HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 1981-10469
Revised 6/3/81
RESOLUTION NO. 10469
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING THE SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN FOR
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE 650 ACRE BONITA LONG CANYON
ESTATES
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does herely
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, Environmental Impact Report 79-2 has heretofore
been certified by the City Council and the City Council will
hereafter consider Candidate CEQA Findings for said area, and
WHEREAS, a proposed development plan for the 650 acre
Bonita Long Canyon Estates area located on the east side of Otay
Lakes Road and south of the Bonita Haciendas Subdivision was filed
with the Planning Department, and
WHEREAS, said proposed Sectional Planning Area contains
follcwing uses:
A 15 acre K-6 site (approximately 7~ acres usable,
excluding SDG&E easement)
An 11 acre neighborhood park site (approximately 4+ acres
usable)
A 4 acre multiple family site (approximately 2 acres
usable)
809 single family lots, ranging in size from 6,000 sq. ft
to OVer 3 acres.
Approximately 266 acres of dedicated open space, most of
which is to remain in its natural state
WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Planning
Commission on April 22, 1981 to consider the Bonita Long Canyon
Estates Sectional Planning Area and the Commission recanmended
'that the City Council approve said Sectional Planning Area Plan
:subject to the conditions set forth in Planning Commission
Resolution No. PCM-8l-l3.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
,the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Sectional Planning
rea Plan for the Bonita Long Canyon Estates area in accordance
ith Planning Commission Resolution No. PCM-8l-l3 with the
'ollcwing exceptions and modifications:
1. Revise condition 9.a to allcw 1,000 sq. ft. of the
required 8,000 sq. ft. pads to be in slope up to 20%
in grade.
2. Condition 11 shall be predicated on Council's action
to direct a letter from the Mayor to the Board of
Supervisors asking for authorization of the street
connection and modification of the approved tentative
subdivision map in the County.
-1-
3. The developer shall participate toward improvements
within the Long Canyon drainage basin as described in
the mitigation measures identified in EIR-79-2 for
this project. Plans for desilting basins and
retention basins wi thin the Long Canyon basin shall
be submitted for review by the City Engineer and
shall be subject to Council approval prior to the
approval of the final map for each phase.
4. Modify condition 23.a in Resolution No. PCM-81-13 to
read:
"The developer shall be responsible for the construc-
tion of improvements in Corral Canyon Road to collec-
tion street standards wi thin the Sectional Planning
Area. The developer may be responsible for improve-
ments in Rutgers, south of H Street, extending to the
existing improvements (ref. Chula Vista Drawing
70-760 and 73-86D) as determined by the City Engineer
with the filing of a tentative map for Phase III.
Said improvements shall include the necessary
acquisition of the Corral Canyon/East H Street
intersection as determined by the City Engineer. The
improvements shall be constructed in conjunction with
the development of Phase III of the Section Planning
Area. The connection of Rutgers Avenue south of H
Street will not be required if H Street is
constructed between I-80S and Otay Lakes Road prior
to construction of Phase I I 1. "
,Presented by
Approved as to form by
~
of~~eorge D.' Lindberg,
,;;;...
.~
City:' Attorney
ADOPTED AND APPROVED
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this
by the follcwing vote,
by the CITY
26th day of
to-wi t:
COUNCIL of the CITY OF
May
Councilmen
Hyde, Cox, Scott, Gillow
Councilmen
McCandliss
ABSENT: Councilmen None
fA) &J2. ..-r 1M
Mayor of the City of Chula Vista
S TE OF CALIFORNIA)
:COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) ss.
'CITY OF CHULA VISTA)
I, , City Clerk of the
of Chula Vista, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above
full, true and correct copy of Resolution No.10469 ,and
the same has not been amended or repealed. DATED
L:i l:.Y Cl.erK
/oL{bCf
-2-
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-Bl-13
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL THE APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE
BONITA LONG CANYON SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA OF EL RANCHO DEL REY
WHEREAS, a development plan for the 650 acre Bonita Long Canyon area Of
El Rancho del Rey was filed with the Planning Department by the Bonita Long
Canyon Estates, and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission set the time and place for a public
hearing to consider said development plan and notice of said hearing, with its
purpose, was given by the publication in a newspaper of general circulation in
the city at least ten days prior to the date of said hearing, and
WHEREAS, a hearing was held at said time and place, namely 7:00 p.m.,
April 22, 1981, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed, and
WHEREAS, on April 22, 1981 the Planning Commission recertified the environ-
mental impact report, EIR-79-2, and adopted Candidate CEQA findings relating to
environmental impacts of the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that the Sectional
Planning Area plan for Bonita Long Canyon be approved, subject to the following
guidelines:
1. The developer shall be required to dedicate and/or construct all public
improvements and facilities, onsite and offsite, determined by the City
Council to be necessary to serve the Bonita Long Canyon Sectional Planning
Area; specific requirements to be established with each phase of develop-
ment in conjunction with the filing of subdivision maps.
2. Prior to the issuance of a grading plan for Phase I, the applicant shall
submit and the City's Landscape Architect shall have approved, an over-
all land~~aping plan incorporating a conceptual design for later phases
and a detailed design for those phases on which tentative maps are being
filed. Said plan shall include such items as supplemental canyon tree
planting, slope planting, and an equestrian trails plan for easements,
location, grading, signing and fencing as determined by the Landscape
Architect to be necessary to implement the plan. The trails system shall
be developed prior to or concurrent with the certification of slopes in
the initial grading stages.
/~w7
-1-
3. The developer shall request the formation of an open space maintenance
district for the entire 650 acre project prior to the t'ecordation of
the final map for Phase I. The rear slope banks of lots abutting
Acacia Avenue and the Long Canyon drainage system located in Phase III
shall be included as dedicated open space to insure maintenance.
4. Prior to the issuance of building permits in each phase, the applicant,
working with the school districts, shall furnish evidence to the City
that the school districts are able to provide school service to the
future residents of that phase.
