Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1980/03/19 AGENDA City Planning Commission Chula Vista, California Wednesday, March 19, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. City Council Chamber PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of February 27, 1980 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 80-9, Flower House, 10 unit condominium project at 490 Flower Street 2. Consideration of final EIR-80-4 for South College Sectional Planning Area, Charter Point 3. Consideration of CEQA findings for Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area (EIR-79-8) 4. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): Consideration of development plan for the Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area of E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan 5. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): Consideration of tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 80-13, Hidden Vista Village, Watt Industries ORAL COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR'S REPORT COMMISSION COMMENTS To: City Planning Commission From: D.J. Peterson, Director of Planning Subject: Staff report on agenda items for Planning Commission Meeting of March 19, 1980 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 80-9, Flower House, l0 unit condominium project at 490 Flower Street A. BACKGROUND 1. The applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map, known as Flower House, Chula Vista Tract 80-9, for the purpose of subdividing a 15,134 sq. ft. parcel into a one lot 10 unit condominium project at the southeast corner of Fifth Avenue and Flower Stree~ in the R-3 zone. 2. An Initial Study, IS-78-9, of possible adverse environmental impacts of this development was conducted by the Environmental Review Committee on August ll, 1977. The Committee c6Bcluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the Negative Declaration. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt the Negative Declaration on IS-78-9 and find that this project will have no significant environmental impact. 2. Based on the findings contained in Section "D" of this report, adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the tentative subdivision map for The Flower House, Chula Vista Tract 80-9, subject to the following conditions: a. The developer shall be responsible for the removal and replacement of all broken sidewalk along Flower Street (this amounts to approxi- mately 50% of the frontage along Flower Street). He shall also be responsible for the construction of a sidewalk ramp at the southeast corner of Fifth Avenue and Flower Street and for the construction of a 22 foot wide driveway on Flower Street to serve the westerly four units. An excessive width driveway permit shall be obtained prior to construction of the driveway. The foregoing work shall be accomplished under a separate construction permit. b. The owner shall grant an 8 foot wide easement along Flower Street to the City for street tree purposes. C. DISCUSSION 1. Existing site characteristics. a. The subject 84' x 180' parcel is a level corner lot with the narrow frontage facing Fifth Avenue. There is an existing single story duplex (both one bedroom units) located on the easterly portion of the site and an accessory structure in the southeast corner. In addition, there are 8 units (6 two bedroom and 2 one bedroom) presently under construction. The exterior remodeling of the duplex and the new units were reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee on September 6, 1979. b. The 8 new units are located in a two story structure with parking located underneath the 4 units nearest Fifth Avenue. There are 2 ground floor units and 6 upper units. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 2 2. Parking. There are 14 offstreet parking spaces provided. Of this number tO spaces are located underneath the units and 2 are open spaces in front of the new units. Two open parking spaces are also located on the east side of the duplex. The code requires 12 onsite spaces and allows 3 offsite guest parking places. All spaces are full size. 3. Storage plan. Each of the one bedroom units is provided 60 cu. ft. of adjacent storage space located in the patio or balcony as required by ordinance. The upper two bedroom units will have either 86 cu. ft. or 96 cu. ft. of adjacent storage located in the balcony and the lower units will have 80 cu. ft. of storage in the patio. The ordinance requires a minimum of 80 cu. ft. The required nonadjacent storage is located either at the end of the covered parking areas or in the accessory building and proportionately assigned to each unit based on proximity to the unit. Th2 total amount and location of the storage meets the ordinance for some of the units and exceeds it for others. D. FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the tentative subdivision map for The Flower House, Chula Vista Tract 80-9, is recommended for approval based on the following findings: 1. The site is physically suitable for residential development and the proposed development conforms to all standards established by the City for such project. 2. The design of the subdivision will not affect the existing improvements: streets, sewer, etc., which have been designed to avoid any serious health problems. 3. The development will increase the housing supply in the community without adversely affecting the public service needs of residents of Chula Vista and available fiscal and environmental resources. 4. The subdivision is consistent with the General Plan Elements as follows: a. Land Use Element - The General Plan designation for the site is High Density Residential, 13-26 dwelling units per gross acre. The density of the project of 29 units per net acre is consistent with this desig-- nation. b. Circulation Element - The adjoining streets are improved to handle the present traffic flow. c. .Housing Element - While the conversion of two older multiple family units will reduce the city's apartment stock, the new development will provide additional housing and offer an expanded choice of ownership. Inasmuch as the development contains fewer than 50 units, it is exempt from the requirement to address the need to provide housing for low and moderate income families. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 3 d. Conservation, Open Space, and Parks and Recreation Elements - No parks are planned on the site and the developer will be assessed fees in lieu of park land dedication. e. Noise Element - The property is not subject to objectionable noise levels. f. Seismic Safety and Safety Elements - The development is not adjacent to or on any known fault systems. g. Scenic Highways Element - The site does not abut a Scenic Highway or gateway. h. Bicycle Route Element - No bicycle routes are proposed adjacent to the site. i. Public Buildings Element - No public buildings are proposed on the site. I I I I I I I ~ ~ I , ~ I~1 ! ; I I i ~ ~ ~ I I I I ; I II ,{ MARIETTA ST , -- i I FLOWER I I r I i I. , I sm -- I_['' kERN _/~ .- ~-' m "E" STREE I PCS-8O-9 I00' 200' [ THE FLOWER HOUSE ~, I0 UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT AT :T H ',.o ~'Lo~E. ~ - EXISTINg EXISTIN~ 8LD8 TOREt4~iN STORA~ (~ a al ~ P~IN8 I0 P~KING ~PA~ ~W THE · ~0~ ~ PROPOSED '~ B~8 NE GATIVE DECLARA TION PROJECT TITLE: Ziegler Flower St. Apartments Project Location: 496 Flower St. Project Proponent: GMZ Developers P.O. Box 1876 Chula Vista, CA 92012 CASE NO. IS-78-9 DATE: August 11, 1977 A. Environmental Setting The project site involves about 15,000 sq ft. of property located at the southeast corner of Flower St. and Fifth Ave. This is an urbanized area of Chula Vista with apartment development to the west and s6uth and single family dwellings to the north and east. The project site is comprised to two lots, the westerly lot is vacant and void of any significant vegetation and the easterly lot contains a single family dwelling and various forms of domesticated vegetation. A soils report on this property has revealed that there are expansive soils under a surface layer of silty sand. No geological hazards are near. The latest school capacity condition along with anticipated students from the project are as follows: Attendance Capacity New Students Feaster Elem. 416 382 ~4 Chula Vista Jr. High 1280 1200 2-3 Chula Vista Sr. High 1255 1024 ' 1-2 B. Project 'Description The existing single family dwellin~ would be retained with its detached garage converted to a laundry room. A new two story structure would contain four 2 bedroom units and a second story one level structure over' much of the parking would provide two 2 bedroom and two 1 bedroom units. A total of 8 units in addition to the existing dwelling would be provided. 14 on site park~nc spaces would be included along with about 5700 sq. ft. of open space. The structures would be spanish in design with a tile roof. C. Identification of potential environmental effects 1. Soils Due to the existing soil conditions a potential for adverse effects is present. 2. Schools The local elementary and junior high schools are operating in excess of their capacity. D. Mitigation 1. Soils The soils engineer has made specific recommendations regarding foundation design. These recommendations should be foil©wed. 2. Schools The General Plan policies regarding the availability of educational facilities should be followed. This will insure the avail- ability of school facilities to serve this project. E. Findings 1. The site is partially vacant and the easterly section is developed with a single family dwelling. There are no signifi- cant natural or man made resources present. Adverse soil conditions are present, however, they are being adequately treated through design techniques that will insure no adverse impacts. No geological hazards are present. School facilities are over capacity in this area, however, conformance to the public facilities provision of the General Plan will insure the ability of the school districts to provide an adequate level of educational service. 2. The applicants proposal conforms to the applicable zoning and general plan land use designation and is not anticipatc~ to achieve short term to the disadvantage of long term goals. 3. There are no potential impacts expected to occur due to project implementation and no interacting elements which could cause a cumulative adverse effect are anticipated. 4. The proposed apartment project will not cause the emission of any hazardous substance or noise which could significantly degrade the quality of the existing environment. · F. Persons and organizations consulted ~ City of Chula Vista Planning Dept. Public Works Dept. Fire Dept. GMZ Developers Chris Ziegler Alpha Labratories, Inc. Soil & Foundation Engineering The Initial study application and evaluation forms documenting tke no significant impact are attached. E~IVI RONME N~ COORDINATOR EN 3 {rev. 5/77) City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 4 2. Consideration of final EIR-80-4 for South Cp]Jege Secl ~al Planning Area, Charter Point A. BACKGROUND The public hearing on the draft EIR for this project was he' on November 28, 1979 and the hearing was closed. Consideration of the final EIR~ Ps scheduled for a meeting after the revised development plan was available and recommendation from the Environmental Review Committee and Planning Department available. The Environmental Review Committee reviewed the revised deve Dpment plan on March 6, 1980. It was determined that significant environmel tal impacts were mitigated by the revised project. B. RECOMMENDATION Certify that EIR-80-6 has been prepared in compliance with t California Environ- mental Quality Act of 1970 and the Environmental Review Poli~y of the City of Chula Vista, and that the Planning Commission will review the information in that EIR as it reaches a decision on the project. C. REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN The draft EIR on this plan found that the project as proposed would have significant environmental impacts due to land form alteration and unique biological resources. The project proponent has incorporated split level units into the project. This has resulted in the elimination of most of the grading adjacent to Telegraph Canyon Road and a balanced cut and fill grading operation. The remaining elements of the project, circulation, type of development, number of dwelling units, etc., are essentially the same as the previous plan. D. ANALYSIS The following significant environmental issues were identified in the draft EIR and have been addressed by the developer: 1. Land form (Section 3.2, draft EIR). The project as previously proposed would have had a significant aesthetic impact. This impact would take place in an area designated for "natural open space" in the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. Further, the slopes facing Telegraph Canyon Road are included in the City's General Plan Scenic Highways Element. Changes in the project, incorporated in the map dated February 5, 1980, will reduce the impacts of the project on the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan Open Space to a level of insignificance by increasing the natural slope area. Landscaping treatments for manufactured slopes further mitigate aesthetic~impacts on Telegraph Canyon Road, thereby reducing to a level of insignificance int~acts on the scenic highway. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 5 2. Biology (Section 3.6, draft EIR). Significant impacts to the onsite Cleveland Sage community would have resulted from grading and filling activities on slope areas facing Telegraph Canyon Road. These activities will also endanger the burrowing owls which nest on the project site. Changes in the tentative map, dated February 5, 1980, h~e reduced grading activities on slopes facing Telegraph Canyon Road. Adherence to the map will reduce impacts on the onsite Cleveland Sage community to a level of insignificance. Further, the project applicant will initiate a zoologist-directed program to remove burrowing owls from the project site during grading activities. Implemen- tation of this program will reduce impacts on this faunal species to a level of insignificance. 