HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1994/07/06
July 6, 1994
FROM:
The Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
Duane E. Bazzel, Principal Planne~
TO:
SUBJECT:
Lower Sweetwater Valley General Plan Amendment Issue Paper
Attached is a copy of the Lower Sweetwater Valley General Plan Amendment Issue Paper which
addresses a range of potential land uses that have been proposed for the Lower Sweetwater
Valley property located at the southwest quadrant of SR-S4 and I-80S freeways.
In February of this year the City Council directed City staff to prepare an issue paper containing
a range of land uses that would be considered as part of a General Plan Amendment and
Rezoning for approximately 62 acres, primarily located in within the low-lying areas of the
Sweetwater River Valley. Council requested that staff present these land use alternatives to
various boards and commissions for input prior to their authorizing staff to proceed with the
preparation of an Environmental Impact Report and General Plan Amendment.
A presentation by staff of the contents of this Issue Paper will be given at your regular meeting
of July 11, 1994. Comments regarding the contents of the Issue Paper will be solicited at the
meeting.
This Issue Paper will be submitted to the City Council at its meeting of July 26, 1994, and all
comments will be forwarded to them prior to their selection of alternatives to be considered in
the subsequent Environmental Impact Report on the project.
(:\pc.mcm)
DRAFT
LOWER SWEETWATER VALLEY
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
ISSUE PAPER
Prepared by the
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
July 6. 1994
.
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6. 1994
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Project Location
3.0 Review of Earlier Actions
3.1 General Plan
3.2 Annexation I Zoning
3.3 Prior Project Proposals
3.4 Public Input
4.0 Analysis
4.1 Environmental Constraints
4.2 land Use Compatibility
4.3 Summary and Analysis of Proposed land Use Alternatives
4.4 Potential Traffic Impacts
4.5 Open Space Acquisition
4.6 Park land Thresholds
5.0 General Plan Amendment I Zoning
6.0 Conclusions
Appendices
-i-
Paae
1
1
2
2
3
4
5
6
6
12
14
25
28
30
32
33
35
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
LIST OF EXHIBITS
FIGURES
Vicinity Map
Project location
land Ownership
Existing Drainage
Chula Vista Greenbelt
land Use Alternative 1
land Use Alternative 2
land Use Alternative 3
land Use Alternative 4
land Use Alternative 5
Existing General Plan Designations
Existing Zoning Designations
Assessment Study Area
Proposed General Plan I Zoning Alternative A
Proposed General Plan I Zoning Alternative B
TABLES
lower Sweetwater Valley Property Details
land Use Alternative 1
land Use Alternative 2
Land Use Alternative 3
land Use Alternative 4
Land Use Alternative 5
Proposed land Use Alternatives
Historic Traffic Counts for North Second Avenue
Preliminary Assessment District Open Space Acquisition and
Maintenance Costs
-ii-
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
APPENDICES
A. Senior Care Facility
B. Family Recreation / Fun Center
C. Veteran's Home
D. Demineralization Plant
E. Neighborhood Petition (presented to City Council on 4/19/94)
-iii-
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this issue paper is to respond to direction from the City of Chula
Vista City Council to examine the opportunities and constraints affecting a 67.82
acre area known as the Lower Sweetwater Valley Special Study Area ("project
area") and identify potential land uses that could be permitted by an amendment to
the General Plan. A range of potential land uses will be examined in this paper
along with potential General Plan designations and zoning necessary for
implementation. This paper will address neighborhood concerns, current General
Plan policies that may impact the subject property, and then be presented to the
City Council for authorization to prepare the appropriate environmental review
documents (CEQA) and process the requisite General Plan Amendment and
Rezoning.
2.0 PROJECT LOCATION
The project area consists of 67.82 acres, located at the southwest quadrant of
SR54 freeway and Interstate 805 (See Fig. 1). The property is divided into 5
separately-owned major parcels (See Table 1). of which 4 parcels are located
within the Sweetwater Valley and one parcel is located on a bluff overlooking the
other parcels and fronting directly on North Second Avenue. Located to the south
of the project area is a single family neighborhood with homes lining the southerly
boundary of 3 of the subject parcels (see Fig. 1, parcels A, B & C).
To the west of the project area is also a single family residential neighborhood,
across Second Avenue, with the exception of a 77-unit condominium project
located at 110 North Second Avenue.
1
:\LOWSW.lP
/
VICINITY MAP
.;;;:.," ",._~ ,- ~ D' -~-~~'i. ' : ~ 1~4
'I'~ = ~ - ......:--::::~ 1,\ ,".... I~~;j
. tI'''''' ......' . . ~ '
i ...~tI ....... -'
· ~ ~ ..... ..~~ _' ,\\W/" ",. ~
&' ~ ~ --' ~\ - '-: "" ,',' -
-=-40 ~ --f;I~'~ ~~. ~',..~ ~
-::::oJ:' 'T-' :: I !-- == 1'-.. ~' ",,<:
!.J. _ ' " ~ \\Vi ~ '"
. Ii T ~~
--- "-,-
..--1::1._____ ~ ::: ' ~
;{}{~ '" " II J' '1
~b;Z ~ ~\ l ~:;::r III ,!= ----- ~l:: ~r.J ,,~_ I-"r-
"\='__ ..~: lI:: ~. L--
m~ I.:OJECTLOCATION I~ > '" ~ ~~\~ ~ j
i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ h ~t\, H ~ ~.~
Lower SWfttwater Vallery
FIG. 1
PROJECT LOCATION
LOWER SWEETWATER VALLEY "SPECIAL STUDY AREA"
DRAFT GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
---..
.....1
---
Lower SWeetwater Valley
RG.2
/
LAND OWNERSHIP
A - REICH BART
B _ KAMPGROUNDS OF AMERICA (KOA)
C _ INVESTMENT PROPERTIES GROUP, LTD. (IPG)
D _ CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
E - MROSS
..
...---
. . ~
, -..,
.....1
Lower Sweetwater Vall.,
fiG. a
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
Table 1.
Lower Sweetwater Valley Property Details
Parcel Owner Size Zoning Land Use
A Reichbart 5.59 Ac. R-3 Child Care I
Adult
Counseling
B Kampgrounds of 24 Ac. A-8 Campground
America (KOA)
C IPG Limited 18.24 Ac. R-1 (6.25 ac.) Vacant
A (1.64 ac.)
Unzoned (10.35 ac.)
D City of Chula Vista 14.25 Ac. R-1 (5.06 ac.) Vacant
Redevelopment Unzoned (9.19 ac.)
Agency
E Mross Trust 5.74 Ac. R-I (3.42 ac.) Vacant
Unzoned (2.32 ac.)
3.0 REVIEW OF EARLIER ACTIONS AFFECTING THE LOWER SWEETWATER
VALLEY PROPERTY
3.1 General Plan
The entire project area is designated as "Open Space I Special Study Area" on the
City's General Plan Land Use Diagram updated in July, 1989. Prior to adoption of
the Special Study Area designation in 1989, the property was designated as "Open
Space" on the Chula Vista General Plan.
:\LDWSW.IP
2
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
In the text of the General Plan the Lower Sweetwater Valley property is recognized
as potentially a portion of, or a visual element adjacent to, the Chula Vista
Greenbelt. The Chula Vista Greenbelt concept was adopted by the City Council in
1989 as a continuous 28-mile open space link extending from the Bayfront, up the
Otay River and Salt Creek and the westerly edges of the Upper and Lower Otay
Lakes to the Sweetwater Valley, then extending down the Sweetwater Valley to
link up with the north/south Bay frontage. This Greenbelt is envisioned to contain
trails for, at a minimum, hiking and bicycling, and is also intended to provided a
further link to park facilities throughout the interior of the City. The Greenbelt will
be discussed in more detail later in this paper.
3.2 Annexation / Zoning
Approximately 88 acres of property, which included the 67.82 Lower Sweetwater
Valley property, was annexed to the City of Chula Vista in 1985. This annexation
of previously unincorporated property was approved largely as a result of the City
of Chula Vista being considered the appropriate jurisdiction to provide services to
the area and the physical separation of the property from other incorporated
(National City) and unincorporated areas (County). Additional property included in
the annexation at that time included the residential neighborhood located west of
North Second Avenue.
A portion of the area currently owned and operated by the KOA campground was
prezoned A (Agriculture) by the City of Chula Vista in 1978. The remaining portion
of the Lower Sweetwater Valley that was subject to annexation, is located within
the flood plain of the Sweetwater River, and was not prezoned and remains
unzoned today. This area was to be zoned when a final General Plan land use
designation is determined for the Lower Sweetwater Valley property. In addition,
:\lOWSW.lP
3
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
approximately 14.73 acres, consisting of the lower half of parcels A, Band C (see
Fig. 1). is currently zoned R-1 (Single Family Residential), this area having been
zoned with the neighborhood located to the south.
3.3 Prior Project Proposals
Prior to annexation of the property into the City of Chula Vista, the County of San
Diego had acquired the vacant property within the flood plain of the river for
purposes of including this area within the large Sweetwater Regional Park.