Prior to approval of the tentative map by the Planning Commission for
Phase III, the Chula Vista Elementary School District shall notify the
City of its intent to require dedication of the K-6 site shown on the
Sectional Planning Area plan. Failure of the school district to utilize
the site will authorize the developer to submit a revised Sectional
Planning Area plan for additional lots within the designated school
site. The City will make a similar decision regarding the park site
in conjunction with the school district's plan.
5. The park site shall be increased in size to approximately 5 acres with
adequate exposure provided from Corral Canyon Road and street "P".
6. The number of dwelling units shown on the Sectional Planning Area plan
shall be limited to the following:
Phase I 199 un its
Phase II 1 05 units (43 units transferred to Phase III)
Phase III 193 un its
,.)
Phase IV 152 units
Phase V 157 units
Phase VI 20 un its
Total 826 units
Further changes in the number of units or lots may be required,
predicated on the filing of subdivision maps in accordance with the
standards and requirements included as guidelines of the Sectional
Planning Area or conditions of the subdivision ~aps.
7. The developer shall pay P.A.D. and R.C.T. fees for Phases I and II
with the remaining phases to be contingent upon the decision during
consideration of Phase III as to whether or not a park is to be
constructed in conjunction with the elementary school. If the city
I cXlbfJ -2-
proceeds with the park requirement, adjustments to the P.A.D. and
R.C.T. fees will be determined with development plans for Phase III.
S. Phase VI may be developed out of sequence, provided a precise plan is
approved and all fees are paid.
9. a. The minimum pad area for units in Phases II and V and the Canyon
Drive area of Phase III shall be S,OOO sq. ft. The minimum pad
area in Phases III and IV shall be 7,000 sq. ft. (All pad sizes
shall be exclusive of the SDG&E easement.)
b. Minimum pad width shall be 60 ft. as measured at the front setback
line, with the average pad width to be 70 ft.
c. Minimum pad depth shall be gO ft. for the purpose of computing the
required minimum pad area.
d. Development standards shall be submitted concurrent with tentative
subdivision maps filed for each phase. Said criteria shall include
such items as corral locations and special fencing criteria. Setbacks
for all phases shall be as follows:
Front yard 25 feet
Exterior side yard 15 feet
One side yard 10 feet
Both side ya rds 15 feet tota 1
Rear yard 20 feet (R-1 standards for single story
encroachment shall be applicable)
10. The rear 25 feet of each lot abutting open space areas will be evaluated
as to the need for fire retardant plant materials. Appropriate conditions
will be established with each subdivision map.
11. The developer shall acquire, dedicate, and improve the necessary area to
extend stt.eet "5" offsite to connett to the county street shown on
T.M. 3750 adjacent to the terminus of street "5". If the connection of
street "5" to the county road system proves to be infeasible, the
developer shall provide access for emergency vehicles between the ends
of cul-de-sac streets "R".
12. The water tank area shown adjacent to the elementary school site shall
be relocated unless the school site is not utilized or the school pad
area is increased to a minimum of 9 acres in size.
13. The requirement for undergrounding the existing 69 kv line within the
250 foot wide SDG&E easement shall be waived.
/cJQro9
-3-
14. The applicant shall file CC&R's with each phase which will prohibit the
resubdivision or parcelling of lots in any approved phase which will
increase the number of lots in the phase.
15. Prior to the approval by the City Council of Phase I, the applicant shall
submit a master list of street names for all five phases of the single
fami ly area.
16. The entire 650 acres shall be annexed before final map approval is given
to Phase I.
17. Prior to consideration of a tentative subdivision map for Phases II, V
and VI, detailed geotechnical reports shall be prepared by the applicant
and submitted to the City. All recommendations of the geological and/or
soils engineer shall be followed.
18. Mitigation of archeological sites SDi 5829 and 5830, in accordance with
Appendix III of the Archeol09ical Survey and Report dated January 25, 1979,
shall be carried out prior to the approval of the tentative map for Phase V.
19. Prior to the approval of any final map for the project, the developer
shall subm'it necessary calculations to show that downstream sewer capacity
is adequate, or the developer shall provide improvements necessary to
assure adequate capacity.
20. Except where specifically changed on the approved tentative map, street
designs shall adhere to the following standards:
a. All horizontal curves shall have a minimum intervening tangent
distance measured in feet equal to four times the design speed of
the street (reverse horizontal curves are not acceptable).
b. Compound horizontal curves shall be avoided.
c. Maximum street grades for residential collector streets shall be 12%
(except Via Hacienda).*
d. The following streets should be designed to residential collector
standards with minimum centerline radii of 380 feet.*
"pll street
"L" street (from Corral Canyon Road to "K" street)
"R" street (between "V" street and Corral Canyon Road)
"XII street
*Those streets with a 12% grade of minimum centerline radii will be subject
to further review at the tentative map submittal stage.
/ (y.lb 1
-4-
e. There are potential sight distance problems at the following inter-
sections; these intersections should be studied carefully by the
applicant before a tentative map is prepared:
Baylor Avenue/"A" street - looking west
Canyon Drive/Corral Canyon Road - looking north
Cumbre View/Canyon Drive - looking north
f. Maximum centerline grade for cul-de-sac street turning areas shall
be 5%.
g. The maximum grade at any intersection of two streets shall be 6%
within the intersection and for at least 50 feet past the curb lines
of the intersecting streets.
h. All through residential streets shall have minimum centerline radii
of 200 feet. Minimum centerline radii shall be 180 feet for cul-
de-sacs.
i. Grade segments in excess of 12% sha 11 not exceed 300 feet in 1 ength.
