaces in addition to what was required by the Zoning Ordinance. Chair Tuchscher noted, for future projects, that the jury was still out relative to types of parking as to ease of access, traffic flow, etc., and it was really on a site-by-site basis. Colnmissioner Fuller stated it was now a requirement by the Department of Motor Vehicles that a driver be able to park between the lines of a perpendicular parking space before getting a license. Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that the project did go through the Design Review Committee, and it was their responsibility to review both architecture and site planning. The project had received site plan approval. Commissioner Ray, referring to the Design Review Committee minutes which stated that anti- graffiti paint was to be used on the north wall, asked why it would not be used on all walls. Mr. Lee replied that it was the responsibility of the Building & Housing Department to review all plans for graffiti paint on any large surfaces. Mr. Griffin stated that he had been in attendance at the meeting and did not recall discussion limiting it to the north wall. Commission members noted that it was part of the motion passed by the Design Review Committee, shown on page 12 of the minutes. Mr. Lee stated that it was a City ordinance requirement for the Building Department to review all building plans including building walls and freestanding walls for purposes of looking at large surfaces and requiring the anti-graffiti paint. Commissioner Salas commented that she would be happy to see the Moose Lodge at that location. She felt the fraternal organizations added a quality of volunteerism to organizations. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Salas/Ray) 5-0 (Commissioner Tarantino excused) that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit PCC-95-26 in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the draft City Council resolution. PC Minutes -8- April 12, 1995 Chair Tuchscher stated he was happy that something that would benefit the neighborhood was going in there. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Assistant Planning Director Lee reported the actions of the City Council on projects which had been before the Planning Commission. Mr. Lee noted that the next scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission was a dinner workshop the following Wednesday night at 5:30, at which time staff was planning to discuss the EastLake affordable housing program which would be coming forward in the form a public hearing at the first meeting in May. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Chair Tuchscher noted that Erik Basil was leaving, and thanked him for his help. Mr. Basil replied that his contract services with the City was complete, and that the Planning Commission would be assisted by Assistant Attorney Ann Moore who was hired to replace Rich Rudolf on a permanent basis. Chair Tuchscher was interested in the acceptance of the Cornerstone development when it is completed and on the market, and consideration staff might have relative to approving that type of development in the future. Mr. Lee stated there had been a number of inquiries on that particular type of housing. There was some interest in EastLake. Commissioner Ray commented on a condition made relative to the light rail corridors in the Otay Ranch project. He noted that at a GMOC meeting they had been given an update on fiscal constraints to that and other major transportation projects that may be coming forth in the state, and that no public money would be coming forth for SR-125 or light rail extension in South Bay. When revisiting that condition, the Planning Commission may want to look at a language change that would indicate a mass transit corridor. Mr. Lee stated that at the May workshop, he hoped to come back with an update on the Ranch. Commissioner Fuller thanked staff for including the article on "Highway Blues" in the Commission packet. She thought it was very timely. They talked a lot about accessibility, but admitted they had no way of measuring how to design accessible roadways. Commissioner Fuller noted that several of the Commissioners were interested in attending the quarterly League of California Cities dinner on Thursday. Commissioners Willett, Tuchscher, and Fuller indicated their interest. The Planning Commission Secretary stated she would make the reservations. PC Minutes -9- April 12, 1995 In answer to Commissioner Salas, Mr. Lee stated that Commissioner Martin had accepted a position in Lake Havasu. He had been invited to attend the next dinner meeting but would be unavailable since he would be leaving the City right away. Chair Tuchscher commented that he had spoken with Commissioner Martin, who had asked him to let everyone know that he had enjoyed working with them and had enjoyed his time on the Commission and would miss the personalities and people involved--staff, as well. Regarding SR-125, Commissioner Willett said that it was proceeding from the Border to Highway 54. There was a severe problem from Highway 54 to I-8. The access and egress was a well thought-out plan. With reference to the light rail, there was still a line there but it would be started as a four-lane, six lane, and then an eight-lane. It was proceeding. There was no public money on the SR-125. Commissioner Ray stated that a finn distinction had been made between the corridor that had both automobile and pedestrian traffic, as opposed to a dedicated transit corridor. He would be looking for more information relative to light rail. Chair Tuchscher noted that there may be a major conflict with the April 19th workshop meeting in that Council would be interviewing for the vacant Council seat. Most of the Planning Commissioners had applied for that appointment. MSUC (Fuller/Salas) 5-0 (Commissioner Tarantino excused) to cancel the workshop of April 19, set a special workshop meeting at 5:00 p.m. on April 26, with the regular meeting following at 7:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT at 8:50 p.m. to the Special Dinner Workshop Meeting of April 26, 1995 at 5:00 p.m. in Conference Rooms 2/3, to be followed by the Regular Business Meeting at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers Nahcy Riple)/, Sec~etar~ Planning Commission