HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 1 - Approval of MinutesPlanninu Commission
November 9, 2016
6:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
MEMBERS PRESENT:
MEMBERS ABSENT:
MOTION TO EXCUSE
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Anaya, Fuentes, Livag,
Calvo, Nava
and Chair Gutierrez
MSC: Fuentes/Anaya Motion"O.assed
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE: Asst. Dir of D
Planner'SteyE
Associate PI
Chester Bautista; Landscape Architect Pato
Aden, HomeFed Corporation; :Todd Galar
Associates; Tim Jones,Architect,.Nathan B
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIAIVCEAND
OPENING STATEMENT:
1, `Approval of Minutes
October 26,i416
PUBLIC COMME
uracil Chambers
Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA
Oppment Services Tiffany Allen; Principal
ower„Deputy City Attorney Mike Shirey;
ner_ :Harold I'Pelps; Associate Civil Engineer
a Ferman,e,Project Coordinator Janice Kluth; Kent
au, Millenia project; Ranie Hunter, Hunsaker &
aft, Resident
r Motion Passed 5-0
Persons speaking during Public Comments may address the Board/Commission on any
subject matter within the Board/Commission's jurisdiction that is not listed as an item on the
agenda. State law generally prohibits the Board/Commission from discussing or taking
action on any issue not included on the agenda, but, if appropriate, the Board/Commission
may schedule the topic for future discussion or refer the matter to staff. Comments are
limited to three minutes.
Planning Commission Minutes
November 9, 2016
Page 12
PUBLIC HEARINGS
The following item(s) have been advertised as public hearing(s) as required by law. if you
wish to speak on any item, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form and submit it to the
Secretary prior to the meeting.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: DR1S-0031; Design Review consideration of two apartments
behind an existing single-family house. Proposal is located at
443 G Street in the Residential Apartment (R-3) Zone
Applicant: Timothy P. Jones, Architect,
on behalf of Eric Ciprian"Investments.
Project Manager: H
ate 'Plann
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt the Resolutions approving
the proposed project, based on the findings and subject to the
conditions contained therein.
Harold Phelps gave a slide presentation to include location map, slides of the house, parking
spaces (underground), open space and landscaping an advised the Commission that we had
received a letter of opposition from the aeljacerit property owner'
COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS
• Reduced set back "'what mitigati6.A efforts were proposed
Worked with staff adjacent property'owner never contacted architect
® Moving 1, garage and adding 5 underground parking spaces?
Moving an attached garage and adding underground parking. Requirements
are for 4 spaces; they're providing 5
® What are the op` space requirements and how were they met
10' side, §pace an ?,15' x 50' back space to include table and chairs to share. Each
unit also'has a private balcony
® Were there or what are the improvements to the front of the property
t The improved, completely remodeled front unit sets the tone for the architecture
'% and colors for back units.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Nathan Becraft, the adjacent property owner, spoke in opposition of the project. His main
concern is the 2 -story, 25' structure 5 feet from his property. He would prefer a 15 foot
setback. He has fruit trees that will be blocked from the sunlight. Feels the project Iacks
appeal as open space — right up against the fence. He stated that privacy was not necessarily
his concern, but the lack of esthetic light being blocked from his property.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Planning Commission Minutes
November 9, 2016
Page 13
COMMISSIONER DELIBERATIONS
• Concerned about the change in set -back
• If there's an added parking space, maybe it could be redesigned
® Need for housing vs property rights of neighbor
® Suggestion that property owner and applicant meet and confer
Architect is dismayed that there is not a full Commission here to vote. Was here: previously and
there were only 4 members present. Feels the project could possibly pass if all 7 were available.
Will consider redesign, but would like the whole Commission prescnt�
It was voiced by a Commissioner that even if the full Commission were_ here,`it does not appear
that the project would have passed. Thinks it's a good pp
g project and if`it is brought_ back' it
doesn't change, then the Commission will have to decide the"outcome. Both project and
neighbor have valid concerns, but the Commission is here to see if there can be an answer.
