HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 2002/05/08 MINUTES OF THE
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. Public Services Building
Wednesday, May 8, 2002 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista
ROLL CALL/MOTIONS TO EXCUSE:
Present: Hall, Castaneda, Cortes, Thomas, Willett
Absent: O'Neill, McCann
Staff Present: Jim Sandoval, Assistant Director of Planning and Building
John Schmitz, Principal Planner
Luis Hemandez, Principal Planner
Rich Zumwalt, Associate Planner
/ynette Tessitore-Lopez, Associate Planner
Mary Venables, Associate Planner
Mark Stephens, Principal Planner
Ann Moore, Senior Assistant City Attorney
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/SILENT PRAYER
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Read into the record by Vice Chair Hall
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: No public input.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS 02-08; Consideration of a Tentative Subdivision
Map known as San Miguel Ranch Lot 5, Chula Vista
Tract 02-08 - Pardee Construction Company.
Background: Rich Zumwalt, Associate Planner, reported that the Tentative Subdivision
Map proposes to subdivide 22.39 acres into 107 single family residential lots and 13
open space lots. The project has two vehicular entries on the north side accessing Calle
La Marina with an internal 56 foot wide public street circulation loop and an additional
street that bisects the loop. Access to future SR-125 will be provided through on-ramps
to be located at future Mount Miguel Road and East H Street.
Pedestrian access to the site and surrounding amenities will be provided by a network of
sidewalks and trail connections through the primary entry located at the southeast corner
of the project site.
Planning Commission Minutes - 2 - May 8t 2002
Recreational amenities are not provided on site, however, a future 2.1 acre private
Neighborhood Park is located approximately 250 feet northwest of the project and the
proposed 16.2 acre San Miguel Ranch Community Park is located approximately 1/4
mile north of the project.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt ResOlution PCS 02-08
recommending that the City Council approve Tentative Subdivision Map Chula Vista
Tract 02-08 in accordance with draft Council Resolution.
Commission Discussion:
Commissioner Thomas inquired what Police and Fire have to say about two access
points for emergency vehicles. He further asked for clarification on the affordable
housing Condition VI. A.c.on the draft Council Resolution.
Jim Sandoval responded that Police and Fire reviewed the project and agreed that two
access points are appropriate.
Rich Zumwalt, responded that the applicant is acknowledging that the Master Developer
has entered into an agreement with the City stating that the San Miguel Ranch Planned
Community is subject to affordable requirements. This project is a portion of the SMR
Planned Community and does not contain an affordable housing component, however,
as other neighborhoods are developed, at some point the affordable housing requirement
will be incorporated.
Commissioner Castaneda stated that since these are public streets and the City has strict
requirements for implementing traffic control measures i.e. speed humps, he is
concerned that the long stretch on the street that runs parallel to San Miguel Road will
create a speeding problem.
Public hearing opened and closed 6:45.
MSC (Willett/Thomas) (5-0-2-0) that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCS 02-
08 recommending that the City Council approve tentative Subdivision Map Chula Vista
Tract 02-08 in accordance with draft Council Resolution. Motion carried.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC 02-13; Conditional Use Permit to permit an existing second
dwelling unit as an accessory second dwelling unit behind the
primary single-family residence, at 736 Church Avenue.
Background: John Schmitz, Principal Planner reported that the proposal consists of adding
498 sf to an existing 812 sf structure that was originally a detached garage and workshop.
Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - May 8, 2002
The resulting 1,310 sf building would consist of a 404 sf garage and a 906 sf accessory
second unit.
At the previous public hearing, the Planning Commission asked for the history of the
property, the status of the existing structure in terms of setbacks and the compatibility in
terms of surrounding uses and in relation to State government code.
· Proposed setbacks are allowed by Zoning Code.
"....if located in the rear 30% of lot..." and "...no closer than 3 ft. to any side property
line..."
· State Government Code permits accessory units to be up to 1,200 sf.