3. Traffic/Street Capacity (Section 3.10, draft EIR) Vehicle trips generated by the project will use Telegraph Canyon Road and the Telegraph Canyon Road/Otay Lakes Road intersection. Both of these road system components are currently carrying high traffic volumes and the presence of a~di- tional project generated traffic will constitute a significant impact. Offsite improvements, which have been incorporated as part of the project, will mitigate to a level of insignificance the street capacity impacts of the project. These improvements will consist of the widening of Telegraph Canyon Road to four lanes eastward from the end of the existing four lane configuration to a point east of this project site. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 6 3. Consideration of CE~A findings for Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area (EIR-79-8) A. BACKGROUND 1. This EIR was certified by the Planning Commission on October 10, 1979. 2. It is the policy of the State of California that every public agency, such as the City of Chula Vista, should not approve a project if it would result in a significant environmental impact and it is feasible to substantially mitigate the impact. Only when there are specific economic, social or technical reasons which make it infeasible to mitigate an impact can a project with significant impact be approved. (See attached candidate CEQA findings.) Therefore, when an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more signif- icant environmental impacts, one of the following findings must be made: a. Changes or alternatives have been required of, or incorporated into the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR. b. Such changes or alternatives are within the responsibility and jur~- diction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. c. Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. 3. The candidate findings were the subject of discussion at the February 27, 1980 Planning Commission meeting. Consideration was continued until the March 19, 1980 meeting along with other related matters. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion certifying that in accordance with the attached "candidate CEQA findings" the: 1. Planning Commission, having reviewed and considered the information contained in EIR-79-8, finds that the implementation of specific mitigation measures recommended in the final EIR will avoid significant adverse environmental effects in the following areas: (Note - The number in parenthesis following each heading refers to the res- pective section number of the EIR.) a. Geology (3.3) b. Soils (3.4) c. Drainage (3.6) d. Archaeology (3.8) e. Transportation (3.10) f. Noise - Short-term (3.11) City Planning Commiss,on Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 7 2. Planning Commission, having reviewed and considered the information contained in EIR-79-8, finds that the mitigation of the following impacts is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies: a. Water Quality - Regional (3.7) b. Air Quality (3.12) c. Schools (3.16) d. Sewage - Regional (3.21) 3. Planning Commission, having reviewed the information in EIR-79-8, finds that there are specific economic, social, and technical considerations which make infeasible the full mitigation of the following impacts as specified in the attached supplemental "Candidate CEQA Findings": a. Landform (3.2) b. Biology (3.9) c. Aesthetics (3.13) 4. Planning Commission, having reviewed the information in EIR-79-8, adopts the following findings of "Overriding Considerations": a. The project will result in a more compact urban form and a resultant reduction in energy consumption, air pollutants, and a greater ease in providing urban services. b. The project will provide for an increase in the housing stock in an area close to the center of metropolitan San Diego. This increase will include housing for low and moderate income families. This will be of social benefit to the community. c. The extension of a major element of the city's traffic circulation system (East "H" Street) will occur as a result of project implemen- tation. d. The project will promote alternate forms of energy saving transporta- tion, such as car pooling and bus transportation with the installation of a park-and-ride facility at the intersection of 1-805 and East "H" Street. C. REVISIONS TO THE FINDINGS Since the last Planning Commission meeting concerning these findings, several refinements to the document have been made. They are as follows: 1. Number of dwelling units (Sec. A) The original plan called for 140 apartment units south of East "H" Street. The plan was subsequently modified to include housing for senior citizens and low and moderate income housing and the apartment units eliminated. The project description now reflects that change. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 8 2. Drainage (Sec. B.4) A notation has been added to this section indicating that when the City Engineer reviews the design of drainage system it will be examined to assure the protection of the public safety and general welfare. This shows that the review of plans will assure that problems, such as runoff backing up, will be resolved. Other problems, which may not be apparent until detailed engineering drawings and calculations are prepared months from now will also be resolved. The final EIR notes that the system must be designed to interface with the existing culvert and be of a capacity adequate to carry the ultimate runoff of the Rice Canyon basin. 3. Landscaping/Erosion Control (Sec. B.11) This finding has been modified to clearly state that several landscaping plans will be required. The first will be a master slope and erosion control plan. This plan must be approved prior to the issuance of any grading permit and implemented concurrent with the grading of the site. A master landscaping concept plan will also be required for the developed portion of the pro,iect site. This will include a description of the types of vegetation to be Ysed and a phasing program. As each phase of the project is implemented a more d~tailed landscaping plan will be required. 4. Paleontology (Sec. B.6) During the public hearing on related items on February 27, 1980, the question of fossilized remains in Rice Canyon was raised. The Natural History Museum was subsequently contacted. They were not aware that the EIR was a supplement to a Master EIR which did have a section on paleontology. That analysis was based on a survey of the site done for the Sports World EIR. That survey found only fossil molluscs which were noted as being common and widespread, and not unique or unusual. It was also noted that in the event of unique or unusual finds alternatives or mitigation could be required. The recent identification of marine mammal fossils on the site is of such impor- tance to require appropriate mitigation. This mitigation would include an initial survey of the property and the presence of a monitor during grading of the site. This is noted in the Candidate CEQA findings and described in detail in the proposed conditions of approval. D. DISCUSSION 1. Level of specificity. A finding that an impact is being reduced to a level of insignificance needs to be supported by evidence in the final EIR, candidate CEQA findings, conditions of approval or other reports or documents, that the impact will be mitigated. The detailed technical specific on how mitigation is to be implemented is not necessary at this stage of development regulation. It is simply necessary to know that mitigation is feasible and will be implemented. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 9 2. City responsibility vs. that of other agencies. When the review of a project's impact and mitigation is under the Jurisdiction of another agency it is the role of the city to provide cooperation and> if necessary, coordination with the project proponent. The city should not impose conditions on a developer which are in conflict with another agency's require- ments. If school districts indicate that they can provide services to a develop- ment and do not need the dedication of a school site, the city should only require that "can serve" letters be provided. Copies of notices of preparation and draft EIR's are provided to all respon- sible agencies; any comments they have should be considered by the Planning Commis- sion and other decision making bodies. ~,~T¢~..~ CA;:.~'ON f EC? ION?~L ~L~..,I..G~ ~'~ ~ ' AEEA' ~,~d~,en Vista Village" EIR 79-~ CANDIDA'FE CEQA FINDINGS ~_~, Public Resource Coae Sec. 21081) (Calif. ~-' ' ' '- ' Aa~,~nlsurat~ve Code Sec. 15088-9) - ~au= C..~ifornia nn~ ever :x]blic -:.jenuy, including the City of Chula Vista, shou!'d . . .__~ if it would result in a si~nif~=~'h ' __ ' '~ ~ it is feasible to substantially !osscn 1.'.,': ~' :~',:~- Only .,.~n there are o~eclfic economlc, social, Ca.. ::~...}],~C~. ~i~ :~lgnl~lcant impact be approved. ~ .~refore, .... =n 2}1 ~=. ~l=.~ been completed nhish e~.o or !ere :}J.g~i:'icant envirom,~ental im2act(s , ..... u~l.u .......... 3u~ =o~iC~iO~ ~.~!O~h 2 r '~ ......... ;v.~ boon a{.~o[)cea '.by such o~_r agency cr cLn alr,] snou!d -~''-" by ~uch other agency, or 1 3. '37)cci f ic economic, social, or considarations make infeasible full mitigation _ ~.c.~.. ~l__r~ ...... ye. identified ~ ~ ~-~ ~ final ~!.~. ~h~ rog .... pro3ect ls located ' ' ~ ..... ] ' ~' '-~r:~!y within the limits of the ~'~v ..... ~.. Car?on .... ional Planning Area (SPA) ~l~g l~ ~a~.~l~ .......... o~ land uses including: 328 ~' ~-~ ~; ~, d~ ell~nc;s, ~> ........... holy 275 combination elderly housin9 and ~:~o~ tr~e-lnco~e {Se~ion~= ~) family du ..... lc untus; ccn<.~n~n~umo,, ~' ' ' '- a 1S8,000 square-foot_, commercial center; a ~,.~r,~ and ride facility; a 6.5-acre park s~te; 125 acres ~' ~ ...... ~-'-~ · 9-acre elementary ocnool si~e; and ~<r~ junior hlq~-sc~ool site. %hie commercial ~nclud,~ an ~340-seat theater, 2 restaurants, banks, ~,~ o! OLzlCO space, and S retailo,.,~.~,~=.' - .... =,~. ..... ,~03 ~.~ feet. As part of the project, "~= ,c,u~' b~ e::cendc:_' as a 6-tane ~,-~c from Interstate ~5 ~out ..... s_..rn corner of tbs oroject. ,~. L ...... : .... E IHSIGNIFICA?~ fn,= fin.ul~.~-. for C~i~ Rice Ca~von_ ~ CO~C!~C]ed thee ~r~-~;~-cc' ' would," "not have any significant, adverse 1~.~,~= ..... 2 parenthesis fol!o~.~ing the issue~-~',-_~ .... to number of the EIR) 1. Land Use/Zoning/Planning (3.1) '~ Groundwater (3 3. Uater Quality - local (3.7) 4. Aobile Noise - long-term (3.11) 5. Community Social Factors (3.14) ~o,,,mun~tv Tax Structure (3.15) 7 Recreation and Open S,~ac~ (3.17) ~' Police (3.1S) ~' Uti!itl /E (3 20) ~. es nergy . !0. Sc,.~age - local (3.21) !1. Solid waste (3.22) cub-and-fill oeeration e::pectel to involve between 3.~ of =,;~ larler cany~3ns are filled. Cut may a~groach 100 feet. · ~ao~~ ~=reet, Street k, ,,ld~'' ...... }zac±±~tles, nool sites, residential and commerci;:;] =,e ?,~ca Cai:yon oP,., w!ll involve substantial ?r<,, .... i/ould leave approximately 125 acres undiscuroe~.~ o~en space ~.no incorporate architectural and l~;mG~c~_~,3~ WnlC;:~ :~ou].d lessen the project's irs)act on "' ' O~,~f~u~O~ 1S expected to bo balanced, iJ[ it occurs presently pro?osed by the applicant. Thei.,,;:.~.~r.'? of ,-h...,u }project on landform would be significant, ,,~uzg~ol~. It z$ infeasible to fully - ' '3 ~')rcj ock-rela .... ~u~ impacts to landform modification to a lew.:l · n.~n~"~'~L~nce while, at the same tirae, implementing the laqd use ob'3ec'c-' ives of ~'~n~ ~ E1 Rancho del Rey S~eclf~c' ' Plah~ ~.~- provide for hhe extension of East H Street, in accordance ': - .... ' Llternative alignments of ~-~ [2 ~- considered, uone with less impact to landform modification~ ,.~ ..... r, 7%,ol}c safety (fire and emergency vehicles) ~ en~inecr3, n,-~ CunC,:~no iictated a rejectioh oZ .... · .... ~zCaSlbl~_ ( re~-~ rence: ~ ~ ~ - ~.,,~,'.~ ...... ~ r' o..~ ,,=~ u ide, ~ed~zay/Coo.= Report, ~ ! 97 7 ). '2he ados:re:.; ]and use designations for the Rice Carryon or; c;oscribe:~ bv~,,,..~"-' E1 Rancho del Rey So~ific: ~... Plan, will recruit? .... ~'l~"~'nr_v~._,l=n~on' ? = ?- (dedicated ~ =~ ........ ~r~_~, l;ater, sewer, parh sit~=s, ?ld'2~'ly and _..o_,._~te-income housing) that make economically inf~:a:;~J. 31.: uhe reduction of impacts to landfor~ to ~ level of insignificance. 2. ~ (3.3) ~i~.~..q geologic hazard associated ~Ji~h development of ?ro ~c~rty is lin~ited to potential seismicity. The pre~cncc infcrreu ~ .u-~ ~races on the property, which ~ould be ao~u~a :~::n c~e ~,~: !lacion and Sweetwater Fault Zones, -~ susDec~ ~..~i~ ....... ~-~,~ ~-'~ investigations ~ere performed. These lll~urr ~ .- ~h~y %:oul~~] prcs(~c ~r-~cQs are not con~gidered active, holdover, "~ ~ occur in response to ground shaking produced by a distant ~r~qu~;~,' '-' .... ~... (Shepardson. Engineering Associates, February_ _l 'Z'he ~ctua]. ~,resence of fault zones has not been verified ah ' ~lm_ of initiation tine, Hut ',,ill be further investigated at the ;' of 5:fading activities. .~.~ 1 ~ioi7 ~ OU1,.~ include ac~n~ r ence to ~ .... ~ o ~, ,1~ _~co ....... _.~.on. ~ the 9eotechnical studies, ~Lnclu~l~ revl%'..~ ,'~' ': ,~ n ~] '-:~ In '-he event fault tr~-~ arc fou ~, "~,] b,:l <~,~1'~'.'~"{ ~zith r p-_~t to their ~.,o~_~1~.1 for flelo inspection of a .jualificc an~ the r~.o,~a~.n~=tlono of the '' ~ _ oils '"' ";] - geologist and applicable legislative standards ~J. il 'oe follo~.zeu'~ in final engineering and design t~chnlque~.~ ' The~e~.,.~.c; .... ~ - hazar~l on tile subject oroperty, is .Potentia!]}~ si:~nific~nt, but ~aitigable. 3. ~ (3.4) .... ~rcincj to the Shepardson~9~n(..' ~'ln~c ~,-~.,-,rt '~' ~ ~'.C), a minor araount of expansive soil was founu in ~-~'~ ho_i~;ons of the river terrace materials and in khc strata of thc Otay Formation. Erosion character'~e~ .... - ' ' hr.:vailing soils will r~uire that measures be taken to provile ~.ro~.~or projection for exposed slopes during and immediately ~.e site. ofter un~ grading of i!itilation will include the preparation of a deta~!e~, so~ls repcrt identifying on-site soil hazards and containing specific ::illii!o{~_~1~3''~r' i{cSlg'- '~ -~ to reduce any soil-related ~:~azar~s' -~ ~_o acce~}t..gl~ level. This report will be revleweG by the Clty Eh:3 .... .:r and the issuance of a grading :oermit would co~,~.~ioned on incorporation of appropriate ~ '~'~-,~' landsca ~e 'Dian will be prepared and submitted to the Ciky, prior - ~',' of ~radln~ ~ermit This ,~s~ ~ ~ - - =~ '-:~-~ to occur lmKioolataly fol].o~ im~ ~' ~' ~"~ r, rotect all bare surfaces from erosion and potential siltation drainage basins. ~"-.-~c ~..~a~,~","' ,'sire soils an~ potential erosion hazar6:.~ ]}rcs2n~ on-slue arc potentially significant, but x D~L~IIIAGE (3 6) ,i-~a :;ubjcct ~roperty drains into three Da~l~.