Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1988/03/24 MINUTES OF A CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE (ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING) OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Thursday, March 24, 1988 Council Conference Room 7:00 p.m. City Hall ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Cox; Councilmembers Nader, Moore McCandliss MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Malcolm STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Goss, Assistant City Attorne Rudolf 1. REPORT ON CENTRAL CHULA VISTA PLAN (Scenario 4) Mayor Cox opened the conference by announcing that the purpose o the meeting was to continue discussion on the General Plan Update. Gary Wood, Project Planner, presented the report on Central Chul Vista Plan. Referring to a map, Mr. Wood noted the boundarie involved in the Central Chula Vista area and discussed th proposed land uses and zoning patterns. He submitted th following ten Scenario IV characteristics: 1. Maintenance and protection of the single family communitie east of Second Avenue and south of H Street. 2. Selected down-planning and up-planning in the area betweE Broadway and Fourth Avenue to stabilize and protect areas c single family housing and identify and confirm the are~ already established with multiple family units. 3. The designation of a combination of office and higher densit residential in one or more of three opportunity areas adjacer to Town Center I. 4. The designation of an office and high density residential arc Detween E and H Street transit stations and I-5 and Broadwa3 This would include Woodlawn as a through Street. 5. The extension of H Street through to Tidelands and establishment of a Transit Loop utilizing E and H Street~ Third Avenue and Tidelands Avenue. 6. Designation of deeper lots on portions of Broadway encourage redevelopment with larger setbacks and off-stre~ parking and in areas of opportunity introduce some non-reta. uses to relieve the continuous strip commercial. Minutes - 2 - March 24, 1988 7. The designation of the area east of Second Avenue and north o C Street extended (southwest of the 1-805 and South Ba Freeway interchange) as medium density residential. 8. The designation, as gateways to the City, of E, F and Streets from I-5 and Broadway and Fourth Avenue from South Ba Freeway. Additional design standards to be incorporated int the Central Chula Vista Plan for these subareas. 9. The designation of a 26-28 mile greenbelt and trail syste loop from the Bay to the Otay Reservoirs. In the Centra Chula Vista area designation of an open space/bicycle/hikin trail connection between the Bay and the Sweetwater Rive valley east of 1-805 as part of this system. 10. The Central Chula Vista population increasing from 42,100 i 1986 to 44,900 at buildout of the General Plan. Mr. Wood pointed out the following three opportunity areas in th Central Chula Vista area which could be designated Residentia High Density or Commercial Office: 1. North and east of the Library parksite. 2. East of Third Avenue, south of "E" Street, north of "H Street. This is in the vicinity of Church and Del Mar Avenue. 3. East of Fourth Avenue on either side of "G" and Roosevel Street. Director of Planning Krempl commented that the action requested c the Council would be conceptual approval with a caveat to allc staff to continue to analyze those areas of opportunity and t bring back a report in the draft General Plan. Mr. Robert Scott questioned whether Council's approval thi evening for any designated areas is tantamount to its becoming final recommendation. Director Krempl stated that as soon as th] process is culminated, staff will prepare a draft General Ple which will have to go through extensive public hearings ar community forums before the Planning Commission and then Cit Council before it is resolved and finalized. Councilman Nader explained that approval in "concept" is t~ momentum or direction in which the Council is going and that ~ was not too early for any person to give the staff any input int the areas they are concerned with. Minutes - 3 - March 24, 1988 Mr. Will Hyde, 803 Vista Way, Chula Vista, stated the proble along Broadway is that it is a strip commercial area. H questioned whether the staff or consultant would be contemplatin going from this mixed commercial strip to a straight commercia development and whether the plan is to deepen some of th commercial lots. Mr. Wood responded that this was covered under number 6 in hi outline. Mr. Hyde then questioned whether it would be appropriat to develop a specific plan specifically for Broadway noting tha in the review process, the modifications of zoning, especiall those permitting higher density, should be taken int consideration along