Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1981/04/07 Item 5, 5A . , COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item S, Sa ITEM TITLE: Meeting Date 4/7/81 puBlic hearing - Consideration of tentative subdivision map for Hudson Valley Estates Unit No.1, Chula Vista Tract 77-10 Resolution 1"'I'.2~- Approving tentative subdivision map for Hudson Valley Estates Unit No.1, Chula Vista Tract 77-10 Director of Planning ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No~) SUBMITTED BY: A. BACKGROUND 1. In November, 1977 the City Council approved a tentative subdivision map known as Hudson Valley Estates No.1 for the division of 4.34 acres, located between Second Avenue and the extension of Las Flores Drive north of "D" Street in the R-l zone, into 11 lots. In 1978 a parcel map was approved dividing the property into two parcels. One of the parcels is a 127'x200' lot fronting on Second Avenue and developed with an existing single family dwelling. The tentative subdivision map was then revised to cover only the remain- ing 10 lots (3.38 acres) fronting on the extension of Las Flores Drive. 2. The developer has submitted a new revised tentative map proposing to subdivide the 3.38 acres into 15 lots, 7 of which will be panhandle lots. 3. On February 5, 1981 the Environmental Review Committee found that the environ- mental impact report, EIR-78-1, prepared for the previous project was adequate and satis- fied CEQA review requirements for this project. B. RECor'l~'ErIDATION , Certify EIR-78-1 and concur with Planning Commission recommendation on the tentative subdivision map. C. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION On March 11, 1981 the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the City Council approve the revised tentative map for Hudson Valley Estates No.1, Chula Vista Tract 77-10, in accordance with Resolution PCS-77-10 (Revised). D. DISCUSSION 1. Site characteristics. The project site is located on a segment of the east facing slopes of a shallow canyon which runs northerly from "E" Street toward the Sweetwater Valley between Second and Minot Avenues. The average natural slope of the property is approximately 18 percent with some slopes reaching 40 percent. The northeasterly portion of the site lies within the Sweetwater River flood plain. The property has a differential in elevation of approxi- mately 50 feet. 2. Proposed revision. The proposal involves the creation of 15 lots, 7 of which would be panhandle lots and 8 of which would have full frontage on the extension of Las lores Drive. The lots fronting on the street will have lot sizes ranging from slightly over 7,000 sq. ft. to approximately 7,600 sq. ft. The panhandle lots will range from a minimum of approximately 12,000 sq. ft. to a maximum of almost 14,000 sq. ft. The net area of the panhandle lots (exclusive of access drives and guestparking) will average approximately 11,000 sq. ft. /0 ~;?Cf continued Form t.1l3 (Rev. 11/79) EXHIBITS Agreement Resolution X Ordinance Plat s 2 Notification List Code requirements for panhandle lots. - Other Res. PCA-77 - 1 O( ReIEJ'.(WIRONMENTAr".OOCUMENT: Attached X Submi tted on i I -. Page 2, Item "5 Sa Meeting Date 4/7/81 Extensive grading is proposed, resulting in the exportation of approximately 27 ,000 cubic yards of soil. Most of the excess dirt wi 11 be used to raise the street elevation of Las Flores Drive north of the proposed subdivision. The grading of the panhandle lots will consist primarily of rough grading with additional grading antici- pated upon the development of the lot. E. ANALYSIS 1. The proposed subdivision will have a density of 4.4 DU/acre, well within the General Plan range of 4-12 DU/acre. The proposed grading has changed from the original plans. All of the lots and the street will be raised above the 100 year flood level. The new grading plan will involve the grading of the adjacent properties to the north and east, to which end the developer has been working with those owners in preparing an overall grading plan. The developer is also working toward the formation of an improve- ment district for the installation of utilities and street improvements. Because of the subdivision design~and the gra8ing plan; the formation of the district must be approved before the final map can be approved. 2. The developer has submitted conceptual plans showing how the panhandle lots can be developed to meet the requirements of the code governing such lots. The plans involve the extensive use of retaining walls and the use of split level floor plans. Code requirements (attached) regarding panhandle lots include guest parking, architec- tural review, prohibition of garage conversions, and setbacks predicted on the orientation of the dwelling unit. KGL:hm ,,~..,...,~- ..,.~~ - by th8 City Cuu::::l ?f \... '~_In '''"nl'' ~ Chul3' iSl2, '-'..; l!U. ~. ~ O-'~"d J~ 1.- .f/ r b - _'1...:- t\~.."....____.__~-----"'--~ / OC;~ cj