j. Streets within the Sectional Planning Area shall conform to the
following (corresponds to typical sections on S.P.A. plan):
(1) 56 foot right of way with sidewalks on both sides:
(a) Via Hacienda
(b) Street "A" (Via Hacienda to Baylor Avenue)
(c) Street "R" (south of street "V")
(d) Street US" except eastern cul-de-sac, street "K" except
cul-de-sac
(e) Streets 11111, I'pl', and IIVII
(f) Street US" (except cul-de-sac north of "V" street)
(g) Canyon Drive (from Bonita Hacienda subdivision to "X"
street and from "0" street to Corral Canyon Road)
,ill (h) "X" street (from "yo street to Canyon Drive)
(i) Country Trails Lane
(j) "L" street (from Corral Canyon Road to "K" street)
(2) 56 foot right of way with sidewalk on one side:
(a) Canyon Drive (from "X" street to "0" street)
(b) "X" street (from "yo street to US" street)
_N {)
( 3) 52 foot right of way with sidewalk on both sides:
(a) S tree ts IICII, 11011 , "[11 , IIFIl, IIGII, "Jll , IIMII , IIN", "QII, "TII,
"UII, and "YII
(b) 11511 street north of tlVII street
(c) llRIl street north of IlVII street
(d) ilL II street (from IIKII street to II Mil street)
(e) IIKII street cul-de-sac south of IlL II street
(f) Baylor Avenue
(g) Cumbre View
(4) 52 foot right of way with sidewalk on one side:
(a) Ill" street
(b) I'RIl street cul-de-sac
(c) "W" street
(d) 11011 street
2l. Drainage:
a. Permanent energy dissipators, such as shown on Regional Standard
Drawing D-4l, shall be used at outlets of drainage facilities.
b. The developer shall participate toward improvements within the Long
Canyon drainage basin as described in the mitigation measures identi-
fied in EIR-79-2 for this project. Plans for desilting basins and
retention basins within the Long Canyon basin shall be submitted for
review by the City Engineer prior to approval of the final map for
each phase.
22. Sewers:
a. All sewers within cul-de-sacs shall terminate in a manhole.
b. Improved access shall be provided to all manholes.
c. Sewers serving 10 or less lots shall have a minimum grade of 2%.
d. The method of sewering Phase V from the western end of "s" street
shall be indicated. The developer shall submit proof that offsite
sewers are available and adequate in capacity to handle the added
....
sewage from Phase V.
e. Manholes shall be provided at all changes of grade and alignment.
23. Improvements:
a. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of improve-
ments in Corral Canyon Road to collector street standards within the
Sectional Planning Area and Rutgers Avenue south of the southern
boundary of the Sectional Planning Area to the existing improvements
I 0 1[(09
shown on Chula Vista Drawings 70-760 and 73-860. Said improvements
shall include the necessary acquisition of the Corral Canyon/East "H"
Street intersection as determined by the City Engineer. The improve-
ments shall be constructed in conjunction with the development of
Phase III of the Sectional Planning Area.
The connection of Rutgers Avenue south of "H" Street wi 11 not be
required if "H" Street is constructed between 1-805 and Otay Lakes
Road prior to construction of Phase III.
b. The developer shall be responsible for the completion of improvements
on the south side of East "H" Street from Corral Canyon Road west to
the existing improvements shown on Chula Vista Drawing 68-1100 prior
to acceptance of improvements for Phase III.
c. The developer shall participate in the offsite construction of Central
Avenue as determined by the County of San Diego, Department of Public
Works and the Chula Vista City Engineer prior to construction of
Phase III. Construction must comply with mitigating measures adopted
by the City of Chula Vista.
d. The developer shall acquire, dedicate and improve Otay Lakes Road
from the point where the centerline of the SDG&E easement intersects
said road to the improvements shown on Chula Vista Drawing 73-100A-D.
Said improvements shall include but not be limited to 41.5 feet of
pavement, curb and gutter, and drainage facilities, east of centerline
within a 50 foot half-width right-of-way prior to acceptance of
improvements for Phase I.
e. The developer shall complete construction of the northerly half of
East "H" Street from Corral Canyon Road to Otay Lakes Road. Improve-
ments shall include two 12-foot traffic lanes and one 8-foot parking
lane within a 32 foot curb to curb width. Monolithic curb, gutter
and a 5 foot sidewalk shall be provided along the northerly side of
the roadway and curb and gutter along the south side. The southerly
curb line shall be 9 feet inside the south right-of-way line of a
....
50 foot half-width street right-of-way. Street lights and other
normal furnishing shall also be included, as shall the landscaping
and irrigation of one-half the median island. Said improvements
shall be completed prior to acceptance of improvements for Phase I.
/1\t.J(n9
-7-
24. Mi see 11 aneous :
a. Add a typical section for Otay Lakes Road.
b. Erosion and sediment control plans will be required with grading
plans for each of the construction phases.
c. The developer may request that a reimbursement district be formed
for those improvements which lie outside the subdivision boundary
and provide benefit to other properties. It shall be the developer's
responsibility to submit to the City for approval a plan indicating
improvements to be included, properties to be assessed, and method
of assessment for said district.
The Planning Commission directs that this resolution be transmitted to the
City Council and a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the applicant.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA,
this 22nd day of April, 1981 by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
Commissioners G. Johnson, Stevenson, R. Johnson and Pressutti
NOES:
Commissioners O'Neill and Williams
ABSENT:
None
/". . ..J /
C~i.wr ~A.d' .~..__
Chairman
ATTEST:
'?~~
~
/JJ1t1!;fa-Lil/
/ Sec reta ry
""
I D4 G I
-8-
_c:: ,
.~
'-
"
''--------.
~-
....,
~
~~---
-~
-,
,...
~
~.
....~~
! /
~;.
'/ /' ~f
/~/ !-- .
//,
./ / ,I
/ / I
// /
/
/
PROJECT
AREA
(BONITA LONG CANYON )
)
LOCATOR
PCS-8/-4 a
PCM-8/-/3
\',=
.
".
........................
.........................
.........................
.........................
.........................
.........................
.........................
