HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1980/02/27 AGENDA
City Planning Commission
Chula Vista, California
Wednesday, February 27, 1980 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of February 13, 1980
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-80-11 - Consideration of tentative subdivision map for
Chula Vista Tract 80-11, Vista Arizona, Chris Galichon
2. Consideration of supplement to EIR-79-8 on Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area
3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-80-C - Consideration of zoning approximately 3 acres of
unzoned freeway right-of-way at the southeast corner of 1-805
and East "H" Street to P-C, City initiated
4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-80-13 - Consideration of development plan for the
Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area of E1 Rancho del Rey
Specific Plan, Watt Industries
5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-80-15 - Consideration of tentative subdivision map for
Chula Vsita Tract 80-13, Hidden Vista Village, Watt Industries
6. Consideration of amendment to the Municipal Code making stock cooperatives and
community apartment projects subject to the same provisions
as condominiums
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
COMMISSION COMMENTS
T~: City Planning u~mmission
From: D.J. Peterson, Director of Planning
Subject: Staff report on agenda items for Planning Commission Meeting
of February 27, 1980
1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-80-11 - Consideration of tentative subdivision map for
Chula Vista Tract 80-11, .V.ista Arizona, Chris Galichon
A. BACKGROUND
1. The applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista
Tract 80-11, Vista Arizona, for the purpose of the development of a one lot 12 unit
condominium project at 582 Arizona Street in the R-3 zone.
2. An Initial Study, IS-78-83, was conducted by the Environmental Review
Committee on July 13, 1979 for an identical 12 unit condominium development on the
adjacent property to the east. Since this developer is using the same building
design on an identical piece of property, with minor revisions, this project will
result in substantially the same effects and the mitigation measures proposed in
IS-78-83 will be applied to this development. The findings of insignificant impact,
as listed in IS-78-83, also apply to this project.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Adopt a motion finding that in accordance with the findings listed in the
Negative Declaration of IS-78-83 this project will have no significant impact.
2. Based on the findings contained in Section "D" of this report, adopt a
motion recon~nending that the City Council approve the tentative subdivision map for
Vista Arizona, Chula Vista Tract 80-11, subject to the following conditions.
a. The owner shall grant a 7½ foot wide easement along Arizona Street
to the City for street tree purposes.
b. The existing driveway to be removed shall be replaced with monolithic
curb, gutter and sidewalk. The proposed driveway shall be 24 feet
wide and an excessive width driveway permit §hall be obtained prior
to its construction. The foregoing work shall be accomplished under
a separate construction permit.
c. The CC&R's shall be amended to prohibit the installation of outside
T.V. or radio antennas in accordance with the city code (Article 2.6
of the CC&R's).
d. The owner shall grant to the City the ll foot wide drainage easement
(adjacent to the existing 20 foot wide drainage easement at the southerly
end of the property) shown on the tentative map as "proposed 11 foot
drainage easement."
e. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of the north
half of the drainage channel adjacent to the property. He may request
a deferral since there is an anticipated Army Corps of Engineers
drainage improvement project. If said deferral is approved, then the
developer shall post a bond with the City in an amount to be approved
by the City Engineer in order to guarantee the installation of said
improvements.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 2
f. Those areas of the subdivision which are subject to inundation due to
a 100 year frequency flood shall be delineated on the final map.
g. A minimum distance of 6 feet shall be maintained between the building
and proposed retaining wall located at the northerly edge of the
drainage easement.
h. The applicant and/or all subsequent owners shall be obligated for the
construction costs for fencing as required by the Director of Public
Works and to perform all necessary grading, provision of access, and
landscaping as determined by the City Planning Director within 60 days
after completion of the proposed drainage channel along the south property
line.
C. DISCUSSION
1. Existing site characteristics.
The subject property is a 60' x 310' (18,600 sq.ft.) parcel located on the
south side of Arizona Street approximately 260 feet east of Broadway. The site is
relatively level, sloping gently toward the south and draining into a natural
channel which traverses the rear portion of the property. The site is presently
developed wi th two older dwelling units which will be removed for the development
of this project.
2. Proposed development.
On December 13, 1979 the Design Review Committee approved a two-story building
containing 12 two bedroom units on the rear portion of the site, with the parking
(12 carports, 10 open spaces--22 total) located in front of the units. The pro-
posed development represents a near duplication of the existing 12 unit condominium
project (South Shore Condominiums) on the adjacent parcel to the east with some
minor modifications.
3. Architecture.
The proposed design of the structure is of contemporary Spanish architecture
with a light stucco exterior, wood trim, patios and balconies, and mansard tile roof
on the front, rear and east elevations. The entrances to the units are located
on the east side of the property.
4. Open Space.
The project meets the open space requirements. Each of the interior lower units
has a 60 sq. ft. patio adjacent to the entry and access to the open space in the
side yard. The front and rear upper and lower units have a 120 sq. ft. patio or
balcony. The upper interior units have 60 sq. ft. balconies. The private areas
either meet or exceed the requirements of the code.
5. Parking.
The 22 parking spaces provided on site meet the requirements of the code for
the 12 two bedroom units. Twelve of the spaces will be in carports and assigned
to each of the units. While not a requirement, the carports provide a covered area
for each of the units and afford an opportunity to provide storage.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 3
6. Storage.
The code requires that 200 cu. ft. of private storage be provided for each
unit. In addition, a minimum of 40% or 80 cu. ft. must be adjacent to the unit.
Each of the interior units (upper and lower) will provide 107 cu. ft. of
adjacent storage located at one end of the respective patios or balconies. The
front and rear units have two adjacent storage spaces, totalling 213 cu. ft.,
located at each end of their patios or balconies. In addition, 176 cu. ft. of
storage space is proposed for each unit within the carport area; thus, the
proposed storage exceeds the minimum requirements of the code.
D. FINDINGS
Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the tentative subdivision
map for Vista Arizona, Chula Vista Tract 80-11, is recommended for approval based
on the following findings:
1. The site is physically suitable for residential development and the
proposed project conforms to all standards established by the City for such
development.
2. The design of the subdivision will not affect the existing public improve-
ments and the existing drainage will be required to be improved, thereby avoiding
any serious health problems.
3. The subdivision is in substantial conformance with the General Plan
Elements as follows:
a. Land Use Element - The proposed density of slightly less than 28 units
is in conformance with the General Plan designation for this area
of 13-26 dwelling units per gross acre.
b. Circulation - The adjoining street is improved to handle the present
and ultimate traffic flow.
c. Housing Element - The removal of two older units will reduce the city's
apartment inventory; however, the new project will provide additional
housing and offer an expanded choice of ownership. Since the project
contains less than 50 units it is exempt from providing housing for
low and moderate income families.
d. Conservation, Open Space and Recreation Elements - No parks are planned
on the $~ite 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.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 4
h. Bicycle Route Element - No bicycle routes are propsed adjacent to the
site.
i. Public Buildings Element - No public buildings are proposed on the site.
