Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1994/06/08 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, June 8, 1994 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Martin, Commissioners Fuller, Moot, Ray (7:10), Salas, and Tarantino COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Tuchscher STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Planning Director Lee, Associate Planner Hernandez, Assistant City Attorney Rudolf, City Traffic Engineer Rosenberg MOTION TO EXCUSE MSC (Fuller/Tarantino) 5-0 to excuse Commissioner Tuchscher who was out of town on business. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Martin led in the pledge of allegiance to the flag and a moment of silence. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chair Martin reviewed the composition of the Planning Commission, its responsibilities and the format of the meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSC (Fuller/Salas) 5-0 (Commissioner Tuchscher excused; Commissioner Ray not yet arrived) to approve the Planning Commission minutes of May 11, 1994, and of the Special Joint Meeting of the Chula Vista Growth Management Oversight Commission and Planning Commission of May 11, 1994. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None PC Minutes -2- June 8, 1994 ITEM 1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-94-20/PCA-94-02: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY LANDSCAPE MANUAL AND ASSOCIATED AMENDMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE - City Initiated (continued from meeting of 5/11/94) Assistant Planning Director Lee requested continuation of this item to July 13. Additional time was needed to meet with the development community. MSC (Fuller/Moot) 5-0 (Commissioner Tuchscher excused; Commissioner Ray not yet arrived) to continue PCM-94-20/PCA-94-02 to the Planning Commission meeting of July 13, 1994. ITEM 2. PUBLIC HEARING; RECONSIDERATION OF THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS FILED BY CHARLES TIBBETT FOR 0.67 UNINCORPORATED ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BONITA ROAD AND LYNWOOD DRIVE A. GPA-94-03: AMEND GENERAL PLAN FROM OFFICE COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY TO COMMERCIAL VISITOR B. PCZ-94-B: PREZONE TO C-V-P, COMMERCIAL VISITOR Associate Planner Hernandez noted that this request was considered by the Planning Commission on May 11, 1994, and at that time the Commission, based on traffic concerns, denied the project by a unanimous vote. Those concerns were primarily on-site vehicle stacking capacity, delineation of an internal circulation system as it relates to the vehicle stacking capacity, obstruction of Bonita Road traffic flow by carwash ingress and traffic, site drainage pattern, assurance that the drainage was not going to end in the adjacent drainage channel, and the concern that the overall result of changing the property from Office Commercial to Commercial Visitor would be an increase in traffic at that intersection. Subsequent to that meeting, the Planning Commission at their May 18, 1994, workshop agreed to reconsider the item to allow the applicant to address some of the issues that the Planning Commission raised at their previous meeting. Mr. Hernandez noted that the applicant and the applicant's traffic engineer were present to respond to any questions the Commissioners had relating to traffic. Staff had no additional information or analysis, and, as stated in the May 11 staff report, staff recommended approval of the General Plan Amendment and Prezoning request in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the resolution and ordinance. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. (The next three speakers gave an organized presentation.) PC Minutes -3- June 8, 1994 Greg Cox, 3130 Bonita Road, Suite 200, Chula Vista, representing the applicants, introduced Charles Tibbett, the owner of five carwashes in San Diego County, and Paul Magnotto, co- owner of this project. Since the applicant had been granted the opportunity for the re-hearing, they had hired an additional traffic consultant, Dan Marum, and had worked closely with City Traffic Engineer Hal Rosenberg. Paul Magnotto, 244 Camino Elevado, Bonita, gave a brief history of the project. Mr. Magnotto stated that the surrounding residents supported the project; the project would provide a service to the community, would be creating jobs and paying taxes, and beautifying a piece of property which is an eyesore. He asked for the Commission's support. Mr. Magnotto then presented slides which showed the architectural rendering of the project, traffic circulation in and out of the project, and traffic flow inside the project itself. Mr. Magnotto stated that since the last Commission meeting, they had approached the County who owned the property adjoining the subject property and asked if it was possible to obtain a deceleration lane off Bonita Road which would help with the flow of traffic. The County had approved the lane, and the applicant had received full staff support from the City of Chula Vista. Continuing with the slide program, Mr. Magnotto noted there was 300' between the exit ramp of their property, where the deceleration lane would be located, the typical number of cars on the site at one time, the number of cars on site at peak