.........................
.........................
.........................
..........................
....n...................
..........................
:::::::.JiA:::::::::::::::::
..........................
..........-..............
..........................
:::::::::::J:::::::::::::.
..........................
..........................
LEGEND
590 Acres @ ,66DU/ac ~389 DUo
56 Acres Q? 4.0 DUlac- 22400
4Acres @ 10.0 DULl:Ic- 40 DU,
r-=ru:rAL ACRES-650 .
: TOTAL DWELLING UNITS -653
I .
I K-6 .
I ,
'------'
r----... .
: K-6 : 1
I 'I
~-----;
I
I
. H'. ST_'
~
~----,
o
o
o
APPROVED
: SOUTHWESTERN
GENERAL DEVELa
(BONITA LONG CANYO~
NORTi1( )
I ,
1 K-6 I
I :
,-_____J
, ,
'ENT PLAN
EXHIBIT A
PCS-81-4 S.
PCM -81- '3
'-
'.
LEGEND
. .
......................:::::::;::::::::::;;:::;;:
................................................
................................................
~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ii ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ i i ~ ~ ~ ~ i; ~
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::
................................................
~ ~ i i i ~ ~ ~ ~ i i i ~ ~ ~ i i ~ g iig gi g i g~ ~ i i ~ ~ ~ i i;g i i ii
Ilili Iii illii Ii 1IIIiilililllll liliilillilil!! iill': :'I',I:"I,~I:i,ili,~~i.il,llllii Ii i ii
::::::: EQUESTRIAN COMMUNITY ::::::::::::::::' ~:. .:::: :
- 1(.6 .
4~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ i I I I I J f I I I J J J I J J J J J J J J J J I J J J I J J
......................................
BONITA VISTA ::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::
HIGH SCHOOL :::::::::::::::::::::::::igigE;E;EE;
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
o 29 Acres SCHOOL/PARK/WATER TANK
(ill) 617 Acres 1.71 DUlAc = 809 D U
~ 4 Acres 14 DU/Ac = 56 DU
TOTAL ACRES 650
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS 865
EAST" H" ST.
I
I k-6
I I
L____.J
PROPOSED
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
~ONITA ~ONG CANYON
NoiViil
)
)
EXHIBIT B
PCS-81-4 8
PCM-81-13
'.
-.-..-----
-
;",'1),
!,
.~.
,...,
~.
, \
'<I" <-"- h,\:'.:'
{'lio .J,'"
,J., !~':>"~<~:;. ,:'
, " " ." (
'''',., ,:.,',1\' ""
t~; .
-+:, '\ ~ i
.
.
.
" .
!; ,
660
/'
--.--:-
"
, '
i'
I'
45i1 ,'I
Vli~~ ; ,
~'l';'
~ ,'>~Y~ -' "i
, """,,0;} !. ,
. ~/,~'/. .' i
,v" ,.."" j,:;
~ A~..H ~ -. .' . '
'. /~;.~/' ' ','/://
, I' ,," "y'
'I .',' 0'" ':" ,/" "
, .. ~""/';1:'/ ....
'f ",/" ,"
,-, (/' /.;.;...,'
. .." . I ..,
r-\'; '::hl!: I Ld! (Pi'
, . I;' ;.....I-r"~~ 0\
t : ~ :. t \. 5";'-: \ <." <,
. ",,', ".:;'1',.:-....
~fh1{I::E'v'E'W
STREET
CENTER I..IN~
I
I
l-t
BONITA
LONG
CANYON
'~~
\
0-
...s
1:;
--....
.
'f-
~s,,1 J: ~
. , "\- .~. I:"
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 7a,b,c.
Meeting Date 5/26/81
a. Resolution /o.oft. 1- Approvi ng Secti ona 1 Pl anni ng Area plan for Bonita Long
M TITLE: Ca nyon Es ta tes
b. Resolutionlo~lP- Approving tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista
Tract 81-4, Bonita Long Canyon Estates
c. Resolution /~~1/- Adopting CEQA Findings for Bonita Long Canyon Estates
MITTED BY: ~__ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X)
Director of Planning~~ - -
RECOMMENDATION
It is my recommendation that the resolutions approving the Bonita Long Canyon
Estates development be adopted in the following order:
a. Resolution approving Sectional Planning Area Plan
b. Resolution approving tentative subdivision map
c. Resolution adopting CEQA findings
--
~
--~,.- ,~.~, L......r,l,.,r~il of
by';\.'!':::' 1. 'if ,,~I," ,\...
C';",:I'~c v;~ta Cali,'ornia
,('t...-' u ,
D'1t('~d" 5''''~ -,?/
01/ b 9'
~ A-113 (Rev. 11/79)
,.t
I
~ i
I
II
,
'I
, I~
I
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 6 a
Meeting Date 5/26/81
Public hearing ~ Consideration of Sectional Planning Area Plan for 650 acre
Bonita Long Canyon Estates
Director of Planning ~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes
No~)
, !. BACKGROUND
1. The applicant has submitted a Sectional Planning Area plan for the development
of the 650 acre Bonita Long Canyon area located on the east side of Otay Lakes Road and
,outh of the Bonita Highlands subdivision in Bonita. The General Development Plan adopted
in 1971 (Exhibit A) established a density of approximately one dwell ing unit per acre
for the entire 650 acres. The City's General Plan designates most of the area as "Resi-
~ential 1-3 DU/acre) with several smaller areas carrying the desi9nation of 4-12 DU/acre.
2. The proposed Sectional Planning Area plan contains the following uses:
o A 15 acre K-6 site (approximately 7y, acres usable, excluding SDG&E easement)
o An 11 acre neighborhood park site (approximately 4+ acres usable)
o A 4 acre multiple ~amily site (approximately 2 acres usable)
o 809 single family lots, ranging in size from 6,000 sq. ft. to over 3 acres.
o Approximately 266 acres of dedicated open space, most of which is to remain
in its natural state.
