HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/24/2013 Planning Commission Minutesdill
CITY of
CHULAVISTA
�vf Chula Vista Boards & Commissions
Planning Commission
MW a
July 24, 2013
6:00 p.m.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Council Chambers
Public Services Bldg 100
276 Fourth Avenue
CALL TO ORDER At 6:01 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Commissioners Anaya Calvo, Livag, Spethman, Vinson and Chair Moctezuma
Members Present: Anaya (arrived at 6:10), Calvo, Livag, Spethman, Vinson and Chair Moctezuma
Members Absent: n/a
MOTIONS TO EXCUSE:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MOMENT OF SILENCE
OPENING STATEMENT:
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were none
1. Public Hearing: Design Review (DRC- 12 -10) to construct 144 residential
condominiums for individual ownership with one and two car
garages, open parking, recreation area, and associated open space
on approximately 8.7 acres within the Otay Ranch Village Two,
Neighborhood R -11, Planned Community District RM1 multi - family
zone. Applicant: Sunrise Company
Project Manager: Caroline Young
The Applicant has submitted a Design Review application for approval of 144 residential
condominiums for individual ownership with one and two car garages, open parking, recreation
area, and associated open space on approximately 8.7 acres. The site is currently vacant and
located within the Otay Ranch Village Two, Neighborhood R -11
Proiect Description
The proposal includes two (2) building plan types ranging from three -unit to six - unit /plex
buildings. The three unit /plex building would be two - stories (30 feet) and the six - unit /plex
building will be three stories (32 feet).
Planning Commission Agenda
July 24, 2013
Page -2-
Spanish style architecture incorporates materials such as light to dark colored stucco, tiled
roofs, decorative tile trim, window shelves and shutters, arched recessed windows, decorative
stucco wrapped lattice recess on the balconies, and arched openings. Required parking is
provided both onsite and offsite with 48 one -car garages and 96 two -car garages, 60 off - street
parking spaces, and 61 on- street parking spaces provided along Santa Diana Road, Santa
Victoria Road and Santa Alexia Avenue surrounding the site.
On site amenities include several open space areas throughout the project site consisting of a
recreational area with a toddler play structure, benches, seating area, covered picnic area, and
a barbeque. Additional amenities consist of open courtyards and open space areas between
buildings.
CONCLUSION
The proposed 144 residential condominiums for individual ownership are a permitted land use
in the Otay Ranch GDP and are permitted in the Residential Multi - Family One (RM1) district of
the Village Two SPA Plan. The proposal complies with the policies, guidelines and design
standards for the Village Two Design Plan as well as the Village Core MPP.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Design Review
Permit, DRC- 12 -10, subject to the conditions listed in the attached Resolution.
DISCUSSION /QUESTIONS:
Chair Moctezuma: Clarified the density and approval being requested by the applicant.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS /QUESTIONS
Cmr. Vinson: Supports the project would like to make the motion to support the project.
Cmr. Livag: Likes the architectual elements and since it meets all the requirements, he would
like to second the motion.
MSC (Vinson /Livag) to support DRC 12 -10
Motion carried: 5 -0 -1 -0 with Commissioner Calvo abstaining
2. Public Hearing: Design Review (DRC- 13 -14) to construct two buildings totaling
181,211 square -feet for a senior care facility with assisted living,
memory care, senior housing, and associated uses and open space,
to be constructed in two phases on approximately 4.5 acres in Otay
Planning Commission Agenda
July 24, 2013
Page -3-
Ranch Village One, Neighborhood 1 CPF -2 site. Applicant: Trinity
Pacific. Project Manager: Caroline Young
The Applicant has submitted a Design Review application for approval of two buildings on the
site: a four - story, 145,211 square -foot building; and a three - story, 36,000 square -foot building.
The site is located within the Otay Ranch Village One, Neighborhood 1 CPF -2 site
Project Description:
The Project site is located in the southern portion of Otay Ranch Heritage Village One within the
Village Core, on a vacant parcel south of East Palomar Street. The front of the lot, adjacent to
East Palomar Street, is level with the street grade. However, the lot gradually slopes downward
with a steep slope in the rear of the site. The Community Purpose Facility zoned (CPF -2) site is
the last remaining undeveloped parcel in Heritage Village One since construction began in Otay
Ranch Village 1 back in 1998. The CPF -2 site is bordered on the north by Residential
Condominiums, Multi - Family Apartments to the east, Sharp Rees - Stealy Medical Clinic and
Heritage Town Center to the west, and Single - Family Residential and Open Space to the south.
The first phase consists of a four story building with 91 assisted living units and 63 memory care
units. The building will have a kitchen area, dining room, pub, beauty shop, exercise room,
dance, therapy, chapel, and several activity rooms for the residents in addition to staff offices,
maintenance and a laundry room. There are two different unit types; one consisting of a studio
unit with a full bath; and the other with one and two bedrooms with a living room, full kitchen
and bath. These assisted living and memory care units are reserved for seniors who may need
assistance from staff such as preparing meals, walking, and taking showers.
