Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1996/02/21 MINUTES Chula Vista Planning Commission Hearing Chula Vista, CaJifomia 7:03 p.m. Wednesdav. November 8,1995 Council Chambers Public Services Building CALL MEETING TO ORDER / ROLL CALL: The meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Chair T uchscher. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Tuchscher, Commissioners Tarantino, Salas and Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioners Davis, Ray and Willett (excused) MSU (Thomas/Salas) to excuse Commissioners Davis, Ray and Willett. Approved 4-0. STAFF PRESENT: Special Planning Projects Manager Jerry Jamriska, Assistant Planning Director Ken Lee, Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid, Assistant City Attorney Anne Moore, Senior Planner Rick Rosaler, Senior Civil Engineer Bill Ullrich, Planner Beverly Luttrell and Planner Julia Matthews OTHERS PRESENT: Kim Kilkenny, Kent Aden and Ranie Hunter of The Baldwin Company, John Bridges of CottonlBelandlAssociates, Dan Marum ofBRW and Tina Thomas of Remy & Thomas APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meeting of September 20, 1995 MSU (Thomas/Salas) to approve the minutes of Sept em be.' 20,1995 as submitted. Approved 4- 0-3 with Davis, Ray and Willett absent. ORAL COMMUNICATION: None. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: EIR-95-0 I: consideration of comments on the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) One and Annexation Draft Second-Tier Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Mr. Jerry Jamriska indicated that on September 25, 1995, the SPA One Draft EIR was filed with the State Clearing House opening the 45-day public review period. Staff was informed this morning that, while the 45-day public review period ends tonight, the State Clearing House did not begin their distribution of the Environmental Impact Report until two days later. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission take oral testimony and close the public comment period tonight but permit written comments to be submitted until Friday, November 10, at 5:00 p.m. Staff will then prepare the appropriate responses to comments to be distributed to the Planning Commission on November 29, 1995. At that time, staff would like the Planning Planning Commission Hearmg Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 2 Commission to close the public hearing on the SPA One Plan and take appropriate action on the Draft EIR and the SPA One Plan. Mr. Jamriska indicated that on November IS, 1995, staff will be asking the Planning Commission to open up the public hearing on SPA One consideration. At that time, staff will be presenting the SPA One Plan, the Planned Community District Regulations, the Overall Design Plan, the Village Design Plan, the Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan, the Regional Facilities Report, the Phase 2 Resource Management Plan, the Non-renewable Energy Conservation Plan, the Ranch-wide Affordable Housing Plan, the SPA One Affordable Housing Plan and the Geotechnical Report. These reports are all required as part of the General Development Plan that was adopted in October 1993. Mr. Jamriska further indicated that on November 17, 1995, staff will be. presenting the Public Facilities Finance Plan and the Otay Ranch SPA One Plan Conditions of Approval to the Planning Commission. Chair Tuchscher and Commissioners Salas and Thomas expressed concern regarding the amount of additional material before them. There was also confusion as to what their duties were for the evening. A five minute break was requested so the Planning Commission could confer on how to proceed. BREAK: 7:30-7:35 p.m. Chair Tuchscher indicated the Planning Commission would move forward with staff's presentation, open the public hearing on the Environmental Impact Report, continue the public hearing until the meeting of November 15, 1995 at which time they would anticipate closing the public hearing on that item. Mr. John Bridges (CottonlBelandlAssociates), EIR consultant for the project, gave an overview of the Otay Ranch SPA One and Annexation Second-Tier Draft ErR, the conclusions of the document and some of the points to consider as the Planning Commission entertains oral testimony. The Draft EIR evaluates the environmental impacts of the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area 1 of the SPA One development, the amendments of the Otay Ranch General Development Plan and the annexation of Planning Areas I and 3 within the Chula Vista Sphere of Influence and the Mary Patrick Estate Ranch House. The Draft EIR analysis the SPA One Plan as it existed on July 22, 1994. Tiering is recommended by CEQA for complex projects like the Otay Ranch. The first tier involved the entire Otay Ranch Project; the second tier deals with a specific level or component of the project that builds off that first-tier EIR. This eliminates repetitive discussions of some of the same issues and allows the first tier documents to be incorporated by reference. There were nine alternatives analyzed. Six alternatives were identified for the SPA Plan, and three for annexation. Alternative A, B I, B2 and C look at reduced grading and landform impacts. Alternative C proposed two modifications in the alignment of Paseo Ranchero that would affect and improve the biological impacts of the project by preserving Coastal