~10(~' 400"
NORTH
.-,mm. Keyes Arizona Street Apartments
Pro~,~_~_ _~..:~ ..... ~ 577-581 Arizona Street
Pro~ec~ 2r~on~n:: Robert Keyes 470 Third Ave. Chula Vista
.... 9. July 13, 1978
C,~oz XO. IS-78-83 D~Tm.
A. Project Setting
The project involves .42 acres of property located on the south
side of Arizona St. between Broadway and 5th Ave. The site is
currently developed with 3 dwellings and is adjacent to two family
and multiple family homes.
The rear of the property involves a portion of the Telegraph Canyon
Creek drainageway and is subject to inundation. There are no
significant natural resources known to be present and the area
appears to be void of any significant vegetation.
B. Project Description
The proponent proposes to remove the existing structures and con-
struct a 12 unit apartment building. The structure will be located
to the rear of the property and on-site parking for 22 vehicles
will be located adjacent to Arizona st.. Landscaping in accordance
with the City's Landscape Manual will be required.
Grading for pad preparation will primarily be export, however some
may be placed near the existing drainage channel on the southern
portion of the site.
C. Compatibility with zoning and ~lans
The proposed project is in conformance with existing R-3 zoning and
the high density residential land use designation indicated on the
General Plan.
D. Identification of environmental effects.
Drainage
The 6ortion of the site adjacent to Telegraph Canyon Creek is subject
to inundation. Improvement of this drainage channel may be required.
A study to determine what the level of flood waters would be, and
at what floor level the residential units will have to be constructed
will have to be undertaken. This could result in a substantial
design change.
Schools
The local elementary and junior high schools are currently over
capacity. Additional students from the project will further this
burden on educational facilities.
The developer ~ill be required to obtain written assurance from the
appropriate school districts that adequate facilities will be
available to new students.
Parks
The project is located within City park district no. 6.02 where there
are currently no park facilities. Park fees in lieu of land
dedication will be required by the City to contribute toward the
future purchase of parklands within this district.
E. MitiGation measures necessary to avoid impact
1. Drainage improvements to City standards and a flood
hazard study will have to be undertaken.
2. Written assurance of room available from appropriate
school districts will be required.
3. Park fees in lieu of land dedication are also required.
F. FindinGs of insignificant impact
1. The project site is developed with dwellings and appears void
of any significant natural resources. There are no known
geologic hazards within the immediate area.
Compliance ~ith the recommendation of the flood hazard study
will avoid significant hazards due to inundation.
2. The proposed apartment building is in conformance with the
land use element of the General Plan and is not anticipated
to achieve short term to the disadvantage of long term environ-
mental goals.
3. Potential impacts can be mitigated to an acceptable level and
no impacts which Could interact to create a substantial
cumulative effect on the environment are anticipated.
4. The project is not anticipated to generate any substantial
traffic volume or related noise or emissions. No hazard
to humans is expected to occur.
G. ~ndividuals and organizations consulted
Cit'/ of Chula Vista Planning Dept.
Public Works Dept.
Fire Dept.
Documents
Flood Hazard Boundary Map H.01-11 (Dept. of Housing and Urban
Development - Federal Insurance Admin.)
iS-75-12
IS-75-21
IS=78-83
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 5
2. Consideration of supplement to EIR-79-8 on Rice CanNon Sectional Planning Area
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 juris-
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.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion certifying that 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)
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 respon-
sibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies as specified in the attached
supplemental "Candidate CEQA Findings":
a. Water Quality - Regional (3.7)
b. Air Quality (3.12)
c. Schools (3.16)
d. Sewage - Regional (3.21)
City Planning Commission
Agenda items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 6
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 implementation.
d. The project will promote alternate forms of energy saving transportation,
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.
RICE CA~YON SECTIOI~L PLANNING AREA
"Hidden Vista Village"
EIR 79-8
CANDIDATE CEQA FINDINGS
(Calif. Public Resource Code Sec. 21081)
(Calif. Administrative Code Sec. 15088-9)
A. B_A~jIC~BD_U/~
It is the policy of the State of California that every
public agency, including 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 lessen
that effect. 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.
Therefore, when an EIR has been completed which identifies
one or more significant environmental impact(s), one of the
following findings must be made:
1. 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, or
2. Such changes or alternatives are within the
responsibility and jurisdiction 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, or
1
3. Specific economic, social, or other
considerations make infeasible full mitigation measures
or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
The proposed project is located on the east side of
Interstate 805 at the East H Street interchange. The 419-acre
parcel is entirely within the limits of the City of Chula Vista.
The Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan proposes
a mixture of land uses including: 328 single-family dwellings,
with lot sizes ranging from 6,000-18,000 square feet; 140
multi-family units; approximately 275 combination elderly housing
and low and moderate-income (Section 8) family multiple units;
638 condominiums; a 188,000 square-foot commercial center; a one-
acre park and ride facility; a 6.5-acre park site; 125 acres of
open space; a fire station; a 9-acre elementary school site; and
a 22-acre junior high-school site. The commercial center would
include an 840-seat theater, 2 restaurants, 2 banks, 40,000
square feet of office space, and 8 retail stores, ranging from
5,400-32,000 square feet. As part of the project, East H Street
would be extended as a 6-lane road from Interstate 805 to the
southeastern corner of the project.
B. EFFECTS FOUND TO BE INSIGNIFICANT
The final EIR for the Rice Canyon SPA concluded that the
project would not have any significant, adverse impacts in the
following areas:
(NOTE: the number in parenthesis following the issue refers to
the respective section number of the EIR)
1. Land Use/Zoning/Planning (3.1)
2. Groundwater (3.5)
3. Water Quality - local (3.7)
4. Mobile Noise - long-term 3.11)
5. Community Social Factors 3.14)
6. Community Tax Structure 3.15)
7. Recreation and Open Space 3.17)
8. Police 3.18)
9. Utilities/Energy 3.20)
10. Sewage local 3.21)
11. Solid waste 3.22)
C. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND
FEASIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES
Development of the proposed project would involve a major
cut-and-fill operation expected to involve between 3.5 and 4.5
million cubic yards of earth. Major topographic changes would
occur as the area of mesa is increased through grading and
several of the larger canyons are filled. Cut slopes would reach
50 feet in height while fill slopes, in the area of the school
sites, may approach 100 feet.
Implementation of East H Street, K Street, Ridgeback Road,
park facilities, school sites, residential and commercial land
uses in the Rice Canyon SPA will involve substantial alteration
of landform.
The project would leave approximately 125 acres undisturbed
as natural open space and incorporate architectural and landscape
designs which would lessen the project's impact on landform. The
grading operation is expected to be balanced, if it occurs in one
phase, as presently proposed by the applicant.