The proposal is to add 498 sf to the existing building resulting in a 1,310 sf
structure, but only a 906 sf dwelling unit.
The unit appears to meet the State's criteria as outlined on the staff report, therefore, staff
recommends: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCC 02-13 based on the
findings and including the conditions contained therein for an accessory second dwelling
unit, per State Government Code Sections 65852.2(b)(1 )(A)-(I), for cities without adopted
accessory second unit ordinances.
Public Hearing Opened 6:55
Pandra Boyle, 739 Church Avenue, Chula Vista, spokesperson for the area neighborhood
stated they collectively oppose the proposal based on their disagreement with staff's
interpretation of the State law with respect to size, and Mr. Contreras' total disregard to
compliance with City regulations, she, therefore, urged the Commission to deny this
proposal.
Commission Discussion:
The Commission felt that, as the property currently stands, they cannot make the necessary
findings to grant the CUP. This was primarily based on the parking violations caused by
the garage conversion to the existing illegal second unit. They indicated that once the
existing code enforcement violations are addressed and the property is given "a clean bill
of health", they would be more inclined to consider granting the CUP at a future time,.
They, therefore, recommended continuing the public hearing and giving the applicant the
opportunity to bring the structure into compliance.
MSC (Thomas/Willett) (5-0-2-0) that this item be continued to June 12, 2002 to allow the
applicant to abate all of the code enforcement issues and bring the existing structure into
compliance. Motion carried.
Planning Commission Minutes - 4 - May 8, 2002
3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a series of amendments to the City of Chula
Vista Housing Element of the General Plan for the 1999-2004
Planning Period.
Background: Leil[ani Hines, reported that in accordance with California Government
Code on December 2000 the City of Chula Vista self-certified the Housing Element of the
General Plan for the 1999-04 planning period.
In order for the City to take advantage of future funding opportunities, the State requires
review and certification of jurisdiction's Housing Element for compliance with State law.
State HCD has reviewed the City's Element and provided comments.
In response to comments received from HCD, staff is proposing a series of amendments to
provide greater specificity and clarity and are more house-keeping in nature. HCD's
review of the amendments state that they are in compliance with State law.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt resolution recommending
that the City Council adopt amendments to the City of Chula Vista Housing Element of the
General for the 1999-2004 planning period.
Public hearing opened and closed 7:25.
Commissioner Hall asked for clarification on what type of effort is expended in ensuring
that the general public is aware of the affordable housing opportunities.
Ms. Hines responded that Com mun ity Development conducts extensive public outreach to
advertise the programs they have available and make available the information on income
requirements. The Department has a referral list of all available affordable housing.
Additionally, the City will be conducting its first annual homeownership fair to showcase
the first-time homebuyer program as well as homeownership products.
Cmr. Hall inquired if the affordable housing component remains for subsequent owners
when the unit is sold, or is it sold at market value.
Ms. Hines further stated there are two ways to handle this, although they have not reached
that point yet with their program. One way is to have the property deed-restricted so that
the next buyer must be income-eligible for affordable housing. Another approach would be
for the City to "re-capture" part of the equity and then transfer it to another qualified buyer
as a "silent second down payment".
MSC (Cortes/Willett) (5-0-2-0) that the Planning Commission adopt resolution
recommending that the City Council adopt amendments to the City of Chula Vista
Planning Commission Minutes - 5 - May 8, 2002
Housing Element of the General Plan for the 1999-2004 planning period. Motion
carried.
4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC 02-39; Conditional Use Permit for Nextel Communications
to construct an unmanned cellular communications facility at
2800 Olympic Parkway.
Background: Nextel Communications proposes to construct an unmanned cellular facility
at the ARCO Olympic Training Facility located at 2800 Olympic Parkway consisting of one
35 foot monopalm and a cluster of four staggered Canary Island palms of varying height. A
250 sf equipment is also proposed reflecting architectural features and landscaping of the
existing Visitor Center.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt the resolution
recommending that the City Council conditionally approve the proposed cellular
communications facility.