L ..
Applicant's architect (Jones) said that the applicant is hot:present °and he wants to do his best to
represent him. Cannot speak as to what he would do. Would= ike to continue to the first meeting
in December (Dec l4i) and bring back to a full Commsson
V ii ;.
MSC: Fuentes/Zaker
To continue the project, and do a redesign andto` liave tbae adjacent property owner and the
Applicant make an effort to find ' common�gio n'id'. Th
eri to come back at an appropriate time
with a re -designed project ;that would satisfy, those requirements. The next meeting date is
December 14, 2016.
There was discusszon�on the
communication between ;the
added.
—3-2
Yes-Livag, Fuentes,
11M
MSC:
a'redesign of the project as a requirement or just
to an agreement. Also a date specific time was
To continue the item to December 14fh and ask that the Applicant and property owner explore a
possible redesign.
Motion passed 5-0
Planning Commission Minutes
November 9, 2016
Page 14
3. PUBLIC HEARING PCS16-0005 Consideration of a Tentative Subdivision Map to
subdivide a 4.72 acre site into seventy eight (78) lots for individual
ownership located in Otay Ranch Village Two Neighborhood
R-17B(b),
Applicant: Baldwin and Sons
Project Manager: Chester Bautista, Associate Civil Engineer
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission approve the .Tentative .Subdivision
Map, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in
the draft Planning Commission Resolution `
Associate Engineer Chester Bautista gave a slide presentation regarding the'-entative Map
which included the location map and plot map.
COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS
® Lot number can go up to 95?
® Was this not already approved?
Was approved as condominium and are now asking the ,as for sale lots" owners will
now own their lot. ,f
t
MSC: Anaya/Livag to approve
Motion Passed 5-0
4. PUBLIC HEARING
Sta
(E
Consideration of amendments to the Eastern Urban Center
all Planning Area (SPA) Plan to change the building height
in a portion of District 1 to conform to the footprint of the
Derry Retail Center.
Applicant: SLF IV-Millenia, LLC.
Project Manager: Patricia Ferman, Landscape Architect
"hat the Planning Commission adopt Resolution MPA16-0003
ecommending the approval of SPA amendment to allow the
change of height requirements in a portion of District 1, based
on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
Landscape Architect Patricia Ferman and Associate Planner Jeff Steichen gave a presentation
that included location map, graphics of the area and two plot maps — current and proposed and
conceptual site plans.
Planning Commission Minutes
November 9, 2016
Page 15
COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS
• Is this a comparison of the proposed and current?
Shows the MH1 that would provide 1 story requiring a 25' minimum height, but this
shows elevations of 1 story to be equivalent to 37'.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Todd Galarneau, representing Millenia spoke in support of the project and commended
staff of the excellent job they have done. Have previously brought theAyers Hotel and
Tramell-Crow community and this Sudberry project complements those projects.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
COMMISSIONER DELIBERATIONS `
• Is a 130,000 foot project common to these neighborhood sites?
Depends on size of lot, freeway access and size of retailers being hous
There was discussion of being "economically feasible" and"what that includes.
MSC: To approve Anaya/Livag
Motion Passed 5-0
5. PUBLIC HEARING:
Sta
MPA16-0015, MPA1
Consideration of am
Ra"nch General Deve
Portion of village 4'
Map for.Chula<Vista
EnWronmental Impa
]016, MPA16=0008, PCS16-0002, PER16-0001
idrnents to the Chula Vista General Plan, the Otay
)ment=_Plan, the Otay Ranch Village 3 North and a
tional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, a new Tentative
act 16-02, and an Addendum to Final
Report 13-01.