In Phase 2, a three - story, 36,000 square -foot building will be constructed for seniors who can
live independently. Each unit is a studio with full kitchen and bath. The first floor consists of the
main entrance lobby and studio units. The second and third floors consist of the remainder
studio units. The seniors who live in this building can also use all of the facilities and amenities
on the site, in addition to having meals prepared for them in the main building, upon request. A
total of 63 units will be constructed in Phase 2.
Spanish style architecture incorporates materials such as light to dark colored stucco, concrete
tiled roofs, wood stain, cultured stone, wrought iron balconies, wood trellis and arched
openings. Required parking is provided on site.
On site amenities include several open space areas throughout the project site consisting of
two large courtyard areas and two roof decks in addition to three indoor solariums for the
residents to enjoy. The courtyards consist of seating, enhanced paving, and landscape
treatments. Enhanced paving is provided adjacent to the front and rear entrance of the four -
story building. Enhanced paving is also provided within the turn - around area for passenger pick
up /drop off on Santa Andrea Street.
Planning Commission Agenda
July 24, 2013
Page -4-
In order to comply with the building siting polices and guidelines included in the Village One
Design Plan, buildings have been oriented towards the corner and along the frontage on East
Palomar Street as well as a pedestrian connection along Santa Andrea Street.
While pedestrian access is the most significant feature in the Villages of Otay Ranch, increased
vehicular access is also important in order to offer a variety of ways to access different areas.
Dispersion of automobile traffic also has the effect of making areas more pedestrian friendly as
cars and pedestrians have less direct interaction. The Project site provides three vehicular
access points and several pedestrian access points throughout the site.
CONCLUSION
The proposed senior care facility is a permitted land use in the Otay Ranch GDP and permitted
in the Community Purpose Facility (CPF) district of the Village One SPA Plan. The proposal
complies with the policies, guidelines and design standards for the Village One Design Plan.
Therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Design Review Permit, DRC -13-
14, to construct 181,211 square -feet of building area for a senior care facility with assisted
living, memory care, and senior housing subject to the conditions listed in the attached
Resolution.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution DRC -13 -14 to construct 181,211 square -feet of
building area for a senior care facility with assisted living, memory care, and senior housing
based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
DISCUSSION /QUESTIONS:
Cmr. Vinson: Is there any energy conservation connected with this project.
Young: Not that she knows of — will defer to applicant.
Cmr. Calvo The Commission is approving Phase I and Phase 2 tonight, correct?
Young: Correct
Cmr. Calvo Referred to a presentation slide and asked the direction of the tower to
be verified.
Young: Verified that the tower is on the west side.
Chair Moctezuma: Is there an elevator?
Young: Yes, there is.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Planning Commission Agenda
July 24, 2013
Page -5-
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Cmr. Vinson: Thanked the applicant for bringing the project forward. Stated that we are
concerned about the environment and asked the applicant to expound on what type of energy
conservation things were being used.
Ryan Miyahira, architect: They are following the Chula Vista "high effeciency standards" and
providing insullated low heat; windows will contain high efficiency HVAC for all units, but they
have no plans for solar at this time.
John McColl, from Trinity Pacific Investments and on the Board of St. Paul Senior Homes and
Services, and Cheryl Wilson, CEO of St. Paul Senior Homes and Services were available for
questions.
Cmr Vinson: Is it not feesible to put solar in this project?
Wilson: They did look into solar, but as a non - profit, they do not receive a tax break for
installing solar. There also is no funding from SDG &E or any other source. They looked into the
"payback" time and it would take 18 to 19 years to realize their full investment. At this time,
the cost to add that to the building would be extraordinary.
Cmr Spethman: In looking at the elevations on the project, it looks very flat, which he knows is not
the case. He commended the architect on the color pallet, the difference of materials being used,
the lighting, the landscaping, etc. He observed that it is a quality project and that the team has
gone over and above what a project like this usually has when it is brought to the Commission.
Does the HVAC equipment on the roof have the proper sound barriers, screens, etc?
Wilson: yes — all units will be screened.
Cmr Calvo: Definitely agrees with Cmr Spethman that the architecture for the Phase I building is
exceptional, but has reservations regarding the Phase II building. Where is the primary entrance
for the Phase II building and it seems to be a step below Phase I. Is concerned with the view from
Fieldbrook because it is up above and is seen from below.
Architect: Pointed out the main entry for Phase II building on the easel chart elevation.
Cmr Calvo: Thinks that the entrance of the Phase II building needs a little work. It could be
done with color or angles, etc.