hour with circulation and stacking. He emphasized that the carwash would be more expensive than the typical carwash, and because of that there would be less washes. Mr. Magnotto then showed some slides of other carwashes in the City and their stacking and drying capacity. Dan Mature, Catalina Engineering, 8989 Rio San Diego Drive, San Diego, noted that the previous traffic study was done by Darnell and Associates and reviewed by the Traffic Division and approved. The years of analysis in the previous study were near-term 1993 and 1998 with and without the project, and in 1998 a cumulative analysis with the inclusion of the development of the Church and the School on Lynwood Drive. Intersection safety was also reviewed in the previous report, review of the driveway impacts, and review of on-site circulation system. The carwash was anticipated to wash between 125 and 250 washes per day. The on-site employee count would be 7 to 10, and parking was provided for them on-site. He compared the peak traffic for conunercial office use to the carwash use, and mentioned that the percentage of traffic using the automobile-type service areas was traffic that was already on the road and was not a single-purpose trip to get a carwash. Traffic is spread throughout the day and a continuous use of the infrastructure invested in the construction of a four-lane major road, the release of exiting vehicles is controlled, the slowest hours of operation are in the first two hours of operation and the last two hours of the day when Bonita Road would be at its peak, and the slowest period of the year were the winter months when the carwash would be closing at 5 p.m. and surveys showed that cars were washed less frequently during the winter months. Regarding intersection safety, Mr. Marum stated that the addition of the right-turn-only lane (or turn-out) addressed the issue of interruption of continuous flow in an eastbound direction on Bonita Road because of people trying to get into the site. The Lynwood Drive access point onto Bonita Road would be a controlled release of vehicles onto Lynwood Drive and would mix in PC Minutes -4- June 8, 1994 with the approach volume on Lynwood Drive in a northbound direction to the signal. Mr. Marum said that the site had been designed in an optimal way to utilize the frontages, or the tangent portions of the property lines, to hold the maximum amount of vehicles if it ever reached that level. His understanding of the 18 vehicles approaching from Bonita Road and 11 vehicles from the Lynwood Drive access was double the level of traffic activity that was tested in the report; the holding capacity of the site was much higher than tested. The proposed site would accommodate 41 inbound vehicles anticipated during the peak. The widening of the Lynwood access drive was a previous recommendation from the original report which had been incorporated into the site design. Mr. Marum noted that the Bonita Road threshold standards found that Bonita Road was operating at a good level of service in an area adjacent to the interchange, based on the threshold standards that were analyzing travel time on the entire segment of Bonita Road, east/west on either side of the interchange. It had been observed that the modification of the phase length for the northbound, left through, and right movement off of Lynwood made by the County allowed for up to 15 vehicles in the queue being allowed to move through on the same signal phase. The intent by the County was to provide relief to the Lynwood Drive traffic, both during the morning and on Sundays during Church services. Mr. Marnm stated that the City was planning to implement a third lane toward the freeway on- ramp between Plaza Bonita and the on-ramp to 1-805 in the northbound direction, which also includes a raised median on Bonita Road which would enhance the traffic restrictions for traffic turning right out of the site at the driveway access point on Bonita Road. The improvements being required on Bonita Road on the frontage of the property allowed for the inclusion of a standard bike lane and the sidewalk. Finally, Mr. Marum noted that the facility being classified as a major four-lane facility in the General Plan was the type of facility that would allow for driveway access as opposed to a six-lane prime facility where access is restricted. This type of site would be in conformance with the overall plan of the General Plan. Mr. Maxum stated he was available for questions. Chair Martin stated, with the build-out of the eastern portion of Chula Vista, the Growth Management Oversight Commission had pointed out three areas of concern on "H" Street which were really impacted by traffic, one of which was the Lynwood/Plaza Bonita intersection. Chair Martin asked, if that continued to impact Bonita Road, did Mr. Marum anticipate the Lynwood/Plaza Bonita Road intersection to have more than 700 vehicles per day? Mr. Marum replied that in the long-range studies, both at the General Plan level and the more intense Otay Ranch level of analysis, they had looked at Bonita Road as needing upgrading to six lanes. That had continually been rejected by the Sweetwater Community, and the models had not considered the six-lane capacity. The model looks at "H" Street--a six-lane facility--as a better facility for quicker travel to the freeway