Sage Scrub, some Gnatcatchers, Cactus Wrens and other sensitive species. The existing General Development Plan was looked at as an alternative. Planning Commission Heanng Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 3 Annexation Alternatives A, B and C proposed variations of reducing the amount of area that would be annexed. There are three categories of impacts associated with the project: I) significant and unmitigable impacts [land use planning and zoning, landform alteration, aIr quality, noise and transportation], 2) significant but mitigable and 3) less than significant: CEQA indicates that where you have significant and unmitigable impacts, you must identifY these in the Findings of Fact and the Council must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations if the project is to be approved. Cumulative impacts are those impacts that are associated with development of the project and other development that is expected to occur, generally, in the South Bay area during the same time that this project is developing. Chair Tuchscher asked for questions or comments for staff of the Commission. Commissioner Tarantino asked about the status of the appeal by Daniel Tarr on the EIR. Ms. Tina Thomas (Remy & Thomas), legal counsel for the project, indicated that a Notice of Appeal was filed with the Appellate Court, and the Appellate Court has stayed the appeal pending resolution of the bankruptcy issues. Seeing no additional questions of staff, Chair Tuchscher opened the public hearing. Mr. Gregorv T. Smith, P.O. Box 7727, Rancho Santa Fe. CA 92067 (SNMB) stated that since the hearing was being continued until November 15, 1995, he did not have any comments. Mr. Jack Monger. 722 'F' Avenue, Coronado, CA 92118 (representing the Barnabas Foundation) stated that his client feels they have been unreasonably and unfairly singled out to have their property designated as open space primarily to provide a view corridor for Telegraph Canyon Road. The impact on the value of that property is truly significant. We would like to voice our opposition to that action. Chair Tuchscher suggested that Mr. Monger discuss the proposed annexation at the November 15,1995 hearing. Mr. Bruce Sloan, 900 Lane Avenue, Suite 100, Chula Vista. CA (EastLake Development Companv) wanted to make sure EastLake's comment letters had been received. He stated that he would be available at the next hearing to answer questions if any were directed to EastLake. Mr. Mike Coleman (Otav Water District) wanted to let the Commission know that OWD was still reviewing the documents and would respond back quickly. Ms. Nancv Bragado, 1255 Imperial Avenue. Suite 1000, San Diego, CA 92101 (Metropolitan Transit Development Board stated that MTDB appreciated the emphasis given toward transit and the receptiveness to their comments throughout the process. Every aspect of the plan, including the land use mix, densities, street layout and site design standards have been designed to support transit users, pedestrians and bicyclists. The EIR does not give any traffic credit to the project based on its efforts to promote alternative modes of transportation, and it Planning Commission He<l1 mg Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 4 merits some consideration at this stage in the process. The EIR does not address public transportation in the Public Services and Utilities section. Neither does the SPA One Plan Public Facilities Plan. Seeing no further speakers, Chair T uchscher stated that the public hearing would remain open. He then asked for comments from the Commissioners and staff presentations. Mr. Dan Marum (BRW, Inc.), traffic consultant for the project, stated that the traffic analysis that was performed for the GDP for the entire project did address the issue of the potential benefits that could be realized from the design of the villages and their ability to reduce the reliance on the automobile for some of the trips generated by the residential development in the project: The transit component's ability to reduce travel demand and traffic activity were viewed as two distinct issues in both the GDP and SPA One traffic analysis. The component that BRW did not test was the transit corridor impact on reducing travel activity and travel demand. The work BRW did addressed the non-work trip. SPA One will not have the light rail or transit corridor component. In the analysis that BRW has conducted to date, we do not feel that you have the mass of all the villages together to contribute to a true traffic benefit in testing the village component or the transit component yet: BRW does envision that as more villages come on-line and the transit component becomes more real and there is commitment of funding and there is a realistic time of delivery of that transit service and you have the mass of multiple villages contributed to a reduction in local traffic activity, that you would be able to start to see the benefit on the circulation system that is going to be built in eastern Chula Vista. In BRW's opinion, there was not going to be a lot of benefit realized from just these first two villages which are a relatively small percentage of the whole urban acreage, the 10,000-acre parcel. Commissioner Salas voiced concern about the unknown in terms of the phasing and development and time line of the project: Mr. Marum indicated that there are traffic monitoring programs