However, due to the fragmented physical relationship of the property to the core of
the Regional Park, caused by the presence of two major freeways, and a need for
the County to liquidate non-contiguous parcels to the Regional Park, the County, in
1989, sold the property to individual owners, including a portion to the City of
Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency for purposes of providing affordable housing.
In 1990, the City of Chula Vista proposed to provide a site for the relocation of
displaced mobile homes on 14.25 acres within the project area (parcel D). A draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was distributed for comment which examined
the environmental impacts which could potentially result from the proposed Mobile
Home Relocation Park. The draft EIR was never finalized and the proposed General
Plan amendment and rezoning necessary to accommodate the mobile home park
never occurred and the project was dropped. Also in 1990, the property owner of
18.24 acres (parcel C). located east of the KOA campgrounds and west of the City
of Chula Vista parcel, proposed a single family residential development project.
This proposal was also subsequently discontinued prior to issuance of a Draft EIR
and public hearings.
:\LOWSW.lP
4
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
In March 1993, the City of Chula Vista made a commitment to the Veterans
Administration to pursue locating a proposed Veterans Home on the 14.25 acres
owned by the Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency within the Lower Sweetwater
Valley.
3.4 Public Input
In 1990, with the distribution of the Mobile Home Park Draft EIR, the City received
a significant number of responses regarding the adequacy of the analysis contained
in that draft EIR as well as a petition containing approximately 600 names of
residents from the surrounding neighborhoods objecting strongly to the Mobile
Home Relocation project. In response to the public's concerns regarding potential
impacts of the proposed Mobile Home Relocation Park the project was dropped and
the Draft EIR was never finalized.
In December, 1993, City staff, as directed by the City Council, held a public forum
at Rosebank Elementary School and provided notice to property owners
surrounding the Lower Sweetwater Valley to enable the public to examine a
number of development proposals that the City had received for properties located
within the vacant flood plain portion of the Lower Sweetwater Valley. A
significant amount of discussion occurred at the forum, attended by approximately
60 residents, including a significant interest in preserving the vacant land area
within the valley as open space.
At a City Council meeting in February, 1994, representatives of the adjacent
neighborhood again expressed their concerns to the Council and their desire for
open space within the vacant Lower Sweetwater Valley property. Subsequent to
this meeting, a petition was submitted signed by over 100 residents, which
:\lDWSW.IP
5
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
outlined their desires, including the following (see also copy of petition in Appendix
E):
1. That existing vacant land be designated as natural open space,
2. That the unzoned property be zoned agricultural, and
3. That studies be prepared for the following assessment districts:
a. Acquisition of the 14 acre City of Chula Vista property (parcel D) by
the neighborhood,
b. Acquisition of 38 acres of property (parcels C, D & E) by the
neighborhood.
Representatives of the adjacent neighborhood also asked the City to examine
alternative funding sources for acquisition of the vacant properties.
4.0 ANALYSIS
4.1 Environmental Constraints
The following is a synopsis of existing constraints affecting the project area. Each
individual land use scenario or alternative will have specific environmental impacts
associated with it which will be briefly addressed in this paper. A complete
environmental analysis (EIR) will be conducted addressing each of the viable land
:\LOWSW.IP
6
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
use alternatives prior to a public hearing process on subsequent General Plan
Amendment and Zoning actions.
4.1.1 Geology
Thirty-eight acres of vacant, undeveloped land is located on flat, low-lying
floodplain deposits of the Sweetwater River. These deposits are overlain, in part,
by recently deposited alluvium carried by streams descending to the Sweetwater
River from several small valleys along the project area's southern boundary.
Additionally, floodplain and alluvial deposits are locally overlain by artificial fill,
mostly undocumented off-site soils with scattered debris.
Several notable earthquake faults are located in the project site vicinity, and are
considered active or potentially active. However, no fault traces have been
mapped on the project site. The nearest fault traces are identified as the
Sweetwater Fault (0.75 miles east), the La Nacion Fault (2 miles east) and the
Rose Canyon Fault (3 miles east).
A relatively long duration of strong motion generated by an earthquake can cause
various types of ground failures, including liquefaction. During an extended period
of ground shaking the ground can be altered from a solid to a liquid state, thus
potentially causing damage to engineered structures. Development of structures
on the low-lying portion of the project site would have to be properly engineered to
avoid potential impacts from earth shaking.
:\LOWSW.lP
7
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
4.1.2 Drainage
The low-lying portion of the project site is located on historical floodplain deposits
of the Sweetwater River. The Sweetwater Drainage Basin is about 230 square
miles and has two reservoirs upstream of the project site. The project site land
surface elevations range from 20 to 30 feet above mean sea level. A portion of
the site is also technically within the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) designated 500-year flood impact zone. Changes that have occurred as a
result of the construction of the adjacent flood channel have resulted in improved
drainage conditions on the project site. The FEMA designations have not yet been
removed from the project site; however, according to the U.S. Army Corp of
Engineers, drains constructed to handle runoff from the project site into the flood
channel were designed conservatively so that no designated on-site ponding areas
would be required (see Fig. 4). Appropriate drainage facilities to convey runoff
across the property would be required for any development of the property. It
appears that all of the proposed land uses, with proper grading and appropriate
drainage facilities, could be feasibly developed.
4.1.3 Biology
A wetland area presently exists along the northerly edge of the low-lying portion of
the project site (see Fig. 4). This swale is the principal biological resource on the
project site and any proposed development of the project site would have to
preserve this area or mitigate for any loss of wetland and/or habitat. Additionally,
the vacant land area is made up of annual grassland, which serves as a foraging
area for many birds that perch in the large eucalyptus trees at the western edge of
the project site.
:\lOWSW.IP
8
"
EXISTING DRAINAGE
---~
Drainage gates
Natural drainage
Low-lylng wetland area
..
v
~
Toe of slope
.
- -....
. i ~.
. .....
.....f
I.
Lower SWfttWGter Valley
FIG. 4
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
4.1.4 Noise
The project site is heavily impacted by two major sources of noise, SR54 to the
north, and Interstate 805 to the east. There are no other significant noise sources
that would impact the project site itself.
In 1989, a noise survey was conducted on the project site to determine the
average noise levels during peak traffic hour periods on 1-805 which were selected
to represent areas which receive the greatest noise exposure from the highways.
The noise levels along the east boundary of the project site registered an average
of 68 dBA, 3 decibels above the City of Chula Vista's minimum acceptable level of
65 dBA for residential areas. These noise levels were expected to increase
incrementally as traffic increases on SR54 and 1-805. Any residential development
of the project site would require an acoustical analysis and proposed mitigation
measures would have to be analyzed for feasibility and aesthetic impacts.
The potential for noise impacts from a development proposal would have to be
analyzed for its impact on adjacent single family neighborhoods, as well as the
existing KOA campground. This analysis would need to examine noise sources,
hours of operation, topography and consider existing ambient noise levels.
4.1.5 Aesthetics
The existing visual character of the project site can be characterized as an open,
low-lying, grassy field area surrounded on all sides by urban development and man-
made structures. The site is recessed from surrounding lands so the visual
impression from nearly all off-site vantage points is one of "looking down on the
project area." The project area is gently sloping within the Sweetwater Valley at
:\lOWSW.IP
9
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
elevation 20 ft., with the exception of the elevated land mass situated along the
westerly edge of the property, which rises approximately 100 ft. above the valley
floor.
The property is visible from several offsite vantage points. Motorists traveling on
North Second Avenue can view the valley floor as they travel just south of the
existing child care/adult counseling land use located at the top of the hill. This
view of the site is obvious but brief.
Residents of approximately 15 homes and the child care/adult counseling land uses
along North Second Ave. also view the site. Additionally, the site can be seen
from several homes which border the project area to the south. Many residents
living at the end of Las Flores Drive, Minot Avenue, Corte Maria, and Vista Way
have views of the site from their backyards. These homes all sit above elevated
slopes, some with excellent vantage points.
The site is also visible from the pedestrian and equestrian path which follows the
Sweetwater River flood control channel to the north of the site, and highly visible
from both SR-54 and 1-805. The Lower Sweetwater Valley property is one of the
first areas that a traveler sees when approaching Chula Vista from the north on 1-
805. Any development proposal or even retention of this area as open space
should include a long-term proposal for strategic landscaping which would enhance
the appearance of this highly visible area.
4.1.6 Access
Approximately 38 acres (see Fig. 3, parcels C, D & E) located within the low-lying
area of the project area and east of the KOA campgrounds are at this time land-
:\LOWSW.IP
10
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
locked. However, the owner of Parcel C (lPG) has obtained a 60 ft. wide
easement across the KOA campgrounds to Edgemere Avenue/North Second
Avenue. This 60 ft. wide access easement can only provide access to the easterly
two parcels (parcels D & E) if access is granted across the IPG parcel. An
equestrian/pedestrian trail and maintenance road atop the Sweetwater flood control
channel along the northern edge of the properties also provide very limited access.
Located to the south of the project site are two streets which could provide
physical access to the area. These are Las Flores Drive and First Avenue. First
Avenue would require extension to the project site. However, input received from
these neighborhoods in the past and through preliminary meetings preceding this
issue paper have indicated that residents are adamantly opposed to any vehicular
access to the property from the south through established neighborhoods, citing
potential security, noise and traffic impacts as their primary concerns.
