HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1981/12/02To: City Planning Commission
From: D.J. Peterson, Director of Planning
Subject: Staff report on agenda items for Planning Commission
Meeting of December 2, 1981
1. PUBLIC HEARING: Tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 82-6,
Hilltop Terrace, at the northeast corner of Telegraph
Canyon Road and Nacion Avenue - Dale Building Company
A. BACKGROUND
The public hearing for this tentative map was originally scheduled and advertised
for December 2nd; however, the developer has requested that the Planning Commis-
sion delay consideration of the map until December 16th. Therefore, a continuance
is in order. Corrected notices of the hearing date have been sent to interested
homeowners in the area.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Continue the public hearing to the meeting of December 16, 1981.
AGENDA
City Planning Commission
Chula Vista, California
Wednesday, December 2, 1981 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PP~qYER
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of November 18, 1981
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. PUBLIC HEARING: Tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 82-6,
Hilltop Terrace, northeast corner of Telegraph Canyon
Road and Nacion Avenue - Dale Building Company
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of draft EIR-81-3 on EastLake Planned
Community
(Continued from November 18, 1981)
3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of EIR-80-6 A (Supplemental) on Telegraph
Point
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Rezoning application PCZ-82-C to change the zoning for 288
and 290 Del Mar from R-3 to C-O - Joseph A. Casey, D.D.S.
5. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-82-7, request for mini-market
with gasoline sales at 720 "H" Street, Atlantic Richfield Co.
6. PUBLIC HEARING: Tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 82-5,
Centre Villas, 344-354 "G" Street - Hoffman & Salganick
7. PUBLIC HEARING: Amendment to E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan to redesignate
high school site in Ranchero Sectional Planning Area to
Low Density Residential
8. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Revised Housing Element of the General Plan
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
CO~MISSION COMMENTS
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981 Page 2
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of draft EIR-S1-3 on EastLake Planned
Communits
A. BACKGROUND
1. This hearing was continued from the meeting of November 18, 1981 to the
meetings of December 2 and December 16, 1981. This continuance was necessary to
obtain comments from State agencies through the State Clearing House and input
from the newly formed EastLake Task Force.
2. The Resource Conservation Commission recommended, at their November 16,
1981 meeting that the Planning Commission certify the EIR with special considera-
tion being given to agriculture preservation, the availability of water, and traffic
impacts (see attached minutes).
3. The EastLake Task Force, comprised of members from the Sweetwater Planning
Group, Jamul-Dulzura Planning Group, and the Resource Conservation Commission,
held their first meeting on November 23, 1981. It is anticipated that their work
will be completed by the December 16 meeting and that they will testify at that
meeting.
4. The State review period has been extended by the clearing house for an
additional one week period. This extension was agreed to after consultation with
city staff and after assurance was given that comments would be received priot to
the December 16th hearing and this would not result in a delay in the processing
of the EIR.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Take additional testimony on the draft EIR and continue the hearing until
the meeting of December 16, 1981.
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
November 18, 1981 Council Conference Room/City Hall 5:33 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Taylor, Vice Chairman Augustine (arrived 5:37 p.m.),
Commissioners Griffin, Hernandez and Hodson
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Environmental Review Coordinator Reid
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MSUC (Hodson/Hernandez, 4-0) to approve the minutes of the
regular meeting of September 21, 1981, as mailed.
2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
(a) EIR-80-3 (EastLake) Vice Chairman Augustine indicated that the following
should be given special consideration:
(1) Agriculture - Important to preserve agricultural land. Any development
such as EastLake would be premature until a need is established.
(2) Water Availability - Peripheral canal has not been approved. There is
not enough water to provide to the site.
(3) Traffic - Those driving to and from EastLake would be driving through
high density area. Would have an impact on nearby residential areas.
MSC (Taylor/Hernandez, 4-1 with Hodson voting against) to accept the EIR as
written with special consideration to the items enumerated by Mr. Augustine.