with the grid pattern of streets an constraints of the thresholds for limited traffic. Mr. Woo indicated that a specific plan for Broadway could be done. Councilman Moore referred to the one quarter mile grid of R- zoning now prevalent north of "H" Street, west of Broadway commenting this was not too good for the City. MSUC (Cox/Nader) to approve the Scenario for the Central Chul Vista General Plan Update "in concept" and to direct staff t continue with the work. 2. REPORT ON EASTERN TERRITORIES Mr. Wood submitted staff's recommendations on the General Pla Update (attached and made part of these minutes). He added tha at the last conference (February 9), Council directed staff t consider certain revisions to Scenario IV Land Use Map. He the submitted his analyses for the following revisions: 1. Removing at this time the 2005 phase line from the Genera Plan Map. Phasing will be addressed with Growth Management. 2. Investigate the potential for non-residential land uses sout of Orange Avenue and north of the Otay Landfill. 3. Investigate the potential for a node of greater the single-family residential density in the vicinity of the Chu] Vista Community Hospital. 4. Plan for transitional land uses north of the EastLake Busines Park and south of the Otay Municipal Water District Propert~ These studies have been made and are reflected on the enclose Scenario IV Land Use Map. They will be elaborated on at tP Council Conference. Director Krempl noted the meeting staff had with the developers ~ the eastern territories adding that he will continue to go ahe~ with the analysis of those alternatives presented at the meetin~ and report back to the Council. Minutes - 4 - March 24, 1988 Mr. Wood explained that there are four policy issues for which th Council asked for further definition and these were: 1. Define guidelines for the use of density ranges an investigate the appropriate higher target in the uppe two density ranges. 2. Develop policies for defining development areas which ar diagrammatically shown on the General Plan Land Use ove which residential densities would be applied. 3. Develop criteria which might allow for someone t approach the high end of any density range. 4. Define policies that would provide for the potential o clustering or a density transfer within a project area. Under 3.2.4 Mr. Woods suggested adding the inclusion of publi functions such as Library, Police and Fire. Planning Director Krempl stated that there has been some confusio in respect to items 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5. The intent of thos statements were meant to work along with the map for th developers to be able to understand the process staff has gon through to arrive at the areas that are developable and those tha are not. As to EastLake Greens, Mr. Krempl stated staff is sti] going through a considerable amount of discussion and analys] mainly because of the density transfer issue. At this point, th6 do not feel that EastLake Greens as presently proposed applies t the policy issues. The developer is looking at reducing t~ densities and changing the land use; therefore, staff may need t come back some time next month and concentrate on just t~ specific Greens project in order to get some policy Or guidelin~ from Council. In the meantime, staff is continuing discussion ar meeting with the developer and if these issues cannot be resolved. Stan Waid, representing George Kost, President of the Sweetwat~ Valley Civic Association, stated that the problem with Scenario is Route 125. He noted the Sweetwater Valley Association~ recommendation for an Alternate "D" and outlined on the map t~ configuration of their proposal for Route 125 which would be fr~ Telegraph Canyon Road going northwest, swinging to the northea~ and then continuing north for an intersection at Jamacha Boulevarl Tim Kruer, representing, Terra Nova Associates, discussed h~ company's concerns with point 2.5. He said they are trying ~ design a quality project for their area and staff's policy shou~ be expanded to give incentives for the developers. Also tak~ into consideration should be the proximity of the development materials and density transfers should be given for that. Furth, transfers should be given for open space greenbelt areas sinl their project will be burdened more by the greenbelt than oth~ developments in the eastern territories - over 1/3 of the property is designated as open space. Minutes - 5 - March 24, 1988 Director Krempl commented that the idea of enhancement would be reasonable candidate for density transfers; however, in arrivin at the General Plan categories, staff and consultant have alread taken into consideration the open space greenbelt areas designate on the General Plan. As to the quality of projects, that is very difficult