The impact of the project on landform would be significant,
and only partially mitigable. It is infeasible to fully mitigate
project-related impacts to landform modification to a level of
insignificance while, at the same time, implementing the adopted
land use objectives of the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan, and
provide for the extension of East H Street, in accordance with
that plan. Alternative alignments of East H Street were
considered, some with less impact to landform modification,
however, public safety (fire and emergency vehicles) and traffic
engineering concerns dictated a rejection of these alternative
alignments as infeasible (reference: Rice Canyon
Development/Conservation Guide, Sedway/Cooke Report, September
1977).
The adopted land use designations for the Rice Canyon SPA,
as described by the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan, will require
public improvements (dedicated streets, water, sewer, park sites,
elderly and moderate-income housing) that make economically
infeasible the reduction of impacts to landform to a level of
insignificance.
2. ~ (3. ~
The geologic hazard associated with development of the
property is limited to potential seismicity. The presence of
inferred fault traces on the property, which would be associated
with the La Nacion and Sweetwater Fault Zones, was suspected, and
geotechnical investigations were performed. These inferred fault
traces are not considered active, however, "they would present
planes of weakness along which minor, relative movements might
occur in response to ground shaking produced by a distant
earthquake." (Shepardson Engineering Associates, Februaary
1980). The actual presence of fault zones has not been verified
at this time, but will be further investigated at the time of
initiation of grading activities.
Mitigation would include adherence to the foundation
recommendations of the geotechnical studies, including review of
preliminary and final grading designs prior to approval of final
subdivision plans. In the event fault traces are found, they
will be analyzed, with respect to their potential for activity,
and the recomme~.~a~ions of the field inspection by a qualified
soils engineer geologist and applicable legislative standards
will be followed in final engineering and design techniques.
The seismic hazard on the subject property is potentially
significant, but mitigable.
5
3. SOILS (3.4
According to the S~epardson Engineering Report (February
1980), a minor amount of expansive soil was found in the topsoil
horizons of the river terrace materials and in the mudstone
strata of the Otay Formation. Erosion characteristics of the
prevailing soils will require that measures be taken to provide
erosion protection for exposed slopes during and immediately
after the grading of the site.
Mitigation will include the preparation of a detailed soils
report identifying on-site soil hazards and containing specific
engineering design to reduce any soil-related hazards to an
acceptable level. This report will be reviewed by the City
Engineer and the issuance of a grading permit would be
conditioned on incorporation of appropriate mitigation. A
landscape plan will be prepared and submitted to the City, prior
to issuance of a grading permit. This landscape plan will
describe the planting to occur immediately following grading to
protect all bare surfaces from erosion and potential siltation of
drainage basins.
The expansive soils and potential erosion hazards present
on-site are potentially significant, but mitigable.
6
4. ~ (3.6)
The subject property drains into three basins; Glen Abbey,
Bonita and Rice Canyon. Approximately three-fourths of the
project is located within the Rice Canyon Basin, therefore, this
basin would be the most affected. The EIR estimates that the
expected discharge from the project would be 2070 cubic feet per
second (cfs) after development. This discharge figure is
approximately 24 percent greater than would naturally occur.
Expected runoff is less than that which the "Fogg" Report
predicts upon full development of Rice Canyon, but greater than
the capacity of the existing culverts which run beneath
the I- 805/East H Street Interchange, where discharge from Rice
Canyon is collected. The culverts beneath 1-805 are designed to
handle 1600 cfs, which appear t° be inadequate to handle the 50-
year flood potential for Rice Canyon; a 50-year flood is
estimated to be 2100 cfs by the Fogg Report and 2070 by the EIR.
The project's overall drainage system is being designed to convey
ultimate runof'f (50-year flood) off-site and downstream.
Sedimentation of the culverts at the 1-805/East H Street
interchange has been evident in the past and would be increased
by the development of Rice Canyon. This situation will be
avoided by the installation of sedimentation basins at the
appropriate locations.
The drainage con ~1 system for the project 11 be designed
by the project engineer, prior to approval of final subdivision
naps for the project. This drainage system design will be
reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and easements
dedicated as necessary.
The impact of the project on local drainage is potentially
significant, but mitigable.
5. WATER OU~ITY - ~ ¢3.7)
The incremental increases in liquid waste created by the
project would further overload the metropolitan treatment
facility at Point Loma. This plant is operating at full
capacity. This, and other projects, could result in decreased
water quality in the vicinity of the ocean outfall.
The project may have a cumulatively significant effect on
water quality near the Point Loma facility and is not fully
mitigable by this project. Such changes are within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies,
(specifically, the City of San Diego and Regional Water Quality
Control Board), and outside the control of an individual project,
or the City of Chula Vista.
8
6. ~ (3.8)
The survey yielded eight prehistoric finds, including: six
shell scatters, one flake isolate located primarily on a major
southwest-trending ridge, and one additional flake isolate on a
northwest-trending ridge on the southern portion of the property.
~o artifacts or midden are believed to be associated with the
shell scatters, and the two isolated flakes were the only
artifacts found during the survey. In addition to the
prehistoric finds, a small area of paleontological fossils was
also located.
The proposed development would have direct impact on the
archaeological resources located on the subject property, as well
as posing an indirect impact on SDI. 4776, 4677, and 4889,
archaeological sites located on surrounding properties. Grading
of the ridges on the site would destroy all but two of the
archaeological sites. Increased human activity, e.g., hiking,
off-road vehicle, exploration, etc., as a result of the
development might cause disruption and/or destruction to
identified archaeological sites on the subject property not
directly impacted by grading or uses on adjacent properties.
Mitigation will include a collection and micromapping
program for surface material and limited excavation of those
sites suspected to have subsurface potential. In the event
subsurface material is encountered, a preservation or salvage
9
pla'n ~7ill be prepar, and carried out. Contr must also be
exercised over the movement of grading equipment outside ~he
boundaries of the property in order to protect any resources in
those areas.
The impact of the project on archaeological resources is
potentially significant, but mitigable.
The project site possesses several sensitive plants,
important wildlife habitat, and a disturbed vernal pool.
Sensitive plant species include Snake Cholla, Coast Barrel
Cactus, San Diego Sunflower and Pygmy Spike-Moss. The steep-
sided canyons on the property represent good wildlife habitat.
The vernal pool has been largely disturbed during construction of
the nearby aqueduct. Development of the property would destroy
many of the sensitive plant populations, fill several of the
canyons, and possibly further disturb the vernal pool.
The estimated 125 acres of open space included in the
project would preserve relatively large areas of natural
vegetation and partially offset the loss of vegetation and
habitat in the developed portions. Landscaping is expected to
reflect natural vegetation and will, to a limited extent, serve
as a substitute for original vegetation on the larger slopes.