~, Glen ,~D~p¢.,, , Lonita anc] llice Canyon. Approximately three-fourths cf thc ' ~l,_ z,~fore, th~' .~ec'c i~ located; within the Rice Canyoll Bas,n, '-~ '"~ , would bc the most affected. The EIll esnimates that ...... cn~_ cilschar~c ~rora the project would be 2070 cubic feet per nd (cfs) after development. This discharge figure is ~ ~,'~,-_,~lr, ~.~uely ~ percent greater than would naturally occur. ........... runoaa is less than that v~nz~ the "Fogg" Repor'c ,~rcJ~.ccs u?on full development, of Rice Canyon, but gr~ .... ..... ~-~r than .... a~ o~ the existing culverts which run i- ~.,p/.~asu " ~- ~,~ where discharae from ~ ~ ,~r .... Interchange, ., · ~o~, 1,i; co!lcctofl. The culverts beneath I-:~;05 are designed lu.~, , ,,n~c, a?pear to be inadequate to handl~ u]:~ 50- flood :3otential for Rice Canyon; a 50-year flood ' "~ ~ 's " ...ralll~.je syste~,] is being (~:,~lg lec~ ho co~vuy uiLimahc runoff (50-year flood) off-site and ~ne .... -~05/;:'~,s-e H Street ].xatrci~ango isas been evident in the past and would oe u~-~..3 ...... ~ o~. ~,~c_ Canyon. This smtuation will be .:ye;; eu ,~.:. the ~, o~,llation of sedimentation basins ,.:~ ~t;} :,r o 2rlau~ locations. 7 ,:r~.3nL~.~r control system for the project will be ?roi;ccc engineer, prior to approval of final ........ ~/_o~ .... ~.ne system will be c~eoljn .... adverse effects upon public safety and general wei~are. r~vl~,g~d and approved by thc drainage system design will Da a 'a~ ~- Engineer - ~ easements dedicated as necessary. ' of ' ;i. mnact t~o project on local drainage is potently013-/ ' ~,~ =~- but mitigable. _~. ~,~T~,~-~o OUALITY - ~EGIOHAL Tbs incremental increases in liquid waste created by urojcct would further overload the metropolitan treatment f~ci] ~ ~-v ,;~ Point Lores. This olant is operating ~.~ full ca :.OClCV. .._hi.,, ~nd ot..er projects, could result in docre~s.-d .,~:~-' .... ~ ~u~]{t..~ ~._ y in ~be, . vicinity of the ocean outfall. The t:rojcct may have a cumulatively sipnificant effect n~ , tho Point Loma facility and is not fully ' ' ' -- ~ .... c ...... it h in t h :-,J. tzqaole hy thins ~ro~t. Such ha ,ge~ are - rcs:~onoibility ~hu jurisdiction of other uuc~c ( ~f:~ : ~- thz City of San Diego and .... .3~ .... 1 Water '~ ,~.~,~fC~ ' -' " , '~-~' ~,<~ the control of an ~lld~lOu~ 3. ~'~2%IiAEOLOGY/PALEOi~2OLOGY ( 3. ~) 2he survey yielded eight prehistoric finds, includinq: :six sh~.~!! scatt~r:~, one flake isolate located prir~arily on a major so~ch'rest-arencin2' ridge, and one additional flak(~ isolate on a nerthw2st-trohdin~ ridge on the southern portion of thc property. lie artifacts or midden are believed to be associated with the shill scatters, and the two isolated flakes were the only a rLifccts found duriug the survey, in addition to the prehistoric finds, a small area of paleontological fossils was also IccaLcd. ~i'he proposed development would have direct impact ou the archaeological resources located on the subject property, as well as ~osing an indirect impact on SDI. 4776, 4677, and 4889, ~rchaeologica! sites located on surrounding properties. Grading of th~ ridges on the site would destroy all but two of the .?rcl,aao!ogical sites. Increased human activity, e.g., hiking, eff-roa,S veNic] ~, exploration, etc., as a result of thu i~uvelolment might cause disruption and/or destruction to identified archaeological sites on the subjeck property not dircc~iy impacted ~3y grading or uses on adjacent properties. [iihigation '.;ill include a collcction and micromap >ins }pro~ran~ for surfac~l material and limited excavation of tho~e si. Les suspectefi to have subsurface potential. In the event subsurface material is encountered, a preservation or salvage !an ~ ill be pre?ared and carried out. Control must also b~ e::crc, issd over the movement of grading equipment outside the bo~n ~aries of the property in order to protect any resources in Paleontological resources have been identified on-site, core-.rising the fossilized remains of molluscan shellfish and marine ]~ammals. A qualified paleontological researcher shall be present during initial grading activities to monitor the operation and recover significant fossil resources. 'Phs inpact of the project on archaeological an~ pa!eont.'.~logical resources is potentially significant, bu~ ~i~-ilabie. 7. BIOLOGY ?he ~r:~jech site possesses several sensitive plants, important wildlife habitat, and a disturbed vernal pool. Schsitivc plant species include Snake Cholla, Coast B~rrel Cactus, £an Diego Sunflower and Pygmy Spike-Ness. The steep- si{lcd, c.?nyons on h;_]e !property represent good wildlife habitat. 2he ,~ornni pool has been largely disturbed during construction of the ~earby a~!ueduct. Development of the property would destroy .~y of the sensitive plant populations, fill several of the c~i:yons, and possibly further disturb the vernal pool. 1 0 ............... open ..... cb included in t ~ ~<:,~ i25 { CreS oE ~'"q ~' --- praserve relatively large areas of natural t .... loss of veget- ' ' ~.~ ~l~. ly offset ,_]evelosed portions. Landscaping is expected ko vacetation. ._ and will, to a, ].imiteci extent, serve fcr original vegetation on the larger slopes. 3r,~3~"~ .... would have si~nificant~ and ~lartiallv_ mitigabie biological resources present on the Dreoerty. lm,~ct~ to biology ho an lnslgnl~iC<nt ih{~ior moiificatio~ ~A~ red~ction of the scooe El Rancho del Rey Speczfzc Plan ~}rovia~s ~{ ~ Canyon ~P~ ~,<' proposed ~" c lS project. naoztat is'- unavoidable if t'-' land uses (see discusszon ........ ,, - Cart 1 L~n~rorm) of the Rice Canyon ~,. '~-'~ ~'P~'~"' '~ N (3.10) .i, 'circ,~ '~ ~ion syster:, has been designed for the 72ice Canyon ' ' ~ t.~ ,~..,~ '~ traffic g .... ra~d ',~icn %~i!i adequately handle m ..... '-~ .... ~ 7;reject; no roads :~resently exist on-site. This ~ ........ ' ,~.:~ <~wol~gnQc~ in accordancc the Ra~ci]o del ~ ' ~,~ ~1 .... ~.l,.~n ~n%~ includes the extension of ~ .... ~'~. Street lro~ !- C05 ~o the eastern boundary of ~ ' ' - '- ' ~ e SP~ improved to a f~l~'nou~j~ the circulation pattern can accommodate the project ......... , ~,,~ ~r~,ffl~ aha sis indicates that the szx ~_ano ii~;orov:~ ~h~ ~or- East l! o~re~°~ ~' ma~:" be lna~ec]u~te' -' ' to carry t?. ~ ~.xD~=~, w~tn ultimate development of thc ~1 Rancho del P, ey. Dedication of right-of-way sufficient to provide for 2 P.~2~iuiona]. ].c~n~[~ %;ill be provided for future widening, as the ~r ic ~ ~,,~,c=o associated with ~he project are potentially o~n~_~,t, ~u,. mitigable. 9. !,,,'OISE - SHORr£-TER[I (3.11) Shorh-herm noise impacts '..;'ould be exserienced by resi~lence~z. Vhe grading operation is expected to occur at one and .-~'ill be oztensive. The major mitigation measure again~t -;onstruction noise is the restriction of operators to "normal" ~ori~in~ ~.:our';, precluding activities at night, or on ',,;eekend~ ~.~_i]:~a%i's.· No ea~uip~ent should be used which does not ~,et aip~:.iicnble Federal, State and Local (City of Chula Vista) noise The short-term noise impacts created by the construction {~'-{~o potentially significant, but mitigable. ~,C ... lt.~ are 10. AIR OUALI~Y ~ The project would incrementally add to the air pollution !_'.roblems which e~:ist on a local and regional scale as a result of construction, transportation, and energy use. The project, b? itself, would not have a significant effect on air quality. Several mitigating factors are inherent in the proposed ~ r~ark-and-ride facility is included in the ,!evelopment. co!~ ~ercial contel The proximity of shopping and schools to future residents would reduce the lengths of trips. []ass transit is expected to be available along the major str~.~ets. '2he effect of the project on air qu~iity is cumulatively sign.:.fJ, cant and partially mitigable. Com[~lete mitigation of the air <[uality i~:/~act is beyond the control of this project. It is i region-~l probleu which is the responsibility of the APCD, State .~nd Federal agencies. 13 ~.~ propose~! oroject would transform the presently vaccnt ~ rctl into aD urban development. A large portion of the natural ez,..L~on and terrain would be altered. This land use change V,:: ]' ' ' ' ' ', ~ul ~ affect th~ views of existing residences along the rim of ....... ,~on and from 1-805. Several of the cut-ant%fill slooes .sm propose_q to exceed 30 feet in height and would ~== l~res~:nt visucl quality of the area. 7. z~ mi'lJ, qalion, the applicant will to preserve approximately 125 ~:cres of natural open space. This open space is relatively concl:~uou~% .~hanclng its overall mitigating value. In -"~ ~ ~ .... ~: ap?licant ~il! preparing a ...... ter conc~puual l=ndocap= ?.~:~' has desi~ned the project to minimize topograr>hic alteration. ~ich will take 'L'?:o ?!~.n ,,~ill descrlo_ the overall plantings x~c.~ over tZe d~vc!ope~ oortion of the property. This · , proqra~: will utilize native and ada~ted species plan ~n~ ~, ~.:ill blen,3 171cll mil,= natural vegetation. Permanent ~' irri ~anion s_~=~.=,,.~..~=~+ for cut and fill slopes= will be lmplementea · ' ._ding operations, in conqunchion ~zith overall rough gr :~.;n ~3ill 13e reviewed prior to the issuance of any gradin~ --~ ........ S~lc~ental landscape plans ~or individual ~" ~ ~]:q[~es ~,i11 be required as further r~finements of the master ......... ~ ~ landsc~.pe plan. To the extent feasible, the overall ~:~]i.]n o~ th~ 9ro]ect has minzmzze~ grading and landfor~ -"- ....... o~ ~o r~muce aesthetic impacts. 14 Aesthetic iron,acts are significant and partially miti~jabla by !.a.~d~capi~-I an~ uhe project design. I~ is infeasibi~ to so~ ~let~iy r duc~3 aesthetic impact~ to a level of insignificance w~iie, at th~ same time, implementing the Rice Canyon SPA land us ~ objectives, as determined by the adopt~ E1 Rancho del Sp~cifis Plan (see discussion in Part 1, Landform S~ction). the capacity of an ~v~r~, s~z.2 junlor hiqh s nvr}rage capacity of a junior high school. districts are a!re,~dy o~or,~tln{~ aoovc thc~ir Th~- students generated by the Rice Canyon cro-,'E these facilities. ., SPA Plan currently $~..~o',.,, ~'-ns land .... ~ -~unior hi,lb~'~l'~,~0i , as ~ ~ eqUl' ,~ ~.1 in' '- this ~lX~e tot the ~ 15 ~.~-" ..... ~u~_~'-~ to reduce the impact of additional chiidrcn, ~.,~ _~ to contribute thc n ......... y fees a ~. ~ xj 1. {~ C ".i i ~; ~ ~-- I+J 0 ~ districts, or make alter..~l~ arrange' i'urtl ':: .~cre, the City of Chu!a Vista will require lette[s ~'-' ,: .3c~' ooI ~strict-' indicating ..... ~n=~ adequate education}al _~,._~_~.~S '~ '~-~ ..... will .be available. .... project would have significant iron, act on local districhs over both the short and long-term. The short-ter~ ...... t can ,- -lg~ed through the dedication of land '~P.~n:anl o~ school fees. The long-term impact is a cumulgtiv; - ' ' ' h ' ~n,~ other opm~ ,_!Eii~S'C~ i;illc 1,3 the result of this - " ' devcl ' .~- Craa Cl~ zl:,~ ~clal burden on schools by ~ ....'-~,'-~.~' ' - ','~. ' . ln~nc~ ~,~ith school z,_ ~...] ....... , ,fz,} .... cannot De comn!ctely f' ' .... . _~'- thc: ,-~r r~'_se.~_~-:- tiros, the long-term impact is considered '-o= b2 sn!y '2,-rtza!!y ,,~lctg.~ol~, reduction of long-te~ z ~.c=o to level of insigni{icanc3 is beyond the control ef an individual ~- · otc decision- ~:sroj2~= or City, and_~ the responsibility of ~ ',to ,- ,-- ~,': ~ economic constraints make inEeasible the reduction of ovara!i lens-term impacts to a level of insignificance. 3 o 'r ~ ~' only concern :rith re,~arc to fire na~c~rd 1s for ' ~=u~hflr=~ in undevelo~}ed areas within .~ potential for _ ~_n~ caused Dy increase~ prop~o~u developm'~' ~ !~ctivitv. .,: ar recommended to r3~uce (fife ..r .... ) should ")" '~ ' ' " - ' ..,~ ~ roas and lncerLa! ~o8~,..~,:a. oFu--ro_ ego .... elves: 15. !/ffi' E R (3.23) ?h{ project will create an increased demand on the Counav~s d~_,mestic water supply. This supply is, expected to decrec~se as kr.~z~na claims a larger portion of its share of Colorado ?,ivr~'r ,/i~%r. The ultimate impact cannot be predicted, but each s{-~rviced with domestic water could have a co~,~bined effect on f'~ ture supply. Partial mitigation could be accomplished by the developer ~h]3ou. gh the installation of water-conserving devices in the !?iumi3ing system and landscaping with drought-tolerant plants. A 3-r~y,~;~ter reclamation system could be installed, but the econom f~}~2~ibi!ity of this alterr:ative seems questionable. 2reject could !lave a cumulati~'!v significant and not do~aestic water su~ly. [~itigation mm.~zct ts not co~upletely within the control of is project and is the responsibility of k~glonal, City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 10 4. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): Consideration of development plan for the Rice Canyon Sectional Plannin§ Area of E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan~ Watt Industries A. BACKGROUND 1. This item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of February 27, 1980 to coincide with consideration of the tentative map. 2. The applicant has submitted a Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan for the development of the Rice Canyon area of E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan located on the east side of 1-805 in the vicinity of the extension of East "H" Street. For the Planning Commission's information, two 8~"x11" maps are enclosed in the packets to facilitate comparisons between the adopted plan for the Rice Canyon Specific Planning Area and the applicant's proposed development plan for the area. The text of the Specific Development Plan of E1 Rancho del Rey, as adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council, is also enclosed for the Commission's information. 