Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1990/05/23 Tape: 310 Side: 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers Wednesday, May 23, 1990 Public Services Building ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Tugenberg, Commissioners Cannon, Carson, Casillas, Fuller, Grasser, and Shipe COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Leiter, Principal Planners Lee and Pass, Assistant Planner Griffin, Environmental Coordinator Doug Reid, Associate Planner Herrera-A, Senior Civil Engineer Ullrich, Traffic Engineer Rosenberg, Assistant City Attorney Rudolf, Planning Consultants Lettieri and Manganell , Community Development Specialist Abbott PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Tugenberg and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chairman Tugenberg reviewed the composition of the Planning Commission, its responsibilities and the format of the meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meetings of April 11 and April 25, 1990 MSUC (Shipe/Carson) 6-0-1 (Shipe abstained) to approve the minutes of April 11 , 1990, with a correction to show Commissioner Shipe absent "with notification." MSUC (Shipe/Carson) 6-0-1 (Cannon abstained) to approve the minutes of April 25, 1990, as mailed. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None The items were taken out of sequence, as follows. PC MINUTES -2- May 23, 1990 ITEM 4: PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-90-42: REQUEST TO UTILIZE DEWELLING AT 1515 HILLTOP DRIVE AS SHELTER FOR HOMELESS YOUTH - South Bay Community Services, Inc. Principal Planner Lee asked that this item be continued to June 13 meeting to give the applicant and staff additional time. An amended notice had been sent to the residents. MSUC (Cannon/Carson) 7-0 to continue PCC-90-42 to the meeting of June 13, 1990. ITEM 2: PUBLIC HEARING: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EIR-89-3, SALT CREEK RANCH The Commissioners expressed their desire to have time to read and digest the EIR, since there had been a problem with the Commissioners receiving the correct copy. MSUC (Carson/Shipe) 7-0 to continue the DEIR EIR-89-3 to June 27, 1990. ITEM 1 : PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-90-L-M: CITY-INITIATED PROPOSAL TO REZONE CERTAIN TERRITORY, THE FIRST GENERALLY BOUNDED BY HERMOSA AVENUE, ORANGE AVENUE AND ZENITH STREET, THE SECOND BEING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IMMEDIATELY WEST OF HILLTOP DRIVE ALONG JICAMA WAY, ORANGE AVENUE, TAMARINDO WAY, FESTIVAL COURT AND HOLIDAY COURT, AND THE THIRD BEING THE RESIDENTIAL AREA SOUTH OF MAIN STREET ALONG DEL MONTE AVENUE, ALVOCA WAY, TEENA DRIVE AND ANCURZA WAY, FROM THEIR CITY-ADOPTED COUNTY ZONE CLASSIFICATIONS TO CITY CLASSIFICATIONS UTILIZED THROUGHOUT CHULA VISTA Planning Consultant Letteiri , using overhead projection, showed the locations of the areas proposed to be rezoned. Mr. Lettieri described the Montgomery Specific Plan designation and the proposed zone reclassifications, as per staff report. Mr. Lettieri stated the Montgomery Planning Committee had unanimously approved the rezoning and recommended the zoning changes to the Planning Commission on April 13, 1990. Commissioner Casillas questioned the width of the area on either side of the street in the proposed C-C-P area below Montgomery Street on Third. Mr. Lettieri stated it was about 150 feet, at least two lots. This being the time and the place advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Carson/Fuller) 7-0 that based on the Initial Study and comments on the Initial Study and Negative Declaration, find that this reclassification will have no significant environmental impacts and re-adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-88-4M and IS-88-65M for the Montgomery Specific Plan. MSUC (Carson/Fuller) 7-0 to recommend adoption of an ordinance to change the zones as described on the attached Exhibit "A". PC MINUTES -3- May 23, 1990 ITEM 5: RESOLUTION: DESIGNATING PROPOSED BOUNDARIES FOR THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAN - Community Development Community Development Specialist Abbott introduced Carlos Flores of RSG Inc. who is the Redevelopment Consultant for the project who explained the details and the purpose of the process. He said a redevelopment plan should be adopted around November 13, 1990. He invited questions by the Commission regarding the boundaries or redevelopment process. Commissioner Carson queried Mr. Flores regarding the notice to be sent to the residents, if there would be included the opportunity for the residents to be a member of the Project Area Committee. Mr. Flores assured her there would be that opportunity, and that the residents would be informed as to what the responsibilities of the Project Area Committee would be, when the information meeting would be held, and when the election of the Project Area Committee would be held. Commissioner Carson asked how they would be sure everyone in the project area would be noticed. Mr. Flores