3. Certification of the EIR was considered as a previous item.
RECOMMENDATION
Concur with Planning Commission recommendation with the following exceptions:
1. Revise condition 9.a to allow 1,000 sq. ft. of the required 8,000 sq. ft. pads
to be in slope up to 20% in grade.
2. Condition 11 shall be predicated on Council's action to direct a letter from
the Mayor to the Board of Supervisors asking for authorization of the street
connection and modification of the approved tentative subdivision map in the
County.
3. Condition 13 must be eliminated since the 69 KV is on the same poles as the
12 KV. Under these conditions, our ordinance does not require undergrounding
of the 69 KV line.
4. tlodify condition 23.a in Resolution IJo. P01-81-13 to read:
"The developer shall be responsible for the construction of improvements in
Corral Canyon Road to collector street standards within the Sectional Planninq
Area. The developer may be responsible for improvements in Rutqers south of-
H Street, extending to the existing improvements (ref. Chula Vista Drawing
70-76D.and 73-860) as determined by the City Engineer with the filing of a
tent~t~v~ map for Phase III. Said improvements shall include the necessary
acqu1~lt1on ?f the Corra~ Canyon/East H Street intersection as determined by
the Clty Eng1neer. The lmprovements shall be constructed in conjunction with
~he developm~nt of Phase III of the Sectional Planning Area.
The co~nect1on of Rutgers Avenue south of H Street will not be required if H
Street 1S constructed between 1-805 and Otay Lakes Road prior to construction
of Phase Ill." .
(Rev. 11179)
continued
Page 2, Item 6a
Meeting Date 5/26/81
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On April 22, 1981 the Planning Commission recommended by a vote of 4-2 that the
City Council approve the Bonita long Canyon Sectional Planning Area plan in accordance
~ith Resolution PCM-81-13. A copy of the Planning Commission's minutes is enclosed in
Council's packets.
D., DISCUSSION OF MAJOR POINTS
1. Number of Dwelling Units.
The applicant's plan proposes approximately 865 dwelling units (809 single family
and 56 condominium units) to be constructed in six phases within the 640 acres. The ','
General Development Plan for El Rancho del Rey, adopted in 1971, authorizes a maximum
of 653 units, thus, the proposed Sectional Planning Area plan represents a 33% increase
in density. The General Plan for this area designates approximately 609 acres at 1-3
dwelling units per acre and 50 acres at 4-12, allowing for a range of 800-2400 dwelling
units on the property. The requested density is clearly in the lower limits of the
City's General Plan.
2. land Form Alteration and Natural Open Space.
Forty percent of the 650 acre site will be retained in dedicated open space largely
preserved in its natural state. Grading will involve 3-1/3 million cubic yards of fill
and 2-1/2 million cubic yards of cut. The most intense area of development occurs in
Phase I where over 70% of the area is graded for single family lots. Supplemental tree
planting in certain canyon areas and planting of fire retardant material will be required
as conditions of tentative map approval.
3. Circulation System.
a. Some of the existing roads which link the various phases of the Sectional
Planning Area are operating beyond their design capacity. In addition, other road
segments have not been constructed to accommodate the proposed project; therefore, sub-
stantial offsite improvements will be required with each phase of construction. The
first phase will require improvements to "H" Street (onsite and offsite) as well as
Otay lakes Road.
b. The 148 dwelling units planned for Phase II will rely on Canyon Drive for
ingress and egress until the completion of Phase III allows for additional access to
the east. The Planning Commission recommended that development in this area be
restricted to 105 lots, with the remaining lots assigned to later phases of construction.
,', " c. The third and fourth phases will involve the connection of Corral Canyon
':dto.ad to "H" Stre,et with additional improvements on Central Avenue in accordance with the
'!~ftigating measures (four travel lanes) outlined in the Environmental Impact Report.
,'lflladdition, offsite improvements may be required in Rutgers Avenue south of "H" Street
~{;i complete the link.qge between Otay lakes Road and the eastern area of Bonita.
,l"....
"v d. Phase V requires a road connection to an adjacent tentative subdivision area
already a'pproved by the County but not yet constructed.
II
I
I
Page 3, Item 6a
Meeting Date 5/26/81
4. Phasing.
a. The applicant has divided the project into six phases. The first five phases
are li~ited to single family detached home si~es ~ith the sixth phase.proposed ~s"a
56 unit condominium development. Phase I, WhlCh lnvolves 199 lots adJacent to H Street
:;~\'InLrequire regrading and relandscaping of a po~tion of.the.existing Tiffany Park.
. The'devel opel' wi 11 be res pons i b 1 e for the work Wl th cred 1 t glVen towa I'd payment of
p.AlD. and R.C.T. fees.
b. ~he phasing for the development of the park/school site has noLbeen
addressedr,Qy;;the deve 1 opel'. Timing for improvements to the 'school area wn ibe the
responsibiJ,f>~'yof the school district. The park site should be developed with Phase III.
~", j~', ':",' .,
r"" ' ~,j
..d,:jb\'lithough.t~e condominium area is listed"as Phase VI, there is no objection
allowirl:if.:l''i:.s development out of sequence.
5. DrainaJge.
Approximately three-fourths of the site is part of the Long Canyon basin which
flows northwest and joins the Sweetwater River just north of Bonita Road. The project
area within that basin constitutes 43% of the total basin. As stated in the environ-
mental impact report, "All of the drainage basins in which the project is located have
existing drainage facilities which are inadequate to one degree or another." Reports
on file with the City indicate that the proposed development will produce only a small
increase in runoff (4% added, based on 50 year storm) in the total basin. However,
because of the inadequacy of existing downstream facilities, the added increase will
cause flooding to the already developed housing along Acacia Avenue. The applicant
is proposing to solve the downstream inundation problem by using onsite retention basins
in Long Canyon to control the amount of flow. With proper design, the system should
substantially reduce the present and projected flows in the canyon. The system will
require review and approval by the City Engineer. The applicant has the option of
improving the downstream drainage facilities at an estimated cost exceeding $700,000 as
an alternative to the retention basin plan. However, with little or no money available
from other projects to aid in the construction, such a solution places a very costly
burden on this project.
