Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRC 1994-24 I RESOLUTION NO. DRC-94-24 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DECISION TO INSTALL A 3 FT. HIGH GATE ACROSS LA COSTA AVENUE, A PRIVATE STREET WITHIN THE EASTLAKE GREENS PLANNED. COMMUNITY WHEREAS, a duly verified Appeal Form was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on September 25, 1995 by B-EDC 17, L.P., Brehm Communities; and, WHEREAS, said appeal requested approval to install a 3 ft. high by 16 ft. wide gate across La Costa Avenue within the Eastlake Greens Planned Community; and, WHEREAS, The project is exempt from environmental review as a class 3(e) exemption; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said appeal and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its mailing to property owners within 1000 ft of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten days prior to hearing; and, WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m. November 29, 1995 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION finds as follows: a. The lot configuration and circulation system within Parcel R-17 was planned and designed under the precept that the site would be developed as a single neighborhood, well integrated within the community fabric, rather than as a self- contained project. The private street within the site was intended to tie the public street system providing continuous circulation to and from North Greensview Drive and Masters Ridge Road. The proposed gate would prevent the implementation of the original development plan and would be contrary to the urban design policies contained in the Eastlake Greens SPA plan. b. La Costa Avenue/ Torrey Pines Road has been designed in accordance with private loop road standards and does not meet cul-de-sac street design standards. If the gate is installed, each segment of La Costa Avenue would exceed the 500 ft. maximum length allowed for private cul-de-sacs by virtue of each segment being over 2,200 ft in length. c. The proposed hammerhead turnarounds have not been well integrated within the overall plan to reduce disturbance to property owners and aesthetic impacts. The dead end streets and hammerhead turnarounds reduce the front yards and existing landscape/ open space areas of four lots (two lots of each subdivision) and creates a less than attractive dead end street condition. d. The Police Department has indicated that the proposed gate would create a visual barrier and would limit police patrol and could increase emergency response time. The Police Department opposes installation of the gate. e. The Fire Department has indicated that although the time required to gain access through the gate would not be significant, it may be critical on certain situations and it would be preferable to provide uninhibited access throughout the project. f. Installation of the gate would be confusing for delivery services as well as I residents' guests. g. The Design Review Committee and the Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) have indicated that the placement of the gate at the proposed location would form an artificial barrier between two halves of the same neighborhood restricting continuous vehicular circulation along LA Costa Avenue, and that such action would be contrary to the efforts made at all levels of government to create more interactive, livable communities. the DRC and MTDB have recommended against placing a gate across La Costa Avenue. h. Other solution such as the installation of multiple lines of speed bumps across the street to discourage trips across neighborhood boundaries or a reciprocal access and street maintenance and liability agreement between the two neighborhoods associations have not been fully explored. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED. THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby denies the requested appeal this 29th day of November, 1995 by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Commissioners Davis, Ray, Salas, Tarantino, Thomas and Willett NOES: None ABSENT: Chair Tuchscher / Joh C. Ray, Vice Cha" ~ , , 1. jr ~x r.~ , Y" ~Z x Nancy Ripley, ecru rta y (m:Uirnne\pla'+'~\pcm9511.pcx)