Pedestrian access to the project site could be provided from Edgemere
Avenue/North Second Avenue, the flood channel trail, Las Flores Avenue and First
Avenue. Some residents have indicated a desire to have neighborhood pedestrian
accessibility to the flood channel trail by traversing the project site. However,
concerns have also been expressed regarding unwanted intrusion into the
neighborhood which could occur through the promotion of a formal pedestrian
access in these areas.
4.1.7 Emergency Services
The Police Department has indicated that although vehicular access to the low-
lying portion of the project site is limited to that from Edgemere Avenue, the
Department feels that access to neighborhood areas south of the project site on
:\LOWSW.IP
11
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
Las Flores Avenue, Minot Avenue, First Avenue, Corte Maria Avenue and Vista
Way is adequate to provide emergency service to the project site and surrounding
area.
The Fire Department has indicated that any development of properties within the
low-lying properties would require appropriate fire flow provisions. This would
require the extension of adequate water resources to accommodate minimum
pressure standards. The design of access roadways into the property would
require appropriate widths and turnaround areas. Emergency Medical staff would
need access to within 150 ft. of activity areas on the property. Proposed
structures may require sprinkler systems. The Fire Department has indicated that a
second vehicular access road into the project site will not be necessary to provide
emergency access.
4.2 Land Use Compatibility
Site development of the Lower Sweetwater Valley is governed by the City's
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance (Title 19 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code).
The site is currently designated "Open Space I Special Study Area" in the City's
General Plan, as shown on Fig. 11. Current zoning on the site is shown in Fig. 12.
Site zoning includes 21.86 acres of unzoned land, 14.73 acres of Single Family
Residential (R-1) zone, 20.82 acres of Agricultural (A) zone, and 5.59 acres of
Multiple Family (R-3) zone. The portion of the site which is presently zoned R-1
could accommodate an estimated 91 homes with 7,000 sq. ft. lots. The portion
zoned R-3 could provide a maximum of 180 multiple family units, by zoning
ordinance standards, however, existing development on the site contains child care
and adult counseling facilities.
:\lOWSW.IP
12
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
General Plan land use designations for surrounding areas include "Freeway" to the
north and east, "Low-Medium Density Residential" to the south and west, and a
small pocket of "Medium-High Density Residential" to the west of North Second
Avenue. Zoning classifications for surrounding properties are Floodway (F-1) to
the north, Single Family Residential (R-1) to the south, freeway to the east, and
Single Family Residential (R-1) and Apartment Residential (R-3-P-20) to the west.
Land uses permitted under the "Open Space" category include open space, limited
recreation uses, rural residential, and agricultural uses. The KOA campgrounds
were permitted through an active Conditional Use Permit. The Special Study
overlay was applied with the intention that the site would be redesignated pending
the City's decision on a Lower Sweetwater Valley general plan amendment request
in 1989. However, the general plan amendment proposal was dropped.
Therefore, the land use designation of "Open Space" has served as a holding or
protective designation until a general plan amendment is adopted.
Site development must also comply with project-specific thresholds contained in
the City's Growth Management Ordinance. Under this ordinance, project-level
conformance review by City staff is required for each of the following issue areas:
fire and emergency medical services; police services; traffic; drainage facilities;
sewer facilities; and water facilities.
4.2.1 Chula Vista Greenbelt
The project site could be incorporated into the City of Chula Vista Greenbelt
concept (See Fig. 5). Section 7.3 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan
states that, "The Chula Vista Greenbelt is the backbone of an open space and park
system that extend throughout the city." The 28-mile greenbelt concept is
:\lOWSW JP
13
--
CHULA VISIA GREENBELI
. .
~
"'. ".-.
.... ......"
..::
.. ...;..... ....
. ..'
6
Lower SWfttwater Valley
FIG. 5
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
intended to utilize existing developed and undeveloped open space and potential
new open space linkages from the Bayfront, extending up the Otay and
Sweetwater River Valleys, and linking with the Upper and Lower Otay Reservoirs.
The conceptual greenbelt extends eastlwest through the Sweetwater River Valley.
The following General Plan text discusses the Greenbelt concept in the reach
between 1-805 and the Bayfront: "The Sweetwater Valley Regional Park ends in
the vicinity of 1-805 and Plaza Bonita Road. The Greenbelt extends under the
freeway south of the interchange with Route 54 and along the southerly edge of
the Route 54 to the vicinity of 5th A venue extended. The Greenbelt then follows
the alignment of the Sweetwater River prior to the freeway construction along a
natural open space area north of C and Sea vale Streets and under Broadway. the
railroad and trolley tracks and 1-5 to the bay. "
The greenbelt concept could provide a multi-purpose trail along the Sweetwater
flood channel and provide access from the Lower Sweetwater Valley project area
to the trail system as well as to the Rosebank neighborhood to the south.
In addition to open space opportunities, the Lower Sweetwater Valley area also
presents opportunities for potential development. Development of this area would
have to be sensitive to environmental issues and be compatible with the
surrounding residential neighborhoods.
4.3 Summary and Analysis of Proposed Land Use Alternatives
Various land uses have been proposed for the vacant parcels within the project
area. The following is a brief analysis of these proposals combined with
compatible land uses. Following further direction from the City Council, a
:\lOWSW.IP
14
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
complete environmental analysis will be conducted on selected alternatives and
formal hearings to amend the General Plan will be held. For purposes of this
analysis existing land uses and zoning are assumed for parcels A and B. Uses
consist of Child Care and Adult Counseling with R-3 zoning that would permit
Multiple Family Residential (max. 180 units') on parcel A, and Campgrounds and
Agricultural zoning on parcel B. This assumption is consistent for each alternative
(see Table 7 for composite listing of all Alternatives).
4.3.1 land Use Alternative 1 (See Fig. 6)
Parcel A - Existing Child Care, Adult Counseling or Multiple Family Residential.
Parcel B - Existing KOA Campground.
Parcels C and D - These parcels are proposed to remain as vacant open space and
be maintained as an open space district.
Parcel E - This parcel is proposed, by the Sweetwater Authority, to contain a
water demineralization plant which would extract brackish ground water from the
adjoining river aquifer and through a reverse osmosis process provide potable water
which would then be piped into Sweetwater Authority's available supply (see
Appendix for more details).
1 Parcel A consists of 5.59 acres, however, as a result of significant slope areas on the property,
redevelopment of this site would likely result in fewer units.
:\LOWSW.IP
15
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
Table 2.
lAND USE AlTERNATIVE>1
Parcel land Use Acres . Owner
A Child Care, Adult Counseling or 5.59 Ac. Reichbart
Multiple Family Residential
B KOA Campgrounds 24 Ac. KOA
Campgrounds of
America
C Open Space 18.24 Ac. IPG Ltd.
D Open Space 14.25 Ac. Chula Vista
Redevelopment
Agency
E Proposed Demineralization Plant 5.74 Ac. Mross Trust
:\LOWSW.lP
16
/
LAND USE ALTERNATIVE 1
Parcel A - Child Care I Adult Counseling or Multl-Famlly Residential
Parcel B - KOA Campgrounds
Parcel C - Open Space
Parcel D - Open Space
Parcel E - Demineralization Plant
o
...--......
.- -
. i ~
, ...."
......
.-.
D
.
Lower SWeetwater Vallery
RG.6
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
4.3.2 land Use Alternative 2 (See Fig. 7)
Parcel A - Existing Child Care, Adult Counseling or Multiple Family Residential.
Parcel B - Existing KOA Campground.
Parcels C, 0 and E - These parcels are proposed to remain as vacant open space
and be maintained as an open space district. However, strategic landscaping could
be planted and maintained by the open space district which would enhance the
visibility of the site from adjoining thoroughfares.
Table 3.
lAND USE ALTERNATIVE 2
Parcel land Use Acres Owner
A Child Care, Adult Counseling or 5.59 Ac. Reichbart
Multiple Family Residential
B KOA Campgrounds 24 Ac. KOA
Campgrounds of
America
C Open Space 18.24 Ac. IPG Ltd.
D Open Space 14.25 Ac. Chula Vista
Redevelopment
Agency
E Open Space 5.74 Ac. Mross Trust
:\lOWSW.IP
17
/
LAND USE ALTERNATIVE 2
Parcel A - Child Care I Adult Counseling or Multl-Famlly Residential
Parcel B - KOA Campgrounds
Parcel C - Open Space
Parcel D - Open Space
Parcel E - Open Space
8: -~
D
u_
Lower SWeetwater Vallery
-.
- ,
. i ~
. -..,
....-,
RG.7
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
4.3.3 land Use Alternative 3 (See Fig. 8)
Parcel A - Existing Child Care, Adult Counseling or Multiple Family Residential.
Parcel B - Existing KOA Campground.