Mitigation which is not presently proposed by the proponent could
10
inv'olve a transplant~ ion program for selected nsitive plant
suecies, however, certainty of success in transplanting is not
well documented at this time and cannot be accurately predicted.
The project would have significant and partially mitigable
impacts on the biological resources present on the property. It
is infeasible to reduce impacts to biology to an insignificant
level without major modification and reduction of the scope of
the project. The E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan provides for
development of the Rice Canyon SPA as proposed by this project.
Loss of habitat is unavoidable if the land uses (see discussion
of Public Improvements, Part 1 - Landform) of the Rice Canyon SPA
are to be implemented. However, the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific
Plan did designate biological sensitivity/open-space areas of
greatest importance, 125 acres of which would be preserved as
part of the proposed action (Section III, C. Conservation of the
text of the E1 Rancho del Rey Development Plan).
A circulation system has been designed for the Rice Canyon
SPA which will adequately handle the expected traffic generated
by the project; no roads presently exist on-site. This system
has been designed in accordance with the E1 Rancho del Rey
Specific Plan and includes the extension of East H Street
from I- 805 to the eastern boundary of the SPA improved to a
width of 6 lanes.
ll
Although the circulation pattern can accommodate the project
traffic, the traffic analysis indicates that the six lane
improvements for East H Street may be inadequate to carry the
volume expected with ultimate development of the E1 Rancho del
Rey. Dedication of right-of-way sufficient to provide for 2
additional lanes will be provided for future widening, as the
need should arise.
Traffic impacts associated with the project are potentially
significant, but mitigable.
Short-term noise impacts would be experienced by surrounding
residences. The grading operation is expected to occur at one
time and will be extensive. The major mitigation measure against
construction noise is the restriction of operators to "normal"
working hours, precluding activities at night, or on weekends or
holidays. No equipment should be used which does not meet
applicable Federal, State and Local (City of Chula Vista) noise
standards.
The short-term noise impacts created by the construction
activities are potentially significant, but mitigable~
12
The project would incrementally add to the air pollution
problems which exist on a local and regional scale as a result of
construction, transportation, and energy use. The project, by
itself, would not have a significant effect on air quality.
Several mitigating factors are inherent in the proposed
development. A park-and-ride facility is included in the
commercial center. The proximity of shopping and schools to
future residents would reduce the lengths of trips. Mass transit
is expected to be available along the major streets.
The effect of the project on air quality is cumulatively
significant and partially mitigable. Complete mitigation of the
air quality impact is beyond the control of this project. It is
a regional problem which is the responsibility of the APCD, State
and Federal agencies.
The proposed project would transform the presently vacant
parcel into an urban development. A large portion of the natural
vegetation and terrain would be altered. This land use change
would affect the views of existing residences along the rim of
Rice Canyon and from ~-805. Several of the cu~and-fill slopes
are proposed to exceed 30 feet in height and would effect the
present visual quality of the area.
13
As mitigation, the applicant will to preserve
approximately 125 acres of natural open space. This open space
is relatively contiguous, enhancing its overall mitigating value.
In addition, the applicant will prepareing a landscape plan and
has designed the project to minimize topographic alteration. The
landscape plan will describe the planting which will take place
over the developed portion of the property. This landscaping
program will utilize native and adapted species which will blend
with the natural vegetation. The plan will discourage the use of
purely interim landscaping. Where feasible, landscaping should
be permanent; this objective is dependent on the availability of
irrigation water. This permanent landscaping could be instituted
in a phased program as development occurs. To the extent
feasible, the overall design of the project has minimized grading
and landform alteration to reduce aesthetic impacts.
Aesthetic impacts are significant and partially mitigable by
landscaping and the project design. It is infeasible to
completely reduce aesthetic impacts to a level of insignificance
while, at the same time, implementing the Rice Canyon SPA land
use objectives, as determined by the adopted E1 Rancho del Rey
Specific Plan (see discussion in Part 1, Landform Section).
14
The project is expected to generate 500 elementary school-
age children, 358 junior high school-age children and 240 senior
high school-age children. The number of elementary-age children
is equivalent to the capacity of an average size elementary
school, while the junior high school-age children represent a
quarter of the average capacity of a junior high school.
Local school districts are already operating above their
design capacities. The students generated by the Rice Canyon SPA
would further crowd these facilities.
The Rice Canyon SPA Plan currently dedicates land for an
elementary school and junior high school, as required in the E1
Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. These sites would be graded by the
developer, but no plans exist at this time for the construction
of either school.
In order to reduce the impact of additional children, the
developer will be required to contribute the necessary fees to
the local school districts. Furthermore, the City of Chula Vista
will require letters from the school district indicating that
adequate educational facilities will be available.
The project would have significant impact on local school
districts over both the short and long-term. The short-term
impact can be mitigated through the dedication of land and
15
payment of school fe The long-term impact a cumulative
effect, which is the result of this and other developments
creating the financial burden on schools by requiring permanent
facilities, which cannot be completely financed with school fees.
At the present time, the long-term impact is considered to be
only partially mitigable; reduction of long-term impacts to a
level of insignificance is beyond the control of an individual
project or City, and is the responsibility of State decision-
makers. These economic constraints make infeasible the reduction
of overall long-term impacts to a level of insignificance.
13. FIRE
The only concern with regard to fire hazard is for the
increased potential for brushfires in undeveloped areas within
and adjacent to the proposed development caused by increased
human activity.
Several measures are recommended to reduce the brushfire
hazard. Greenbelts should be maintained along the perimeter of
developed areas and internal roadways. Off-road vehicular
activity in undeveloped areas should be strictly prohibited.
The increased brushfire hazard created by the project is
potentially significant, but mitigable.
16
The Point Loma treatment plant is presently operating above
capacity. The .3 million gallons per day expected to be produced
by the project would incrementally burden these existing
treatment facilities.
Expansion of the Point Loma facility may occur in the future
through construction of a secondary treatment plant; however, the
Metro System indicates this would occur no earlier than 1985.
The effect of the project upon regional sewage treatment
facilities is cumulatively significant and not mitigable by the
project. Such mitigation is the responsibility of the various
public agencies (City of San Diego) involved in the sewage
treatment and disposal process.
The project will create an increased demand on the County's
domestic water supply. This supply is expected to decrease as
Arizona claims a larger portion of its share of Colorado River
water. The ultimate impact cannot be predicted, but each new
area serviced with domestic water could have a combined effect on
future supply.
17
Partial mitiga% ~n could be accomplished the developer
through the installation of water-conserving devices in the
plumbing system and landscaping with drought-tolerant plants. A
graywater reclamation system could be installed, but the economic
feasibility of this alternative seems questionable.
The project could have a cumulatively significant and not
mitigable impact on domestic water supply. Mitigation of this
cumulative impact is not completely within the control of this
particular project and is the responsibility of Regional, State,
and Federal water agencies.