than Bonita Road, while the demand for traffic may be equal on both streets. Bonita Road is at or near the saturation point of a four-lane major facility, carrying approximately 40,000 vehicles per day. The General Plan recommends 30,000 ADT for four-lane facilities, and with 32,000 or more, they would recommend a six-lane prime facility to handle that type of flow. PC Minutes -5- June 8, 1994 Chair Martin asked if the travel time of the east traffic, going east from 1-805, would be compromised by the turn-out lane. Mr. Marum stated that it slowed traffic a little where there was not an exclusive deceleration lane, but the Traffic Engineer was briefed on the ability of this site to create a 100' right-turn-only lane that could accommodate up to four vehicles in addition to the eight vehicles that could be stacked along the western front of the property heading south in an in-bound direction. The 100' de-acceleration turnout would give drivers the ability to pull out of the through lane and get into the site. Answering Chair Martin, Mr. Marum stated that the impedance would be much more valid if not for the stacking distance on the site where cars would be able to go all the way in and stack before they got to the vacuum areas. It was his opinion that the travel time studies would not be degraded because of this site, especially with the provision of the i00' turn-out lane. City Traffic Engineer Rosenberg stated that normally there was a 20' section between the curb and the lane line which allowed enough width for a vehicle to slow down adjacent to the curb without impeding traffic behind it. This particular driveway would not impair the existing level of service, and the deceleration lane not only provided additional width normally found at a standard driveway or normal intersection; it provided extra width that is not common. Commissioner Tarantino asked if there were any plans being considered by CalTrans to create a special ramp to get into Plaza Bonita, to bypass Bonita Road and go directly from 1-805 into Plaza Bonita, which had been considered at times. Mr. Rosenberg stated that CalTrans had done an analysis and had determined that SR-54 would provide the adequate relief. They did not anticipate much growth, the saturation level had been reached, and the developments in the Eastern Territories would not exacerbate the current conditions. Commissioner Salas noted that concern had been voiced at the last meeting by some of the citizens in the area that there had already been some decline in the level of service in the area since the Church had been built. She asked if there was a deceleration lane into Lynwood Drive; she believed there was some improvement in the area just by slowing the cars by making them aware of the deceleration lane into the carwash. Mr. Rosenberg concurred. He pointed out that the dimension between the new curb which would be constructed as part of the project and the lane line was approximately 17'. If a motorist wished to turn right, there was room to move out of traffic to turn. Commissioner Moot asked to be shown the curb lane referred to. Mr. Rosenberg noted that there was a marked bike lane which was 5' wide, and adjacent to the bike lane was a 12' lane. The motorist could still pass if a car was stopped or broken down. Mr. Greg Cox noted that with the installation of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, there would be an additional 4' beyond what presently exists. Commissioner Moot was concerned about exiting the project onto Bonita Road. Sometimes the two left-turn lanes to get into Plaza Bonita were not sufficient to hold the traffic and there was PC Minutes -6- June 8, 1994 not a smooth flow in the lane before traffic is able to get into the double turn lane. He was concerned that traffic turning right out of the carwash could cause stacking in the lane next to it and not have any smooth traffic flow into the intersection. Mr. Rosenberg stated that it was a controlled intersection; although the Vehicle Code stated an exit could not be made without yielding to traffic, he thought the applicant would be willing to place a stop sign--if not, the City would place a stop sign for him--at that exit and force the traffic before the exit to stop. They would have to yield; if traffic was backed up, the motorist would not be able to turn immediately and would have to wait for a gap in traffic. At Commissioner Moot's request, Mr. Rosenberg showed a slide indicating the de-acceleration lane, the new curb line and sidewalk. Commissioner Moot noted there was actually an area where a car could turn out and merge back into traffic into the right lane. Mr. Cox stated there would be one car exiting approximately every 2-1/2 minutes, with the option of exiting onto Bonita Road or Lynwood Drive. He reiterated that they wanted to work with staff and the Planning Commission and if there was a desire to have the Safety Commission look at the project, they were not opposed to that. Mr. Cox concluded there would be more traffic trips if left designated for an office building than anticipated from the proposed carwash. Commissioner Ray asked if there would be an exit lane from the carwash going east. Mr. Cox stated it would be wider, but not an actual lane. Ron Lane, 3907 Massachusetts Avenue, La Mesa, stated that the applicants had