Parcel C - This parcel consists of 18.24 acres and would be developed as public
park and be maintained by the City of Chula Vista Parks and Recreation
Department. Development of a park at this location could serve as a staging area
for the Chula Vista Greenbelt trail system which likely will run eastlwest on the
levy of the Sweetwater flood channel. In addition, development of this parcel as a
park could serve to reduce the deficiency of park acreage west of 1-805 and
provide accessible park land for residents of the Rosebank neighborhood, which
currently lacks neighborhood or nearby community-level park facilities.
Parcel 0 - This parcel would be retained as natural open space which could
augment the proposed park on Parcel C, provide additional visual open space as
part of the Greenbelt and act as a buffer between proposed land uses on Parcel E.
Parcel E - This parcel is proposed to contain a water demineralization plant as
described in Alternative 1 above.
:\lOWSW.IP
18
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
Table 4.
lAND USE ALTERNATIVE 3
Parcel land Use Acres Owner
A Child Care, Adult Counseling or 5.59 Ac. Reichbart
Multiple Family Residential
B KOA Campgrounds 24 Ac. KOA
Campgrounds of
America
C Proposed Park 18.24 Ac. IPG Ltd.
D Open Space 14.25 Ac. Chula Vista
Redevelopment
Agency
E Proposed Demineralization Plant 5.74 Ac. Mross Trust
:\LOWSW.IP
19
/
LAND USE ALTERNATIVE 3
Parcel A - Child Care I Adult Counseling or Multl-Famlly Residential
Parcel B - KOA Campgrounds
Parcel C - Park
Parcel D - Open Space
Parcel E - Demineralization Plant
III. -....
D
o
.
~ ~.-
---
Lower SWeetwater Vallery
-.
- ,
. , ~
- ..-,
...._f
.. -
fiG. .
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July, 6, 1994
4.3.4 land Use Alternative 4 (See Fig. 9)
Parcel A - Existing Child Care, Adult Counseling or Multiple Family Residential.
Parcel B - Existing KOA Campground.
Parcel C - This parcel would consist of a public park, as described in Alternative 3
above. The City Council, in prior discussions regarding the locating of a Veteran's
Home within the Lower Sweetwater Valley site, indicated a desire to have park
facilities adjacent to the Veteran's Home.
Parcel 0 - This parcel would contain a 400-bed Veteran's Home. This Home
would require the approval of a Conditional Use Permit and would be enhanced by
the public park located immediately to the west, and would be consistent with
commitments that the City Council has made to find a location for the Veteran's
facility within the city.
Parcel E - This parcel would contain a water demineralization plant as described
above in Alternative 1 above.
:\LOWSW.lP
20
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
Table 5.
lAND USE ALTERNATIVE 4
Parcel land Use Acres Owner
A Child Care, Adult Counseling or 5.59 Ac. Reichbart
Multiple Family Residential
B KOA Campgrounds 24 Ac. KOA
Campgrounds of
America
C Proposed Park 18.24 Ac. IPG Ltd.
D Proposed Veteran's Home 14.25 Ac. Chula Vista
Redevelopment
Agency
E Proposed Demineralization Plant 5.74 Ac. Mross Trust
:\LOWSW.IP
21
/
LAND USE ALTERNATIVE 4
Parcel A - Child Care I Adult Counseling or Multl-Famlly Residential
Parcel B - KOA Campgrounds
Parcel C - Park
Parcel D - Veteran's Home
Parcel E - Demineralization Plant
.- -
.. .
...;
..,-_1
.-~
.. -.....
'.
Lower SWeetwater Vallery
fiG. 9
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
4.3.5 land Use Alternative 5 (See Fig. 10)
Parcel A - Existing Child Care, Adult Counseling or Multiple Family Residential.
Parcel B - Existing KOA Campground.
Parcel C - This parcel would contain a 400-accommodation multi-level care
housing facility for seniors. This facility would be self-contained and would be
situated on only 10.24 acres of the 18.24 acre IPG parcel. This project would
consist of 150 units of independent senior apartments, 200 assisted living
accommodations, and a 50-bed skilled nursing facility.
Parcel 0 - This parcel would contain a 22.25 acre (this includes 8 acres from
Parcel C) Family Recreation and Fun Center proposed by Pacific Malibu
Development Corporation and Warner Properties. The Family Recreation consisting
of lighted softball and soccer field, concession facilities and restrooms. The Fun
Center would consist of 2 lighted miniature golf courses, a giant water slide, water
bumper boats, go-kart raceway, batting cage, kiddie land area, an arcade and
videolcomputer learning center. A total of 280 parking spaces are proposed for
both the Family Recreation and Fun Centers. The total number of parking spaces
were proposed by the developer to provide for parking needs.
Parcel E - This parcel would contain a water demineralization plant as described
above in Alternative 1 above.
:\LOWSW.IP
22
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
Table 6.
lAND USE ALTERNATIVE 5
Parcel land Use Acres Owner
A Child Care, Adult Counseling or 5.59 Ac. Reichbart
Multiple Family Residential
B KOA Campgrounds 24 Ac. KOA
Campgrounds of
America
C Proposed Senior Care Facility 10.24 Ac. IPG Ltd.
D Proposed Family Recreation I Fun 22.25 Ac. Chula Vista
Center Redevelopment
Agency
E Proposed Demineralization Plant 5.74 Ac. Mross Trust
:\lOWSW.lP
23
/
LAND USE ALTERNATIVE 5
Parcel A - Child Care I Adult Counseling or Multl-Famlly Residential
Parcel B - KOA Campgrounds
Parcel C - Senior Care Facility
Parcel D - Family Recreation I Fun Center
Parcel E - Demineralization Plant
. -1M!.
- .
. . ~
. _0"'"
......
--.
Lower SWeetwater Vallery
fiG. 10
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
Table 7.
PROPOSED lAND USE ALTERNATIVES
AlT Parcel A Parcel B ParcelC Parcel D ParcelE
1 Child Care, KOA Open Space Open Proposed
Adult Campgrounds Space Water
Counseling Demin.
or Plant
Apartments
2 Child Care, KOA Open Space Open Open Space
Adult Campgrounds Space
Counseling
or
Apartments
3 Child Care, KOA Park Open Proposed
Adult Campgrounds Space Water
Counseling Demin.
or Plant
Apartments
4 Child Care, KOA Park Proposed Proposed
Adult Campgrounds Veteran's Water
Counseling Home Demin.
or Plant
Apartments
5 Child Care, KOA Proposed Proposed Proposed
Adult Campgrounds Senior Care Family Water
Counseling Center Recreation Demin.
or I Fun Plant
Apartments Center
:\lOWSW.lP
24
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
4.4 Potential Traffic Impacts
Alternative 5 is assumed to be the most intense urban land use alternative and
therefore was the subject of analysis with regard to potential traffic impacts. The
City of Chula Vista Traffic Engineering Division has prepared a preliminary traffic
analysis examining potential traffic movements and trip generation from each of
the land uses proposed in this alternative.
Second Avenue extends from the south, transitions into North Second Avenue
adjacent to the KOA Campground entrance, then becomes Edgemere Avenue as
the road continues across the Sweetwater flood channel until intersecting with
30th Street in National City.
The traffic analysis assumes a single point of entry on North Second Avenue at the
KOA Campgrounds entrance. A total of 7,360 average daily vehicle trips (ADT)
were counted in 1993 on North Second Avenue, presently a two lane residential
street with a curb to curb width of 40 ft..:L' The Chula Vista General Plan
identifies North Second Avenue as a Class II Collector roadway, which at ultimate
build out would require widening to 52 ft. curb to curb, and would provide a design
capacity of 12,000 ADT at Level of Service (LOS) C.
:\lOWSW JP
25
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
An additional 3,253 ADT is estimated to be generated' by the new land uses in
Alternative 5, of which an estimated 1,382 ADT (45%) will impact North Second
Avenue south of the project. This will result in a cumulative total of 8,742 ADT
on North Second Avenue, south of the project, when added to current traffic
counts. When the estimated project traffic is included with cumulative General
Plan build out forecasts, a total of 11,600 ADT is expected on North Second
Avenue. As stated previously, an ADT total of 12,000 is the design capacity of
Level of Service (LOS) C. Traffic counts experienced in 1990, the last year counts
were taken before the completion of SR-54, totalled 11,660 ADT on North Second
Avenue (see Table 7).
An additional 2,110 ADT is estimated to be generated by the land uses in
Alternative 4, of which an estimated 443 ADT (40%) will impact North Second
Avenue south of the project. This will result in a cumulative total of 7,803 ADT
on North Second Avenue, south of the project, with a General Plan build out
forecast of 10,600 ADT, also under the LOS C standard of 12,000 ADT.
However, the roadway width between the KOA Campground entrance and C
Street is considered to be below the General Plan standard at 40 ft..:L. Although a
52 ft. curb to curb roadway width is the General Plan standard for a Class II
Collector, restriping for 15 ft. wide travel lanes, a continuous 10ft. wide left turn
lane, and no parking would achieve acceptable levels of service (LOS C or better).
2
Traffic generation assumptions:
.
.
.
.
Family Recreation/Fun Center would fill 75% of the 280 parking spaces at 2 hour
intervals, 10 hours per day. Add 10% for deliveries and other.
The 400-bed Senior Care Center would generate 2 trips per unit per day.