18
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 7
3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-80-C - Consideration of zoning approximately 3 acres of
unzoned freeway right-of-waN ~t the s~utheast corner of 1-805
and East "H" Street to P-C, Clt~ initiated
A. BACKGROUND
1. This item involves a request to zone approximately 3 acres of excess
freeway right-of-way located at the southeast quadrant of 1-805 and East "H"
Street to P-C (Planned Community) zone. The property is presently unzoned.
2. Environmental Impact Report EIR-79-8, certified by the Planning Commission
on October 10, 1979, included the subject property. The candidate CEQA findings
which are supplementary to that EIR were considered as an earlier agenda item.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council enact an ordinance to zone the
property as shown on Exhibit A to P-C (Planned Community).
C. DISCUSSION
1. Existing site characteristics.
The subject property, part of the 1-805 freeway right-of-way, is located on the
south side of East "H" Street and east of the northbound "H" Street offramp. The
property has a width of 200 feet and an average depth of 640 feet (the southerly
portion of the property being triangular in shape). The site is approximately 50
feet lower than East "H" Street and has 2:1 downslopes along the north and west
sides of the property which constitute approximately 50% of the site.
2. Rice Canyon development.
The developers of the Rice Canyon area have been negotiating with the State of
California for the acquisition or lease of the subject property. In anticipation
of acquiring the site, the developers have included the property in their develop-
ment plans. The site would be filled and the southerly one acre used as a park-and-
ride site. The northerly portion would be used as part of an auto park commercial
development. The California State Department of Transportation has filed a letter
with the City confirming the proposed sale and concurrence with the P-C zoning.
D. ANALYSIS
The proposed zoning is consistent with the zoning of the adjacent property. The
location of the site dictates the need to coordinate its development with the
adjoining Rice Canyon commercial site. Should the site not be acquired by Watts
Development the staff would require the granting of necessary easements to guarantee
access in accordance with approved plans.
I VAC ~' ~ / '"'"'
VAC
PROP~ P-.C
GHT
VAC
SINGLE ~
I
N 0 R T Iq
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 8
4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-80-13 - Consideration of development plan for the Rice
Canyon Sectional' P'l~nnin9 Area of E1 Ra'ncho del Rey Specitic
Plan, Watt InduStries
A. BACKGROUND
1. The applicant has submitted a Sectional Planning Area (SP~) 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 8½"xll" 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.
2. En¥ironmental 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. RECOP~IENDATION
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 (gross)
Commercial 40
Commercial Recreation 10
Fire Station 1
Park 5
K-6 School l0
Junior High School 30
Open Space 126 (north of "H")
,, ,, 58 (south of "H") .....
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 9
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 of
the SPA boundary. Approximately lO1 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 on
the north side of East "H" Street and 415 units on the south side (1,247 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 Cal 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 240-275 dwelling units, or a density of 22-25 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 February 27, 1980 Page l0
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 ty~es 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 the
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 is proposed. The connection will
assist in reducing fire response time and provide a secondary connector to the
Bonita area.
' i. The plan provides for access to the developable properties to the north
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 within the
SPA as authorized under paragraph H.2 on page 10 of the text of the Specific Develop-
ment Plan of E1 Rancho del Rey.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page ll
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. Except for the encroachments into the open space areas the plan is in sub-
stantial conformance with the adopted E1 Rancho del Rey plan. The development of a
portion of the commercial areas with residential uses is authorized at a maximum
density of 18 dwelling units per acre. (Reference paragraph G.3 on page 9 of the
text of the Specific Development Plan of E1 Rancho del Rey.) While the proposed
Section 8 housing would in itself exceed this density, the total residential develop-
ment planned on the south side has a combined density of 18 units per acre (415 units
~ 23 acres).
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, garden
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 indicated
four density classifications implying a variety of dwelling types. However, the
table of translation (page 11 of the text of th~ Specific Development Plan of E1
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 co~ercial 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 units.
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 m~re usable
space provided within the project. Further, retention of this area as open space
would serve little purpose. It would simply be a narrow strip between the base of
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 developer should
make a specific proposal to the City if development is desired in this area.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 ?age 12
E. FINDINGS
The Planning Commission may recommend approval of a SPA plan provided it finds tha~
the facts submitted with the plan establish that:
1. The proposed sectional planning area plan is in conformity with the general
development plan of the P-C zone, any adopted specific plans, and the Chula Vista
general plan and its several elements.
The proposed 826 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 authorizes
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 240-275 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 orderly,
sequentializeddevelopment of the involved sectional planning area.
The proposed development will be developed in a west to east manner as set
forth by City Council policy. The plan provides for access to other areas
subject to development.
3. The proposed sectional planning area plan would not adversely affect a~acent
land use, residential enjoyment, cir~ulation,~ or environmental quality.
Single family detached housing is proposed adjacent to the Lynwood Hills area.
The connection to Lynwood Drive will provide better response of emergency
vehicles. Since the plan is in general conformance with the adopted E1 Rancho
del Rey plan, it should not adversely affect the adjacent land uses.
·
'-- N 0 R T H
' L__J *'"'.,""Tx.,`.
Density ~----.L....~ Jr High School
[ Medmm
ommerciol {~ii~
Open Spoce
NOFtTH "
° I
!
e~e. SPACE: /' I
!,,-.~ / /
·
I
/.~9 /[ (66ae.) 11
'--
~.;.
,~emial ao I I
~e
OPENf I
~5~, S~ CE
I
(82 ac) ~ t
OPEN ~ ~
(~ ao.) SPACE ~ ~
DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE
NOIRTH ' ':
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 13
5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-80-15 - Consideration of tentative subdivision map for
Chula Vista Tract 80-15, Hidden Vista Villager Watt Industries
A. BACKGROUND
1. The developer has filed a tentative map identified as Hidden Vista Village
and is proposing to subdivide approximately 419 acres in the following manner:
329 single family lots ranging in size from 6,000 sq. ft. to 18,000 sq. ft.
4 condominium lots containing a total of 638 condominium units
2 major open space lots containing approximately 125 acres
A 19 acre elementary school site (9 acres usable)*
A 64 acre junior high school site (22 acres usable)*
An 18 acre park site (6 acres usable)*
A 30,000 sq. ft. fire station site
A one acre park and ride facility for Cal Trans
One lot of approximately ll acres to be devoted to senior citizen and low
and moderate income housing
One 8 acre auto park site
One 3 acre commercial recreation area
One 20+ acre site devoted to retail commercial activities.
*There is nearly 60 acres of natural open space proposed within these three sites.
It should be noted that detailed precise plans will be filed at a later date for
Planning Commission and City Council approval on all of the commercial, commercial/
recreation development, and the senior citizens-low/moderate income housing area.