one to analyze in regard to density transfers every developer will make an argument that he has a qualit development. Councilwoman McCandliss responded that some recognition should b given for quality development. Mr. Wayne Loftis, representing Unocal, noted that Route 125 a presently proposed will be going right through Unocal's property He indicated they would be supportive of the Sweetwate Association's configuration Of Route 125 since Unocal would b losing about 30 acres and requested the transfer of densities b given for that since it is "beyond the scope of a project." Another real issue is innovative designs and flexibility whic should be of benefit to the City; further, developers should b given some incentive to be more creative, i.e. density transfers. Director Krempl agreed with some of Mr. Loftis' statements addin they should encourage creativity and staff is willing to work wit this developer. Mr. Wood noted that some properties have freeway designs in thei areas and others have to provide schools, parks and publi facilities so eventually it evens up. Council discussion followed regarding development policies allowing incentives for creative development and recognizin quality development for density transfers. Charles Gill, Attorney representing Buie Corporation, discusse the flexibility aspect of the project, noting their concerns o designations of individual areas of open space and the limitation in the policies. One concern is the density transfer and th inability to do any construction within those areas. They woul like to receive some credit for the open space areas. They woul like some mechanism provided for the innovative project they ar considering. The second concern is the design constraints whic will limit their flexibility to provide a quality project. Mr. Gill offered the following sentence to be added to point 2.1. in order to recognize that the Council is looking for flexibilit for innovative design and creative projects of mixed housing i the eastern territory: "Due to the lack of site specific detail inherent in the Genera Plan process, the City Council may allow development within op~ space areas when proposed as part of a precise development pla subject to criteria as discussed during this General Plan process. Minutes - 6 - March 24, 1988 Councilman Nader questioned whether there could be a statement i the policy that at any time the Council chooses, they can allo building in areas designated for open space. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf questioned Mr. Gill as to whethe he was proposing to undo the open space portion of the Genera Plan by his new language by opening it up to development an questioned whether that can be done according to State requirement Mr. Gill responded that what the Council has before them is alan use element and the guidelines can be made consistent with Stat law through appropriate language in the General Plan. There is n problem with State law prohibiting the flexibility he is talkin about. Director Krempl stated he has problems with this added languag since it would diminish the import of the General Plan and it flexibility. Mr. Bob Santos, 900 Lane Avenue, Chula Vista, representin EastLake, stated he is still working with staff on his propose project. He presented a map which he stated he is using a demonstrative points which was entitled "Composite Constraints." Mr. Santos noted by the colors of the maps the areas which woul be considered buildable and those which would not. He suggested breakdown of the open space categories in the policy statement into two sub-sections: one would be Open Space/Greenbelt Area with Natural Constraints. These would be areas that are in exces of the 25% slope, the 100 year flood level, active and inacti~ fault zones, hazardous setback areas, etc. which would not requi~ any density transfers. The second category would be the OpE Space/Greenbelt with Public Purpose Constraints. These would preservation of canyons, scenic highways, open space corridors etc., for which Council should grant either from zero to 10( density transfer offsets. Mr. Santos added that if a higher educational facility such as university is proposed, EastLake should see some density transfex for that provision. As to point 4.3 (EastLake Greens), Mr. Santos stated there shou~ be some general guideline that a predominant character of project in a low-medium density classification would be consider~ to be changed by clustering when more than 30% of a residenti~ area is proposed to be developed with attached housing when lowl than two units per building. Director Krempl commented that he received the new language proposed by Mr. Santos only this afternoon and would like opportunity to analyze these comments and report back to t] Council. Minutes - 7 - March 24, 1988 Mr. Greg Smith, representing Baldwin Company (Salt Creek Ranch stated he is continuing to work with staff on their project. Th only issue they have now is to adjust the topography with o without property ownership. They do have a problem of having t maintain a residential character in one section of their projec which is designated E-5 since to the north of that is the sewerag treatment plant. He felt this 49 acre parcel should have a highe density. Councilwoman McCandliss discussed the increase in the industria zones in this area. Director Krempl explained that based on th topography, they have increased the industrial in the Baldwin are and reduced some of it in the EastLake area. Presently, th Baldwin Company will have 96 acres of industrial. Councilwoma McCandliss noted that consideration should be given to the traffi generation coming out of the industrial areas. Council discussion followed regarding the various aspects of th consultant's presentation, the direction to staff to work with Mr Santos and Mr. Gill as to their comments and recommendations; th density transfers for open space and the traffic generations. Councilman Nader commented that all of the aspects of the staf recommendation should be held in abeyance until the staff repor comes back. He agreed there should be some density transfers an questioned whether the Council should have the flexibility wit zoning changes to grant the density transfers without having General Plan Amendment to allow the character of residentia development within certain areas. This would, of course, be wit notice of public hearings which should be sufficient to allow tF Council this flexibility. MSUC (Cox/McCandliss) to accept staff recommendations, items and 3b and to direct staff to review the comments made by t~ various speakers this evening and bring back those comments wit staff responses and recommendations and modifications of the ite~ made before the Council this evening - the report due in the ne> two weeks for Council consideration. Councilwoman McCandliss suggested continuing the recommendation 3a for two weeks and have that brought back back for discussi( and staff analysis. Councilman Nader clarified the intent of the motion is for sta~ to continue work on those portions of the policies that do n~ pertain to the comments or issues raised this evening. Mayor Cox noted that was certainly the intent of his motion. 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. Minutes 8 - March 24, 1988 5. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT a. Assistant City Manager Asmus submitted a letter sent to Cit] Manager Goss from Ken Larsen, Director of Building & Housin. concerning the Town Centre Parking Structure. Mr. Larsen wil be having City crews remove the veneer between the parkin structure and the elevator tower in order to eliminat property damage or injury to pedestrian foot traffic in tha area. This will be done as quickly as possible - by Friday March 25. 6. MAYOR'S REPORT None. 7. COUNCIL COMMENTS None. 8. CLOSED SESSION Mayor Cox stated the Council will recess to Closed Session fo purposes of instructions to negotiators. They Council will als be meeting possibly on March 29 at 4 p.m. and March 31 at 4 p.m for Closed Session to discuss Sierra Club v. Marsh, Sierra Club v Coastal Commission and Personnel. The Closed Session will be hel jointly with the City Council and Redevelopment Agency Councilman Nader requested that the Closed Session on March 31 b held at 5:30 or later. Mayor Cox asked that the City Manage check with the Councilmembers as to the time they wish to meet. At 9:50 p.m. the Council recessed to Closed Session, the Assistan City Attorney reported that the Session ended at 10:15 p.m. ADJOURNMENT AT 10:15 p.m. to the meetings scheduled for Close Sessions on March 29 and 31 and to the regular meeting of April = 1988 4 p.m. ~ulasz, M~~ City Clerk 1202C Revised X~arch 16, 19g~ DRAFT STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ON GENERAL PLAN UPDATE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP 1.0 DEFINE GUIDELINES FOR USE OF THE DENSITY RANGES. AD3UST THE TARGET IN THE LOW DENSITY RANGE FROM 1.5 DU/AC TO 2.0 DU/AC AND INVESTIGATE THE APPROPRIATE HIGHER TARGET IN THE UPPER T~/O DENSITY RANGES. l.I The revised general plan residential densities and target densities are as follows. Baseline Target(l) Maximum Name Density Density Density Low 0.5 2.0 3 Low mediuim 3.0 4.5 6 Medium 6.0 8.5 11 Medium-high High 18.0 22.0 27+ (1) Statistical average to be used for monitoring the progress in implementing the General Plan. -1- DRAFT 2.0 DEVELOP POLICIES FOR DEFINING DEVELOPMENT AREAS, ~'HICH ARE DIAGRAMMATICALLY SHOWN ON THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE, OVER WHICH THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES WOULD BE APPLIED. (FOR EXAMPLE: THE DEFINITION OF AREAS OF 25% SLOPE AND GREATER AND THE DELETION OF THESE AREAS FROM THE DESIGNATED DEVELOPMENT AREAS MAY CHANGE WHEN MORE DETAILED TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION IS PREPARED.) 