The Demineralization Plant would generate approximately 10 trips per day.
The 400-bed Veteran's Home would generated approximately 1,200 trips per day.
The 18.24 ac. Public Park would generate approximately 900 trips per day.
.
:\lOWSW,IP
26
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
Table 8.
HISTORIC TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR NORTH SECOND AVENUE
YEAR A VERAGEDAllY TRIPS (ADTI
1987 6,320 ADT
1988 10,680 ADT
1989 11,950 ADT
1990 11,660 ADT
1991* 4,830 ADT
1992 5,660 ADT
1993 7,360 ADT
* _ SR-54 Freeway completed and opened this year.
The proposed intersection of North Second Avenue and the entrance to the KOA
Campground and the other Lower Sweetwater Valley parcels will require a curb to
curb width of 44 ft. for a distance of 300 ft. from the intersection. This width will
provide one 10ft. left turn lane and two 17 ft. lanes (in/out). The access road
could then be reduced to 34 ft. in width. Sight distance at this intersection is not
considered to be a safety problem with the installation of a traffic signal. The
City's Traffic Engineer has determined that Alternative 5 land uses will warrant a
traffic signal at this intersection. Alternative 4 land uses do not meet warrants for
a signal, however, to ensure proper safety a traffic signal may be required.
Other roadway segments, assumed to be impacted by project-related traffic, are
not expected to be significantly impacted by any of the five alternatives.
:\lOWSW.IP
27
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
4.5 Open Space Acquisition
One major concern expressed by residents adjacent to the project site has been a
request to retain the vacant land area within the Lower Sweetwater Valley as
undeveloped open space. Some residents have previously expressed a need to
provide park facilities within their neighborhood area, citing the lack of facilities,
however, the strong neighborhood desire expressed has been that no development
occur on the site and that the property be maintained as natural open space.
4.5.1 Assessment District
At a public forum held earlier this year, and at a City Council meeting where the
Lower Sweetwater Valley issues were discussed, the concept of neighborhood
acquisition of vacant land for open space was introduced. The Council directed
staff to examine the potential of the surrounding neighborhoods acquiring and
maintaining the vacant Lower Sweetwater Valley property as natural open space in
perpetuity. Therefore, staff has retained the engineering consultant firm of BSI to
conduct a feasibility study which would identify an assumed benefit area, apply a
fair weighting to properties within the benefit area then determine a unit cost for
acquisition and maintenance. Preliminary results of this study assumed a potential
benefit area roughly from SR-54 to E Street and 1-805 to Fourth Avenue (see Fig.
13). The benefit area contains 868 equivalent dwelling units (EDU's). A
preliminary appraisal of the 14.25 acre Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency
property (parcel D) resulted in an appraised value and acquisition cost of
$744,000.:1:-. If applied to the 868 EDU's within the benefit area, this property
would cost approximately $864 per EDU. This would also translate into
approximately $74 per year for a period of 25 years through the application of an
assessment bond. This cost figure is based on preliminary data which will be
:\lOWSW.lP
28
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
further refined before being presented to the City Council for direction along with
this issue paper. If the same per-square-foot appraisal value were applied to the
two vacant lots which abut the Agency parcel, east and west, the total appraised
value and acquisition cost for 38 acres would be $1,984,000.:1:-. Assuming the
same benefit area, this total would translate into a cost of approximately $200 per
EDU per year for 25 years.
If the property is acquired for open space purposes it must receive ongoing, long-
term maintenance. Cost estimates, prepared by the City's Open Space
Coordinator, for limited maintenance (e.g., Code #4-level maintenance) amounts to
$15,500 per year for the 14.25 acre Agency parcel (parcel D), and $25,000 per
year for 38 acres (parcels C, D and E). The maintenance costs combined with the
acquisition costs for the 14.25 acre parcel is estimated at approximately $92 per
EDU, per year. The maintenance costs combined with the acquisition costs for the
38 acres is estimated at approximately $218 per EDU, per year.
Table 9.
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION
AND MAINTENANCE COSTS
Parcel(s) Parcel(s) Acquisition Maintenance Total Cost
Size Costs Costs Per Year Per EDU
. Per Year*
D 14.25 Ac. $744,000 + $15,500 $92+
C,D & E 38 Ac. $1,984,000+ $25,000 $218+
* - Acquisition costs estimated to be paid off in 25 years.
:\lOWSW.IP
29
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
4.5.2 Other Available Funding Sources
Park Acquisition and Development (PAD) Fees - The City of Chula Vista Municipal
Code does not permit the use of Park Acquisition and Development (PAD) Fees for
the acquisition of permanent natural open space. These funds are collected from
new residential development and must be used for the acquisition of park land and
construction of active park facilities. These funds may be pooled for the
construction of Community-level or Neighborhood-level park facilities, based on
park master planning.
State and Local Grants - The Planning Department has made a number of contacts
to determine if other funding sources, either local or state-wide, are available for
potential acquisition of natural open space or park land. Contacts have been made
with the Wildlife Conservation Office, the State of California Department of Parks
and Recreation (Acquisition Section), and the State Coastal Conservancy. These
agencies have indicated that with the failure at the polls of the proposed California
Parks and Wildlife (CALPAW) funding proposition in the last election, an
opportunity for a local source of funding for open space land acquisition was lost.
Other active funding programs either target habitat lands supporting endangered or
threatened species or significant wetlands. Most funding sources have been
depleted or are targeting these sensitive areas. In Los Angeles County, voters
approved a bond program in the past which supplied funding for open space
acquisition. No such program is currently available in San Diego County.
4.6 Park land Thresholds
Land Use Alternatives 3 and 4 identify park uses for a single parcel (parcel C)
combined with a Veteran's Home or with natural open space. The provision of
:\LOWSW.IP
30
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
park facilities within the Lower Sweetwater Valley could provide accessible park
facilities to the Rosebank neighborhood which currently do not exist, as well as
provide a facility linked to the 28-mile Chula Vista Greenbelt.
Each year the City analyzes various thresholds as part of the City's Growth
Management Policies. The Growth Management Oversight Committee (GMOC)
recently completed their annual analysis of park thresholds for the City. The
GMOC has reported that the western portion of the City (west of 1-805) is still
below the park threshold of 3 acres per 1,000 residents. The current inventory of
park land in western Chula Vista is 1.22 acres per 1,000 residents. Eucalyptus
Park, a 17.83 acre community park, is located approximately 1/2 mile from the
project site, and serves the community north of F Street.
Recognizing the need to provide additional park land to serve residents west of 1-
805, the City Council has set aside funds in its Five-Year Capital Improvement
Program for the purpose of acquiring said park acreage. The source of these funds
is the Park Acquisition and Development (PAD) fees which are charged to new
development. However, it should be recognized that the collection of PAD fees
has declined n recent years, due to a slowdown in development activity, and the
construction of "turnkey" parks in lieu of payment of fees in many new residential
projects in eastern Chula Vista. In addition, there is a great deal of competition for
the limited PAD funds that are available. Nonetheless, the City could consider the
use of this fund to purchase one or more of the vacant parcels of land in the Lower
Sweetwater Valley then develop it as park land in the future. Along with this
option, adjacent property owners could dedicate large slope areas facing the valley
to the City and, under an assessment district, these slopes would receive
consistent maintenance and act as a buffer from the park areas in perpetuity.
:\LOWSW.IP
31
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
5.0 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT I ZONING
The 67.82 acre project site is currently designated "Open Space I Special Study
Area" in the City's General Plan, as shown on Fig. 11. The following are
alternative General Plan designations which would be necessary to implement the
proposed land use alternatives.
5.1 General Plan Amendment I Zoning Alternative A
If the property retained the "Open Space" designation currently depicted on the
General Plan Land Use Diagram this would be consistent with proposed land uses
depicted in Land Use Alternative 1, 2 and 3. However, it is recommended that
parcel A be designated as "Medium-High Residential (11-18 du/ac)".
Zoning to implement the "Open Space" General Plan designation is recommended
as "Agriculture" (A) for parcels C, D and E. This alternative would require rezoning
of the southerly portion of each property from R-1 to A and the application of the
A zone for all currently "Unzoned" parcels. Existing zoning would be retained for
parcels A (R-3) and B (A).
5.2 General Plan Amendment Alternative B
The proposed land uses in Alternatives 4 and 5 are varied and somewhat unique.