Public Hearing Opened and Closed 7:45.
Kathy Lim, Nextel Communications 5761 Copley Drive, Suite 100, San Diego, CA 92111
thanked the Commission for their consideration of the proposal and stated she was
available to answer questions.
MSC (Willett/Castaneda) (5-0-2-0) That the Planning Commission adopt the resolution
recommending that the City Council conditionally approve the proposed cellular
communications facility. Motion carried.
5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC 02-23; Conditional Use Permit to allow an existing 423 sf
unit to remain as an accessory second dwelling unit behind an
existing single-family home at 158 First Avenue in compliance
with State Government Code Sections 65852.2(b)(1)(A)-(I) for
cities without adopted accessory second unit ordinances.
Background: I_ynette Tessitore-Lopez reported that a non-permitted 423 sf accessory
second unit was built behind an existing 1564 sf primary single family home. The project
came into the Planning Department as a result of a Code Enforcement case. Though the
appropriate permits were not obtained prior to construction, the unit is in compliance with
State guidelines for cities without adopted accessory unit ordinances. A conditional Use
Permit is required in order to allow the City to determine compliance with State
provisions.
Planning Commission Minutes - 6 - May 8, 2002
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCC 02-23
based on the findings and including the conditions contained therein for an accessory
second dwelling unit. Per State Government Code Sections 65852.2(b)(1)(A)-(I).
MSC (Castaneda/Willett) (5-0-2-0) that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCC
02-23 based on the findings and including the conditions contained therein for an
accessory second dwelling unit. Per State Government Code Sections 65852.2(b)(1)(A)-(I).
Motion carried.
6. PUBLIC HEARING: ZAV 02-06; Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's decision of
January 23, 2002 to deny a request to exceed the maximum
floor area ratio to encroach into the required rear and side yard
setbacks of the R2T Zone.
Staff recommends public hearing be opened and continued to May 22, 2002.
MSC (Thomas/Castaneda) (5-0-2-0) that public hearing be continued to May 22, 2002.
Motion carried.
7. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM 02-14; Consideration of amendments to the Eastlake III
Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, Otay Ranch Village Eleven
Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, and Otay Ranch Village Six
Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, to incorporate Section 11.8
Water Conservation Plan into each of the Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) Plans.
Background: Mary Venables, Associate Planner reported that for the Commission's
consideration is the Water Conservation Pilot Program, including the necessary SPA
amendments to incorporate water conservation plans into three projects. Ms. Venables
further stated that the Commission is asked to make the following recommendations to the
City Council:
· That the City Council accept the Water Use Efficiency report and direct staff to draft
Water Conservation Plan Guidelines.
· Adopt a Resolution incorporating the Eastlake III Water Conservation Plan into the
SPA Plan.
· Adopt a Resolution incorporating the Otay Ranch Village 11 Water Conservation
Plan into the SPA Plan.
· Adopt a Resolution incorporating the Otay Ranch Village 6 Water Conservation
Plan into the SPA Plan
Planning Commission Minutes - ? - May 8, 2002
All three of the participant developers in the study agreed to install three interior water
saving devices in all of their dwelling units; they are:
· Hot Water Pipe Insulation
· Pressure reducing valves
· Water-efficient dishwashers
Although Eastlake III was not able to use recycled water as extensively as the other two
projects due to the drainage restrictions into the upper and lower Otay reservoir, they were
able to save potable water through the use of Evapotranspiration (ET) Controllers in the
parkways and in open space irrigation and will also provide water-efficient landscaping.
Based on documented information, implementation of all measures except the educational
program is projected to reduce the projected potable water demand by the following:
· Eastlake III by 5.3% without educational program and by an additional 5.3% with
the educational program.
· Otay Ranch Village 11 by 14.9% without Landscape Guide and by an additional
5.7%. with Landscape Guide and educational program.
· Otay Ranch Village 6 by 4.0% without educational program and by an additional
3.9% with Landscape Guide and educational program.