gave her several sources of noticing. Commissioner Carson asked if there would be anything on the notice to get the residents' attention to stop and read the notice. Mr. Flores replied the City logo or something to show it came from the City would be included. Commissioner Casillas asked if residential areas west of I-5 in the West Fairfield area were included. Mr. Abbott assured him they were included. Commissioner Casillas urged that RSG Inc. do everything they could to assure that the residents west of I-5 in the West Fairfield area be noticed, since he had been approached by several people in that area who are concerned that they would not be included in policy determination. Community Development Specialist Abbott noted two changes to be made in the resolution. In Section 4, the last three words, insert "the" before "official plan" at the end of Section 4. In the next paragraph, "property" should be "properties". MSUC (Cannon/Casillas) 7-0 to pass the resolution attached to the staff report, with the changes, designating the proposed boundaries for the Southwest Redevelopment project Area and approving a preliminary plan. Commissioner Cannon stated he had a conflict of interest on the remaining item on the agenda, PCZ-89-7 and PCS-90-06, as one of his clients is involved in the project, and left the dais. ITEM 3: PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-89-M; REQUEST TO PREZONE 11 7 ACRES LOCATED SOUTHERLY OF LYNNDALE LANE, NORTHERLY OF EAST "H" STREET, AND EASTERLY OF THE I-805 FREEWAY, TO R-E-P - Cameo Development Company (continued) PC MINUTES -4- May 23, 1990 PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-90-06; REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 11 .7 ACRES KNOWN AS LYNNDALE HILLS, CHULA VISTA TRACT 90-6, INTO 17 SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED LOTS AND ONE OPEN-SPACE LOT - Cameo Development Company (continued) Planning Consultant Manganelli gave an overview of the project using overhead projection. He noted the zoning and land use in the immediate vicinity to the east in the City was zoned P-C and improved with single-family dwellings which back up to the subject property. He continued to give the surrounding land uses. Mr. Manganelli stated the property contains 11 .7 acres and is proposed to be divided into 17 residential lots and one large open-space lot. The open-space lot contains 4.7 acres, about 4 acres of which would be left natural and unimproved and provided as a mitigation measure for perceived biological impacts. The zoning would be R-E-P to provide for the open-space lot. Mr. Manganelli then showed the access to the lots, and showed the area which would be slightly graded and filled. Mr. Manganelli said staff had had correspondence from a property owner in the area as well as the Sweetwater Planning Group and Sweetwater Civic Association objecting to the access via Bonita Road, which this development would have to take. He stated it would add 170 trips to the Bonita Road/I-805 intersection. The alternative would be to take the road out to East "H" Street (which was the recommendation of the three correspondents) which would be the northbound on-ramp to I-805. Mr. Manganelli stated staff recommended approval of the subdivision. Commissioner Carson asked if there was any other place that could be accessed rather than impact Bonita Road. Mr. Manganelli said there was none. Commissioner Fuller, making reference to the Sweetwater Planning Group letter, said that annexation of the plan would violate the LAFCO Charter as it would result in a peninsula, or finger of land. Mr. Manganelli said he had discussed that with LAFCO, and they are comfortable with the piecemeal annexation situation rather than a comprehensive annexation program. Chairman Tugenberg was of the opinion that all land that was to be annexed had to be contiguous to a municipality. Mr. Manganelli agreed that was true in most cases, but did not work in this case. Chairman Tugenberg noted the traffic going east/west on Bonita Road was heavy, the traffic going into Bonita Plaza Shopping Center across from Lynndale is heavily travelled, but not much coming out of Lynndale. Upon Chairman Tugenberg's query, Traffic Engineer Rosenberg estimated the volume of traffic exiting and entering Lynndale to be between 500 and 1 ,000. PC MINUTES -5- May 23, 1990 Commissioner Casillas asked why there couldn't be another access, maybe a road from the east end of the property up to Terra Nova. Chairman Tugenberg said that when Terra Nova was built, the people in the Lynndale area objected to traffic going through their community, and there is a fence there. It is possible, but the Sweetwater people objected to it. Commissioner Casillas said he thought maybe another plan could be developed to incorporate another entrance to this project. Commissioner Grasser commented that she didn't think this amount of homes would make a big impact on the area. Planning Consultant Manganelli stated it was estimated that at the present time