HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1988/01/12 Item 13 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
•
Item 13
Meeting Date ~~ /~/~~~~
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: Zoning Ordinance Amendment PCA 88-3;
consideration of amendment to Title 19 (Zoning) of the
Municipal Code to require approval of a major use permit to
operate cardrooms within Montgomery
Ordinance as ~ ~ Amending Title 19 (Zoning) of the
Municipal Code requiring approval of a major use permit to
operate cardrooms within Montgomery
SUBMITTED BY : Director of P1 anni ng ~(G ~Q~ B~p~NG AND AppPT10N
~/~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~ G d ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X )
On September 1, 1987, the City Council considered an urgency ordinance
presented by staff recommending that a 90-day moratorium be placed on location
of cardrooms within Montgomery with a public hearing to be held at the end of
this period to consider extension of the moratorium until implementation of
the Montgomery Specific Plan. The immediate concern by staff was not whether
or not a cardroom might be reasonably located within the Montgomery area, but
t e lack of appropriate planning and zoning review mechanisms in place at this
At that hearing, Mr, Fran Burger testified in opposition to the proposed
urgency measure, stating that he had a property in escrow for the purpose of
establishing a cardroom and that a moratorium would stop the plans that he had
made, which were in conformance with current City regulations,
The Council voted to adopt the urgency ordinance after amending the ordinance
to exempt applications from the moratorium who obtain approval for a cardroom
from the Montgomery Planning Committee, Planning Commission, and City
Council, That ordinance expired on December 15, 1987,
An Initial Study, IS-88-30M, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the
project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on November 26,
1987, The Environmental Review Coordinator concluded that there would be no
significant environmental effects and recommended that the Negative
Declaration be adopted,
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and
adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-88-30M,
2. Amend Title 19 (Zoning) of the Municipal Code to permit the location of
cardrooms within Montgomery subject to approval of a major use permit as
• shown in Exhibit A, attached and made a part hereto,
•
Page 2, Item 13
Meeting Date -~-/srf8& ~~io2~~~
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Montgomery Planning Committee, at
their meeting of December 2, 1987, voted 6-0 with one member absent, to
recommend to the City Council that the zoning ordinance be amended to require
approval of a major use permit prior to relocation of cardrooms within
Montgomery.
The Planning Commission, at their meeting of December 16, 1987, recommended
approval of the proposed ordinance amendment as recommended by staff by a vote
of 6-U with one Commissioner absent.
DISCUSSION:
In the report and recommendation to place a moratorium on cardrooms in
hiontgornery, which was considered by Council on September 1, staff noted that
cardrooms were not evident within the annexation area when the annexation took
place on December 31, 1986. This was due to the fact that while the zoning
ordinance for the County (which is still in use on an interim basis) permit
cardrooms in some commercial land and industrial zones, the County Code
enforced by the Sheriff's department did not allow this type of use to be
licensed, and was, therefore, prohibited.
Since the County Code was not adopted when annexation took place, cardrooms
which are classified as "Participant Sports and kecreation for Indoor Uses"
a permitted use in several commercial and industrial zones without any
~^etionary review. In many cases, without the requirement for a major use
permit, there is no opportunity for adequate review of the proposed site or
placement of appropriate conditions of approval by staff, neither is there an
opportunity to review and comment by surrounding property owners and the
public. This situation prompted the City Council to adopt the proposed 90-day
moratorium, with exemptions for applicants who obtain approval of a major use
permit by City Council, which requires recommendations by the Montgomery
Planning Committee and Planning Commission.
The City has a standard of one cardroom per 40,000 population including
Montgomery. The estimated 123,000 population for the City translates into
three cardrooms allowed while the number currently licensed is four. Only
three cardrooms are operational at the present time due to closure of one
business by afire.
Since the licensing of cardrooms as governed by the P°lunicipal Code includes
P~iontgomery, no new cardrooms can be established within Montgomery because all
available licenses have been issued. There are no cardrooms in Montgomery at
the present time; although staff has received several inquiries by the
existiny cardroom operators about the possibility of relocating their
operations to Montgomery, there are no active proposals that staff is aware of.
The urgency ordinance establishing the moratorium expired on December 15,
1987. Staff is recommending that a permanent amendment to the zoning
o finance be enacted to require approval of a major use permit by the City
il, with review and recommendations by the Montgomery Planning Committee
a Planning Commission. The requirement for a major use permit would be
similar to the CUP requirement in force in areas of the City outside
Montgomery.
''T 4'Yf
• a
The City regulatory system is structured so that cardroom licenses are issued
in accordance with Chapter 5.20 of the Municipal Code, with additional review
afforded through the CUP process. The CUP requirement gives the City an
opportunity to weigh locational factors associated with operation of this
business, such as the proximity of residential uses, potential conflicts with
adjacent commercial uses, and the amount and design of on-site parking.
Page 3, Item 13
Meeting f)ate~~t~ /~/~I BY
Processing of a "permanent" zoning text amendment would eliminate the need to
renew interim measures with time limitations, repeatedly, in anticipation of
implementation of the Montgomery Specific Plan. Once the Specific Plan is
implemented, the present ordinance will be replaced by a permanent regulatory
system which will address the issues associated with cardrooms.
~,~PC 4632P
by thn City Cot.~nril of
Chula b'ista, California
•
Dated //~~~~
by t City Council of
Chula Vista, California
Dated _,,~;~_ ~~
~`~ -