HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1974/11/12 Item 15AGENDA ITEM N0. [ 15 ]
CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF: November 12, 1974
ITEM TITLE: Resolution - Approving tentative map of South Bay Villas, PCS-74-5
INITIATED BY:
Director of Planning
A. BACKGROUND
1. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the 40 acre "Holderness property" at
the end of East J Street into 113 R-1 residential lots and 2 open space lots.
The project is shown on the enclosed tentative map.
2. On June 25, 1974 the property was rezoned from A-8 to R-1-H-P (Hillside
Modifying District with a precise plan required). Under the H District provisions,
the property could be developed with a maximum of 124 dwelling units on 72% of the
land, or 27+ acres. The precise plan modifying district was attached to permit
the subdivider to vary the lot size and lot coverage regulations of the Zoning
Ordinance. The development conforms with the provisions of the "H" Modifying
District.
3. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR-74-9) for the project was considered by
the Planning Commission on October 9, 1974 and adopted on October 23, 1974.
B. ANALYSIS
1. Site Characteristics.
The 40 acre site slopes inward to a centrally located canyon. The average
natural slope of the entire property is 13%. The property is bisected by a 100
ft. easdment owned-in-fee by the City of San Diego for the San Diego Otay 42"
steel pipeline, which transmits water from the lower Otay Reservoir to portions
of southeast San Diego, including Paradise Hills. The pipeline will remain on
site and will be located under East J Street (refer to tentative map).
(continued on supplemental page)
ATTACHED: Resolution [ X] Ordinance [ ] Agreement [ ] Plat [X?C]
See EXHIBITS [X] No. 1-2-3
Financial Statement:
Commission-Board Recommendation: The Planning Commission voted 6-0 on October 23,
1974 to recommend that the City Council approve the tentative subdivision map for
South Bay Villas subject to the conditions set forth in the attached letter dated
October 28, 1974.
Department Head Recommendation: Concur. In addition, the City Council should, by
minute action, certify that the EIR-74-9 for South Bay .Villas has been completed
in accordance with CEQA 1970, as amended, and that the Council has considered the
EIR information in making its decision.
City Manager Recommendation: Concur
~ ~~~
AGENDA ITEM N0.
15
Supplemental Page No. 2
Vegetation on the site consists of dense stands of shrubs in the main canyon
area (Lot A) and the rare Snake Cholla, a cactus plant identified by the EIR as
being unique to the South Bay area. This plant is located primarily on lot B in
the northeast corner of the property. The EIR recommended that these plants be
preserved through less grading and/or transplanting, which can be successfully
accomplished.
2. Proposed Development.
a. The plan shows that 113 single family lots will be developed on 24.4 acres
for a net density of 4.6 units per acre. A summary of land uses is tabulated
below along with the development permitted by the "H" District.
Total Parcel Size: 40 acres (Average natural slope: 13%)
Property owned by subdivider: 37.7 acres (Average natural slope: 13.8%)
Pro oral Hillside District Req uirements
0 of Net % of Net
Land Use Acres Site Units Density Acres Site Units Density
Developed 24.4 65% 113 4.6 27.1 72% 124 4.6
(lots &
streets)
Open Space 12.2 32% 10.6 28%
(Natural 10.4)
(Slopes 1.8)
Future Dev. 1.1 3%
Totals 37.7 100% 113 4.6 37.7 100% 124 4.6
San Diego Pipeline - +2.3 acres (excluded from slope, density and grading computations)
Total Parcel Size: 40 Acres
Excluding the 2.3 acres for the pipeline and the 1.1 acres for future development,
the overall gross density of the 113 units on 36.6 acres being developed under this
proposal is 3.1 per acre, compared to 3.3 per acre permitted by the "H" District.
b. Lot Size.
As authorized by the precise plan provisions, lot sizes have been reduced
somewhat to produce a more logical and flexible development pattern. Even so, the
minimum lot size is 6000 sq. ft. and the average is around 8000 sq. ft. This
compares favorably to conventional R-1-7 zoning, which allows some lot sizes as
low as 5000 sq. ft., and the average lot size at 7000 sq. ft. 62 of the lots are
under 7000 sq. ft. in area.
c. Typical Plot Plan
The typical plot plan shown on the tentative map is accepted with a note of
caution: Some of the floor plans are wider than the typical plan and a limited
number of the lots are narrower than 60 ft. and less than 100 ft. in depth.
Special attention will have to be paid to matching floor plan and lot configura-
tion in those cases in order to insure the minimum side yards of 10 ft. and 3 ft
and a minimum level rear yard area of 15 ft.
d. Noise Impact.
