Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/10/2013 Planning Commission Minutesalt tr My of CHULAVISTA Planning Commission REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION ?l�lfnufes July 10, 2013 Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. Public Services Bldg 100 276 Fourth Avenue CALL TO ORDER At 6:03 p.m. ROLL CALL: Commissioners Anaya, Calvo, Livag, Spethman, Vinson and Chair Moctezuma Members Present: Anaya, Livag, Spethman, Vinson and Chair Moctezuma Members Absent: Vice -Chair Calvo MOTIONS TO EXCUSE: Vice -Chair Calvo had contacted staff and requested an excuse from tonight's meeting MSC (Spethman/Vinson) to excuse Vice -Chair Calvo. Motion carried PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MOMENT OF SILENCE OPENING STATEMENT: PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were none 1. Public Hearing: Design Review (DRC- 13 -02) to approve a 48 -unit multi- family attached alley condominium project with two (2) car garages, remainder lot, and associated open space on approximately 1.9 acres located in the Otay Ranch Village Two, Neighborhood R -lOB, Planned Community District (RM2) Residential Multi- Family 2 zone. Applicant: Pacific Coast Communities Project Manager: Caroline Young Planning Commission Agenda July 10, 2013 Page -2- Project Site Characteristics: The 1.9 -acre project site is located in the eastern portion of Village Two within the Village Core, on a vacant parcel north of Santa Diana Road and east of Santa Ivy Avenue. Neighborhood R -10B is bordered on the north by a Single - Family attached alley product, future park site to the east, future Multi - Family residential to the west, and a future elementary school across Santa Diana Road to the south (Attachment 1, Locator Map). All of the surrounding parcels are currently vacant. Summary of Surrounding Land Uses General Plan Zoning Site: Mixed -Use Residential Planned Community,RM2 South: Public Quasi North: Res. Low Medium East: Park West: Res. Low Medium Planned Community,RM1 Planned Community,RM1 Planned Community P3 Planned Community RM2 Current Land Use Multi - Family Res. Attached Alley Future Elementary School Single - Family Detached Alley Future Park Future MF Residential The Village Design Plan, Section III Residential District and the Village Core Master Precise Plan (MPP) include guidelines and policies that ensure that multi - family residential buildings will contribute to the pedestrian- oriented "Village Concept" established in the Otay Ranch GDP. Policies relating to pedestrian connections, building orientation, enhanced elevations and vehicular access are listed in each document to implement the visions. The pedestrian features throughout the site meet the intent of the Village Design Plan. The Village Two SPA Design Plan, Multi - Family Residential Guidelines Section and Village Core MMP identify Santa Barbara, California as the design inspiration for the Village of Montecito (Village Two). As a fundamental component of the village core, the architecture of the proposed multi - family development is focused primarily on the Santa Barbara design theme. Although not mandated, preferred architectural styles for the core's multi - family development include Spanish Eclectic and Spanish Mission to complement the design theme of the remainder of the village. Planning Commission Agenda July 10, 2013 Page -3- Village 2 SPA regulations require 2.25 spaces for three or more bedroom units. Therefore, the required parking is 108 spaces. All the units within the project provide a two -car garage with a total of 96 parking spaces. On- street parking consists of 42 spaces along Santa Diana Road pursuant to Otay Ranch Village 2 SPA, Section VIII (3) Parking Regulations. The project exceeds the required parking by thirty parking spaces and does not propose any compact parking. CONCLUSION The proposed 48 multi - family attached alley condominium project are a permitted land use in the Otay Ranch GDP and are permitted in the Residential Multi - Family Two (RM2) 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. Therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Design Review Permit, DRC- 13 -02, to construct a 48 -unit multi - family attached alley condominium project with two (2) car garages, remainder lot, and associated open space on approximately 1.9 acres, subject to the conditions listed in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution DRC -13 -02 to construct a 48 -unit multi- family attached alley condominium project with two (2) car garages, and associated open space on approximately 1.9 acres, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. DISCUSSION: Cmr Vinson: In reviewing the parking requirements — is it permissible to count spaces on Santa Diana Rd. as parking spaces for the project? Proj Mgr Young: In Otay Ranch and Village Two, unlike other portions of Chula Vista, it is allowable to use offsite parking. Cmr Spethman: Does not see anything in the plans for open space, i.e. recreation aneminities, bbq space, playground area, etc. Proj Mgr Young: There is a 10' wide area between the buildings, a corner area and private courtyards in front of the residence. Cmr. Spethman: Doesn't consider the 10' space between buildings to be viable recreation space. Has a huge concern because it is an intense project and there is no play area. Principal Planner Stan Donn: There are amenities that will be provided to