If either of these two alternatives are selected, it is recommended that a "Mixed
Use" General Plan land use designation be applied, and that a Specific Plan be
adopted for parcels B, C, D, and E. The Specific Plan would be tailored to provide
specific design guidelines affecting each of the parcels. Chapter 19.07 of Title 19
in the Chula Vista Municipal Code authorizes the preparation of a specific plan as
:\lOWSW.IP
32
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
follows: "Specific plans may be implemented through the adoption of standard
zoning ordinances, the planned community zone, as provided in this title, or by
plan effectuation standards incorporated within the text of an individual specific
plan. The method of implementing an individual specific plan shall be established
and expressed by its adopting resolution or ordinance...At the discretion of the City
Council, whenever a specific plan is adopted without intent to implement it through
standard zoning designations, it shall be considered to supersede all underlying
zoning designations..." In other words, the Specific Plan that would be developed
for the Lower Sweetwater Valley project area, would contain specific zoning and
land use regulations, and would supersede the underlying zoning standards on the
property. The Specific Plan zoning and land use regulations would address issues
of access, landscaping, development phasing, setbacks, etc. It is also
recommended that all of the parcels subject to the "Mixed Use" designation and
Specific Plan (parcels B,C,D & E) be zoned "Mixed Use" (MU) as an underlying
zone classification. This "MU" zone is recommended to be added to the City's
Zoning Ordinance (Title 19, of the Municipal Code), concurrent with the General
Plan Amendment and Rezoning for the Lower Sweetwater Valley project area. The
"MU" zone designation will require the adoption of a Specific Plan prior to any
development.
6.0 CONCLUSIONS
The purpose of this issue paper is to examine a range of land use alternatives,
implement the current General Plan "Special Study Area" designation for the Lower
Sweetwater Valley property adopted in July, 1989, and ultimately lead to the
preparation of a General Plan Amendment, Rezoning and, potentially, a Zoning Text
Amendment.
:\LOWSW.lP
33
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
This issue paper will be presented to the public and various City Boards and
Commissions for input before being presented to the City Council for further
direction. Prior to the public hearing process required for a General Plan
Amendment and Rezoning, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) will be
prepared which will present a complete analysis of the potential environmental
impacts for the proposed range of alternatives.
This issue paper concludes that of the five alternative land use scenarios examined
herein that none of them appear to be infeasible from a land use or environmental
standpoint. It is recommended that the potential environmental impacts of all five
of the land use alternatives discussed in this issue paper be fully and equally
analyzed in a Draft EIR and that no preference or weight be given to any of them in
the analysis.
:\lOWSW.IP
34
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATIONS
OSp* -
RLM -
RMH -
Open Space - "Special Study Area"
Residential Low Medium (3-6 du/ac)
Residential Medium High (11-18 du/ac)
.- -
.,
,
...,
.....1
.-,
In
Lower SWeetwater Vallery
fiG. 11
~
EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATIONS
F1 -
A -
R1 -
R3 -
R3P20 -
IL -
UNZ -
--
o
FLOODWA Y
AGRICULTURE
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (20 du/ac)
LIMITED INDUSTRIAL
UNZONED
..
. .
.. ~
--..,
..,-_.
....
Lower SWeetwater Vallery
fiG. 12
ASSESSMENT STUDY AREA
Lower SWeetwater Vallery
FIG. la
GENERAL PLAN / ZONING
ALTERNATIVE A
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
"RMH" - Residential Medium.High (11-18 du/ac)
"Open Space"
ZONING:
R3 - Multiple Family Zone
A - Agricultural Zone
. ,
i
......,..-
en
O"!1!1!h,. "OPEN SPACE" 'm..
"'11!1 (GP DESIGoNATION) ,.'.:~ii! iI..
oun. "nn. -am -::n. ~ihz. .=lih:.
O:ij!!::. -Iii!!::. OZ" :=:. O:ijib:. -Iii!!:: O:ij!5::.
":iii:. ":m. :... "':iii:. 0; ... ":iih.
h:. o:i!!g; A o2l ..\C o:ijig::. :i!fg!:. o:ij!g!.
':m. .:~ It.. ~:. .UU. onn. on:
o:i!Eih:. .:ij~*i:. OZ" ih:. .:ij!~::. o:ij!ii.. o;ijiih:. 0:
0;:::. oun.
0:;:;:. O:iih.
.,
---
Lower SWeetwater Vallery
FIG. 14
GENERAL PLAN I ZONING
ALTERNATIVE B
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
"RMH" - Residential Medium-High (11-18 du/ac)
"Mixed Use" (Implemented by Specific Plan)
ZONING:
R3 - Multiple Family Zone
MU - Mixed Use Zone
,
. . ~
. -...,
....-.
..~
.. :!!::.
. "I:::.
':iii:.
':iih.
':iii~i!;;,. "MIXED USE" :::.
tu::. '1::::.
\:.':iji~ (GP DESIGNATION) ::iji~ii! i!".
.... trl. .....
.un. -us:. 'un. 'un on::. '1m. "un.
':ini:. "ith:. 'Iii!!:. on t. ':ii!!:. ':ij!!:. ':ijih.
":;iii!:. ':m:,.. =Ih. "::!::':. -:a':::. ":;iii:.,
:. 'l!u:.fII:l!iI. ".a'E.m:. ':m:. 'ili!:.
::::. ":;:. ~:: ""'I' 'q:=:. ':;::', ':;:',
.1,.. :... :... ..... 1.._ n:.. n.
.tijis::. "ijig!:. ':' ~!::. "ij!ii::. ':ijig. "ijiii::. .:
'I:::. 'u::.
':m:. elm:.
.,
. .--
_n
Lower SWeetwater Vallery
fiG. 15
Lower Sweetwater Valley Issue Paper
July 6, 1994
APPENDICES
:\lOWSW.IP
35
APPENDIX A
SENIOR CARE CENTER
(Investment Properties Group, Ltd.)
. 1 0 acre site
. 400-accommodation multi-level care senior housing project as follows:
150 units of independent senior opartments (75 studios, 75 one-bedroom units)
200 assisted living occommodations (100 accommodations for cognitively
impoired, 100 accommodotions for physicolly impaired)
50-bed skilled nursing focility
. Residents in the senior oportments have the option of purchosing the following services:
Three meals per doy
- Housekeeping services
Transportation services
. Residents in the assisted living orea would receive the following services:
Three meals per day
Housekeeping services
Socializotion progrom
Aid with doily living services (bothing, dressing, grooming, and medication
monitoring)
APPENDIX B
FAMILY RECREATION CENTER / FAMILY FUN CENTER
(Pacific Malibu Development Corp. / Warner Properties)
. 22.25 Acre Site
Family Recreation Center Amenities:
. 3 Regulotion (ASA & USSSA) Lighted, Fenced Softboll Fields (300 ft. foul lines, obove
ground dugouts, skinned DG infields)
. Scoreboards
. Common Concession Focility, Drinking Fountoins, Restrooms, Public Areos (wolkwoys,
gross and shode trees, picnic ond playground oreas)
. Bleochered Seoting
. 1 Regulation, Lighted, Fenced, Equipped Soccer Field
. 1 Regulotion, Equipped Soccer Field
. Shared, Lighted Parking Lot for 280 vehicles
Family Fun Center Amenities:
. 2 Lighted Miniature Golf Courses, around water
. 1 Giant Water Slide Area
. 1 Water Bumper Boats Facility
. 1 Go-Kort Rocewoy Facility
. 1 Botting Cage Facility
. 1 Kiddie Land Area
. 1 Covered/Enclosed Arcode/Food and Video/Computer Learning Center Facility
. Restroom ond Chonging Facilities
. Shared, Lighted Parking Lot for 280 vehicles
APPENDIX C
VETERAN'S HOME
(Veterans Administration)
. 14.25 Acre Site
. 400-bed facility
- 200-bed Residential Care Unit
120-bed Intermediate Nursing Core Unit
- 60-bed Skilled Nursing Care Unit
- Licensed Residential Core Unit (as oncillary function with no separate bed
ollotment)
APPENDIX D
WATER DEMINERALIZATION PLANT
(Sweetwater Authority)
. 5.74 Acre Site
. 5.0 Million Gallons Per Day (MGD) Demineralizotion Plont producing 4.0 MGD of
product woter by reverse osmosis and blending. Ultimate expansion to 10 MGD of
product is anticipoted.
. Focilities would occupy opproximately 3 ocres of site.
. Product to be pumped to existing Sweetwater Authority storage and distribution system
via a 12 or 1 6-inch pipeline.
.
APPENDIX E
RECEIVED
'94 lIAR 30 A 8 :08
CITY OF CiMA VLSTA
CITY CLER" ;, OF !"ICE
To,
The Mayor & Council Members, City of Chula Vista,
276 4th Ave.,' Chula Vista, CA 91910.
Dear Mayor & Council Members,
REF: Lower Sweetwater Valley Area.
We have formed a committee representing neighbors surrounding the
Lower Sweetwater Valley Area.
We would like to present our proposals regarding the above mentioned
area to the Mayor & City council to act upon.
Please put us on the agenda for the April 19th. 94, City Council
meeting and confirm.
Enclosed please find the proposals and petitions.
Sincerely Yours,
~~~
Mohinder (Mo) Goomar, M.D.,
Chairman, Lower Sweetwater Valley Open Space Committee,
5 Las Flores Drive, Chula Vista, CA 91910-1960.
Telephone: 427-4525
Wii'iTEN CO.\\N.UNtCAT1Oi~S
. . /n J/jy;1
To,
The Mayor and Council members, City of Chula Vista.
1. We, the residents surrounding Lower Sweetwater Valley area,
propose that the eXisting vacant land be designated as natural open
space. The petitions supporting this proposal are provided with this
letter.