tried to make this the best project for the site and for the applicant. He believed the phase lengths which had been changed by the County had helped, and the back-up was not there. They had observed the Church impacts, and since the phase changes, traffic moved smoothly. Peak Church traffic on Sundays let out within 15 minutes of each service. He asked for approval of the project. Charles Tibbett, 3907 Massachusetts Avenue, La Mesa, one of the owners of the carwash, felt it was a good project for the site, and they felt they had answered the problems of traffic. He asked that the project be approved. Mrs. Lois Morera, 377 Camino Elevado, Bonita, a partner in the carwash, favored the carwash and felt it would be an excellent project for the site. Teresa Castro, 260 Camino del Cerro Grande, Bonita, a resident of Bonita and real estate agent, believed the carwash at that location was a convenience and necessity for the community. She was in favor of the carwash. Salvador Castro, 260 Camino del Cerro Grande, Bonita, supported the project. PC Minutes -7- June 8, 1994 William Nelson, 4301 Lynwood Drive, Chula Vista, the owner and operator of a nursery and tree farm across from the proposed carwash, spoke in favor of the project, felt it would enhance the blighted entrance to Bonita, and would provide some needed revenue for the City. Chair Martin asked Mr. Nelson if he felt the carwash would impact traffic going to his business. Mr. Nelson believed it would enhance their business. Commissioner Ray stated the first time the Commission had seen the project, there were some concerns regarding parked vehicles on Lynwood Drive on the eastern side during either special events or normal hours of the nursery's operation. He asked Mr. Nelson if he foresaw a degradation in traffic on Lynwood as a result of the carwash and any impedance with those cars leaving the carwash if vehicles were parked on the east side of Lynwood. Mr. Nelson was not aware of many cars parking on the east side of Lynwood, because of the curvature of Lynwood. He did not anticipate a problem. The driveway would be further up the road, which would allow exiting vehicles to get into the traffic flow going northward toward Bonita Road from one of the exits. There were a number of cars which parked at the top of the hill across from their entrance, but on the way up the hill cars rarely parked. In answer to Commissioner Ray, Mr. Nelson said that it was 500' to 600' from the Lynwood entrance/exit to the top of the hill. Mrs. Nicholas Besker, 4346 Lyndale Lane, Chula Vista, speaking for herself and Mr. Becker, was in favor of the carwash. She felt it would be an improvement to the corner and would not impact traffic up the hill. Eugene Kocherga, 3418 Valley Road, Bonita, would like to have a place to have his car properly washed. Ms. Margaret Gilpin, 3320 Lynwood Drive, Chula Vista, was concerned about traffic. She was neither for nor against the carwash. She bicycles along Bonita Road and was concerned about another access onto Bonita Road. As a motorist, she had not noticed any extended time getting across the intersection. Erina Fornataro, 3249 Holly Way, Chula Vista, was not opposed to a carwash, but was concerned over safety. Some of the corrections coming off the freeway would probably be an asset; however, no one had mentioned traffic coming out of Bonita Plaza. Making a left turn onto Bonita Road from Lynwood Drive, there was a major problem with traffic coming out of Plaza Bonita Road. She stated that drivers did not look at the traffic light and did not stop and look before they turned right onto Bonita Road. There had been a number of near collisions there. She had not noticed any difference in the traffic pattern. Her concern was the traffic from both Plaza Bonita and traffic coming down Lynwood Drive onto Bonita Road, and how the traffic would work coming out of the carwash. She said people make lanes where they don't exist. They want to turn, and they turn wherever they feel like it. Plaza Bonita Road went from two lanes, people created a third lane; now there are four lanes, and they make a fifth lane. PC Minutes -8- June 8, 1994 Roland Fornataro, 3249 Holly Way, Chula Vista, commented on some of the slides, and that there was an error in the stacking distance. He said them never was a good answer on the question as to whether there would be an acceleration lane or merge lane coming out of Bonita Carwash. The road would be widened, but there would not be a full lane. Mr. Rosenberg concurred. Mr. Fomataro said the corner should be dressed up; there was nothing wrong with putting a carwash there. There was a problem coming from the carwash onto Lynwood. There was not adequate room. Them were tracks on the east side of Lynwood every week; there was traffic them. There was parking near the Church and a lot of traffic. Heather Martinez, 6510 San Miguel Road, Bonita, was in favor of the carwash. Greg Cox, having requested rebuttal time earlier, approached the podium and made some closing comments. He believed the concerns raised by Mr. and Mrs. Fornataro were concerns that were shared by people driving through that corridor every day. Mr. Cox noted that if the project were approved, the conditional use permit would subsequently come back to the Planning Commission, and they would be willing to work with