3. Environmental Impact Report EIR-79-8 was originally certified by the Planning Commission on October 10, 1979. The candidate CEQA findings which are supplementary to the EIR were considered as an earlier agenda item. B. RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area of E1 Rancho del Rey subject to the following conditions: 1. The General Plan shall be amended at the next available General Plan hearings scheduled by the City to reflect the modification to the Specific Plan. 2. The developer shall be required to dedicate and/or construct all public facilities determined by the City Council to be necessary to serve the Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area. C. DISCUSSION 1. E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. The Rice Canyon SPA portion of the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan contains approximately 419 gross acres, with 108 acres located south of East "H" Street and 311 acres to the north. The various land use elements of the adopted E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan are as follows: Land Use Acres Commercial 35 Commercial Recreation 10 Fire Station 1 Park 5 K-6 School 10 Junior High School 30 Open Space 126 (north of "H") ,, ,, 58 (south of "H") City Planning Commission Page 11 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Dwelling Unit Range Land Use Density Range Acres Low-High Residential: 1-2 DU/acre 27 27-54 3-5 DU/acre 69 207-345 6-10 DU/acre 35 210-350 11-18 DU/acre 5 55-90 Total 416' Acres 499-839 units *This SPA plan has three additional acres not reflected on the E1 Rancho del Rey Plan (see Paragraph 2 below) 2. Applicant's proposed SPA Plan. The proposed SPA plan contains a gross acreage of 419 acres. Included in this figure are three acres of excess freeway right-of-way which are located outside ef the SPA boundary. Approximately 101 gross acres are located on the south side of East "H" Street and 318 acres on the north. The reason for the difference in the acreages on the north and south sides of East "H" Street from the E1 Rancho del Rey plan is due primarily to the proposed alignment of the street which has been shifted southerly on the proposed SPA plan. A total of 827 dwelling units are proposed o- the north side of East "H" Street and 372 units on the south side (1,199 dwelling units total). 3. Comparison of plans. To facilitate the comparison of the proposed SPA plan with the adopted E1 Rancho del Rey plan, the area will be divided into the area north of East "H" Street and the area to the south. South area a. The area devoted to commercial use has been reduced by approximately 12 acres with the boundaries readjusted by encroaching into a designated open space area along the southwesterly boundary line adjacent to the 1-805 freeway. b. As noted earlier in the report, approximately 3 acres of freeway right- of-way located at the southeast quadrant of 1-805 and East "H" Street have been included in the commercial area of the SPA. The south one acre is proposed to be used by Cat Trans for a park-and-ride operation, and the northerly two acres are to be part of a proposed auto park. The matter of zoning this property to P-C has been considered as an earlier agenda item. c. Approximately 11 acres of the designated commercial and commercial/recrea- tion area are proposed for residential development as Section 8 housing and housing for the elderly, consisting of 232 dwelling units, or a density of 21 units per net acre. No specific development plans have been submitted for this use at this time. d. Three acres of the designated commercial/recreation are proposed for tennis courts with a recreation building. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 12 e. Approximately 4 acres of the commercial/recreation and 8 acres of the open space designated along the southerly side of the road to the easterly SPA boundary (a total of 12 acres) are proposed for residential development consisting of 140 condominium units. The density of the project is 11.6 units per net acre. f. The encroachment of the commercial and residential uses into the designated open space has reduced the open space by approximately 18 acres. North area a. Two basic housing types are proposed as follows: Single family detached 329 units - 75 acres 4.4 DU/acre Condominiums 102 units - 16 acres 6.4 DU/acre Condominiums 396 units - 39 acres 10.1 DU/acre Total 827 units - 130 acres b. The plan proposes the encroachment of 27 single family lots into th~ designated open space (Lot "E"). c. The open space along the northerly boundary has been made a part of the lot area of the schools and park, but the area is consistent with the acreage designated on the E1 Rancho del Rey plan. d. A fire station site (30,000 sq. ft.) is proposed in the general vicinity designated on the E1 Rancho del Rey plan. e. An existing water tank has been incorporated into a three acre site proposed as additional open space. f. The alignment of Ridgeback Road is consistent with the E1 Rancho del Rey plan. g. The residential loop collector has been realigned and provides good access to the park and school sites. h. A street connection to Lynwood Drive was proposed. The connection will not be required at this time, however a street reservation is being required as a condition of approval on the tentative map. i. The plan provides for access to the developable properties to the nortl in the vicinity of the tank site. General a. The encroachments into the open space areas will require an amendment to the adopted E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. b. The proposed development plan constitutes a density transfer withiq the SPA as authorized under paragraph H.2 on page 10 of the text of the Specif's 9evelop- merit Plan of E1 Rancho del Rey. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 13 c. "H" Street at 108' to 136' wide, extending nearly one mile through the project occupies approximately 14 acres. d. Approximately 40 acres of the SPA (10%) will be devoted to public streets. D. ANALYSIS 1. As indicated earlier the encroachments into the open space will require an amendment to the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan which in this instance is an amendment to the General Plan. The General Plan should therefore be amended at the next scheduled General Plan Amendment hearings. 2. Number of dwelling units a. The adopted Specific Plan for E1 Rancho del Rey allocates 839 units to the Rice Canyon SPA, all of which are located on the north side of "H" Street. The applicant's plan provides 827 units on the north side plus an additional 372± units* on the south side. The justification for the units on the south side lies in Paragraph G. 3 on page 9 of the text of the Specific Plan. Pursuant to Paragraph G~ 3 the applicant may devote the acreage that could otherwise be developed commercially to residential development at 18 dwelling units per acre. Inasmuch as the anplicant is proposing only 28.5 acres of commercial while the plan allows 45 acres, the difference of 16.5 acres can accommodate an additional 297 dwelling units. The applicant's plan thus includes approximately 75 more units (372-297) than would be allowed under the adopted plan. In considering this figure, however, it must be recognized that it was derived by planimetering the various land use designations on the adopted plan plus multiplying by the applicable density factor. At the plan scale of 1"=400', a discrepancy of 75 units over 400 acres is not significant. b. It must be acknowledged that the language in the text of the adopted Specific Plan for E1 Rancho del Rey does not make it clear that the Rice Canyon SPA is intended to accommodate the 839 units allowed in the residential portion plus up to 18 dwelling units per acre for every acre of commercial that is not developed commercially. The pertinent language appears on page 9 of the text in Paragraph G. 3. In fact, the language of Paragraph H. 2 on page 10 of the text seems to argue to the contrary. Staff regrets this lack of clarity but definitely recalls that the intent was to authorize the units in the area that could otherwise be developed commercially in addition to the "normal" residential units. Staff's rationale was as follows: (1) There was concern over the potential impact of a large new center on the existing Chula Vista Shopping Center. *This number is approximate at this time as the final design of the Section 8 Housing area is not yet known. This will have to be brought back to the Planning Commission at a later date. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 14 (2) Multiple family uses are appropriately located near shopping centers. Of the various Specific Planning Areas which make up the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan, the Rice Canyon SPA is best suited for intensive residential development, if the dwelling units to be built in a "commercial" portion of the Rice Canyon SPA had to be transferred from some other part of the SPA, the effect would be to reduce the overall density in the one SPA which is best suited for increased density. c. Aside from the business of looking at the number of dwelling units which are allowed, the layout of the plan must be considered. In general the layout of the development and the land use relationships embodied in the plan are good and the building elevations submitted so far indicate that Hidden Vista Village will be an attractive development. 3. The transfer of density within a SPA may be authorized provided the transfer improves the spatial or functional relationships or increases the quality of the land use, circulation or conservation. In this instance, the developer has chosen to utilize four basic dwelling types: single family detached, townhouses, apartments, and low rise apartments. Only two of these dwelling types are proposed on the north side of East "H" Street where the E1 Rancho del Rey plan has indicatcJ four density classifications implying a variety of dwelling types. However, ~e table of translation (page 11 of the text of the Specific Development Plan of Rancho del Rey) reflects the allowance of an overlapping of dwelling types in the density classification, therefore, the proposed plan is in substantial conformance with the E1 Rancho del Rey plan. 4. The encroachment of the commercial use into a portion of the open space area adjacent to 1-805 on the south side of East "H" Street is justifiable since the proposed grading plan provides a level area which bears little relationship to the adjoining hillside open space area and a space that can better be incorporated into the commercial development. The encroachment of the easterly residential development into the open space area along the south side of "H" Street permits the density of the garden apartments to be 11 dwellings per acre rather than 18 The expansion of residential development into the designated open space permits the site plan to open up internally, resulting in a more livable project with more usable space provided within the project. Further, retention of this area as open spac would serve little purpose. It would simply be a narrow strip between the base the hills to the south and "H" Street to the north which has little natural or scenic value. 5. The proposed residential encroachment into the designated open space on the north side of "H" east of Ridgeback Road is not acceptable unless the developer is willing to provide some form of quid pro quo to the City. The ~'eveloper should make a specific proposal to the City if development is desired in this area. E. FINDINGS The Planning Commission may recommend approval of a SPA plan provided it finds that the facts submitted with the plan establish that: City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 15 1. Yhe proposed sectional plannin~ area plan is in conformity with the genera? development plan of the P-C zone, a~d adopted specific plans, and the Chula vista general plan and its several elements. The proposed 827 dwelling units on the north side of East "H" Street is within the allowable range of 499 to 839 units designated on the E1 Rancho del Rey Plan. The overall density of 18 dwelling units per acre proposed on the south side of East "H" Street is also in conformance inasmuch as the text of the plan authorize~ residential development to occur in the area designated as commercial on the adopted plan. The encroachment of some of these units into the area designated as open space on the adopted plan is not in conformance with the adopted plan~ However, in staff's judgment it represents a reasonable use of that land which would otherwise have no great value for open space purposes as it is a narrow strip between "H" Street and the base of the hills. The use of that area for condominiums enables the Section 8 housing to be provided adjacent to the shopping center. Staff believes the trade-off of this open space for 232 units of Section 8 housing is acceptable and recommends that the adopted plan be amended to reflect the applicant's proposed plan. 2. The proposed sectional planning area plan would promote the order~ sequentialized development of the involved sectional planning area. The proposed development will be developed in a west to east manner as se~ forth by City Council policy. The plan provides for access to other areas subject to development. 3. The proposed sectional planning area would not adverse~ affect adjacent land use, residential enjoyment, circulation, or environmental quality. Single family detached housing is proposed adjacent to the Lynwood Hills area. Since the plan is in general conformance with the adopted E1 Rancho del Rey plan, it should not adversely affect the adjacent land uses. I .I Dens,fy !\._ ~1""~. Open Spoce -,.2 Med,um/Low pork: ~:~:::;~ ;~ ~- ~-\~::~.~ ~ Jr High ~i::::::::~.~::~:--"~.~ ~:::::::: ~%~. ":~ ~7' Open ~e '~ X %./ ~¢~L X __ _~. 400' QOO [ ADOPTED PLAN FOR THE ~ SPECIFIC ~NNIN5 AREA N~TH ~~ · · OPEN I Ele. t' ' - . :528 d.u. '; " (6e as.) .-f--~-, ~emial ~e OPEN I // OPEN ( 40 goo SPACE ENCROACHMENT INTO ~SIGNATED OPEN SPACE Exhibit. __ Pcs eo"~ ~ PcM ~J=PUCAN'I~ PROPOSED DEVEL.CPidENT PLAN FOR THE RICE CANYO. ~ 805 · -H- ~T~ET City Planning Commission Page 16 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 5. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): Consideration of tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 80-13, Hidden Vista Village, Watt Industries A. BACKGROUND This hearing was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of February 27, 1980 to allow the staff time to formulate appropriate conditions based on the input received in the public hearing and staff analysis. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the tentative subdivision map for Hidden Vista Village, Chula Vista Tract 80-15, subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall grant a sewer and access easement to the adjoining 14+ acre parcel (Gilbert Dreyfuss) which abuts the southeast corner of Hidden Vista Village; said easement to be of sufficient width to provide two way access for the seven dwelling units allowed to be built under the R-1-H zone. The easement is to be coordinated with the easterly acc?ss point of the condominium development proposed on Lot 334. 