2. We propose that the city council zone the unzoned area as
agricultural. You recall that this area was agricultural to start with
before it was annexed from the County of San Diego. We urge the
Council to correct this mistake made by the previous Council. (The
preceding zoning information was provided by Duane Bazzel, City
employee.)
3. We suggest that the Council ask the staff to perform studies
for the following possible assessment districts:
A. The one assessment district covering the 14 acres City
owned property if assumed by the neighborhood.
B. The second assessment district is for the entire 38 acres
of existing open space if assumed by the neghboring community.
4. Please listen to the voice of the community. It is loud and
clear. We also urge you to take fair financial responsibility for
these proposals.
5. We have formed a committee whose members will directly
interface with the Council to facilitate communications or
negotiations.
Submitted by,
~6Q~
Hohlnder (Ho) Goomar, HD,
Chairman, Lower Sweetwater Valley Open Space Committee.
5, Las Flores Drive, Chula Vista, CA 91910-1960.
Telephone: 427-4525
WE, THE FOLLOWING , WISH THE THE EXISTING VACANT ~OWER
SWEETWATER SPECIAL STUDY AREA TO REMAIN AS NATURAL OPEN SPACE.
NAME (BLOCK LETTERS)
ADDRESS
Jose:: 70leR t=-S "39 L ~5 FLO~~ JJR,
f(BSIl 7O,e<<~5 ;]1 /.115 pt.oteeS Olf:.
DhaJ,; p~,:7::h 60 /.46 F/Drt!$ /)r.
~" 1~.:JP'(f <: 'ciM- ~2- ~ F<v Ud )),.
r(VI.",-k ~k.d-rUj 0'9 4J f/(),o ~r
g'Juip ~H}J>oJU 15fj t.f1> FI6<.tr,f),<.
~ YlJ d9z16 / fe6 - 8 ifk 1182I<:J iI>>c.
Of /7/>"-",, R L;1') FL,)IJ.I=~ ~tt
LJIV"/~;- ILC .
/W(VL-I-VUi n.i- .. J'l-'f JL'LlSJ;t~jiE.s- DIZ~
Sy'~/I1~;J /95 $.PJ5 p.c::YC?AS D..e..
<j~~hwf' Iv fill! Uf IUtzUI PIl.
DW1A~ pA-tAC-l c) 11L-\ D <77-
ID~~ jLI3t1dtf~?II.f;.Sd.
~<9ff/l .fil€IM Ib~-~ '.]) <;7":
~u.uJ.t1 ~~ ~ - . 16 ~ i) JJ-
Mrrt1l~ p().e.fl-(O~ l~oj) 71
7$/Jdz lllf't~~
SIGNATURE
~
OdN lltitN
C.~
Be lie/!- t.. L ~t7S If
. ,:Lv i5~
~4...
WE. THE FOLLOWING . WISH THE THE EXISTING VACANT LOWER
SWEETWATER SPECIAL STUDY AREA TO REMAIN AS NATURAL OPEN SPACE.
~A4 t='~~
ba.J'\A.. t< .J{)hnS~1I
o.u- c..Ldu
~J;?f).lli 1lt(.5r~
~-6Jw_1
(\J . -I /I&..cA4dLJ/dL
/I r ,S I
~ ~i~ J.4/~flNI 42 -..J,~"TA WAy
~'C~p f. D~, :. It VIY;" ~
~ J~ 3.)..:V~ @;t-
D.e..~~ GI~ptJ/~ 1/ f)6IA.~ t.'f:
51) >'^ AI CO \I tiE 't:r 1')o.~.AN 0-
Rof&/A1l1 jov(1..A,),${ ~I v,~'I'04- ..-v"--(
~ \J <a tv.l ~ ov~.H 4.f lV' .." t ~ ...., n1
~ ~ '5'3 V\~~ a.uAY
~ L-UGfV'tJ ~5 l//sf4.- {}J~
RA'IIY\ D ,,/1> L u CEI<.O ~~ fll ,>(iq W A'l
6,A/f!'$ i'Wctf5ud-/ .s- /1Vntf~SC 1'1
4-~ ~~ ~'<1<"~
I' . r( ~#-,{'. REM ~ Cae/E ~IJ AYE- -
lAM! (BLOCK LETTERS)
ADDRESS
qC\J~ LU,-\
74- \/sv- WdLf
-{ u '-f ,::d".b.. {v-! ~
6;{ tf; 511t tJ IJ Y
1/ ~ J, 'sf.,q UA '-1
1',j'Uc.1.l ~~ .
, vJ-K ~'-
fi / 1.0.1-{ b Q...)
/fzb~
\ ~~OJ'
~V~
ttJ1--~
~~
-~~
~;;i!7:~
-~
~~
\.
4""
B{...; ~ F
WE. THE FOLLOWING . WISH THE THE EXISTING VACANT LOWER
SWEETWATER SPECIAL STUDY AREA TO REMAIN AS NATURAL OPEN SPACE.
NAME (BLOCK LETTERS) ADDRESS
~#.t<1/1~ ~/ (F-LJeA. f)~ "'7 ~ A.s ,./a 0 R G..J p~
Z~Tt.JIlD F/t;-PPlV,,(...)4 Y7 4"/ j ,Jt:/o,,,.r cPr.
'JtJL/o C. ffll3()~AlCf1 'f?f Uf~ F/P/le.p Afi-
r:tliec:CA R. ,l1-&ElJcA 4q La.", r:1ores Dr.
_UPE VAL-LA-DOLI D "q LAo FL()RE.-5 Dl2lv€,
Q,(;t.JrJlz., f1l!-to/~ Co? LIrl r VJj<:-f' PIL
S ~ '" r D " M ; f..../CL ~c;: ~ s F/ '0 ~ ~ Or
-
~.~~~C- 4'!13. L4~ F{tN"'s
2 ~ .. - L___'~~ M~~ <1 t c> LIJr; f t...c 9,1iS OIL
~,rRIP;t/A (l.()A)~/r;cJS tf~,(.AJ ,r-:'L..o;iZRL J),2
de!" q HO U E,/J6S/f} rJ ttf LtJ$ FLI k-S I>z- .
?e.no. 3hou~ Q$('QY\ :t4 LAS ~\o(""e.s b,
HYI~~ f:ca~~' ,0 W FlfJ7~ Par.
Jd) 1 c. (\J~,A 6~ "hJ.f' 7~/:J j).e
~ ~ '$ 6 f"v.C fl (JVer DI'~
~1r 'LIaJ F/~J ])V'.,
~ e' ~\\l)'ltl
1dLJ./ J ~
1dIc/a J-.f/oaJq /'c/
t/.-- r fJ,,).p-!;rJL
t. ~{L IjodgeL
/q !As rL'~ Dtt:..
/9 ks F/or~LJr:
/? ~~~ ~
/& oUr flC145 'J:yt,J.L
SIGNATURE
I/:t, - ~c../
~~ --
;Offeu.., (.... ec.-
~~~
~~
J1;t \
An~~~~~
/!X~-
~J~
/Jh!,ttL
~ ~
WE, THE FOLLOWING.. WISH THE THE EXISTING VACANT LOWER
SWEETWATER SPECIAL STUDY AREA TO REMAIN AS NATURAL OPEN SPACE.
Me G c.-e:oMI'\R
HCf\Ace:. 6\--AYc.z.
~^'~ Pc~Sf\PA\\
];AiJ: ;/tt/;~~J
{2eNtE"~ (' {[- f
A NN IE MAk:lLAo
"s c~ H. J HII}. I L He
~FAG. L ?~\?C ""-""",^1;v, 3 lllS
., 1,J r..Jut.vw
1'lh~/Ci !-\Q,QE' " "
Rn r f\[ V(,)\\J D:J :;) {L\~ r Ie.; <'5 I:J '<"'"
L 1-',R.'CE4Li'\Ju '3 lc\5 -F/u1-R5 \J\<...
Y2Ly-Sh"p~r> 0/'-- :2~--z.~-$--F/o~~ {;v.
C.Hf\~ ~\~..:J 11.0 LA~ ~\..clL'i~ ~.
-+2.'1"PCI', Sl'l'.~be:c i.. ~ L.4J f/u'..s --cx-
.:::1"""" 1-.'"'1'>. 5..:''''s,,$'-?c.''' .;z L-rl~. FL."UC."'- s J>..z..
RAME (BLOCK LETTERS)
~tE vA Lf1V"r..
~ ~c...c.A. \'A:.~~""~
l ,~" LA' (Tf: T...J-I ... '\'':-.J;)~
"'~TIIRo FI~,)S,IJOII
~,(,;. ea\<o':\\o
f:'lA l<- ~r r.l~
....
Jo. -1ICIA..
rl7p.~/e!
ADDRESS
S LI'IS FL~ f:$ OR I liE:
'??7 l..A.S~.-S 'Df2.tVC
-:tv 46 F L.Q~> J>Q...
;'0 "
'.
"
31 Lt:~~ r-L()!:.f ~ -:h..' (v;;
4 LA 5 F J..()!2cS
,,4Jj r-t'C'LF,>
PI<..
./JR.