there are about 80 homes in the area that take access to Lynnwood Drive, which translates into 800 daily trips. Commissioner Carson asked Mr. Manganelli to indicate on the subdivision map the location of the barrel cactus and the number of endangered species that would have to be relocated. She was concerned about the endangered species that are becoming extinct. Mr. Manganelli pointed out that the area with the greatest biological impact or greatest sensitivity was the open space lot, which contained 4.7 acres--4 acres undisturbed. The biologist suggested this as a mitigating measure to protect the species which were found: gnatcatchers, cactus wrens, and chollas. Based on the biology report, the engineer was required to redesign to keep the area as an dpen space usage. Commissioner Carson was concerned about the location from which the transplanted species would be taken, and the likelihood of the transplanted materials and revegetation dying out. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Martin Kolkey, 4068 Martin Canyon Ct. , Bonita 92002, representing Cameo Development, presented a chart which showed manufactured slopes and the existing slopes which would remain untouched and some illustrations showing the proposed residential units. He said he had met with the four adjoining parcel owners who had indicated their willingness to cooperate with them regarding installation of new driveway approaches. He recommended concurrence with the Planning staff recommendation. Commissioner Grasser expressed her concern over the quality of the materials and workmanship of the homes. Commissioner Carson expressed concerns regarding the development of homes around the open space area and scaring the animals away. Richard Lott, XINOS Enterprises, Inc. , 9619 Chesapeake Drive, San Diego, CA 92102, representing Martin Kolkey, the owner, as the civil engineer for the project who had prepared the tentative map. Referring to the relocation of the endangered species, Mr. Lott referred to the biological study which pointed out they would be monitored to make sure they lived. PC MINUTES -6- May 23, 1990 No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Casillas said that although he had reservations regarding the access area, he would support the recommendations. MSC (Casillas/Fuller) 5-1 (Carson voted against; Cannon excused) that based on the Initial Study and Negative Declaration, find that this project will have no environ- mental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-89-84. MSC (Casillas/Fuller) 5-1 (Carson voted against; Cannon excused) that based on the findings contained in Section E of this report, adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the prezone and tentative subdivision map for Lynndale Hills, Chula Vista Tract 90-6, subject to Conditions 1 through 34 and with the added changes in the May 16, 1990, memo from the Director of Planning. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Planning Director Bob Leiter informed the Commission that their workshop meeting on June 20 would be a joint workshop meeting with the Growth Management Oversight Committee and the Montgomery Planning Committee to discuss the Growth Management Annual Report. Planning Director Leiter also noted it was Steve Griffin's last meeting with the Planning Committee. Mr. Leiter and the Planning Commission wished Steve the best of luck and congratulations. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Tugenberg stated he couldn't vote for validation of the EIR on Salt Creek Ranch unless there was an alternative other than "A". He suggested the Committee start with the recommendations made by the County Planning Committee or from densities at the base point. Planning Director Leiter assured Commissioner Tugenberg he would relate his comments to the Baldwin Company, and that meetings had been held to discuss that issue and more meetings will be held. Commissioner Carson expressed concern regarding the receipt of EIRs and the completeness of the packet, and the procedures used. Planning Director Leiter assured her this would be looked into. Chairman Tugenberg questioned the procedure for selecting the companies who do the EIRs, and whether the staff of any cities in San Diego County do their own EIRs. Mr. Leiter gave the procedure used for selection, and answered that to his knowledge every city in San Diego County has consultants do their EIRs; and if the Commission has concerns regarding the overall quality of an EIR, they should let staff know that so it would be part of the criteria for screening out qualified firms. PC MINUTES -7- May 23, 1990 Commissioners Casillas and Grasser stated they would not be at the meeting of June 13. It was suggested that the secretary poll the Commissioners to see who would be able to attend the June 13 meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m. to the Regular Business Meeting of June 13, 1990, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Ly Na,cy Ri ., ey,�etIry Planning Commission WPC 7945P