2. The overall landscaping plan, including the equestrian trail extending from the west end of the Lynwood Hills area with linkage provided to the neighborhood park, shall be subject to final approval by the city's land- scape architect. The equestrian trail shall be developed, including proper signing, prior to or concurrent with the certification of slopes in the initial grading stages. The trail shall be installed prior to the granting of any building permits in Phase II. 3. Slope planting and irrigation plans shall encompass the total grading of the site as Phase I and shall include street trees and tree planting in canyon areas. 4. The project landscape architect shall be under contract to supervise landscape construction throughout the total project. The landscape architect will be required to address finish grades, drainage, pedestrian ways, hardscape, recreation areas, overlooks, irrigation, planting ~ maintenance. 5. A master plan of slope areas shall be submitted to the city prior to the issuance of a grading permit delineating maintenance responsibility a. Individual home owners. b. Home Owners Association. c. Open Space Maintenance District. d. Commercial business properties. 6. The developer shall dedicate the necessary properties and request that an Open Space Maintenance District be established prior to the recordation of the final map. City Planning Commission Page 17 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 7. The landscape architect shall develop finish grading plans, providing for the flattening of slopes to a ratio less than 2:1 wherever permitteC 8. The landscape architect shall consider the use of crib walis in certain areas involving steep slopes of high visibility to reduce grading. 9. The pedestrian easements shown at the end of Vista Coronado and Vista Nacion connecting to street "C" in Hidden Vista Village shall be eliminated. 10. The developer shall submit a revised map for the phasing of units and street improvements, which shall include but is not limited to the following: a. In addition to the standard street improvements planned for each phase of development, the developer will be required to make tile full improvement of "H" Street up to and including the intersection with street "K" as well as the full street improvements on street "K" ~rom "H" to the north side of street "E". b. Street "K" shall be improved from street "C" to Ridgeback. c. The first three phases shall include not more than 400 dwelling u~ i~s north of "H" Street. Phase IV shall require the constructio~ of the south side of "H" Street from street "K" to Paseo Del Rey and shall include the construction of the 20 acre commercial site as well as the senior citizens and low income housing area. Within project boundaries the half section for "H" Street shall be shown on the tentative map. Outside the project boundaries, the street section shall consist of a 32 foot paved roadway, with no median, and 4 foot graded shoulders on each side. In addition, Ridgeback Road shall be fully improved from street "K" to street "R". d. No major road construction will be required in phases V and vi; however~ Phase VII shall include full improvements of Ridgeback Road From street "H" to street "K". e. The remainder of street "H" within the project boundaries shal~ be completed with the last phase in accordance with the section ~m i~e tentative map, less credit for offsite portions of street "H". Ridgc back Road from street "R" to the easterly boundary of the project will also be required with the final phase unless a final map for a development east of this boundary requiring access by way ef Ridgeback Road is approved. If a final map is approved, Ridgeback Road shall be completed within six months of such approval. ll. During site grading a lot by lot inspection shall be made on those lots which are in the "plane of weakness" zones. If disturbed soils are found further recommendation shall be required from the project soils engineer. These recommendations should include removal of the disturbed soils and replacement with suitable material. In the event that any fault zones are found during grading o~ Lhe site~ a field investigation shall be required (by a registered geo! ~gist) and any subsequent recommendations incorporated into the project of project design. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 15 12. Prior to any clearing or grading of the site, all substantial individual plants of snake cholla (opuntia parryi var. espintina) coast barrel cactus (ferocactus vividencens) and Mojave yucca (yucca schidigera Roezl e× Ortiges) shall be transplanted to an appropriate site on or off the subject site. An appropriate site is a cut slope with non-natlYe vegetation, not irrigated, and should have a southern exposure. This transplantation program shall be under the supervision of a qualified botanist. No parking or storage of construction associated equipment or vehicles shall be permitted in natural open space areas or on undisturbed areas off site. 13. Prior to any grading or clearing of the property, Sites RC-1 and RC-.9 (ref. EIR) shall be mapped, recorded and any surface material collected. Sites RC-2 through RC-7 (ref. EIR) shall have preliminary testing conducted. This testing shall include micro-mapping, controlled surface collection, and a posthole series at each site. At the conclusion of this work, a report describing the conclusions of the field work and making any further recommendations, shall be filed with the Environmental Review Coordinator and such interested organizations as the San Diego Museum of Man and the San Diego State University Cultural Resource Management Laboratory~ 14. Prior to any grading or clearing of the site it shall be surw~ed by a qualified paleontologist. A report shall be prepared and filed ,~i~n ~]h~ San Diego Natural History Museum. A qualified paleontological monitor shall be present at the pregradi~g conference with the developer, grading contractor and the Environmental Review Coordinator. The purpose of this meeting will be to consul~ and coordinate the role of the paleontologist in the grading of the site. A qualified paleontologist is an individual with adequate knowledge and experience with fossilized remains likely to be present to identify them in the field and is adequately experienced to remove the resources for further study. The paleontologist monitor shall be present during the grading of the Pliocene San Diego formation (Tsd) on the site. The monitor shall have the authority to temporarily direct, divert or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains (primarily marine mammals). At the discretion of the monitor, recovery may include washing and picking of soil samples for micro-vertebrate bone and teeth. The developer shall authorize the deposit of any resources found en the project site in an institution staffed by qualified paleontologists~ such as the Natural History Museum (o~erated by the San Diego Society o~ Natural History). The developer should be aware of the random nature of fossil occurrences and the possibility of a discovery of remains of such scientific and/or educational importance which might warrant a long term salvage operation. City Planning Commission ~age 19 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 15. All dwelling units shall be designed to provide residents with an interior noise level of 45 dBA or lower. Additionally all exterior private open space areas (patios, balconies, etc.) shall be shielded from substantial noise sources such as traffic on 1-805, Ease "H" Street, the commercial center, etc., by earthen berms, walls, buildings or similar barriers. 16. The following map revisions shall be made: a. Increase the centerline radius for street "D", east of street "J"~ from 200 feet to 300 feet. b. Increase the centerline radius for street "C" west of street "A" (by Lot 72) from 200 feet to 250 feet (or improve sight distance with acceptable slope/wall treatment). c. Typical section No. 2 for East "H" Street should be placed under the superelevated typical section for East "H" Street. d. Note No. 17 shall be revised to include Ordinance 1687 in addi~i,)n to Ordinance 1369. e. Note No. 20 shall be revised to refer to Ordinance 1797. 17. The maximum street 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 street. 18. The knuckle in street "R" shall be constructed in accordance with the Type II knuckle of CVDS 6 of the Chula Vista Design and Construction Standards. All other knuckles within the subdivision shall be con- structed according to the Type I knuckle. 19. All cul-de-sacs within the subdivision shall be constructed in accordance with CVDS7 of the Chula Vista Design and Construction Standards. 20. Alley type approaches with minimum curb radii of 25 feet shall be i~ovided at the entrances to Lots 331 through 335. 21. The developer shall grant, on the final map, a street reservation for street "C" from Street "A" to the southerly right-of-way line for Lynwood Drive~ and post a cash bond to guarantee the construction of improveme~t~ within said street "C". A turnaround providing for access to Lot 53 sha~ be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 22. The developer shall participate in the construction of roads and major public facilities in the manner provided therein if a reimbursement district has been established prior to approval of the final map. Ninimum requirements will require the developer to install those improvements discussed in condition "23'~ below. If the reimbursement district provides that those improvements exceed his "fair share", the developer shal~ be reimbursed by future developers. (A proposal for a reimbursement district providing a method of financing for the improvement of East "H" Street and other major thoroughfares is City Planning Commission Page 20 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 being proposed by a private developer. This proposal may be completed and the resulting reimbursement district adopted by the City Council prior to approval of the final map for Hidden Vista Village~) 23. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of East "H" Street within the project boundaries as shown on the tentative map and listed on the attached phasing schedule if the reimbursement district has not been established prior to approval of the final map. In addition, he shall be responsible for the construction of East "H" Street from the easterly project boundary to the future westerly right-of-way line of Paseo del Rey. These offsite improvements shall include, but not be limited to, a 32 foot wide strip of pavement and a 4 foot graded shoulder on each side within a 50 foot right-of-way. The developer shall be responsible for acquiring this right-of-way and dedicating it to the city prior to approval of the final map. A credit for all required offsite work for East "H" Street shall be applied against work on the northerly half of East "H" Street be~e'n street "K" and the easterly project boundary. 24. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of the Rise Cc.,yon trunk sewer from the existing 15 inch sewer north of East "H" Street to the Spring Valley outfall. He may request a reimbursement agreement and repayment diagram for those portions of sewer constructed which will benefit other properties. The size of this sewer along with all other sewer in East "H" Street shall be approved by the City Engineer. 25. The maximum spacing of sewer manholes shall be 400 feet. 26. Sewer main cleanouts per Regional Standard Drawing S-3 shall be provided at all locations where there are sewer plugs. 27. Due to the change in grade of the sewer in street "L", a manhole shall be required in front of Lot 247. 28. Public sewer shall be constructed in the private streets in Lots ~l thro~gh 335 and also within the parking area of Lot 337. Easements for access and utilities in the same areas shall be granted to the city. The exact loca- tion and size of said easements shall be approved by the City Engineer. Sewers shall also be constructed within sewer easements on the west sides of Lots 15 and 18 to the subdivision boundary. 29. Sewer constructed under slopes shall be aligned so as to lie perpendicular to the top and toe of said slopes. 30. All sewer laterals, regardless of size, shall be constructed ?erpendicular to sewer mains. 31. The storm drain system shown on the tentative map is approximate only. The entire system, including locations and sizes of all facilities, shall be approved by the City Engineer as a part of the improvement ~lans. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 21 32. Considerable ponding at the entrance of the existing double barrel 84 inch pipes near East "H" Street and Interstate 805 is required for the system to handle the 50 year flow. Sufficient head must we main- tained on these pipes to ensure there is capacity to handle the 50 year flow. All additional drainage structures connected to these pipes shall be designed to handle the ultimate 50 year storm as indicated in the city's Fog§ report and shall also take into account the hydraulics of the existing system. Siltation and maintenance shall be main considera- tions in the design of the drainage system. 33. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of cross-gutters where they are determined to be necessary by the City Engineer. 34. The pads for Lots 1 through 7 shall be graded to drain into Streets, "D" and "E". 35. Drainage from the slopes at the rear of Lots 8 through 12 shall not ~ permitted to drain into the adjacent properties to the west. 36. An unobstructed sight distance of 400 feet shall be provided along ?idge- back Road for a car on street "R". 37. Tops of slope banks shall be located a minimum distance of l0 f:et from the edge of any public right-of-way or a 48 inch high fence shall be constructed between the top of slope and right-of-way in accordance with city standards. 38. During the progress of land development operations, the developer shall take all safety precautions reasonably necessary to protect adjacent property from damage due to erosion, flooding, silting, and other storm related hazards which are a consequence of his operation. Measures to mitigate the above mentioned hazards shall be incorporated into the final grading plans. 39. Drainage from pads shall not be permitted to flow over slopes. 40. The developer shall grant to the city, by grant deeds, one foot ccntrol lots in locations to be determined by the City Engineer. 41. The developer shall grant to the city easements for street tree planting and maintenance along dedicated streets as determined by the City Engineer and the City Landscape Architect. 