that the City does annually. The City is going to hit capacity problems as growth continues to occur in eastern Chula Vista. The Otay Ranch has circulation systems that are going to solve that. In terms of the phasing, BRW believes it is critical that the City recreate the Transportation Phasing Plan process as this project and other projects are approved because some of the thresholds are starting to get closer to their maximum on the existing facilities. Chair Tuchscher asked if set-aside traffic credits had been taken into account Mr. Marum believed that the only thing that was not intended to be included was the set-aside for the Kaiser Hospital which was conditioned on SR-125. All the traffic work that has been done for year 2010, which is the buildout horizon for SPA One, assumed that SR-125 would not be in place. Chair Tuchscher asked that Mr. Marum check on that as his recollection was that there were trips set aside from EastLake' s next phase of their business center. The concern being, if there are trips there from approved SPA areas, we don't give them to a new applicant by virtue of Planning Commission He<l1mg Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 5 this approval as opposed to just releasing those credits. Chair Tuchscher also stated that there are a number of road segments that are currently operating at Level of Service E and F that are within the County of San Diego, and we seem to be stymied as to how to get the County to rectifY those situations. If and how do we intend to solve those challenges? Mr. Marum indicated that the challenge is certainly before us to work with the County. We are sensitive to some of the difficulties that the County has had in even implementing their community plan upgrades to be in conformance with their community plan due to some of the sensitivity of some of the facilities within the Bonita and Sweetwater Valley area Also, BRW ran the model without SPA One and without any other Otay Ranch activity anticipated being on-line by year 2010. BRW found that many of these same facilities were at a level of servIce that is unacceptable. Some of the facilities are at that level today. BRW then tested with the project and found that daily volumes are even higher because of more traffic activity. Mr. Bill Ullrich added that the City has included in their Transportation Development Impact Fee (Trans DIF) Program some streets in the County that the City is collecting fees from City projects to fund in the future. That amounts to around $2.9 million worth of improvements, and the City feels that is its contribution toward the City projects in the Bonita area. The City is paying its fair share toward County road impacts. Chair Tuchscher asked how long the $2.9 million has been there? When did that start and when did it reach that number? Mr. Ullrich indicated that the City does not have a definite commitment to put those facilities in. The CIP Program dictates which projects get done. Chair Tuchscher was concerned that there are funds available to make some improvements, especially in the Bonita area, and yet the City has no control over those actually going in. The problem is that the improvements need to be put in and even if the City has Trans DIF funds to do it, the City has a County that does not have the political will to make it happen. Mr. Ullrich indicated that the City also has some funds in the SR-125 fee program that are for County facilities as well, if SR-125 is constructed. Commissioner Salas inquired if traffic flow assumed that the extension of Orange Avenue is built and completed? Mr. Marum stated that the extension of Orange Avenue is a key component of the future circulation system to serve this project. At what point in time Orange A venue is warranted for implementation is dependent on the amount of cumulative traffic activity that is a result of development over the next 3 - 5 years in eastern Chula Vista along with the development on this project. Recreating the Transportation Phasing Plan would track that development exactly where it is occurring on an annual basis to give you better input on when Orange A venue and Palomar Street would be required to be extended and whether improvements to the interchange to 1-805 would be necessary along with the extensions of those facilities to the east. Planning Commission Hearmg Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 6 Commissioner Salas was concerned about the housing to be developed on the south side of Telegraph Canyon Road all the way to EastLake and not having Orange Avenue extended She could see very serious traffic problems on Otay Lakes Road and Telegraph Canyon Road. Mr. Marum stated that, with Telegraph Canyon Road put in place as a 6-line facility and improvements at the interchange at 1-805 prior to year 2000, there would be acceptable capacity in the system to accommodate the Otay Ranch first increment of growth over the next four years. However, for the next increment of growth to occur between 2000 and 2005, either Palomar Avenue extension and/or Orange Avenue extension would need to be in place. Commissioner Tarantino wanted to make sure that, if at any time the threshold standard was violated, construction would stop until the improvements that were necessary would be in place. Mr. Marum responded in the affirmative. Chair Tuchscher inquired about specific major infrastructure improvements