6. Elementary School/Park Site.
The Sectional Planning Area plan has an elementary school site designated adjacent
to the SDG&E easement near the extension of Corral Canyon Road. Although the nearby
elementary schools (Tiffany and Sunnyside) are at capacity and the proposed develop-
ment will generate an estimated 500 students, the school district is reluctant to make
a commitment at this time. A final disposition will be made when a subdivision map is
processed for Phase III. The developer is obligated for 6.2 acres of developed park
land based on the 865 unit Sectional Planning Area plan. I am recommending that the
approved maximum density be set at 826 units, which would require 6.1 acres of park.
Since the City can accept developed park land or in lieu fees, the Planning Commission
has recommended that fees be collected for Phases I and II with the final decision to
constru~t . the park wi thhe 1 d unt n Phase .III; '~;':~794use of the City's pa rk( sc hoo 1 con~ept,
the dei=l s 1 on as to whether or not to bUl'ldtfH:I.pa;l'k as shown on the SectlOna 1 Pl annl ng
Arooplan will be predicated in part by the decision of the school district regarding the
elementary school site. The 4+ acre usable park shown on the Sectional Planning Area
plan needs to be enlarged to a minimum 5 acres by deleting 3 lots on the north side
of street "P".
o~fp ~
continued
Page 4, Item
6a
Meeting Date
5/26/81
7. Citizen input at the public hearing.
The Planning Commission hearing attracted citizen input from two nearby areas,
Avenue and Baylor Avenue-Mills Street.
a. Acacia Avenue.
Residents in the adjacent county area were primarily concerned with drainage
sol utions. Assurances wcrt given by the subdi vider' s engineer that the final desi gn
for drainage will be reviewed and approved by ctne>tity Engine'er, and that provisions
for maintenance of the retention basins will be made if that is the conceptual solution
approved by Council.
b. Baylor Avenue-Mills Street (Adjacent to Bonita High School)
~-~,' '
~ti{~~i9hbors expressed concern over the fact that whi le Baylor Street was stubbed
out to,itifrve the adjacent area it was not, in their opinion, designed to accommodate
the projected traffic increase. The Planning Commission concluded that prior to any
construction of units tributary to Baylor, a second connection to Otay Lakes Roal!
through the Bonita Haciendas tract should be available. The Commission made thSt a
condition of approval of the tentative map.
,.
D. DETAILS OF SPECIFIC AREA PLAN
1. Land use, dens ity and lot size
a. The 650 unit density established for the property on the 1971 General
Development Plan for El Rancho del Rey was based on a very superficial analysis of the
site without the benefit of a proposed grading or circulation plan. In addition, lot
padding and retention of open space were not considered in the earlier plan. The
Sectional Planning Area plan presented for consideration seeks approval of 865 dwelling
units. This plan contains more precise design information on which to base a decision
regarding the density. Adjacent land uses (type, lot size, character) as well as topo-
graphic considerations were evaluated in arriving at a recommendation.
1) Phase I is located adjacent to a standard single family detached
subdivision (Sduthwestern College Estates) and, therefore, reflects a
density and lot sizes (typical 7,000 sq. ft.) in keeping with that anea.
,
,~'
2) Phases II, III and IV abut one-half and one acre county subdivisions;Jio
the north and west and for the most part reflect a mixture of lot sizes
with the smaller lots confined to the inner core and easterly periphl;!ry
of the Phase IV area. The average lot size within these phases varies
from 11,000 sq. ft. (Phase IV) to nearly 20,000 sq. ft. (Phase II).
3) Phase V located at the extreme northerly section of the plan has 157
lots on 179 acres, dedicating approximately 89 acres to open space,
with an average lot size of 25,000 sq. ft.
";:i~t5Y /1any of the lots within Phases II, III, IV, and V have pad areas of 6,000
to 7,GQg",lfq. ft., thus the largest portion of the larger lots is devoted to slope banks
which,!mve very limited use for the owner. The general character of pad and house
,.constrpp'iion in this area of Bonita results from an average pad size of approximately
'i&,OOO':$q. ft. It is my conclusion that Phases II and V, as well as the Canyon Drive
area 9f:Phase III, should adhere to that standard. The conditions of approval allow
continued
Page 5, Item 6a
Meeting Date 5/26/81
the gentler slope areas (up to 20% grade) to be counted as usable pad area for those
,portions of the pads exceeding 7,000 sq. ft. The remaining area of Phase III and all
.of Phave IV relate to a more urban setting where minimum pad sizes of 7,000 sq. ft.
:~re appropriate. In addition to pad sizes, the following standards apply:
"
2)
The average pad width will be 70' feet with a minimurri,~~ width of
60 feet at the front setback line.... r'....\
Minimum pad depth will be 90 feet for the area used in computing the
required minimum pad area.
.
I".'
1)
3) Development standards must be submitted concurrent with the subdivisiQO.,
map filed for each phaseandjo!;han include such items as cor('a"llocatibns
and any special fencing criteria. . , '
c. The basic density of the project reflects what would be expected in,the
City's standard R-E (1/2 acre) and R-E-40 (40,000 sq. ft.) zones. The setback's for
those zones are 25' front, 15'-20' exterior side, 10'-15' side yards and 25' rear.