Existing Federal and State mandates require the installation of plumbing devices in new
developments that meet specified maximum flow rates. The City's Growth Management
Ordinances requires a conservation plan be prepared for all major projects (15 du's or
greater).
Ms. Venables further stated that on April 2001 Council retained Dr. Bahman Shiekh to
provide consulting services to analyze technical water saving devices, evaluate three
projects and continue efforts to develop a gray water demonstration project. The pilot
study participants are Eastlake III, Otay Ranch Village Eleven and Village Six.
The Water Use Efficiency report was distributed to local water purveyors and comments
were received back from San Diego County Water Authority, the Sweetwater Authority
and ReWater Systems Inc. and corrections and response to comments were made.
Commission Discussion:
Commissioner Hall stated that he understands responsible development and the need for
such conservation programs, however, he is concerned that any added cost that the
developer is required to implement is understandably passed on to the consumer in
housing cost. Cmr. Hall asked what the cost per unit would be if all of the measures are
implemented.
Planning Commission Minutes - 8 - May 8, 2002
Ms. Venables responded that all of the developers agree that the indoor measures are
relatively inexpensive, however, the outdoor measures vary in terms of what the costs are
going to involve.
Mr. Sandoval interjected that looking at the extensive list of measures in the report, some
of them are considerably more costly than others and the ones that the developers chose
are fairly inexpensive where the cost per unit is in the hundreds of dollars, as opposed to
thousands. Furthermore, one of the measures (the evapotranspiration controller) would
save the homeowner a significant amount of money on their water bill.
Commissioner Willett asked for clarification on wording in (page 58) "recommend that all
liability and responsibility for compliance with the Plumbing Code rests upon the
homeowner using a gray water system or having and un-used stub out on the premises." If
the gray water system is built into the house, the liability and responsibility for the
plumbing code should not rest on the homeowner, but rather, the home builder.
Ms. Venables stated that none of the projects chose to explore a gray water system and
were unsuccessful in negotiating gray water stub-outs in any of the houses. She further
stated that this is an on-going discussion regarding the concerns of the liabilities and where
the responsibility is going to fall
Commissioner Thomas asked for clarification on what, if any, are the cost benefits to the
gray water system.
Dr. Shiekh stated that the Water Use Efficiency report provides an extensive review of the
gray water system. According to calculations of benefit/cost ratio for gray water systems
indicate that the benefits do not justify the cost, therefore, the general feasibility of gray
water systems is doubtful according to cost estimates from suppliers, which ranges
anywhere from $1,500 to $6,000.
Dr. Shiekh further stated that gray water stub-outs can be provided relatively inexpensive
(approx. $200 dollars per residence) in newly constructed homes, so as to make the home
gray-water ready. Stub-outs by themselves do not result in any water savings, however,
they provide the opportunity for homeowners to install a new system with no additional
plumbing expense.
Commissioner Castaneda stated that whether one agrees with it or not, unlike power
plants that can be built to produce more energy, water is a resource that cannot be
produced; we either have it or we don't. Therefore, in his opinion, the lack of water in the
future will dictate the direction and speed in which these water conservation measures are
implemented.
Planning Commission Minutes - 9 - May 8, 2002
Public Hearing Opened 8:55.
Steve Bilson, Chairman/CEO ReWater Systems, 477 Marina Parkway, Chula Vista stated
he disagrees with a lot of what is contained in the consultant's report. He further stated
that over the last 12 years they've installed gray water systems and sponsored the State law
that legalizes gray water irrigation in California.
Mr. Bilson stated that after lengthy review of the City of Chula Vista's loan application, the
California Water Resources Control Board gave Chula Vista 1 million dollars for a gray
water program. The City of San Diego put years into a loan application for their
reclamation plants and did not qualify; they don't meet the threshold of cost effectiveness;
gray water does. By combining water conservation benefits with waste water reduction
benefits, gray water is very cost effective. He, therefore, encouraged the Commission to
urge the developers to implement such measures.