tagged to either a phase of build out or a specific number of permits. Mr. Marum indicated that that information could be found in the Public Facilities Financing Plan. Commissioner Salas had questions regarding the letter that was written by LAFCO. What does the letter mean in terms of annexation to the City of Chula Vista? Does it mean that, if they do not accept this ErR, the annexation does not go through? Mr. Jamriska indicated that LAFCO is the lead agency. If they do not accept the Environmental Impact Report, the annexation will not proceed. Staff does not see a problem with responding to their questions, and we can support our position with SANDAG's Population Series 8 Projections. Chair Tuchscher had several concerns if only the SPA One area was annexed first: parks, road segments, infrastructure, police, fire, etc. Mr. Jamriska stated that staff is being very emphatic about presenting its posItIon before LAFCO Committees as well as the Commission that it is important that the entire western parcel be annexed at this time. From an environmental stand point, staff will determine what the potential impacts would be if it was annexed on a phased bases. Staff will prepare that response for your consideration. . Commissioner Salas asked if the Otay Water District being the water supplier had been resolved. Planning Commission Heanng Minutes November 8, 1995 Page 7 Mr. Jamriska answered in the affirmative. The Otay Water District is the preferred provider Negotiations are going on between the City Manager and the Otay Water District in terms of clarifYing a whole range of issues relating to providing water, the master planning of water facilities and their capital improvement program of providing emergency storage. Seeing no additional comments or questions, Chair Tuchscher asked for a motion to continue discussions at their November 15, 1995 hearing. MSU (Thomas/Salas) to continue discussions regarding the Draft EIR-95-01 in consideration of comments on Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Al'ea One and Annexation Draft Second-Tier Environmental Impact Report to Wednesday, Novembel' 15, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Appl'Oved 4-0-3 with Davis, Ray and Willett absent. Ms. Moore indicated that a motion was needed to continue the items that were noticed for the November 8, 1995 meeting. Chair Tuchscher asked for a motion to continue the public hearing to November 15, 1995. MSU (Salasffhomas) to continue the Otay Ranch SPA One Plan, Planned Community Disttict Regulations, Overall Design Plan, Village Design Plan, Pa"'<s, ReCl'eation, Open Space and Tl'ails Plan, Regional Facilities Report, Phase 2 Resource Management Plan, Non-Renewable Energy Consel'Vation Plan, Ranch-wide Affordable Housing Plan, SPA One Affordable Housing Plan, Geotechnical Report, Public/Quasi-Public Zone, Prezonings and the Genel'al Development Plan Amendments to the meeting of Novembel' 15, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Approved 4-0-3 with Davis, Ray and Willett absent. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: 2. Update of Council Items: Mr. Ken Lee reported that City Council took action last night to approve the additional use permit of the amphitheater at the Otay Valley Road area.. Council added several conditions, but Mr. Lee had not had a change to review them Kolbey's Marketplace was approved with a 5-year CUP. ADJOURNED at 8:52 p.m. to a Special Otay Ranch SPA One Hearing on Wednesday, November 15, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Preparedby ~/~~~ L da Bond, Secretary Otay Ranch Project llb:\EIR:\SPA:\PC11895M.doc MINUTES Chula Vista Planning Commission Hearing Chula Vista, Califol'l1ia 7:05 p.m. Wednesdav, November 15,1995 Council Chambers Public Services Building CALL MEETING TO ORDER / ROLL CALL: The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Chair Tuchscher. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Tuchscher, Commissioners Tarantino, Salas, Willett, Ray and Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Davis (excused) MSU (Thomas/Ray) to excuse Commissionel' Davis. ApPl'Oved 6-0. STAFF PRESENT: Special Planning Projects Manager Jerry Jamriska, Assistant Planning Director Ken Lee, Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid, Assistant City Attorney Anne Moore, Senior Planner Rick Rosaler, Senior Civil Engineer Bill Ullrich, Planner Beverly Luttrell and Planner Julia Matthews OTHERS PRESENT: Kim Kilkenny, Kent Aden and Ranie Hunter of The Baldwin Company, John Bridges of CottonlBeland/ Associates and Tina Thomas of Remy & Thomas ORAL COMMUNICATION: None. Chair Tuchscher asked staff to update the schedule. Mr. Jerry J amriska indicated that, according to staff's preliminary review of the Environmental Impact Report comment letters, several areas require additional research or need elaboration or clarification. Therefore, staff will be recommending that the EIR hearing scheduled for tonight be open for additional public input and testimony. Following the public testimony portion of the Environmental Impact Report, all the hearings relating to the ErR, the SPA, the zoning ordinance, amendments and prezones be continued to a specific time, date and place that will be reflected in a new public notice. That would permit staff to recirculate those portions of the Environmental Impact Report for public input and comment. Staff