((
II
37 Lf1~ f/tJJ:-es' f)-<<.
4'V L~ C~ 1 0.,
4~;' . ..
y7 ..( /f,f ,.1. D....... /:> r
II lY.'S> F\{)v~ ~.
""' L-~~ f/:)ft.1 D~
'd--CJ
R?
J~J
J.. -" 1
AvQ..
A 1/((,
SIGNATURE
N.o"
.\ C
.~
-,
WE. THE FOLLOWING . WISH THE THE EXISTING VACANT LOWER
SWEETWATER SPECIAL STUDY AREA TO REMAIN AS NATURAL OPEN SPACE.
NAME (BLOCK LETTERS)
:= I a:U'\ e.. e lI~..i n~ t1
~l\:;:-AEL- I~D 'i E"Q.O
1ft ref) LV t...L oy 0
NTII/lllf E Lt.6'f'O
~7I1uC6?r'r_
~hn ? A-(C.j~
N rtNCcj r:p~
E~~eh~-
L,~0dov ~
7?tft.~. I!.Ef~L
Wi) {~/t'l\f^
%oJI.61'\ ~c t1ez
~GQc. ~ A. ~C)4.b~
~ R.r-e.-v
~\1A~ lev
ADDRESS
SI'iNATURE p-
bb" Nllno+ Ave.- - e.v G&.a ~~
'0 ~_ ,.!)" d"7--\W;: - ~ v CbJoJ_J-.J:)-~U\~
,.; CFl SSr::Ufl11'J PL/}CE C!. V II
to7" "co v { t: :t
/z C~S'5'GtM,I)H ct C1/ ~q.
(;;2.4 Hill-+o? Ix. C.v. -- ~A ~
(J-lf I-H rl-+of ~(. C.If. ~~
4 \' ~ f~... tlr- ~J ()
Ll~ mlrcl-~ tv. ~
r7~.''VP4 ;{-C/~ L' U Uv/ --
e,?-} lj5 Flore5 IY ICrJ ~rf~
7S ("J;)'I~, C,V. ~
l~ 1) <:.'\ c-v. ~
~~
~cE:-
tt'f k l(\,() T
2, ~ LAt f\orn
UJ
(>y;
(}J.
w",
.. ../~,3C
/1"" C) 2..3
.l2ll_~T>u<
~J1: 'I
....~~
_ ~~ f..<.o
-~
~~,1>, 8/
..Fr') ,'fC1S, AI
(,z-...V
</
WE, THE FOLLOWING , WISH THE THE EXISTING VACANT LOWER
SWEETWATER SPECIAL STUDY AREA TO REMAIN AS NATURAL OPEN SPACE.
Ii Lt1S. FL.c.~ES O,'<'IIE '""net V'c'hr,'h'lfi'r'&..
)./ LAS ru~~S /Jf {!. \.1 (I< 'Wilt' f't.fJ ~IJ
:"I%' _.I a 7' iI 1
:X I i.eLS ,-u>tt6S ""- C1/ t:-H ,/"j/() , . ,,-l~ H1.<:... (,;".p......f.i,c.
S LP\5 f'l.C~5 J>~ ~ \I CA qtq/t 7'-" ..L4 G~~
4~" f'/~~q:'-V ~~(I~ioJ
~LA5 F' 1012..(;;.5- pK.. C'. tJ.'l,q, '11,' ~~{/ML
.::>L-1't:5 f'o~E.5 DR. (J.[).'t(9'~ . ~~
,:J ).4':; F/ore.s T>r. (!V'9I'iU) a D - ~/ I -
o..y~"~ V..L-(if(..~-<f:.~<
4 Lft{ fCuf\?J p~ ev qlfl() rtc. 1I')41ZLl<9o
3'1 L.J.s f( o~~ "bn... et,,A,, 11~.. (:L ~
-1 O.(6S nORl~)E. c..hlJla.~J~~() v (}'. .
'I ~ /-o/1S ;:-~~~$ (>./Z., CIJl'~'1 D ~~
L.}4 LA~ F}oR-~ 's>:'s~~)}~ o~~
;j.. 9 LAS 'FLlJ12-t5.5 J>e- C. v
Qo~4~ &.Q.cJ. t IS. &~
/!L...,/~ "''''" .a,4.;!Z.,u. $l/l. .1;~" '/4-0. ~.
f~/CA-CIt'~ L.L~c 3) '.Ill F 1.0"/ /k. ~/91" ~. .... .. ,,(!A-
/JrB/G;.fJ1L I!tvOll~7Tf . '1-'3 WJS1 ~[lJPcf'lS>I1VE. "if/a O~~"^-
L(JI/~~rS' ,ft..MIj20 L- 1t3 tA~ FLonI' DP., Q/'114 . . Mt-t
I.-P\l~l-IA SMITH 4~ /..A~ Fj,.-OIZ&S 'PR. q,qrO
V~~\.~ ../MM€.OL- I! C\ \I \..." \ . It
~/fL.. 77t1~-<:.;c> ~9 LA5 Rt:;ItE$ P4. 9/'7'/0
NAME (BLOCK LETTERS)
No .'\N:\&c. 1"1 r1RIl.J'tt
.....
"![-'fILe )lit>A L
f (tl br;V~tft.NI)r., Gi.t641cuCt>-
SKltlLt.fI Qti"CMM
1M;!\ (?Af f.J:;. j)).'I.)PO
[(1/ fl1EL. A r../ZE.. ~6 JJ D
:JP~h tU t/e,-cJu. c-c"j
VL 6'vf~
~\'t"'0fP
Jv1 tK; ~~ DS
d t1"",~S ;loP-IV
~JD IJy K ~b I- f-1
,
ADDRESS
SIGNATURE
June 28, 1994
Subject:
Chainnan Tom Martin and Members of the Planning Commission
Ken Lee, Assistant Planning Director ~
Summary of Planning Commission Activities for FY 1993-94
To:
From:
Enclosed is a draft of a Summary of Activities for FY 1993-94 as required by City Council.
You may recall the City Council has requested a yearly one-page summary from all of the
boards and commissions throughout the City to be completed at the end of the fiscal year and
forwarded to the City Council.
Please feel free to revise, add to, or delete the contents of this draft, which was prepared by
staff for your review and edification. You are asked to adopt a summary of activities and
recommendations to be signed by the Chainnan of the Commission and forwarded on to the City
Council. I would remind the Commission over the past two years, as you forwarded on your
Summary of Activities page, requests for compensation of Planning Commissioners has been
included. In making that request, the Planning Commission cited the various planning
commissions throughout the County where compensation is provided. While such a request is
not included in this draft, we would be happy to add such a request along with any other request
under Comments and Recommendations.
KL/nr
(summary.mem)
SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES
FY 1993194
NAME OF BOARD, COMMISSION, OR COMMITIEE (B/C/C) - PLANNING COMMISSION
Council Chambers
MEETING TIMEIPLACE 2nd/4th Wed. - 7:00 p.m. NUMBER OF MEMBERS...:L
3rd Wed. Workshop - 5:30 p.m., CR 213
GENERAL PURPOSE OF TIlE B/C/C:
Serves as the official planning agency of Chula Vista and evaluates major land use proposals in terms of their
impact on the City. It conducts public hearings on significant planning, zoning and land subdivision matters,
and recommends action and policy to the City Council. The General Plan and specific plans are prepared
under the guidance of the Planning Commission.
HIGHLIGHTS OF ACTIVITIES DURING TIlE PAST YEAR:
With the completion of the Planning Commission's work on the Otay Ranch General Development Plan, the
Commission concentrated its work efforts on the City's streamlining program. Planning Commission
representatives were assigned to the newly formed Design Review Manual Subcommittee as well as the
Subcommittee for the Conditional Use Permit Land Use Review. The purpose of these committees is to help
draft new guidelines, making the City's system more efficient and more user friendly. In addition, the Planning
Commission placed a heavy emphasis on being more educated in the planning process by holding various
workshops, which exposed the Commission to planning activities, such as the Planning and Engineering
processing of tentative and final maps, detailed workshop on the processing of environmental impact analysis
as well as Initial Study processing, a detailed planning activity work program involving the Planning
Department'sAdvance Planning Division, and an update on the State's water program via a speaker from the
Delta Bay Area who gave the Commission an overview of the State's water delivery system. In addition, two
Planning Commissioners were fortunate enough to be able to attend the American Planning Association
National Conference in San Francisco, which focused on a variety of planning programs, such as housing
affordability programs, regional planning, and planning for high-technology industry.
COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
DA1E:
SIGNED:
Chairman
M E M 0 RAN 0 U M
........
to:
from:
re:
date:
Members of the Planning Commission
Joe Monaco, Environmental Projects Manger cI^'"
Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) - Channels ide Shopping Center
June 29, 1994
Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Draft EIR for the Channelside Shopping Center,
a 22-acre retail shopping center proposed for the site located in the vicinity of
Broadway, C Street and Fifth Avenue. This copy is provided for your review.
A Planning Commission pubic hearing is scheduled for August 10, 1994 for your
consideration of the adequacy of the document and to accept public testimony and
comments on the Draft EIR.
JM/ak
Attachment
c: \monaco \memos:\PCEIR.mem