staff during the interim. They could look at some type of monitoring device; he felt the applicant would be willing to have some type of trigger mechanism where staff could call for a review of how traffic could come out of the Lynwood driveway with perhaps no left turn allowed on Lynwood. Commissioner Ray asked if the applicant may consider an acceleration lane, or a further cut-out between the entrance off Bonita Road down to Lynwood. Mr. Marum believed the proximity of the access driveway point to the signal would be too close to allow for an acceleration lane with the proper tapered length to get the vehicles traversing back into the main stream of travel before the signal. At the design speed of Bonita Road, the lane would have to be taken down on a very slow taper to get the traffic up to 40 mph and it would be beyond the signal. For that reason, the right mm traffic out of the site exits at the ultimate curb line. He pointed out that for the northbound, left-mm traffic on Lynwood Drive where there is a conflict, the southbound traffic on Plaza Bonita has a red signal as the traffic on Lynwood has a green arrow and a green ball to make either a left or right movement. He had observed some of those conflicts. He noted that the City has a project which is timed within the next fiscal year, within 12 to 18 months, to expand the curb line on the north side of Bonita Road to create a third lane in front of the Pier I Imports; thus, the left-mm vehicles off Lynwood Drive would theoretically have their own lane but would have the right to go all the way across to get into the right mm lane to go northbound onto 1-805. Mr. Mamm asked City Traffic Engineer Rosenberg if there was some type of sign which could be placed at the signal to tell drivers there was a split phase, so they would look not only to the east for westbound traffic, but also straight across where someone has an actual green movement. Mr. Rosenberg stated that the signal belongs to the County and the City does not have the jurisdiction; however, he would alert the County Traffic Engineer to this problem. The solution probably was to post a "No Right Turn on Red" to ensure that the conflict does not occur when the northbound Lynwood traffic gets the green arrow or the green ball. Mr. Rosenberg agreed PC Minutes -9- June 8, 1994 with Mr. Fornataro that Lynwood did have a potential problem with the exit from the carwash onto Lynwood. He had alerted the applicant to the problem and that intersection w°Uld be monitored. If there was a conflict with cars exiting the carwash, insisting on trying to beat the signal, driving into the intersection or into Lynwood, causing queuing back onto Bonita Road, the City would restrict that exit onto Lynwood. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf noted that the issues being dealt with were issues that would come back to the Commission for the Precise Plan and the Conditional Use Permit. If the Commission approved the General Plan Amendment and the Prezoning and the application of the "P" modifier, it would go on to Council. If the Council approved, the project would come back to the Commission. The place to add the conditions would be in the Precise Plan and the Conditional Use Permit. They could not be added in the General Plan Amendment and the Prezoning. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Salas commented that she felt the frustration of the people opposing the project, but they were opposing a problem that already existed and not the actual carwash site. Also, she believed the County was aware of the problems in that particular area, and so was the City's traffic engineer, and they were working on a solution. Mr. Rosenberg concurred, saying it was not a problem as a result of the carwash; it was existing, and the City was working with the County to resolve the issue. Commissioner Salas stated that there would be an impact, whether it was left Commercial Office or changed to Commercial Visitor. Their job was to determine if the zoning was suitable for that piece of land. Assistant Planning Director Lee commented that the approved plan by the County for an office building would actually have the driveway closer to Bonita Road than was proposed for the carwash. The applicant, in working with staff, was proposing to regrade the slope to the south and actually expand the property so that the driveway would be moved further south. There was some added stacking capability. It improved the situation over the access that was approved by the County with the office plan. Commissioner Ray clarified that the north and south lane of Lynwood Drive would be 1"/' wide, with a total width of the two lanes of 34'. The currently striped median was proposed, with the approval of the Pier I project, as an actual hard median. The City Traffic Engineer confirmed. MS (Tarantino/Ray) to adopt Resolution GPA-94-02/PCZ-94-B recommending that the City Council adopt the attached draft City Council Resolution amending the land use designation of the General Plan from Office Commercial to Visitor Commercial; adopt the attached draft City Council Ordinance prezoning the property to C-V-P, Commercial Visitor Precise Plan, in accordance with Exhibit A, attached hereto. PC Minutes -10- June 8, 1994 Commissioner Ray said he understood that this would annex to Chula Vista. In the event of an annexation of the corner to Chula Vista, wouldn't the signaling then revert to Chula Vista authority? Assistant Planning Director Lee stated that it depended on the limits of annexation which varied in terms of what LAFCO would allow or request the City to do as far as adjacent road systems. City Traffic Engineer Rosenberg replied that without knowing the limits of the annexation, he couldn't tell, but it was possible that the City could end up with that signalized intersection. Commissioner Ray asked what would have to happen for the City to control the corner. