The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Statement 1974 /07/09 Item 5a, 5b { . - . � AGENDA ITEM N0. [ 5a,b] CHUL� VISTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING oF: �u�y g� �g74 Public hearing � Consideration of Planned Unit Development PUD-74-1 for Windsor Views ITEM TITLE: Resolution � Approving Planned Unit Development PUD�74�1 for Windsor Views INITIATED BY: Director of Planning A. BACKGROUND 1 . This request for approval of a PUD site plan implements the rezoning considered as a preceding agenda item. The proposal is to construct 56 townhouses on 14.1 acres of property (4 DU/Acre); the PUD does not include the drainage channel or Telegraph Canyon Road. 2. Development of this property was considered by the City in May, 1972, under the same project name and owner. That proposal was for 72 units on 16.3 acres (4.4 DU/Acre). The Planning Commission denied the application and the City Council , on appeal , upheld the Planning Commission's action, based on the finding that the project was premature in several respects: a. The alignment of Telegraph Canyon Road had not been determined; nor had the width and structural requirements of the drainage channel . b. The final alignment of J Street had not been determined. c. The project did not conform to the General Plan policies regarding open space along Telegraph Canyon Road. d. The project grading was not in harmony with surrounding areas. (continued on supplemental page� ATTACHED: Resolution [X] Ordinance [ ] Agreement [ ] Plat [� See EXHIBITS [x] No. 1_2-.3 Financial Statement: Commission-Board Recommendation: The Planning Commission Voted 5�2 on May 22, 1974 recommending that the City Council approve the Windsor Views Planned Unit Development subject to the conditions set forth in Resolution PUD-74�1 (attached), Department Head Recommendation: C011CUY'. City Manager Recommendation: Concur �� , ' _ , AGENDA ITEM N0. 5a,b Supplemental Page No. 2 In addition, there were usable open space and floor area deficiencies which made the design of the project unacceptable. a. Since 1972, several factors have 6een decided: (1J The alignment of Telegraph Canyon Road �as 6een prepared, (2) Required drainage improvements have been decided upon. (3) J Street has been relocated �urther no�tfi, of� t�is propert�, (4) A primary route for a north�south collector has been selected �qst east of this project (this route has not yet been appro�ed�. (5) The Open Space Element of the General Plan has 6een adopted, g�vinq the City and developer guidance in the treatment of Telegraph Canyon. b. Factors which have not changed. The following factors prevalent in 1972 remain unchanged today: (1 ) Otay Land Company, owner of the surrounding properties, has not proceeded with development plans; thus there is still some question as to what effect the grading in the project PUD will have on the development of surrounding lands. (2) No agreement has been reached between the applicant and Otay Land Company regarding cooperative grading and development of the area. c. A tentative map for development of this property is a following agenda item. d. EIR-73-16 for this project was adopted by the Planning Commission in late 1973 and became final on January 23, 1974. B. ANALYSIS 1 . Site Characteristics. The subject property drops off from Telegraph Canyon Road into the natural drainage course and then slopes up to the north at an average slope of 19.3%. The high point of the site is at the northern boundary, at elevation 405' , compared to the elevation of Telegraph Canyon Road at 289' . Views from the property are predominantly to the south, looking across Teleqraph Canyon Road onto the Otay Ranch properties. The view from the top of the site extends west and north toward Point Loma and downtown San Diego. The site is bordered on the east and west sides by branches of La Nacion earth- quake fiault. Neither cross the site, but the soils report did locate a small fault, classified "inactive," on the property. The Soils Engineers stated in the EIR that this current classification is not important for the siting of structures. The northeast corner of the site is crossed by a 100' easement used by the San Diego-Otay pipeline. An archeological survey of the site during preparation of the EIR revealed artifacts associated with the San Dieguito inhabitants of the area approximately 9,000 years ago. The surface of the site has been thoroughly surveyed and cleared of those artifacts. The EIR reports that no further excavations are necessary. 2. Proposed Development. a. Windsor Views proposes 56 units in 28 duplex-type structures. The units, along with the other features of the project, are shown on the enclosed 40' scale PUD site plan. Architectural renderings of the buildings will be posted at the meeting on July 9, 1g74, �� . " ' ,.�. a,�>��«w h� _ ��,,��..t��r�._. �.,.w� ��.�N. ..�b��...��.�w�,,:��. .,�._�..a,�;.��: w . �aEN�A 11tM NU. 5a,b ' ~ ' Supplemental Page No. 3 The following unit mix is being proposed: 30 - 1 story one bedroom and den (2 bedroom) - 1275 sq, ft. 18 - 1 story two bedroom - 1545 sq. ft. 8 - 2 story three bedroom - 1663 sq. ft. Total site coverage by structures amounts to 14%. The concept of the plan involves the establishment of five clusters of duplex units connected by a north-south residential street with a cul-de-sac at the end of each cluster. A tennis court and gazebo area comprise the active recreational amenities at the northern end of the property with 5 barbecue areas dispersed elsewhere in the project. Guest parking is provided in bays on each court. A recreational vehicle parking area is located at the end of Court D. 3. Present PUD compared to Hillside Standards. This site was being considered for R-1-H rezoning until this proposal was filed. If the R�1-H provisions were applied to this property, including the land area for the drainage channel , a total yield of 50 units could be built on 10.8 acres of property, leaving 5.5± acres undeveloped. The proposed PUD shows 56 units on 14 acres. It is obvious that the PUD exceeds the "H" District regulations but it is fairly close, considering these provisions were not required of the applicant. It should also be noted that the project uses several of the techniques encouraged by the Hillside Development Policy, as follows: a. Clustered units b. Narrow streets c. Houses oriented towards views d. Use of half-split pads and units e. Use of multi-pads (more than one structure per pad to minimize stair-stepping up the hill ). 4. PUD Conformance to the General Plan. Windsor Views conforms to the various elements of the General Plan, including the Open Space Element, Policy C (1 ) which specifies that areas in flood plains shall be set aside in open space. The units are set back 240-300 feet from the northern right of way line of Telegraph Canyon Road, setting a desirable precedent for adjacent future developments in implementing the Open Space and Scenic Nighways Elements. 5. Conformance to the PUD Policy. This project conforms to the PUD Policy, with the following exceptions: a. Grading exceeds the goal of the PUD Policy to retain natural topography and avoid large manmade slopes. The grading plan, however, attempts to shape development areas onto existing knolls, takes advantage of the view potentials of the site, and shows the manmade slopes blending in with the natural topography offsite. In addition, certain hillside design techniques cited above are being used to minimize the extent and appearance of the grading. b. Usable Open Space. Although the amount of usable open space satisfies the minimum requirements of the PUD Policy, the sizes and shapes of the various open space areas are gen- erally small and restrictive. A partial solution to this problem would involve the selective use of 12:1 slopes on the smaller, accessible banks, leaving the larger slopes at 2:1 . C. FINDINGS [Section 33.601 6 (e) of Zoning Ordinance] l . The project conforms to the General Plan. 2. The development will constitute a residential environment of sustained desirability and stability. 3, Deviation of the grading plan from the PUD Policy is acceptable in vlew of certain hillside design criteria being employed, and further, on the premise that the approved landscaping will transform the initially barren manmade slopes into a subtle feature of the development. /�73(0� � _ . ,,,,. _. ,�.,,�.�.�...,..� �,.s�,.�,. ,..�.s,.,.., m_,��..