42. Letters of permission from adjacent property owners shall be obtained for any offsite work. 43. The developer may be required to dedicate portions of the proposed open space along East "H" Street for right-of-way purposes in those areas where the proposed right-of-way width for East "H" Street is less than 126 feet. An offer of such dedication, if required, shall be accomplished on the final map. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 22 44. Prior to issuance of building permits for the first phase, the develcp~r will be required to have plans submitted and approved by the Fire Chief for the fire station planned within the development. Construction plans for the station and the required bonding must be devised to have the station completed with the last phase of development. 45. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit and have approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation the landscaping and irrigation plans for the neighborhood park site designated on the approved plan. Construction of the park is to be completed with the completion of Phase IV. Design features of the park shall include, but are not limited to, play equipment, which is determined by the Director of Parks and Recreation to be necessary for the overall improvement of the park. 46. The developer shall be required to dedicate to the appropriate school district the elementary school site and approximately one-half of the junior high school site extending from the easterly boundary of the neighborhood park to the San Diego water line. Both sites sbali be graded in accordance with the approved grading plan as shown on tiaa tenta- tive map. Each of the school districts will be required to make a deter- mination within three months of the date of the action by the P~annin~ Commission as to whether or not the dedication of said sites is accept- able to the district. Failure of the districts to respond within this period, or a response indicating that the sites will not be required by the districts, will officially remove the areas as designated school sites and will cause the developer to resubmit revised grading plans for the area, which will be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and the Director of Planning. The payment of fees shall not be included in addition to the required dedication unless mutually agreed upon by the school district and the developer, or unless evidence of overcrowding is presented as required by city ordinance. Fees may also be substituted in lieu of requiring dedication and grading, subject to mutual agreement by the school district and the developer. 47. The minimum usable lot pad area for the single family lots shall be established at 50'x90' unless specific plans for the development cF those lots not meeting these dimensions are submitted for Planning Depart~ent approval prior to the recordation of the final map. 48. All corner lots will be limited to single story construction. 49. A minimum of 20 per cent of the lots having less than 7,000 sq. Ft. of area shall be developed with one story units with the mixture to be subject to Planning Department approval. 50. The architecture of single family homes shall be subject to review by the Planning Department and is to be consistent with the general architectural theme of adjoining condominium developments; the architecture shall be referred to the Planning Commission and City Council if the applicant and the Planning Department cannot reach agreement. City Planning Commission Page 23 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 51. The developer shall file with the city an overall fencing plan address~nq corner lots, rear lots which back up to public streets, and view lots. T~,e overall fencing plan shall be approved by the city prior to the issuance of any building permits. 52. The CC&R's recorded for each of the development areas, including the single family homes, shall specify that all walls and fences shown on the approved fencing plan filed with the city shall be the responsibility of the individual home owner or the home owners association to maintain in good condition or replace and repair if so notified by the city. 53. The following lots shall be adjusted by dedicating the rear slope bank, or a portion of the rear area (a minimum distance of l0 feet from the sidewalk) to be placed in an open space maintenance district to insure landscaping maintenance: Lots 36 through 45, 48 through 52, 102 through 106, 193 through 199, 257 through 259, 272 and 273, 285 through 287, 303 through 308. The final adjustment of these lot lines will be subject to Planning Department approval prior to the recordation of the final map. 54 Lot 193 shall be deleted unless the usable pad width complies with the minimum 50 ft. width established as an earlier condition. 55. All development in the single family detached home area shall be subject to the standards of R-l-7 zoning regulations as set forth in the city's municipal code. 56. All corner lots containing a downslope to the usable pad shall utilize a retaining wall to eliminate the slope with said area to be filled to the level of the walk. 57. An irrevocable offer of dedication shall be given to the city for the major slope banks located within the condominium area along "H" Street and along the northerly boundaries of the north condominium development, as well as the landscaped areas screening the parking area for the condominiums on the south side of "H" Street. The developer shall be required to request that an open space maintenance district be established for the entire Hidden Vista Village development; however, fees will not be imposed upon the condominium areas for the maintenance of the above mentioned areas unless said areas are not being maintained to standards acceptable to the City Council. If such determination is made in the future, the City Council may impose any necessary fees to insure a satisfactory level of maintenance. This condition shall be stipulated in the CC&R's for the cc;~dcr.~niu? ~rea and filed with the city. 58. In addition to the requirement specified in condition 57, the developer shall include conditions in the CC&R's for the condominiums a prohibition of garage conversions, as well as the renting or leasing of garage space for miscellaneous storage to anyone other than a tenant or owner of the unit. Storage of boats and trailers or vehicles in inoperable condntion shall be strictly prohibited in the designated open parking areas. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 24 59. The developer shall submit revised architectural drawings for the condo- minium area showing the location of a combination of solid stucco wall~ and/or solid wood fencing with a horizontal cap for the balcony and patio areas relating to each specific architectural style of building proposed. Balcony areas may utilize vertical styles or solid horizontal siding sub- ject to the approval of the Planning Department. The 2x6 horizontal style planned for the balcony railings, patio fence and stairways for the condo- miniums located on the south side of "H" Street shall be replaced with materials meeting the standards listed above. 60. Detailed site and architectural plans shall be submitted for each of the recreational areas including the recreation building, and will be subject to Planning Department review and approval to insure the proper function and separation of each area from the adjoining residences. The Planning Department will review each area prior to or concurrent with the issuance of a building permit. 61. Approximately every fifth guest parking space shall be developed as a compact space with the shorter distance allowing the planting of additional trees to soften the parking area. 62. The developer shall submit for Planning Department approval a p~an for textured paving material to be utilized in the entry drive and ~!uster area of condominium development and specific architectural details of garage door treatment to make them an attractive element of the building design. 63. A plan providing for the pedestrian flow within each of the condominium areas shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. 64. The developer shall expressly prohibit the construction of any additions, including patio structures within the condominium areas unless plans are filed with the city and approved for limited patio structures which are architecturally compatible with the buildings. 65. A revised tentative map shall be submitted incorporating the street names suggested in the report to the Planning Commission of March 19, lgso. 66. Construction of Lots 335 through 338 shall be prohibited until such time as detailed plans are approved by the City Council. 67. The City Council shall not take action on the final map nor shall there be any grading permits issued until the city is in receipt of a letter in~i~at- ing that the area can be adequately served for water. 68. The proposed access road to the Sweetwater Authority water tank shall be relocated to the northerly end of street "F". City Planning Commission ?age 25 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 C. DISCUSSION This staff report will begin by discussing the major items which were brought up in testimony offered at the February 27 public hearing and will then proceed to discuss the Hidden Vista Village plan. 1. Items of interest expressed through public testimony on February 27. a. The property owner (Gilbert Dreyfuss) of some 14+ acres of land located adjacent to the southeast corner of Hidden Vista Village expressed a desire to have access provided through the condominium development planned for the south side of "H" Street (see Exhibit D). It was noted by the staff that access could be provided from either this project or through the designated open space adjacent to the east in the Del Rey Sectional Planning Area. The developer of Hidden Vista Village has agreed to grant this owner an easement of sufficient width to provide access to the site. The easement will be located near the easterly end of the project to coin- cide with an access drive serving the proposed condominium development. The staff concurs that the location of this easement will be beneficial to the city since it will eliminate the need to provide an additional access point on to "~" Str£~t. b. A point was raised at the public hearing regarding the need to trmvidr open space in smaller increments scattered throughout the development as ~pposcJ to the plan which concentrates the open space into three major areas, en~ompassing approximately 44 per cent of the total project. These open space areas proposed by the applicant closely parallel the adopted E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan which provides the basic framework for the location of open space. Therefore, the sub- division design is in compliance with the Specific Plan. In addition, each condominium cluster has its own recreation area. c. Questions were raised regarding the proposed debris and sedimentation basin planned at the east end of the project which would be designed to intercept and minimize debris and siltation of the drainage to be carried in underground pipes through the full length of the project. While no specific designs have been submitted as of this date, the design for the sedimentation basin will be subject to the approval of the City Engineer at the time detailed grading plans are submitted for the project. The applicant's engineer has indicated that the basic design will likely involve a substantial area of the Rice Canyon floor abutting the north side of "H" Street at the east end of the project. Estimated maintenance costs will be prepared prior to Council action on this item to best determine the most logical method of handling maintenance costs. It is quite possible that the future developments in the La Canada, Del Centro, and North College areas, which are the primary contributors to the siltation, will ~e responsible for the cost of maintaining this facility. d. Staff discussed the desirability of providing a connection to Lynwood Drive to avoid requiring future residents of this area, as well as the co~nty residents of the Lynwood Hills area, to utilize the 1-805 freeway as the primary means of access between the two areas. As pointed out in the EIR the number of trips generated from Hidden Vi~ta Village would appear to be rather insignificant based upon the calculations of the traffic consultant. There are, of course, several factors which would likely influence the number of trips: (1) whether or not the school districts go ahead with the construction of even temporary facilities City Planning Commission Agenda Items for the Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 26 on the elementary and junior high school sites planned within the development: (2) the number of trips that would be generated to and from the regional shopp~n~ center planned in National City which will have a direct link to Lynwood Drive at Bonita Road. As mentioned in the previous report, both the Fire Department and the Police Department have determined that a connection would be beneficial to their ability to serve the area, not necessarily in the immediate future but in the overall long range plans for the area. Since Lynwood Drive, as well as that portion of the road which would provide the necessary linkage, is located in the county, the developer would be obligated to comply with any county improvements imposed in conjunction with this connection. The county has supplied the city staff with a copy of the conditions they feel are warranted by the development, which include a substantial widening and increase of curve radiuses, which would drastically change the existing character of Lynwood Drive and impact all of the adjoining property owners from the point of connection down to Bonita Road. The present pavement width is approximately 22 to 24 feet, which will accommodate two way traffic. The county has recommended that the road be widened to 36 feet, which would provide for the same number of moving lanes with a ?,rking area adjacent to each lane. Therefore, the widening that the county has suggested would not provide additional travel lanes, although the increased radiussq wou~S provide for smoother and safer traffic movement. After weighing the input from the residents of Lynwood Hills, as well as the requirements to be imposed by the county, the staff is recommending that the connection not be made at this time, but that the developer supply the city with a street reservation with the necessary bonding to complete the street improvements at some future date. This will allow the city to assess traffic movements in the area without the connection, while maintaining the ability to make the connection in the future based upon city and county needs. e. Reference was made at the meeting and two letters were received by the staff relating to past discoveries of fossils in this area and the need for a paleontology study for the determination of possible canyon areas to be set aside in the form of open space. After reviewing the matter further, the city's Environ- mental Review Coordinator has recommended that a qualified paleontologisL be involved in a meeting with the developer and the grading contractor prior to any grading of the area and be present during the grading operation of specific areas to insure recovery of fossil remains. f. The issue was raised as to whether or not the lot sizes proposed for houses adjacent to Lynwood Hills would be comparable in area. The typical lot size within the Lynwood Hills area is 10,000 to 13,000 square feet; whereas, the adjacent lots planned for Hidden Vista Village vary from approximately lO,O00 square feet adjacent to the east side of Lynwood Hills to 12,000 square feet for lots planned on the south side, and approximately 14,000 square feet for lots planned on the west side. Approximately half of the lot area planned for the lots on the west side is taken up by a non-usable slope bank, however, this slope bank provides for a substantial grade difference, placing the pads nearly 50 feet below Lynwood Hills. Thus, it is staff's opinion that the lot sizes proposed in the immediate area of Lynwood Hills are comparable to the existing lots in the area. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 27 g. While there was no specific discussion regarding two pedestrian ease- ments which are shown to connect the Hidden Vista Village with the stub streets e~ Vista Nacion and Vista Coronado, the staff has received word through the developer's engineer that the residents of the Lynwood Hills area are opposed to these pedestri~ ways. The developer was providing these two points of connection at the staff's request to provide the children of the Lynwood area convenient access points to the two school sites planned within the development. It is possible that the children could use the equestrian trail planned to connect to the east end of the Lynwood area and extending along the northerly boundaries of the adjacent Sweetwater Authority water tank site. Thus, if the residents in the area do not wish to have the pedes- trian connections as designed at the end of both streets, staff would recommend that these be eliminated. 2. Phasing. a. As mentioned in the attached, February 27 staff report, the first phase of construction is scheduled to begin in August, 1981, with the last phase schcJuled in April, 1985. In addition to the standard street improvements planned to concide with each phase, the developer will be making the full improvements of "H" Street up to and including the intersection with K Street in the first phase. b. With the completion of the first three phases the developer ~?!1 hr~e built nearly 400 dwelling units north of "H" Street and adjacent to K Stieet. It is staff's opinion that this would be a reasonable time to commence construction of the neighborhood park. c. Phase IV, which is scheduled to start in January, 1983, will involve the construction of the south side of "H" Street easterly of K Street. The staff has asked that development begin on the proposed 20 acre commercial site as well as the construction of the senior citizen and low income housing area, tentatively planned for approximately 232 units, at this time. The northerly portion of "H" Street is not planned for installation until the last phase of building construc- tion, scheduled for 1985. d. It will be necessary for the developer to submit a revised phasing schedule for both units and road construction subject to the approval of the City Engineer and the Planning Director. e. The matter of requiring the applicant to extend "H" Street easterly of his property a distance of 2500+ feet to the intersection with Paseo Del Rey has been studied by the Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. While such a req~ire- ment is burdensome on the developer, it is justified in this case for the following reasons: o Without such an extension there is only one way into and out of the subject development area--via "H" Street to 1-805 and Hilltop Drive. A development of approximately 1200 dwelling units requires at least two good access routes for reasonable traffic circulation and emergency service. The presence of the La Nacion fault system through this area could mean that the area would be isolated in the event of a major earth- quake. The presence of a second street connection minimizes this ~anger of isolation. o The city has taken the position in E1 Rancho del Rey that each develop- ment in the area will benefit to some extent from the construction of "H" City Planning Commission Page 26 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Street and that each area should therefore participate in the construc- tion cost. The area between the easterly property line of the subject property and Paseo del Rey is designated as "open space" on the south side of "H" and as residential, 2-3 and 3-5 DU/acre, on the no~-th side of "H" Street. Those areas will place a much smaller demand on "H" Street than will the 1200~ dwelling units and shopping center on the subject property, so it is appropriate that they should pay a smaller amount of the cost. It is possible that the subject property would have an obliga- tion under a reimbursement district "fair share" formula to do more than extending "H" Street through the subject property. o The extension would make possible a reduction in vehicle miles traveled with consonant savings in energy and a reduction in air pollution. o Should the extension not be provided, the subject development could exist for many years as a large cul-de-sac type of development connected to the remainder of the city by only one access road. If necessary, the city's eminent domain authority could and should be utilized to acquire the necessary right of way. 3. Fire Station. A portion of the Hidden Vista Village single family development involving some 27 lots is proposed to be constructed east of Ridgeback Road in a portion of an area designated as open space. In order to gain city acceptance to build in this area, the developer has offered to construct a fire station facility, consisting of a single family dwelling with an oversized garage which could accommodate the fire equipment. The facility would be located on the proposed lot to be dedicated to the city for a fire station site. In staff's judgment the value of the open space exceeds the value of the fire station. However, consideration should be given to the offsite extension of "H" Street required under the recommended conditions of approval. Staff believes that a portion of that offsite extension can justifiably be attributed to the applicant's development, but a portion should also be regarded as a trade off for encroachment into the open space by these 27 lots. As pointed out in the earlier report, the total amount of open space being provided within Hidden Vista Village is equal to that shown on the adopted E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. 4. Park Requirements. a. Under the city's adopted formula for park dedication the developer is obligated to provide 322 square feet of developed park land for each o~ Lne sinc family dwelling units and 272 square feet of developed park land for each of the 638 condominium units. This brings the developer's obligation to 6.4 acres. The neighborhod park site as shown on the proposed subdivision map has a pad area of 5.8 acres with an additional 30,000 square feet of land being offered for the fire station site. The total for the park and fire station site meets the city require- ments for park land development. b. In addition to the park land dedication ordinance, the city has ~ residen- tial construction tax fee which has been used for park development as ~ell as providing other necessary public facilities. The city has not required the payment City Planning Commission Page 29 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 of such fees where the developer has been required to design and construct a "turn key" park in conjunction with his development, such as the requirement being recommended in this project. c. This map also includes an 11 acre parcel which is committed to the development of low and moderate income and senior citizens housing. The residential construction tax and park fees associated with the development of approximately 232 units for this area would total $100,000. At such time as specific plans are requested to develop this site, the developer will be obligated for those fees unless the City Council chooses to waive the fees to facilitate the development. 5. Schools. a. Although the Planning Department has been in constant contact with both the Chula Vista Elementary and the Sweetwater school districts, the latest letters (copies attached) indicate that the districts are still negotiating with the developer in an attempt to reach a mutual agreement on the method of providing education facilities for this tract. The elementary school district h~s indicated that they have reached a tentative agreement with the developer and may have a final decision prior to the March 19th meeting. b. Ordinance No. 1848, adopted by the City Council in January 1~79, sets forth the procedure for the school districts to negotiate with the developer in taking all reasonable steps possible to alleviate overcrowding of school facilities. The ordinance provides that the city may require both the dedication of land and payment of fees to address the issue of overcrowding if the school districts present clear and convincing evidence of overcrowding together with an equitable fee schedule based on the proposed development. c. The ordinance provides that the Planning Commission shall determine whether to request the dedication of land with development, or the payment of fees, or a combination of both. In discussing the matter further with the City Attorney, it is obvious that the Planning Commission is not in a position at this time to make such a determination without specific input from both districts. d. Based on the projected student generation of approximately 500 elementary school children and nearly 600 junior high and high school students, the staff would recommend that the Planning Commission ask for the grading and dedication of the elementary school site, and the grading and dedication of approximately one-half of the junior high school site, extending from the easterly boundary of the park to the San Diego water line, with the remaining one-half of the site to the east to be reserved, with the stipulation that both school districts shall determine within three months after action by the Planning Commission whether or not the dedication of said sites is acceptable to the districts. Failure to respond within this period or a response indicating that the sites will not be required by the districts will remove the areas as school sites and cause the developer to resubmit the revised grading plans for this area to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and the Planning Director. e. The payment of fees will not be required in addition to the required dedication unless evidence is presented as required by the city ordinance. However, fees may be used in lieu of the required dedication and grading subject to the school districts and the developer reaching an agreement. City Planning Commission Page 30 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 6. Land Development. a. Single Family Area. As mentioned in the previous report, approximately half of the single family tots are between 6,000 and 7,000 square feet in area, which represents a higher percentage of lots under 7,000 square feet than would be allowed under standard R-1 zoning (30% would be allowed under standard zoning). This factor should be weighed in evaluating the benefits conferred by the city in this approval vs. the public facilities being required by the approval. There are a few lots within the development which have a usable pad depth of less than 90 feet, therefore, it will be necessary to place conditions on the map establishing a minimum pad size of 50'x90' to insure that all lots are developable under standard building practices. Although architectural plans have not been submitted and are not required for single family development, the smaller lot size typically dictates a higher percentage of two story units which can create a more crowded look in a subdivision. Therefore, the staff is recommending that corner lots be limited to one story construction and that a mixture of one and two story houses be provided on th~ smaller lots. The mixture could be controlled through Planning Department men,cor- ing at the building permit stage with a stipulation that a minimum of 20 per cent of the housing being developed on lots under 7,000 sq. ft. in area use a single story plan in addition to those required on corner lots. The necessity of providing an overall fencing plan to address the issues of corner lots, rear lots which back up to public streets, and view lots which abut adjoining properties, has been discussed. We will require that an overall fencing plan be submitted addressing these areas, subject to the approval of the Planning Department. Certain lots which back up to public streets must have the rear portion of the lot deleted from the lot and dedicated to the city to allow the area to be maintained as part of an open space district. Most of these lots will be adjusted at the top of the slope, however, a minimum distance of l0 feet must be maintained between the sidewalk and any proposed wall to be located in the rear property to provide for adequate landscaping. Final adjustment of these lot lines will be subject to Planning Department approval. At present Lot 193 has a usable pad width of 40 feet, therefore, this lot shall be deleted from the subdivision unless it can be shown to the satisfaction of the Planning Department that more usable pad area can be attained without affecting the adjoining lots. In granting approval