Since the lots have been clustered so as to preserve substantial areas of natural open
snace, the basic lot size is reduced. This reduction in lot size warrants an adjustment
to the traditional setbacks in the R-E and R-E-40 zones. I have recommended that the
front yard standard of 25 feet be retained with reductions to side and rear yards more
in keeping with R-l-10 standards (10' exterior side, 10' & 5' side yards, and 20' rear
yard) .
d. Phase VI is proposed as the most densely developed area with plans calling
for 56 dwelling units. The 56 units are proposed on a 4 acre site, however, approxi-
mately 2 acres of the site is usable, thereby resultin9 in a density of 28 units per
acre on the developable land. The adjacent condominium development to the north has
fewer than 50 units developed on 5 acres with another 5 acres in open space. To be
comparable in character, Phase VI should be limited to 20 dwelling units.
2. Equestri an Tra il s.
The plan is criss-crossed with equestrian trails which parallel proposed roads
and meander through natural open space and connect to the SDG&E primary east/west
trail system as well as adjacent County trails. 11inor adjustments to the system,
including required protective fencing, limited grading and corral locations, will be
addressed with each tentative map filed on the various phases. Phase I, for example,
requires an adjustment to the system to cross into Phase IV at the location of the dam
for the retention basin. Easements will be necessary to establish trails across certain
lots; signing and fencing will be required where deemed appropriate by the City.
3. Landscaping.
The majority of the ungraded area will be left in its natural state; however,
because of the potential for canyon fires, an area 25 feet wide, beyond each pad
abutting common open space, will be cleared and planted with fire retardant material.
Irrigation of these areas will be the responsibility of the individual homeowner.
Supplemental tree planting will be required in specific canyons and/or drainage areas
to enhance the overall appearance of the development. An overall tree planting scheme
will be required for Phases I-V prior to recordation of the subdivision map for Phase I.
09 Requi red 1 and scapi ng adjacent to lots back ing up to "H" Street and Corra 1 Canyon
Road will be under the maintenace contract of the open SPqC~ di~trict. Each phase of
development within the Sectional Planning Area will be reevaluateu .as to the amount of
native material or decorative plant materials to be used on slop~S;,
ii,
Page 6, Item
6a
Meeting Date 5/26/81
4. School s/Pa rks.
The elementary school site designated on the plan as 15 acres has approximately
7~ acres of usable area located outside the SDG&E easement. The school district has
indicated a need for a minimum of 9 acres, excluding the easement. Therefore, if the
district requires dedication of the site, it appears that the water tank shown abutting
the east side of the school would have to be relocated. Staff will work with the
applicant's engineer to resolve this matter.
The 3 acres encumbered by the SDG&E easement is only partially usable since existing
towers supporting 238 KV lines and poles for 69 KV lines are lcoated within this right
of way. In addition, officials of SDG&E have indicated that future plans call for
additional overhead structures and lines within the right of way.
The park site contains approximately 4+ acres of usable land, whereas, the proposed
865 dwelling units would require over 6 acres of park land based on present ordinance
standards. As mentioned earlier in this report, the extension of "H" Street will require
regrading and relandscaping a portion of Tiffany Park for which credit will be given
to the developer. It is estimated at this time that reworking approximately one acre
of Tiffany Park will likely result in the developer being obligated for 5+ acres of
additional developed park land on the site. The expansion of the park site will require
the elimination of 3 lots shown on the north side of street "P".
The uncertainty of the school district as to whether or not they are going to
require an elementary school site within the development leaves doubt on the city's part
as to whether or not the park should be located within the project. Parks developed
independent of schools are more typically 10 acres in size, whereas, joint park/school
projects providing for some common use of facilities allow the park to function with
5 acres.
The Planning Commission has recommended that the city collect fees with the first
two phases of development and withhold a final decision on the park construction until
subdivision plans are filed for Phase III.
5. Circulation and Phasing.
The 650 acre site is divided into six phases of development, using "H" Street,
Otay Lakes Road and Corral Canyon Road as major access points serving the various
phases. Phase I will be served by "H" Street and Otay Lakes Road, therefore, improve-
ments to those streets are essential to the subdivision. Via Hacienda cannot be
connected to Otay Lakes Road until improvements are installed in the adjacent Bonita
Hacienda subdivision, therefore, building construction for 133 units of Phase I will be
withheld until the connection can be physically made. . This will minimize traffic through
Southwestern College Estates tract.
Phase II is planned for 148 dwellings which will utilize Canyon Drive connected
to Otay Lakes Road. Until Phase III is developed, Phase II is virtually one long
cul-de-sac with only partial relief provided by another street (Cumbre View) which
connects back to Otay Lakes Road and "H" Street by way of Via Hacienda. The Planning
Commission concluded that the approximately 43 lots shown east and south of the inter-
section of street "X" and Canyon Road should be included in Phase III rather than Phase II.
/ot.((p 7
conti nued
Page 7, Item 6a
Meeting Date 5/26/81
Construction of Phases III and IV will create the need to connect Corral Canyon
Road with "H" Street and Rutgers. In addition, the City Engineer has determined that
Rutgers Avenue should be connected offsite from the south side of "H" Street to the
Southwestern College Estates area. However, further evaluation will be conducted when
the tentative map is filed for Phase III. Condition 23.a of Planning Commission Resolu-
tion PCM-81-13 requires the developer to complete Rutgers south of "H" Street. Condi-
tion 23.b makes the developer responsible for the street improvements on the south side
of "H" Street from Corral Canyon Road west to the existing improvements. The developer
objects to this condition stating that his development already is required to complete
excessive offsite improvements. We really cannot evaluate what his fair share on "H"
Street is until a "reimbursement" or "fair share" district is developed (see condition
24.c). Bonita Long Canyon was deleted from "H" Street west of Otay Lakes Road because
they would build "H" Street east of Otay Lakes Road. Therefore, we believe they should
build this segment of "H" Street even though they may receive reimbursement.