2. On October 10, 1979 the Planning Commission certified EIR-79-8 on Hidden
Vista Village. The candidate CEQA findings which are supplementary to that EIR were
considered as an earlier agenda item.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Open the public hearing, receive testimony, and continue the public hearing to the
Planning Commission meeting of March 19, at which time specific recommendations and
findings will be presented for your consideration.
C. DISCUSSION
1. Circulation.
a. Major Circulation Routes.
(1) The primary street bisecting the project will be "H" Street, which
is planned for six through lanes extending from 1-805 to the easterly boundary of the
project with a bike lane planned within both sides of the proposed travel way.
Additional turn lanes are designed for the major intersection as well as deceleration
and acceleration lanes adjacent to the shopping center entrance. Specific recommenda-
tions for the offsite improvements extending to the east and the phased construction
of "H" Street have not been finalized by the City and the developer.
(2) Due to the elevated location of residential development on the north
side of "H" Street and the two major streets servin~ that area, sidewalks are planned
only on the south side of "H". This will tend to direct pedestrian flow coming from
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 14
the north side of "H" to cross this major street at the proposed signalized inter-
sections.
(3) Ridgeback Road which connects with "H" Street and extends to the
easterly boundaries of the development will be the primary road serving the La Canada
Sectional Planning Area proposed as one of the later phases on the E1 Rancho del Rey
Specific Plan. The design of the road will accommodate four moving lanes of traffic
in addition to a bike lane on either side. Parking will be prohibited on both
Ridgeback Road and "H" Street within this development.
(4) The primary circulation system planned for the condominium develop-
ment north of "H" Street will be a series of private loop and cul-de-sac roads
within each individual condominium development. The remaining detached single
family residential area will be served by standard residential street designs. It
should be noted that street F, adjacent to the open space, water tank, and elementary
school site, will provide linkage to a vacant county area which could be developed
in the future.
(5) At the far west end of the project, street C will connect with
Lynwood Drive to provide a secondary means of access for the residents of the
immediate area as well as affording the residents of the adjoining county area the
ability to enter this development without going back to Bontia Road and on to the
freeway. The Fire Department has indicated that this connection is necessary to
provide acceptable fire response with the relocation of the "J" Street
fire station into the Hidden Vista development. It should be noted that while the
Chula Vista Fire Department would not be the first fire unit into the Lynwood Hills
county area, it is possible for that situation to be adjusted in future years.
Therefore, we should plan for that connection at this time.
b. Pedestrian Flow.
(1) A portion of the pedestrian movement was discussed in subsection "a";
however, additional pedestrian movement is being studied and reviewed by the staff
for the individual condominium areas, both for internal function and proposed
connections with the public sidewalk system.
(2) In addition, the developer is showing two pedestrian easements at the
end of the Lynwood Hills development from Vista Nacion Drive and Vista Corconado
Drive. Those pedestrian systems would extend along the sides of the proposed
residential lots and connect directly to C street.
c. Street Names.
The applicant has submitted a list of street names which are under review
by the Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments. Specific recommendations will
be given to the Commission at the next meeting.
d. Equestrian Trails.
(1) At present the equestrians heading south from Bonita Road in the
general vicinity of Hidden Vista Village area take a rather undefined route,
entering an area west of the developed Lynwood Hills area and skirting the area
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27~ 1980 Page 15
to the south heading in an easterly direction over to the remaining area of the
E1 Rancho del Rey ownership. The adopted E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan
recognizes a north-south equestrian route which follows along the Otay Water line
located at the east end of the Hidden Vista Village development. That t)ail
ultimately connects with Bonita Road to the north and the primary leg of Rice
Canyon to the east.
(2) The staff has met with representatives of the Sweetwater Valley
Equestrian group in an attempt to resolve this additional east to west movement
which is apparently taking place at the present time because the subject property
is undeveloped. The developer is willing and the staff has worked out a trail
system which can feasibly be accommodated near the northerly boundaries of the
junior high, park site, and elementary school, and along the rear boundaries of
a limited number of single family homes in the Hidden Vista project. This trail
would terminate at the easterly end of Lynwood Drive and thus force the equestrians
to use a portion of Lynwood Drive as the westerly linkage to this system.
(3) In order to allow the equestrians the same freedom of movement
they now enjoy by skirting to the south and west of Lynweod Hills, it would be
necessary to extend the trail system at the rear lots of the entire residential area
planned to abut Lynwood Hills. Because of the lot orientation and grading proposed
in the area, the staff cannot recommend such a connection.
e. Offiste County Improvements.
The connection of C street with Lynwood Drive will require County approval
so we have asked the applicant to contact the County regarding any necessary
recommended improvements for Lynwood Drive as well as any necessary cul-de-sac
construction at Vista Nacion, Vista Coronado and Lynwood Drive. Although the City
has received a letter from the County Transportation Department indicating that a
substantial amount of improvements will be required for Lynwood Drive as well as
the installation of permanent 96 foot diameter cul-de-sacs at the end of Vista
Nacion and Vista Coronado Drives, these requirements would appear to be excessive
in light of the number of anticipated trips to be generated by this development
(180 per day indicated in the adopted EIR). It will be necessary for the developer
to work closely with the County to resolve these issues.
2. Grading.
a. While there is mass grading proposed for the development area (cut and
fill estimated between 3½-4½ million cubic yards) nearly half of the 419 acres
will remain in its natural state. Major topographic changes will occur with
certain cut slopes reac~ng50 feet in height, while fill slopes in the area of
the schools could approach 100 feet in height. The shopping center area will be
filled as much as 50 feet in some areas to bring the level of the commercial
development just below the "H" Street elevation. The 1-805 freeway will be
slightly above the rear portion of the shopping area, whereas, the condominiums on
the north side of "H" Street will be elevated approximately 40 feet above "H" Street.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 16
b. Staff and the developer have worked together in designing the
manufactured slope banks along the north side of "H" Street adjacent to the
condominium development to provide a variation in the angle of the slopes in the
retention of a canyon foKmation to provide visual relief from the standard 2:1
slope bank allowed by code. It is proposed that these slope banks would be
maintained by the condominium home owners association.
c. In several areas of the single family detached lots, both double
frontage and single loaded lot developments create pads which back up to the
dedicated public street thus creating the need to provide landscaping mainten-
ance through the use of a maintenance district. Certain manufactured slopes
which will receive very little public view, such as those areas lying northerly
of the elementary school, junior high, and park site, will be maintained by the
various jurisdictions developing those sites.
d. The rear slope areas of the single family detached homes would normally
be the maintenance responsibility of individual home owners; however, several of the
larger slopes in the single family areas, as well as the major slope in the proposed
condominium development lying along "H" Street and across the northerly boundary
of the condominiums, will offer such a high degree of visibility that the staff
will recommend they be offered for dedication to the City. That offer would not
be accepted at this point in time, but would be held in abeyance. The City Council
will be asked to form an open space maintenance district over the entire 419 acres
with assessments possible at any future date should the maintenance not be kept at
an acceptable level.