Wilson: As a non - profit, they are trying to keep the costs down and didn't want to spend
money on the architect for Phase II when it will not be built as soon. Assured the Commission
that the Phase II building will be just as beautiful as the Phase I building and that it will have, at
the least, a nice awning or something to articulate the entrance and make the people that live
there want to come into the building.
Planning Commission Agenda
July 24, 2013
Page -6-
Cmr. Livag: Are you planning on executing Phase II right after the completion of Phase I or
what are the hurdles that need to be met before starting Phase II? What are the conditions
that would trigger the starting of Phase II?
Wilson: Would like to do both phases at the same time, but as a non - profit, that is not
feasible. They would like to complete Phase I, get some revenue coming in and then
contemplate the starting of Phase II very soon thereafter. It is totally based on the economics
of the project.
Cmr Livag: What would the occupancy rate need to be to enable you to start Phase II?
Wilson: It would need to be about 50% occupancy.
There was some discussion on how the Phase II construction would affect the entrance on East
Palomar and the Commission was advised that the entrance off San Andreas would be used.
Chair Moctezuma: Does like Cmr Calvo's suggestion of working on the Phase II entrance. An
awning would be great, but you could also enhance it with plants and color. Asked if there
were any "senior friendly" benches — which are a great way to get seniors outdoors and
interacting with others.
Wilson: All of the projects north of the property have benches within them and on the streets.
The benches that are included in this project are contoured to the body.
Cmr. Spethman: Concurs with Cmr. Calvo's concerns about the entry -way and how it was
addressed. With inclement weather and having tenants with mobility issues, he is hopeful that
a simple canopy would not be the solution for the Phase II entrance. He would suggest that
Cmr. Calvo request a condition on approval of Phase II when the motion is made.
Cmr. Vinson: would like to see a condition stating that something permanent would be added
to the building for the entrance of Phase II.
Deputy City Attorney Shirey drafted the following additional language:
The Applicant shall provide additional architectural elements and articulation
around the entrance of the Phase 2 building as approved by the Development
Services Director, or designee.
MSC (Spethman /Calvo) to support DRC -13 -14 with additional condition added
Motion carried 6 -0 -0 -0
3. Public Hearing: PCC -13 -006 Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to
rehabilitate an existing private training facility site for mentally
and physically disabled preschoolers and adults. The Project consists of the following:
1) 2,205 square -foot one -story office addition to the existing two -story building to
Planning Commission Agenda
July 24, 2013
Page -7-
remain; 2) 14,662 square -foot one -story multi - purpose building with classrooms; 3)
1,231 one -story square -foot pre - school building, and associated open space areas on
approximately 2.3 acres at 1280 Nolan Avenue. Applicant: Arc of San Diego
Project Description
The overall proposal consists of rehabilitating an existing private training facility site for
mentally and physically disabled preschoolers and adults. The proposal consists of the
following: 1) 2,205 square -foot one -story office addition to the existing two -story building to
remain; 2) 14,662 square -foot one -story multi - purpose building and classrooms; 3) 1,231
square -foot one -story pre - school building, and associated open space area. There will be a total
of 37,901 square -feet of building area on the site. Overall, the building square footage on site
will be decreased by 1,867 square -feet in comparison to existing building area.
On site amenities include several open space areas throughout the project site consisting of
three (3) courtyards located at the front entrance and in between buildings and a garden area
off one of the courtyard areas. Required parking is provided on site with forty -one (41) off -
street parking spaces provided in the southern portion of the site. There is one vehicle entrance
proposed with two pedestrian access pathways off Nolan Avenue. Improvements to the site
also include a paved parking lot, landscaping, courtyards, and a new trash enclosure.
Pre - School
The pre - school includes early intervention services for children 0 to 3 years of age. The pre-
school provides the typical programs provided to pre - schoolers in addition to providing
assistance for the mentally and physically disabled child with appropriate level learning skills.
The one -story 1,231 square -foot building would be located along Nolan Avenue and would have
a large open space area with an office and restrooms. Outside amenities include a fenced play
area with a play structure for the children.
Operational Profile /Hours of Operation
There will be no changes to the existing operational profile and hours of operation of the
training facility. The existing pre - school will continue to not exceed 25 children. The existing
adult training facility will continue to not exceed 260 adults. All uses will operate during the
existing hours of Monday through Friday from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Parking
The training facility and pre - school require one parking space per 17 students. Therefore, the
required parking is 17 spaces (285/17 =17 spaces). Off - street parking consists of 39 standard
parking spaces and 2 disabled parking spaces for a total of 41 spaces provided on the site. The
project exceeds the required parking by twenty -four parking spaces and does not propose any
compact parking.
Planning Commission Agenda
July 24, 2013
Page -8-
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit
Permit, PCC -13 -006, to rehabilitate an existing private training
facility site for mentally and physically disabled preschoolers and adults, subject to the
conditions listed in the Resolution.