2.1 The land use plan defines three categories of land: areas for urban develop- ment, transportation corridors, and open space/greenbelt areas. a. The urban development areas are land which is most suitable for development due to its relatively unconstrained topography, location with respect to existing or future transportation corridors, and potential to be provided with utilities and public services. b. The transportation corridors are established to provide and protect land necessary to support the ultimate circulation requirements of the ]and use plan. The alignments are generally responsive to the constraints of land form. c. The open space areas are established to protect and preserve sensitive land form and habitat, canyons and drainage courses, mountains and areas for parks. 2.2 These three components are illustrated below. Urban Development Area Transportation Corridor Open Space/Greenbelt Area " DRAFT 23 The urban development areas are defined based on the general topographic and other data available for the entire planning area. More detail data is expected to permit a more precise determination of the urban development area. The more detailed refinement of the urban development areas, trans- portation corridors and open space areas will be part of detail planning during a project's specific plan or site planning process. 2.4 The transportation corridors are defined as those roadways that are included in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. These include the following roadway classifications: freeways, prime arterials, major streets and four lane collector streets. 2°5 Open space/greenbelt areas are generally defined by the following and are more specifically described in the Open Space Element. I. Floodway and floodway fringe. 2. Canyon or stream valley floor. 3. Slopes of 25% and greater that define a canyon, stream valley or mountain. 4. Slopes of less than 25% but which are part of the continuity of slopes defining a canyon, stream valley, top of mountain, etc. 5. Transition areas at the top of slope adjacent to a canyon. 6. Significant side canyons and stream valleys to a main canyon. 7. Developed parks and recreation areas. ~'/ The location of developed parks, particularly neighborhood and community parks shall typically be located on generally level, well-drained land, suitable for cost effective construction of recreation facilities. They shall also be easily accessible from the adjacent residential communities. These parks are ex- pected to be both in canyon and valley open space areas and on adjacent mesa areas based on the criteria noted above. -3- DRAFT 3.0 DEVELOP BASIC PLANNING CRITERIA ASSOCIATED WITH THE USE OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES AT THE HIGHER END OF THE RANGE OF EACH GENERAL PLAN RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY. 3.1 The higher density end of the general plan residential category is defined as gross densities that exceed the target density for the particular category but are less than the maximum density allowed. For example, in the low medium residential category of 3-6 DU/AC with a target of 4.5 DU]AC the higher end would be defined as 4.5 to 6 DU/AC. 3.2 Approval of residential densities in the higher end of a residential category shall be based on the determination that a project site plan and character exemplifies the kind of quality project that the City feels is particularly appropriate to accomplish the overall General Plan Goals and Objectives. This determination shall be based on conformance with one or more of the following criteria. 3.2.1 The inclusion within the project oi public open space or parks that are beyond that provided for in the City's area (size) or improvement standards for such uses. 3.2.2 The inclusion within the project of recreational uses that are seen as desirable by the City to further the overall quality of the City. 3.2.3 The provision of a significant proportion of the total residential units as qualified low income family housing. DRAFT DEFINE POLICIES THAT WOULD PROVIDE FOR THE POTENTIAL OF CLUSTERING OR A TRANSFER OF DENSITY WITHIN A PRO3ECT AREA. t~.l The opportunity for trans£er of density from one portion of an urban development area to another urban development area is permitted in the General Plan. (For detailed discussion see Appendix 1.) Approval of a transfer of density shall be based on conlormance with one or more of the following criteria 4.2.1 Transfer of density would be permitted only between potential residential land and residential land in an urban development area (see Appendix 1). 