will be requesting that the Planning Commission have an additional workshop in January to bring the Planning Commission up to date on the current scheduling as well as status of the reports that have been out for public review. Staff will also be requesting that the Planning Commission schedule several back to back public hearings in February to consider the recirculated Environmental Impact Report, the Specific Plan and other documents that have already been advertised for public review. When you conclude your deliberations and take action on the EIR and the SPA, staff will then schedule tentative map hearings. PC Minutes - 2- November 15, 1995 Mr. Ken Lee handed out the revised calendar as Chair Tuchscher wanted to review it for purposes of clarifYing what will be before the Commission that evening and make sure the public is aware of what items will be continued and when they will be continued to. MSU (Ray/WilIett) to accept the revised calendar of meetings which cancels the F,'iday, November 17, special meeting on the Otay Ranch. Approved 6-0-1 with Davis absent. Mr. Lee also informed the Commission that the City Council workshop set for Saturday had been canceled. 1. PUBLIC HEARING EIR-95-01: Consideration of comments on the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) One and Annexation Draft Second-tier Environmental Impact Report (EIR ) Mr. J amriska stated that the public review period for the Environmental Impact Report was being continued from the November 8, 1995 hearing. Staff had no further presentation on the issues and recommended that public testimony continue. Mr. Kim Kilkennv (The Baldwin Companv): We are pleased that, after working on the SPA Plan for the last two years, hearings have started. I would be remiss if I didn't say that we are somewhat disappointed that the start is one that is going to be modestly delayed because the schedule is of the utmost concern to us. But I recognize fully the reasons for the delay are justified and warranted. I am somewhat pleased that we can take advantage of the delay to provide the public and your Commission a greater opportunity to understand the wide variety and multitude of documents and issues that are in front of you. It has been an exciting opportunity for us to try to interpret the adopted General Plan and to bring life to it through the Specific Plan and, subsequently, a tentative map. We have about six issue areas where we have some disagreement. I'm pleased that your staff and our office have been able to work together and come up with a plan that we are at least 99% in concert on and hopeful that your Commission is equally satisfied with it I think the workshop forum regarding the Public Facilities and Financing Plan that has been suggested for after the first of the year will provide an opportunity so that your Commission and the public can be comfortable with the phasing of the first SPA on Otay Ranch and be assured that Chula Vista will continue to do what it has done in all its eastern territory communities to make sure that facilities are paid for in an equitable and fair way and that they are provided in a timely manner and all your growth management threshold requirements are met Having no more speaker slips and seeing no one else wishing to address the Commission relating to the matter, Chair Tuchscher made a suggestion to continue the public hearing on the EIR for Otay Ranch EIR-95-01 until a date as of yet unspecified. MSU (Thomas/Salas) to continue the public hearing on the EIR for Otay Ranch EIR-95- 01 to be noticed in the futUI'e. Approved 6-0-1 with Davis absent. MSU (Salas/Ray) to continue the noticed hearings for Items 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 on the agenda to a time to be noticed in the futu.'e. Approved 6-0-1 with Davis absent. PC Minutes - 3 - November 15,1995 Chair Tuchscher indicated that the Planning Commission would be prepared to move the project forward through the process one way or the other as soon as the EIR is recirculated and the applicant and staff are prepared to bring it to them. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Mr. Lee briefly went over the agenda for the December 13, 1995 meeting which will include a Conditional Use Permit hearing from Pac Bell, a request for a UNOCAL on Bonita Road and two ordinance amendments. One is on abandoned vehicles and the other is the residential care ordinance which will be back before you. We have an emergency ordinance adopted by the Council sometime back, and we now are moving into the permanent ordinance consideration. SANDAG is sponsoring a free workshop in the Coronado Library this Friday at 2:00 p.m. looking at livable community projects. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Commissioner Thomas stated he feels he cannot serve both the GMOC Board and Planning Commission at the same time. He is going to give his regrets to the GMOC and take his responsibilities seriously on the Planning Commission. Commissioner Ray volunteered to serve as the Planning Commission representative on the GMOC Board. MSC (Thomas/Salas) to appoint Commissioner Ray to the GMOC Board. ApPl'Oved 5-0-2 with Davis absent and Ray abstaining. ADJOURNMENT at 7:36 p.m. to a special meeting on Wednesday, November 29, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Prepared by: ~____~ a~~ Lin a Bond, Secretary Otay Ranch Project IIb:\SPA:\l 1 I 595M.doc