DISCUSSION /QUESTIONS:
Cmr. Spethman: Was a lighting study done?
Project Manager Young: There was no study done, but the applicant did show staff where
the lights would be placed and they are designated on the site plan.
There was discussion regarding as to whether there would be arterial and /or parking lighting for
after hours. There is some concern for the residents pertaining to the glare of the illuminants
when the lights are on. Cmr. Spethman requested that the Zoning Administrator review the plans
so that we had some definite direction on it.
Cmr. Spethman: Wanted to know about delivery hours. He also had questions about the
times that participants would arrive and leave. Is it all during the day, at specific times, etc.?
Young: Deferred to the Applicant.
Cmr. Calvo: Requested the slide showing the view from Oneida street. Will the existing trees
remain? There was some discussion and looking at the elevations and it was decided that some
of the trees would go away because of grading.
Public Hearing Opened
No speaker slips, but the Commission had questions.
Cmr Spethman: Questioned the applicant about deliver hours — both of people and products.
Applicant: Food vendors come approximately once a week. Delivery hours will be within the
program hours which are 8:30 — 4:00.
There was discussion of how the clients arrived at the facility — buses, private cars, etc. Most of
the drop -off clients come from public transportation buses.
Cmr Spethman: The existing building does not seem to fit into the rest of the project. It seems
drab and plain. Is there a reason it is not being re- worked to fit into the rest of the project?
Applicant: "We're accepting donations" O As a non - profit they have a designated budget and
they hope to adjust the fagade of the existing building at a later date. The older buildings were
the classrooms donated to the City of Chula Vista by the Elementary School District, so they're
50+ years old.
Planning Commission Agenda
July 24, 2013
Page -9-
Cmr Spethman is not going to make an issue of the difference, but gave several suggestions on
how the older building could be brought more in line with the others. His examples included
color palette, integrating the stucco colors, a wooden trellis —just something to give the building
some visual relief.
Cmr. Livag: Is familiar with the area because he grew up around it. Stated that the large
building sits up away from the street and is not readily viewed unless you're
looking for it. Thinks it's a great project.
Cmr. Calvo: Why is the main feature below on the side street below the street?
Applicant: Because it's in a residential area, they felt that, because it's about the size of a single -
family house and when you drive down Nolan it would fit in better.
There was discussion about cutting down the trees along Oneida and replacing them and that by
approaching the problem areas the way they are, most of the programs will be able to be on a
single level. There was a question of whether there would be a retaining wall along Oneida and
the applicant responded that the grading that will be done will not affect the structure of the
building. Discussion was continued about the slopes and grading and they compared notes to the
elevation drawings. It was decided that there will be a wall.
Cmr. Anaya: Is familiar with running a non - profit and having to take a venture into a capital
campaign and having to rebuild everything. He understands why things are the
way they are thinks it's commendable for them to take on the project.
Cmr Spethman: It is a nicely designed project and he concurs with Cmrs. Anaya and Livag.
Chair Moctezuma: While we can voice the Commission's preferences, we must be mindful of
the enormous amount of money it takes to complete a project like this and
we should applaud the efforts.
MSC (Anaya/Livag) to support PCC -13 -006
Motion passed 6 -0 -0 -0
4. APPOINTMENT OF NEW CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR FOR FY 2013 -14
Cmr. Vinson has had some discussion with the Vice Chair and she concurs that they would
support Lisa Moctezuma to continue acting as the Chairperson for the Planning Commission.
MSC (Vinson/Livag) to retain the current Chair and Vice -Chair
Motion passed unanimously
Planning Commission Agenda
July 24, 2013
Page -10-
OTHER BUSINESS
S. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Asst. Director of Dev Services Eric Crockett said there was no report except that there are
currently no items for September. If you haven't had the opportunity to meet the new
Director, Kelly Broughton, he's in the audience and you should take time to meet him.
6. COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Cmr. Spethman: would like staff to agendize the proliferation of food trucks that are
sprouting up all over Chula Vista. Some of them are starting to become
"permanent" structures with dining canopies, lights, tables, etc. It makes it difficult for the
smaller restaurants and business to be successful. Food trucks should be moving and not
parked permanently with dining areas.
Chair Moctezuma suggested an information item to let the Commission know exactly what is
going on with them and give different examples.
Asst. Director Crockett stated that they are currently working with the Attorney's office to
determine which codes are in place and what needs to be addressed.
There was some discussion whether it should be an information item or an action item
(regarding land use). The concern is regarding those that seem more permanently fixed. It was
decided that staff would return in September with something.
ADJOURNMENT at 7:26 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting
on August 14, 2013, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers.
Submitted by:
Patricia Laughlin, Board Sec etary
Minutes Approved: 09 -25 -2013
MSC: Spethman /Calvo 4 -0 -2 -0