3. Drainage.
As pointed out in the EIR, there is a substantial amount of drainage calculated
to flow through the Rice Canyon Basin--the 50 year flood estimated at nearly 2100 cfs.
The developer is proposing to intercept the major drainage flow at the east end of
the property and contain that flow in an underground pipe system following the
alignment of "H" Street and extending westerly to connect with the present pipe
system at 805 and "H" Street. The basic internal drainage system of the project will
be reviewed by the City Engineering Department and must conform to City standards.
4. Water.
The entire 419 acre project lies within the Otay Municipal Water District service
area. The City has received correspondence from the Water District indicating that
a master plan for the necessary facility to serve this area was completed some time
ago with financing to occur through the use of approved bond monies. The plan calls
for the construction of a water tank facility approximately 1¼ miles to the east
of the subject property, together with the construction of an 18" diameter water
line extending from that tank along "H" Street to serve the property. In order to
construct this required facility to provide water service for the development, Otay
Municipal Water District has asked that "H" Street be rough graded offsite from the
tank to the easterly boundary of the development. Otay Water District has indicated
that failure to meet these demands will result in the District's refusal to issue
water service letters. The developer is attempting to work with the Otay Land
Company, owners of the property to the east, as well as the Otay Water District and
the Sweetwater Water Authority to resolve this problem. Grading will be prohibited
and final maps would not be allowed to be recorded until this issue is solved to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 17
5. Schools.
a. The developer has indicated an elementary school and a junior high
school site at the northerly end of the project in conformance with the adopted
E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. Both the Chula Vista Elementary School District
and the Sweetwater Union High School District have adopted a fee schedule which
requires developers to pay a specific dollar amount to provide for temporary
school facilities. The City adopted an ordinance over a year ago which allows
the school districts an opportunity to provide "clear and convincing evidence"
of overcrowding within a given school service area and to develop necessary
equitable formulas which can then be used to require dedication of land and/or
fees for temporary facilities.
b. The developer is still negotiating with both school districts on this
matter and at this point has offered to give the schools the land without any
grading or improvements in exchange for the usual school fees. If the developer
and school districts can reach an equitable agreement there will be no need for
the City to intercede. It is possible that we will not have a final commitment
on the part of either school district until the tentative map is being considered
by the City Council.
6. Low and Moderate Income Housing Proposal.
The applicant is pursuing a program calling for the construction of between
240 and 275 senior citizen and low to moderate income family housing units to be
located on the south side of "H" Street adjacent to the proposed shopping area.
This proposal is in a very embryonic stage with only preliminary site plans submitted
to the staff at this time. Assurance will need to be given guaranteeing the con-
struction of these units with phasing to correspond with the other residential
developments within the project. The proposal for 240 to 275 units would represent
between 20 and 25 per cent of the total number of housing units proposed for this
SPA.
7. Phasing.
In accordance with the attached construction phasing schedule, the first phase
of development of some 77 single family units and 112 condominium units will begin
in August of next year and continue with various phases of residential and commercial
development in 1982 through 1985, with the last phase of residential development
involving approximately 80 condominium units to commence in the early part of 1985.
The proposed phasing for the various street improvements is still being discussed
at this time.
8. Fire Station.
a. A site some 30,000 square feet in area is being proposed for a fire
station at the entrance to the single family detached development located approxi-
mately 1/4 mile north of "H" Street. The Fire Department is anticipating phasing
out the present fire facility on "J" Street in Chula Vista and replacing that site
with this location within the E1 Rancho del Rey area.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 18
b. Since this site would serve not only the Rice Canyon SPA but existing
developments lying to the south and to the east, it will be necessary to have
portions of "H" Street extended, together with Paseo Del Rey (partially located
in the Del Rey SPA) to provide the proper linkage back to "J" Street. Therefore,
certain offsite improvements will have to be completed to coincide with the
relocation of the station. The Fire Department is presently negotiating with the
developer to coordinate the time for the determination of the possible physical
construction of the station.
9. Lot Size.
The developer is proposing 62 lots at lO,O00 square feet or more. The primary
location of these lots will be in and around the Lynwood Hills area. In addition,
107 lots will be between 7,000 and 10,000 square feet in size, withthe remaining
160 lots between 6,000 and 7,000 square feet. Thus, nearly 50 per cent of the lots
are less than 7,000 square feet in size, representing a higher percentage (30% maximum)
than would be allowed under standard R-1 zoning. Since the subject property is zoned
P-C and not R-l, there is no prohibition against the more extensive use of the
smaller lots. The developer, in this case, is simply controlled by the maximum
density allowed by the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan for the Rice Canyon SPA.
10. Walls and Fencing.
?o insure overall continuity, the City will require the submission of an
overall fencing and wall plan which would address the problem of double frontage
lots, view lots, corner lots, pedestrian safety adjacent to slope banks, and
definition and privacy of private open space areas within the condominium develop-
ment.
ll. Condominium Areas.
a. The condominium development is broken into two distinct condominium
areas, one lying north of "H" Street and the other lying to the south. The largest
concentration of condominiums lies north of "H" Street, involving some 498 units
located within three lots containing 55 acres, each somewhat self-contained by
virtue of topography and the internal circulation design. Approximately 2/3 of the
units are planned as 3 bedroom and the remaining 1/3 as 2 bedroom.
b. The parking is designed so that the units (all two story structures)
located within the interior of the loop road system will each have a two car garage
with guest parking provided in open bays. All of the units on the perimeter road
system are a split level, 3 story design, with a one car garage and an additional
space, as well as guest parking, provided in an open parking lot. All of the
required guest parking will be confined on site, as opposed to using any of the
public street system as allowed by ordinance.
c. While there' are presently some four different styles of architecture
proposed, the applicant is planning to use one basic style of architecture for a
given area, to create continuity in theme, rather than an indiscriminate mixture of
the architectural styles. Slides of the prospective architecture will be presented
at the meeting for the Planning Commission's review.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 19
d. The developer proposes to construct 140 condominium units on the south
side of "H" Street with nearly three-fourths of those units to be 2 bedroom and the
remainder to consist of 48 three bedroom units and 16 one bedroom units. This entire
project will be of two story construction with the exception of clusters of one story
detached garages provided at the ratio of one space per unit with an additional
parking space and guest parking provided in an open parking bay. Parking in this
instance will be located primarily alonQ "H" Street on the periphery o~ the
development. There will be ample room (20 feet) between the garage and the open
parking area adjacent to the sidewalk to provide effective landscape screening.
e. The City staff is still working closely with the developer's landscape
architect to refine the detail plans within the entire condominium area relating to
the fencing of open space, the pedestrian flow, and the landscaping treatment.