The EIR identifies future problems from the impact of ultimate traffic noise
from J Street for lots fronting on the street. An alternate to fronting the houses
on J would be to reverse the house fronts, thereby permitting the homes to back
up to J with the construction of walls high enough to reduce the noise level.
This is not a realistic alternative, however, since there is insufficient room for
another street to serve these lots, and backing houses up to J Street would not
relate to existing residential development located to the west.
AGENDA'ITEM N0. 15
Supplemental Page No. 3
Based on tentative traffic projections, the normally unacceptable noise
zone will extend approximately 60 ft. from the nearest travel lane. In some
instances the inhabited part of the house behind the garage will be 60'± from the
street; in other cases, building techniques and materials can be used to reduce
the inside noise level to an acceptable intensity. Tn all cases, the rear yards
are more than 60 ft. from the street. With the fencing between houses which
normally occurs in this type of development, the rear yard areas should be
reasonably well buffered from J Street noise.
On certain corner lots on J Street, a masonry wall will be required to atten-
uate the traffic noise in exterior sideyards.
e. Grading.
The grading plan generally conforms to the existing topography. Total
earthwork will be approximately 240,000 cubic yards with cuts and fills up to
18 ft. and 20 ft.,respectively.
The subdivider will attempt to eliminate a "hole" in the northwest corner of
the site by mutual agreement with the homeowners in the subdivision to the west.
In grading the lots, the subdivider will be required to provide a level,
usable rear yard of 15 ft. minimum depth.
f. Future Development.
Lots "C" through "I" on the tentative map are being reserved for future
development. This is necessary because the design of the tentative map is logically
oriented around the topography and not around ownership lines, thus leaving several
small remnants which the subdivider intends to hold for future lots at such time
as he can acquire adjacent properties, or sell the remnants to adjacent land owners.
The shape of these remnants is such t t without using adjacent lands they are not
suitable building sites. The disposition of these remnants shall be settled prior
to recordation of the final map.
g. Access.
Major access will be on East J Street across Otay Land Company property.
The right of way will be acquired by eminent domain with the applicant paying the
cost, since Otay Land Company cannot sell this land to the applicant because of
a 50 acre minimum release clause in the former's grant deed. The triangular
shaped property between the street right of way and this subdivision is being
severed by the extension of J Street and cannot be properly subdivided without
being included with Lot "C"; therefore, this property will also be included in
the eminent domain process, again with the applicant paying all costs, so the
property can be developed in accordance with City subdivision standards. A sketch
of the possible lot arrangement is shown on the tentative map. Access into the
project will also be available from Crest Drive.
h. Open Space Lots.
The two open space lots, A and B, comprising 12.2 acres, will be dedicated
to the City and taken care of under the provisions of an Open Space Maintenance
District, to be formed prior to approval of the final map. Although the canyon
will be "public," the residents of the subdivision will have the most immediate
and continuing enjoyment of its natural beauty. A pedestrian path system will
serve the canyon with several points of access to the streets. Access down into
the canyon itself will be on the existing trails.
i. Park Fees.
Park fees required in the project amount to approximately $30,000, depending
on the number of bedrooms in the homes. Considering the fact that the developer
will be making certain improvements to the pedestrian trail and improving various
entrances to the canyon, such as areas adjacent to Lots 13, 19, and 40, Council
may wish to consider a reduction in the amount of the park fee required. Such a
consideration has broad policy implications, however, so that hasty action is
inapproproate. At the Council conference of October 24th, Council asked for a
staff study of this and other related items. It is suggested that Council action
to allow open space set aside pursuant to the Hillside Modifying District to
count toward open space required pursuant to the Park Dedication Ordinance be
deferred until consideration of the final map for the South Bay Villas tract.
'~ : ~ a /,
Agenda Item No. 15
Supplemental Page No. 4
C. FINDINGS
1. Conformance to Hillside Development Policy.
The South Bay Villas subdivision substantially conforms to the several
guidelines of the Hillside Development Policy, particularly regarding the most
important matter of site design: the subdivided lots are located on the flatter,
more developable ground, and the steeper slopes and canyon areas are preserved.
2. Conformance to Hillside District.
The South Bay Villas subdivision conforms to the Hillside Modifying District
by proposing less density and grading than allowed by the Hillside District. In
addition, approximately 102 acres of natural and usable open space is being
provided in accordance with the District regulations.
3. Consistency with the General Plan.
The proposed subdivision is consistent with all of the General Plan Elements,
notably the Open Space Element which shows the canyon as being preserved.
~,