of the single family area staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt standards requiring that the development adhere to the R-l-7 zoning regulations presently existing in the city zoning ordinance. City Planning Commission Page 31 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 b. Condominium Area. The condominium area is characterized by a cluster unit desig;~ with each unit having either a single car or two car garage, in addition to open parking areas scattered throughout the development. All of the interior landscaping, including the adjacent slope banks, is to be maintained by a home owners associa- tion. Because of past problems the city has experienced with home owners asso- ciations in providing for the continuous maintenance of slope banks, the staff is recommending that the city receive an irrevocable offer of dedication for the major slope banks and that the entire area be placed in a maintenance district which could be activated in the event the slope banks are not properly maintained by the associations. Due to the density of the condominiums and the critical nature of the private parking, staff is recommending that the CC&R's filed with the city specifically prohibit the conversion of any garage, or the renting out of garage space for miscellaneous storage to anyone other than the occupant of the unit. While the various architectural styles proposed are acceptable to the staff, the method of screening the private open space, both patios and balcenies, needs further refinement. The lower patio areas should be screened by a sturco wall, either solid or with combinations of wrought iron, with the substitution of solid wood fencing, using a horizontal cap to tie in with the specific architec- tural style of the building being proposed. Balcony areas should be similarly treated although vertical styles designed with minimal separation, or solid horizontal siding, will be considered acceptable to provide the required privacy for these areas. The 2x6 horizontal styles planned for the balcony railings, the patio fences, and the stairways for the condominiums to be located on the south side of "H" Street are not considered acceptable. It will be necessary to submit details of each recreation area, including the recreation building, to insure that each area will function and have proper separation from the adjoining residences. Acceptability will be determined by review by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. The large number of guest parking spaces required along the perimeter road system is broken up periodically with landscaping features. The area can be further enhanced by requiring every fifth guest space to be developed as a compact space to provide opportunity to plant additional trees to soften the parking ~rea. The project complies with all city standards regarding private open space and enclosed storage. The attached chart of Condominium Summary indicates the amount supplied and the location for the various units. Since one of the primary architectural features of this project will be the garages which face the main circular road system, the staff has concluded that it is essential to provide a treatment to the paving area, involving some texture relief from the asphalt concrete, and to give more architectural attention to the details of the garage doors to make them an attractive element of the design. Although the staff has discussed the general pedestrian flow from the units to the recreation facilities, refinement of these details will be subject to later staff review before acceptance of the final landscaping plan. The major pedestrian flow should be accommodated on sidewalk areas as opposed to requiring people to share a path with the automobile. City Planning Commission Page 32 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 The subject condominium areas do not lend themselves to future additions outside of some limited patio structures. Therefore, the building additions, including patio structures, should be prohibited unless the developer wishes to file with the city typical plans which could be used for limited patio structures. c. Commercial and apartments. As mentioned previously none of the area lying south of "H" Street and west of Ridgeback Road will be allowed to develop until such time as detailed plans for development are reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council. 7. Street Names. The applicant submitted a list of street names to the city which has been reviewed. Certain changes are recommended. The following list of street names is recommended for the Planning Commission's approval to replace those designations on the tentative map: Street "A" Horizon View "B" Ronna Place "C" Bay Leaf Drive "D" Smoky Circle "E" Windrose Way "F" Moon View "G" Starwood Circle "H" Tram Place "J" Combined with "D" Street (Smoky Circle) "K" Hidden Vista "L" Lawn View "M" Woodhouse Avenue "N" Chantel Court "P" Legate Court "Q" Lowewood Place "R" Beacon Place "S" Dawn Court Condo. Lots 331 Fossil Circle 332 Rippwon Circle (Adj. to Ridgeback)333 Cristi Circle 8. Water. The applicant is still negotiating with the Otay Municipal Water District to secure water for the area. As of this date the city has not received a letter from Otay indicating that they can and will provide water to this area. Therefore, while the Planning Commission may approve the tentative map, it will be necessary to place a condition on the map which woulc prohibit any grading or City Council action on the final map until assurance is given by the Otay Water District that the area will be served. City Planning Commission Page 33 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 9. Miscellaneous Requirements. a. All utilities within the subdivision, including existing 69KV and 12 KV lines, must be undergrounded in accordance with the municipal code. b. The developer will be required to plant street trees along dedicated streets. The species, location and number will be determined by the City Engineer and the City Landscape Architect. c. The developer must pay all applicable sewer charges prior to approval of the final map. d. The developer must pay all fees appropriate for the installation of street signs as will be shown on final improvement plans prior to the approval of the final map. e. The developer will be obligated to pay his proportionate share for the financing of traffic signals in accordance with the adopted City Council Policy prior to issuance of building permits. f. The developer must comply with all applicable sections of the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code. Preparation of the final map and all plans shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the Subdivision Ordinance and Subdi- vision Manual of the City of Chula Vista. D. FINDINGS 1. Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the tentative subdivision map for Hidden Vista Village, Chula Vista Tract 80-15, is found to be consistent with the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan adopted by City Council on August 15, 1978 and the City's General Plan, based on the following findings: a. Land Use Element - The Specific Plan designates the area for a combination of uses including a density range of 499-839 dwellin~ units and 50 acres of commercial development. The plan specifies that residential land use at a maximum density of 18 DU/acre may be substituted for commercial acreage. The approved map has substituted 23 acres of residential development for commercial on the south side of "H" Street, allowing an additional 415 dwelling units or a maximum of 1,254 dwelling units. The tentative map shows 967 dwelling units with a maximum addition of 275 units for the proposed 11 acre site adjacent to the retail commercial center. b. Circulation Element - "H" Street and Ridgeback Road will be extended in accordance with the adopted Specific Plan with appropriate widths designed to comply with city standards. In addition, the loop street connecting "H" Street with Ridgeback as depicted on the plan will be provided. City Planning Commission Page 34 Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 c. Housing Element - The proposed project will provide for a mixture of housing types, including single family detached, condominiums, senior and low/moderate income apartment units. The applicant's plan provides a ratio of senior citizen and family low/moderate income housing equal to approximately 20 per cent of the total housing units proposed. This ratio is twice the amount required of the developer to comply with the Housing Element of the General Plan. d. Conservation Element - The developer is maintaining a substantial area in natural open space in order to preserve certain environ- mentally sensitive species (coast barrel cactus) and in addition will be transplanting snake cholla and barrel cactus from areas scheduled for development into designated natural open space areas. A paleontologist will be required to be on site during the critical grading period so that valuable specimens can be recovered, cataloged and recorded. e. Park and Recreation - Open Space Elements - The proposed project will result in the retention of approximately 185 acres or 44% ~f the site for open space. In addition, a six acre park site will be constructed as part of the project. The amount of land and the locations comply with the adopted Sectional Area Plan. f. Seismic Safety Element - The Seismic Safety Element identifies the Sweetwater fault as traversing the westerly portion of the project. However, further field investigations have determined that the proper terminology for the Sweetwater fault is a slip plain and its location is in the extreme northwest corner of the site and outside of the area proposed for development. There are no inferred faults located within the subject site. However, in the event any fault zones are found during grading, a field investigation by a registered geologist and subsequent recommendations will be required. Additional inspection by the project soils engineer is required on a lot by lot basis for areas identified in the "plain of weakness" zones. g. Noise Element - All dwelling units will be designed so as not to exceed a maximum interior noise level of 45 dBA. Additionally, all exterior private open space will be shielded by a combination of earth berms, walls or buildings. h. Scenic Highway Element - Manufactured slopes adjacent to "H" Street have been designed to undulate and vary in steepness with extensiv~ landscaping planned to soften and beautify their appearance. Building locations, design, and signing will all be controlled through the use of development standards to insure compliance with the Scenic Highway Element. i. Bicycle Routes Element - The proposed development will include bicycle lanes in "H" Street and Ridgeback Road. "H" Street is identified in the Bicycle Routes Element as a major bicycle link. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of March 19, 1980 Page 35 j. Public Buildings Element - The applicant has identified and offered for dedication two school sites as well as a fire station site. In addition, the applicant has agreed to construct the fire station if he is allowed to construct the 27 single family units south and east of Ridgeback Road in the area designated as open space on the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. 2. Pursuant to Section 19.48.100 of the Chula Vista zoning ordinance the Commission also finds that the Specific Planning Area plan will: a. Promote the orderly, sequential development of the Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area by causing development to progress from west to east; b. Not adversely affect adjacent land use, residential enjoyment, circulation, or environmental quality by virtue of the slope conditions, street pattern, public facilities and open space system which are incorporated into the plan. 3. Pursuant to Sec. 66412.2 of the Subdivision Map Act the Commission certifies that it has considered the effect of this approval on the housing needs of the region and has balanced those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the city and the available fiscal and environmental resources. CHULA VISTA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT February 22, 1980 The Honorable Will Hyde ~4ayor, City of Chula Vista P. O. Box 1087 Chula Vista, CA 92012 Dear Mayor Hyde: Representatives of the Chula Vista City School District and Watt Industries/San Diego, Inc., have been conferring relative to pro- viding land and buildings for educational facilities for children who will be living in the Hidden Vista Village, Chula Vista Tract 80-15 area. At its meeting of February 19, 1980, the Board of Education directed staff to advise the City of Chula Vista that the developer and the di~ns ted an a eement ~o? ..~ ' ........ ' e district will continue to · wor~ w~tn wa~t industries' representatives and we hope that a fair and equitable solution will be forthcoming in the near future. As soon as we are able to work out a mutually agreeable solution for providing educational facilities, we will apprise you. Leonard Servetter Superintendent LS:JEL:ad cc: Jim Peterson, C.V. Director of Planning Joseph D. Davis, President, Watt Industries/San Diego, Inc. BOARD OF EDUCATION Sweetwater Union High School District ADMINISTRATION CENTER $130 FIFTH AVENUE CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92011 714 425-]700 DIVISION OF BUSINESS SERVICES March 3, 1980 Planning Comission City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 Gentlemen: The board of trustees of the Sweetwater Union High School District has rcceived ~n offer of a parcel of land in lieu of school fees from Watt Industries/Sm~ Diego Inc. within the proposed subdivision Hidden Vista Village in the Rice Canyon SPA. The board on February 28, 1980 directed district staff to make :' further study of this offer. The board also directed that the City of Chula Vista be notified that although negotiations are continuing with Watt Industries, the board is not able at this time to assure that classroom facilities and services will be available for students who may come from this housing project. We will notify the city of any further action by the board relative to this matter. Si~?_~el y, Phili~ D. ,Io-lliFf Director of Facilities and Budgets P~I:ap cc: Watt Industries Ken Lee ON SPA ~","~' EL RANCHO DEL REY RICE CAN' DEl. CENTRO * 2,520~ of PAVED STREET DEl- I RANCHERO L,4DERA , OPEN SPACE