Construction Phasing Schedule
for
Hidden Vista Village
Proposed Starting Dates Type of Units Total Units
10/1/81 77 detached singl.e family
ll2 condominium 189
4/1/82 78 detached single family
Auto Park 78
10/1/82 69 detached single family
60 condominium 129
1/1/83 Retail Commercial
4/1/83 71 detached single family
140 condominium 211
10/1/83 34 detached single family
62 condominium
275 low/moderate housing 371
4/1/84 ll2 condominium 112
10/1/84 72 condominium 72
4/1/85 80 condominium 80
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 20
6. Consideration of amendment to the Municipal Code makin9 stock cooperatives and
community apartment projects subject to the same provisions
as condominiums
A. BACKGROUND
The City Council, on January 15, 1980, enacted urgency Ordinance No. 1890, which
is codified as Section 15.56.005 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. This ordinance
brings stock cooperative and community apartment projects under the purview of
Chapter 15.56, which was formerly limited to the regulation of residential condo-
minium projects.
The Council then requested that the Planning Commission review the subject urgency
ordinance and submit its recommendation on the advisability of making it a permanent
amendment to the Municipal Code.
Ordinance No. 1890 is attached as Exhibit A.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council enact Section 15.56.005 as a
permanent amendment to the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
C. ANALYSIS
1. Ordinance No. 1841, passed and adopted by the City Council on November 14,
1978, and Ordinance No. 1873, dated July 24, 1979, regulate the creation of residen-
tial condominium projects, and thereby supplement the subdivision regulations of
Chula Vista.
2. The aforementioned ordinances, codified as Chapter 15.56, are designed to
promote the safety, health, and convenience of residents of condominium projects.
These ordinances recognize that condominium unit owners tend to regard their
projects as their permanent residences and expect higher levels of onsite comfort,
convenience, and residential enjoyment.
3. Ordinance No. 1841 also protects, to some extent, tenants of rental projects
which are converted to condominium projects. This ordinance amplifies State legis-
lation with respect to the notice of proposed conversion which must be given to
existing tenants, and provides these tenants a 60 day right-of-first-refusal to
purchase their units. It also requires that prospective purchasers of units in a
condominium project created by conversion be apprised of the fact that the involved
units were formerly occupied on a rental basis.
4. While the provisions of the City of Chula Vista's condominium control regu-
lations effectively re9ulate new and converted condominium projects, they do not
cover stock cooperatives or community apartments. Stock cooperatives and community
apartments, however, are similar in land use and occupancy to condominium projects,
and can provide de facto independent ownership of dwelling units in a residential
project held under common ownership. Because of this similarity, cities throughout
California have expressed concern that stock cooperatives, in particular, might be
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of February 27, 1980 Page 21
extensively used to subvert local condominium regulations.*
5. Although the State Subdivision Map Act, under Section 66424, has for several
years provided that proposed condominium and community apartment project~ are to be
processed as "subdivisions," stock cooperatives remained outside of the purview of
this section until late 1979. Even now, the said section covers "stock cooperative
conversions," but not new stock cooperative projects.
6. Urgency Ordinance No. 1890 defines the condominium, stock cooperative, and
community apartment concepts of holding real property, and properly places stock
cooperative and community apartment projects under the regulatory provisions of
Chapter 15.56 of the Municipal Code. Prior to Ordinance No. 1890, the said chapter's
provisions merely governed condominium projects. If Ordinance No. 1890 is made a
permanent amendment to the code, the provisions of Chapter 15.56 would become broader
in application and less susceptible to subversion.
* In theory, condominium, stock cooperative, and co,unity apartment projects
are different. The condominium concept grew out of the Roman Civil Law of Europe
and is based upon a divided fee ownership. The owner of a condominium unit holds
the airspace of his residence in separate or independent fee, and holds an undivided
fee interest in the project's common ar~a, including the land beneath his airspace.
Under a stock cooperative, the corporation holds the fee to the entire project.
The "owner" of the unit merely has a share of stock which permits occupancy of a
designated unit. This occupancy is usually governed by a rental agreement. In
theory, the owner of a cooperative unit is merely a tenant, and cannot convey,
encumber, or devise the involved residence. While the owner can convey his share
of stock, the conveyance would merely be a transfer of a security. The right of
the purchaser to occupy the residential premises would be governed by the terms of
the agreement between the stock cooperative and its shareholders.
The community apartment concept is'a product of the English Common Law and, prior to
the importation of the condominium concept, provided a very popular method of holding
residential property in con, non. From the standpoint of Jurisprudence, each tenant
of a community apartment is a "tenant in common," and owns an undivided interest in
the fee of the real property in question--including the land and buildings. While
the tenant does not own, at law, his dwelling unit, he or she has the exclusive
right to occupy it, and such right has been traditionally protected "in equity."
In the world of reality, condominiums, stock cooperatives, and community apartments
are similar. They are p~sically indistinguishable.
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain
SECTION I: That Chapter 15.56 of the Chula Vista
~4unicipal Code is hereby amel~ded by adding thereto a new Section
15.56.005 to read as follows:
Sec. 15.56.005 Conversion of Multiple Dwelling
Units to Independent Ownerships.
It is the intent of the City Council to establish
herein regulations and requirements for the conversion
community apartment projects or any other form of
ownership ~hich would allow independent o~.~nership of
units other%;ise held under a common and unified owner-
ship.
For the purposes of this section, the following
ownerships shall be subject to the full regulations
of this chapter although not exclusively and subject
to the following definitions:
"Condominium" is an estate in real property con-
sisting of an undivided interest in common in a
portion of a parcel of real property together with
a separate interest in space in a residential~ indus-
trial or commercial building on such real property,
such as an apartment, office or store. A condominium
may include in addition a separate interest in other
portions of such real property.
"Stock Cooperative" is a corporation which is formed
or availed of primarily for the purpose of holding
title to, either in fee simple or for a term of years,
improved real property, ii! all or substantially all of
the shareholders of such corporation receive a right
of exclusive occupancy in a portion of the real pro-
perty, title to which is held by the corporation, which
right of occupancy is transferable only concurrently
with the transfer of the share or shares of stock in
the corporation held by the person having such right
of OCcupancy.
"community Apartment Project" is a project in which
an undivided interest in the land is coupled with the
right of exclusive occupancy of any ~partme~ located
thereon.
It is the purpose of the Council in adopting this
ordinance to apply all regulations referring to condo-
minium projects to all stock cooperatives, community
housing projects and any similar ownership forms in
the same manner as if said terms were substituted for
condominium projects as conditioned in this chapter.
SECTION II: Th~s ordinance shall take effect upon first
reading and adoption if passed by at least four affirmative votes.
Presente~ and Approved as to form by
George D~ Lindberg, City Attorney