pplicant: HomeFed Village III, LLC
roject Manager: Janice Kluth, Project Coordinator
That the Planning Commission adopt Resolutions MPA16-0015,
MPA16-0016, MPA16-0008, PCS16-0002, PER16-0001,
recommending that the Chula Vista City Council (Council)
approve:
1) An Ordinance amending the Chula Vista General Plan and the Otay
Ranch General Development Plan; and
2) An Ordinance amending the PIanned Community District Regulations in
the Otay Ranch Village 3 North and a Portion of Village 4 Sectional
Planning Area (SPA) Plan; and
Planning Commission Minutes
November 9, 2016
Page 16
3) A Resolution approving amendments to the Otay Ranch Village 3. North
and a Portion of Village 4 Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan; and
4) A Resolution approving the Otay Ranch Village 3 North and a Portion of
Village 4 Tentative Map; and
5) A Resolution considering the Addendum to FEIR 13-01.
Project Coordinator Janice Kluth gave a presentation that included siides`of the location map,
The Otay Ranch Village 3 North ar%d a Portion of Village 4 Sectional Planning Area (Village 3),
located at Heritage Road and Main Stree#;(Attachment 1);' was approved in December 2014
(Otay Ranch Village 3 North and a Portion of Village 4 Sectional Planning Area Pian, et. a/), with
1,597 housing units, Office and Industrial uses, Community Purpose Facilities, Open Space and
Preserve, a Neighborhood Park and a School site on approximately 436 acres of land. Today the
land is owned by HomeFed Village III MasterK(L'C (Applicant), and the Applicant is proposing
amendments to the approved SPA and related planning documents, as well as a new Tentative
Map, in order to recon figure'`lots, realign streets and modify land uses to make the project
more marketal l:e (the "ProJ6� t"). The revised Village 3 Plan remains consistent with the 2014
residential authori11 zation and the development area remains substantially within the
boundaries of the previously analyzed development footprint.
As proposed, the Project requires amendments to the Chula Vista General Plan, the Otay Ranch
General Development Plan, and the Village 3 SPA Plan, as well as a new Tentative Map and an
Addendum to Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) 13-01.
Commissioner LfUiag instituted a discussion about the Agreement and specifically the
Community Purpose Facility. Assistant Director of Development Services Tiffany Allen
explained how, according to the agreement, the applicant will subsidize rents so they will not
be charging "market rents" and will subsidize by 33%. Commissioner Livag questioned the
Public Purpose Facility being used for private commercial use.
Planning Commission Minutes
November 9, 2016
Page 17
Kent Aden, with HomeFed, explained that 1.8 acres of land would .be open space/recreational
and the remaining 2.6 acres had two options: 1) raise the lot, provide utilities and sell it or
2) partner with the YMCA to provide a 10,000 sq ft building and subsidize the rent.
Additional elements of discussion included:
4 Market rate to be based on buildings near the location
® Alternative compliance (trading acres)
® Required affordable housing units —160 units -- half moderate and half'!ow income
• Transferring of affordable housing obligations to other Villages `
* Fiscal Impact — explanation of the mixture of commercial/retail space
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Kent Aden, representing HomeFed Corporation, commended staff's hard work and the ease of
processing the project. HomeFed wanted to put their "brand" on this project and staff played
an important role in that factor. Thinks it's the best project they've done to date.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED w `
MSC: To Annrnvp Annun/I itiau
M(
OT
6. DIF
7. CO
look at.
)mmission review some of the
f recommendations and bring the
view and suggestion to the City
Ided to the agenda. Gutierrez
�r 19.62 — Garage parking.
.itierrez wanted to proceed and
_.._. _ ____ �.�g list that staff wanted to take Cl
Asst Director Allen added that there was currently a review of several Ordinances that
they want to bring forward. She suggested that the Commission provide a
comprehensive list of items they would like to look at and prioritize them.
Planning Commission Minutes
November 9, 2016
Page I8
Commissioner Anaya suggested that somewhere in the first quarter of 2017 that, under
Director's Comments, a list be provided as to what is being worked on.
ADJOURNMENT at 7:37 to the regular meeting on November 23, 2016 at 6:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue in Chula Vista, CA.