4.2.2 Allowable rate of transfer would vary between 0 and 100%. 4.2.3 The site plan that results from the clustering retains the same overall character as that described in the general plan residential category. The introduction of some units characteristic of the next higher category is permitted as long as the predominant character of the project remains the same as the underlying general plan category. As a general guideline the predominant character of a project is considered to be changed by clustering when more than 30% of the residential land area is proposed to be developed with residential units characteristic of the next higher general plan category. As residential densities are approved at the higher end of a category, the potential to transfer density or cluster and also maintain the community character is expected to diminish. -5- Revised March 16, 1988 DRAFT APPENDIX I LAND USE CLASSIFICATION AND BENSITY TRANSFER The following policy deals with the identification of a classification system for land uses and, related directly to that classification system, the identification of the opportunity, if any, for density trans£er. 1.0 The General Plan permits the opportunity ior density trans[er from one portion oi an Urban Development Area to another Urban Development Area (Exhibit 1). 1.2 Density transfer is not allowed ior property delined as a General Plan Transportation Corridor or Open Space/Greenbelt Area. 1.3 Within an Urban Development Area some land uses are explicitly permitted density transier credit, some uses are candidates for such transier, the amount oi which may vary irom 0-100%, and some uses are not permitted any transier credit. The identification oi these land uses as they relate to density transfer is illustrated in Exhibit 2. DRAFT EXHIBIT I LAND USE CLASSIFICATION All Land within the General Plan Area is classified as one of the following categories. Name Urban Development Area Transportation Corridor Open 5pace/Greenbelt Area The Urban Development Area is further divided into one of the following sub- categories: Name '.' ~ Non-Residential Development . ,~ . .~.... Area .... "'~ ' °' Potential Residential Develop- ment Area Residential Development Area EXHISIT 2 LAND USE CLASSIFICATION AND DENSITY TRANSFER DENSITY LAND USE TRANSPER FACILITIES DESCRIPTION CATEGORY ALLOWANCE 1.0 Circulation 1,i Freeways Transportation Corridor 0% 1.2 g-lane prime axterials Transportation Corridor 0% 1,3 6-lane prime arterials Transportation Corridor 0% i .t+ it-lane major streets Transportation Corridor 0% 1.5 ½-lane collector streets Transportation Corridor 0% 1.6 2-lane collector street Residential Development Area 100% 1.7 Local streets Residential Development Area 100% l.g Private streets Residential Development Area 100% 1.9 Pedestrian, bicycle and Residential Development Area 100% equestrian trails 1.10 Other transportation related Potential Residential 0-100% facilities not listed above Development Area 2.0 Schools 2.1 Higher education facilities Non Residential Development 0% 2.2 High schools Non Residential Development 0% 2.3 3unior high schools Non Residential Development 0% 2.t~ Elementary schools Residential Development Area 100% 2J Private schools Residential Development Area 100% 2.6 Day care center Residential Development Area 100% 2.7 Special education center Residential Development Area 100% 2.8 Other educational facilities Potential Residential 0-100% not listed above Development Area 3.0 Public Services 3.1 Police/rescue stations Residential Development Area 100% 3.2 Fire stations Residential Development Area 100% 3.3 Libraries Residential Development Area 100% 3.tin Utilities Potential Residential 0-100% Development Area 3.5 Other public services that Potential Residential 0-100% are not listed above Development Area ~.0 Open Space and Recreation zLl Principal open space and Open Space/Greenbelt Area 0% greenbelt system ~.2 Regional parks Open Space/Greenbalt Area 0% t~.3 Community parks Open Space/Greenbelt Area 0% t~.~ Floodplains Open Space/Greenbelt Area 0% t+.5 Sensitive environmental Open Space/Greenbelt Area 0% arabs ~.6 Otay Lakes, Sweetwater Lake Open Space/Greenbelt Area 0% t+.7 San Diego Bay Open Space/Greenbelt Area 0% t~.8 Local parks Residential Development Area 100% t+.9 Local/neighborhood Residential Development Area 100% recreation centers (public, private or association) t~.10 Local/neighborhood lakes Potential Residential G-100% or water features Development Area ¢. 11 Golf courses Potential Residential G- 100% Development Area z~.12 Other open space and Potential Residential 0-100% recreation features Development Area 5.0 Commercial and Employment Non Residential Development 096