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf said that in order for the intersection to come under control of the City, it would have to be either a separate annexation or part of this annexation. He did not know if the applicant intended to include that, or if the City would do it. The requirements of LAFCO was not known in connection with the applicant's application for an annexation. It might be it could only go forward if the intersection was included. Commissioner Ray understood that annexation application would not occur until after the approval of the Prezoning and the General Plan Amendment. Mr. Rudolf concurred. Commissioner Ray asked Mr. Rosenberg if he would make a formal request to the County for the "No Right Turn on Red" sign, or if he would ask for it in a telephone conversation. Mr. Rosenberg stated it would be a formal written request, which would reflect the interest of the Planning Commission in resolving the issue. Commissioner Ray asked that he and the residents who had spoken regarding that issue be copied. It was an existing problem, and whether or not the carwash was approved it needed to be resolved. Mr. Rosenberg agreed. Chair Martin was concerned about the designation of the property as Commemial Visitor, and what might be put on the property if the carwash was not built. Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that the Commercial Visitor zone was fairly restrictive in that it authorizes basically hotel use and restaurant use without conditional use permits. All the other uses provided in that zone require a conditional use permit. That would come before the Planning Comanission for consideration. The site was extremely limited in size, and would not be practical for a hotel or restaurant. Regarding the Commission's action, Mr. Lee reminded the Commission that their first action necessary would be to approve Negative Declaration IS-94-04. The maker of the motion agreed to include it in the motion. The second concurred. PC Minutes -11- June 8, 1994 Commissioner Ray questioned the indefinite continuation at the previous meeting of consideration of the conditional use permit. Mr. Lee explained that the conditional use permit could not be considered until the annexation moved forward. Commissioner Ray confirmed that the Commission would be accepting the Negative Declaration as previously brought before them, the General Plan Amendment and Prezone, but not approving a project--strictly a zoning issue. Mr. Lee concurred. Commissioner Moot asked at what stage the issues of grading, etc. would be considered. Mr. Lee answered that it would be at the conditional use permit and precise plan process. The Design Review Committee is charged with that consideration; however, the Commission would be apprised of any details regarding cross-sections, etc. Commissioner Moot felt the applicants had satisfied a lot of the traffic concerns he had, but he had a difficult time seeing how the project fit into such a small space. Mr. Lee noted the slope would be regraded. RESTATEMENT OF MOTION Based on the Initial Study and the Negative Declaration, find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-94-04; adopt Resolution GPA-94-02/PCZ-94-B recommending that the City Council adopt the attached draft City Council Resolution amending the land use designation of the General Plan from Office Conunercial and Residential Low Density to Visitor Commercial; adopt the attached draft City Council Ordinance prezoning the property to C-V-P, Commercial Visitor Precise Plan, in accordance with Exhibit A, attached hereto. VOTE: 6-0 TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL (Commissioner Tuchscher excused) Assistant Planning Director Lee advised the audience that this item would move forward to the City Council for their consideration around the middle of July. They would receive notice. ITEM 3. CANCELLATION OF REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF 6/22/94. Assistant Planning Director Lee asked that the workshop scheduled for June 15 due to lack of preparation time, and that the regular Planning Commission meeting scheduled for June 22 be canceled because of lack of items. The next meeting would then be July 13. At that time, it would be appropriate to elect the new Chair and Vice Chair for the Planning Commission. MSC (Tarantino/Ray) 6-0 (Commissioner Tuchscher excused) to cancel the workshop of June 15 and the regular Planning Commission meeting of June 22, 1994. PC Minutes -12- June 8, 1994 DIRECTOR'S REPORT - None COMMISSIONER COMMENTS - None ADJOURNMENT at 8:45 p.m. to the Regular Business Meeting of Wednesday, July 13, 1994, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Nancy Ripl~y, Secret/au Planning Commission (6,8 94.rain)