the project — two parks are accessible. Even though the homes are attached, they are more like row homes and the usable amenity is the front courtyard. We felt that this project might be more marketable to those people who would not want to have a condo unit in a large condo complex. Planning Commission Agenda July 10, 2013 Page -4- There was continued discussion regarding "public space" and open space provided to projects. Parks have not usually been considered as part of the calculation of open space on a project. As a technicallity — this project meets the "letter of the law ". This is a constrained site with a rectangular space, which in turn restricts the usable open space. Cmr. Vinson: Asked for some insight on the remainder lot and asked if it would be feesible to use it in the project. If not, whose responsibility is it to maintain it, pay taxes, etc.? Donn: The remainder lot is owned by the applicant and will be turfed. They are currently going through a Spa amendment to add density to Village 2, at which time the lot will be developed. Attorney David Miller stated that he had been involed in this project and that he had to clarify that the applicant could not consider the new Spa amendment or proposal as to what could happen in the future. What staff is trying to do is to look at the project as a stand alone. They could only add 3 additional units to the remainder lot. Continued discussion ensued and included using public space (park land) being used to fulfill the need of recreational space in a project and the fact that every project needed to be responsible for its own open space. This is a unique project and staff could not think of another one that resembles it. It was clarified that the parks that are nearby for use were not included in the requirements for open space in the project and that this project does meet the requirements. Cmr. Livag: If street parking is allowed to be counted as parking spaces for a project, how do you prevent one project from using the same spaces that have already been counted in another project? Donn: In the Otay Ranch Plan, each project that fronts a street are allowed to use the spaces for their project. The spaces are tracked with the project. Cmr. Livag: How is private space calculated to be included in common usable public space i.e. courtyards? Donn: Each unit has a certain amount of private and common usable space. PUBLIC COMMENTS Nick Lee, from Baldwin & Sons, said that they focused on maximizing the private usable space and that it well exceeds the requirements in the Spa Plan. In addition, they met the minimum requirements for usable space — which is the space between the buildings. The reason they were not as concerned with that space is because of the access to other recreational areas Planning Commission Agenda July 10, 2013 Page -5- around the project. All residents in this project will be members of the HOA and will have access to the HOA facilities —which, in the future, will include a swim club. Cmr. Vinson: Had questions regarding the remainder lot. Lee: The remainder lot is approved, but not with units on it. The City of San Diego is using a major water line that runs through the whole village. The concept is that it will be moved and at the end, another building will be added to the remainder lot. In the worse case scenario, the remainder lot would remain undeveloped and used as open space. Cmr. Livag: On the remainder lot — if the density is not approved by the Spa Plan and the water line is not used, what happens to the remainder lot and would the project concept change? Lee: They would not be able to put the planned number of units on the remainder lot, but could still fit three additional units on the lot. Worst case scenario, it would be open space. However, things are moving along with San Diego and they expect it to go in the direction they have outlined. He then explained the process of how the project came to be and that it is unique to Otay Ranch and, to his knowledge, has not yet been done anywhere else. Commissioner's Comments Cmr. Vinson: It is a unique project and thinks the applicant did their best to make the most out of a strange lot. If he meets the City requirements, he suggests we move forward on it. Cmr. Livag: Likes the concept of the project and that it meets the letter of the law, but is concerned about the density. Because they meet the requirements he will support it, but is against density increase in the future. MSC (Vinson /Livag) to support DRC 13 -02 OTHER BUSINESS 1. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: There was no report 2. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Motion carried 4-1 -1 -0 with Calvo absent and Spethman voting nay Vinson: Wanted to know how many terms the Chair had and if she is not termed -out would like to support her being the chair another time. Planning Commission Agenda July 10, 2013 Page -6- Livag: Is concerned with the high density and shares Cmr. Spethman's concerns. He discussed the fact that there are a lot of other projects to be brought forward and hopes that Commissioners understand what would happen with increased density. ADJOURNMENT at 6:49 p.m. to the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting on July 24, 2013, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers. Sub itted by: C Patricia Laughlin, Board S etary Minutes Approved: February 12, 2014 MSC: Anaya/Livag 6 -0 -1 -0 (Vinson absent)