Commission Castaneda asked what the cost would be to retrofit a home for a gray water
system.
Mr. Bilson responded that they rarely retrofit because it is cost prohibitive.
John Norman, Brookfield Homes, 12865 Point Del Mar, Suite 200, Del Mar, clarified
that these are pilot programs that they entered into and they do not necessarily understand
how the costs are going to be borne at the consumer level when the homes are sold. Mr.
Norman further stated that presently, through this pilot program, they have approximately
$865 per unit that is being allocated to this, which translates to approx. 2 million to the
overall project and that is directly going to the consumers.
Mr. Norman further stated that he is not degrading the merit of these programs (water and
air quality), however, the reality is that development costs are being added which are then
passed on to the consumer during the present time when "affordable housing" is the buzz
word. He takes pride in knowing that the new homes that are being built surpass any
expectations of how homes were built 5 or 10 years ago in terms of energy and water
efficient, their layout and traffic patterns.
Lastly, Mr. Norman, stated the new homes are paying their share and the focus needs to be
in creating incentive programs for the older homes that have old toilets, shower heads and
irrigation systems to be retrofitted; similar to trade-ins for energy-efficient refrigerators.
Public Hearing closed 8:55.
Planning Commission Minutes - 10 - May 8, 2002
MSC (Willett/Thomas) (5-0-2-0) that the Planning Commission recommend that City
Council:
· Accept the Water Use Efficiency: Strategies for Proposed Residential Developments
and direct staff to draft Water Conservation Plan Guidelines.
· Approve the proposed amendment to the Eastlake III Sectional Planning Area (SPA)
Plan incorporating the required Water Conservation Plan into the SPA Plan.
· Approve the proposed amendment to the Otay Ranch Village Eleven Sectional
Planning Area (SPA) Plan incorporating the required Water Conservation Plan into
the SPA Plan.
· Approve the proposed amendment to the Otay Ranch Village Six Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) Plan incorporating the required Water Conservation Plan into the SPA
Plan.
Addition to the motion offered by Commission Castaneda to:
· Recommend that the City Council make a formal statement or recommendation to
the water purveyors and the State of California to work towards developing
incentives for homeowners and developers to implement these measures and make
the necessary improvements to retrofit older homes.
Amended motion accel~ted. Motion carried.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS:
ADJOURNMENT at 9:15 p.m. to the Planning Commission meeting of May 22, 2002.
Diana Vargas
Secretary to Planning Commission
C~UtA VLqTA
Depart~ent of Planning and Building
Date: June 12, 2002
To: Planning Commissioners
From: John Schmitz, Principal Planner~
Subject: Continued Public Hearing on ZAV 02-06 (Cabalbag)
On May 8, the Planning Commission scheduled a public hearing on the above application by Mr.
Cabalbag, who is attempting to legalize the home he recently purchased that the previous owner had
added to and modified without benefit of building permits. Since some of the building additions did
not meet the standards of the Zoning Ordinance, a variance request was filed to allow the additions to
remain.
Just prior to the public hearing, staff held conversations with the City Attorney and the applicant
about another technique to resolve the issues relating to this property. This technique will involve the
development of a legal document that must first be reviewed and approved before use on this or any
other property in the City. It was hoped that this process could occur Within the month but
workloads have not allowed that to happen. Staff is therefore requesting that this matter be
continued until July l0th in the hopes that a solution can be presented.
JCS
J:\PlamdngLlohnS \Staff Rep orts~PC\2002~ZAV - Cabalbag. DOC
CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJEC'r ' P~OJECr DESCR,P=ON:
APPUCANT: CONRADO CABALBAG
ZONE VARIANCE
PROJECT
ADDRESS: 75 BISHOP STREET Request: Proposal to exceed the Floor Area Ratio
within the R2T Zone from 55% to 62.68% for a
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: 403 square feet room addition.
· NORTH No Scale ZAV-02-06
h:\home\plannin, UocatorsW. AV020$.cdr 12/13/01