" r"ajor offsite street improvements will.&e n~~'6~ary in Central A\lep~,,;,Where th@
'~ounty has allowed pre. vious developments to O..C;f.'Ur'~.'Wit...hout prOVidinga:a#~~(~.";m.'.prove-
~ents (drainage and street dedication and i,~gr:ov~fT1eot) to serve the areas. As, indicated
tn the ErR, the development of Bonita,,1.~l)g::Pi!''/il~OO\,!i11 require Central Avenue>to be
widened to four travel lanes. AlthougH "thi-s 'pl.3'ces"a substantial burden on this
development, the improvements are necessary to solve area access proboems which will be
maqni fied by the project
Phase V, which includes 157 lots, was originally planned with a loop system involving
streets "S", "V" and "R". The system was modified to leave street "R" as a cul-de-sac,
however, this solution is workable only if street "s" can be connected through to a
,1oo~ street in a County approved tentative subdivision map for property to the west.
If street "s" is not extended to the county road system, two cul-de-sac areas of 2000
foot to 2400 foot lengths are created with streets "s" and "R". The City Engineer,
Director of Planning, and the City's Fire Marshall all agree that providing a'({:onnection
from street "s" to the planned loop street in the county helps the overall circulation
pattern in both the county and the city and is an important link for emergency vehicles.
The primary problem in extending the road is that the County has already approved a
subdivision which eliminated any road connection in this area because of objections
raised by nearby residents in the county. In its place a secondary access road was re-
quired by the developer of the county subdivision to connect northerly to Central
Aven~e. A requirement placed on this developer to provide for the extension of "s" street
to:t.ge county subdivision would necessitate condemnation or purchase of an approved
subd"lvision lot, together with approval from the County. Conditions could pgssibly
change if the subdivision map expires without the recordation of a final map'. 'The
Council should authorize the Mayor to submit a letter to the Board of Supervisors
4fging the approval of this street connection. ':,
,
"
" It should be noted that the school site, water tank area, and the park are,j:l1ot
~learly shown in any phase. The scheduling of this contruction should be esta5,1'isheq
,with the filing of a tentative map for Phase III. ".' '.
Phase VI is dependent only upon improvements along Otay Lakes Road, therefore,
construction could occur independent of the other phases.
:~/".
t. .'
.1,<.,
lcf(f;; 7
continued
Page 8, Item 6a
Meeting Date 5/26/81
6. SDG&E Easement.
, ,'. The SDG&E'easement is encumbered by e~'i$ting;towers, pol es and overhead 1 iries,
.*h'ich limits activity within to trails, op~r',SP~Ge, ro~ds or parking. At p~esent the
City requires developers to undergr~und 69i~V 11~e.~ w~lch exceed 1500.feet 1n length.
When this item was considered by the Plann~n9 COmTI1SS10n, representat1ves of SDG&E
'had indicated that one line was exclusive 69 KV. However, a recent field check by SDG&E
.has shown that a 12 KV line is also attached to the same pole system. Present City
ordinances require the undergrounding of the 12 KV line and not 69 KV when they exist
on .Jhe same system. Therefore, the developer would be required ~o underg~ound the.
']2 KV unless a separate waiver is requested and granted by the C1ty Counc11; Counc11
a60roved such a waiver for the adjacent Bonita Haciendas subdivision.
. The proposed access road to the water tank and the K-6 elementary school has not
been approvectpy SDG&E and, therefore, should be considered schematic at this time.
7. '!,.FEmcihg.
,:;,.;;~.d$c.Qnptive block wall will be required along "H" Street and Corral Canyon Road
ill k'e~Jll:j(igwith current subdivision regulations. Additional fencing for equestrian
areas'as well as slope protection fencing need to be addressed in subsequent filings
of tentative maps.
8. CC&R's
The applicant will be required to file CC&R's with the City which will prohibit
the splitting or resubdivsion of any lot. This condition is necessary because of the
wide variety of lot sizes within the property.
9. Annexation.
The applicant has made inquiries regarding annexation, however, no application has
been filed as of this date. Because of the inter-relationship of the various phases,
I recommend that the entire 650 acres be annexed before final map approval is given to
Phase I.
10. Development Standards.
The development standards submitted by the applicant are incomplete and inconsistent
with the Sectional Planning Area plan filed with the City. Revised development standards
should be filed with each tentative map on a phase by phase basis to insure that
standards will relate more clearly to each phase of construction.
11. Low/Moderate Income Housing.
In general, the 865 unit Sectional Planning Area plan is not designed to accommodate
low or moderate income housing. The 56 unit condominium or apartment area, designed for
the Phase VI area, could provide an isolated and limited area for moderately priced
units. However, as outlined early in this report, I cannot support the density requested
and recommend authorization of no more than 20 units for the site. Under present policy,
the applicant is required to "address the need" to develop 10% of his units at prices
affordable by low or moderate income families. The applicant has prepared a letter
(enclosed in Council's packets) describing the way in which he has "addressed the need."
I ()lj G9
Page 9, Item
Meeting Date
6a
5/26/81
Street Names.
Planning Commission has recommended approval of the fo 11 owi ng street names.
a. For Phase I: '.'.'j~'(.'
Designation on Map Cha nge to
Street A Redlands Place
Street C Tampa Court
Street D Drake Court
Street E Austin Court
Street F Azusa Court
Street G Bristol Court
Street J Hampton Court
Street I Yuba Dri ve
.
b. In Bon ita Long Canyon Sectional Planning Area, Phases II, II I, IV, and V:
Designation'on Map Change to
" "
Street K (south of Canyon Drive) Hackney Drive
Street K (cul-de-sac off street p) Crown Pl ace '..,~
Street L Derby Way
Street t1 Prancers Court
Street N Colt Court
Street 0 Churchi 11 Place
Street P Turf Club Drive
Street Q Pine Trails Court
Street R (north of street S) Trotter Road
Street R (west of Corral Canyon) Country Tra il s Lane
Street S Horseshoe Way
Street T Sulky Court
Street U Exacta Court
Street V Sara toga Street
Street W Canyon Court
Street X Belmont Drive
Street Y Pimlock Court
Street Z Meadow Place
I O<{b ~