Commissioner Hodson commented that he felt this project would be a benefit
to the City in the future.
(b) EIR-80-6A (Telegraph Canyon Point) - Supplementation to the original EIR due
to change in plan.
Mr. Reid commented that the revision will increase the number of dwelling units
within each of the structures and there will be fewer buildings in the project.
This will allow some variation in the slopes.
Chairman Taylor indicated to Mr. Reid that he would like to obtain copies of
any further modifications to this project.
MSC (Hernandez/Taylor, 4-0 with Hodson abstaining) to accept EIR-80-6A as
written.
City Planning Commission Page 3
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981
3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of EIR-80-6 A (Supplemental) on Telegraph Point
A. BACKGROUND
1. At the September 10, 1981 meeting the Environmental Review Committee
reviewed the revised development plans for the East College Sectional Planning
Area of E1 Rancho del Rey located at the northeast corner of Otay Lakes Road
and Telegraph Canyon Road. The Committee found that the revised development
plan could result in significant impacts due to land form alteration and
aesthetics, and required a supplement to the previously prepared EIR.
2. On October 5, 1981 the Environmental Review Coordinator held a public
meeting to provide an opportunity for public imput prior to preparation of the
d~aft EIR. No comments were received.
3. On October 29, 1981 the Environmental Review Committee issued the draft
EIR for public review.
4. At the November 16, 1981 meeting the Resource Conservation Committee
reviewed the draft EIR and recommended its certification. No other comments
on the draft EIR have been received.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Open the public hearing and take testimony on the adequacy of the draft EIR.
If no response is necessary, certify EIR-80-6 A. If a response to comments is
necessary, schedule the final EIR for consideration on December 16, 1981.
C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1. The following table is a comparison of the previous plan and the proposed
revision:
The Terrace (previous) Telegraph Point (present
Number of units 256 252
Number of structures 22 36
Onsite parking 441 443
Cu.Yds. of balanced cut & fill 175,000 295,000
Number of access points 2 2
Maximum slope height 60'± 62'±
2. The project applicant is preparing a revised development plan for
consideration which deals with the issues raised in the EIR. These plans will be
reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee prior to Planning Commission
consideration of the project and CEQA findings.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981 Page
D. CONCLUSIONS
The proposed grading plans require extensive land form alteration with very
little attention given to retaining the natural slopes on the project site.
Cutting and filling are excessive and involve a substantial change in the physical
appearance of the site. Mitigation measures previously discussed will not reduce
impacts to a level of insignificance unless grading plans are revised. In examin-
ing the issues stated above we have determined that the project will have a
significant impact due to land form alteration. At the time of project considera-
tion, the necessary CEQA findings will be presented for Planning Commission
consideration.
DIEGO
VACANT
A-~ (8)
county
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981 Page 5
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Rezoning application PCZ-82-C to~_cha~q~_the zoning for
288 and 290 Del Mar from R-3 to C-O - Joseph A. CaseS, D.D.S.
A. BACKGROUND
1. This item involves a request to rezone the property located at 288-290 Del
Mar Avenue from R-3 to C-O (see locator).
2. The project is exempt from environmental review as a class l(n) exemption.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the change of zone
for the 45' X 135' site located at 288 and 290 Del Mar Avenue from R-3 to C-O.
C. DISCUSSION
1. Adjacent zoning and land use:
North R-3 Public parking lot
South C-O Professional offices, beauty salon and apartments
East C-O & R-3 Professional offices and apartments
West C-O Professional offices
2. Existing site characteristics.
The project site, measuring 45' X 135.5', is located on the west side of Del
Mar Avenue approximately lO1 feet north of "F" Street. The subject property
was originally one lot which has since been divided into two equal parcels (each
measuring 45' X 67.75') with one parcel fronting on the street and the other
located immediately behind to the west. Each parcel is developed with a wood frame
single family dwelling. A two car garage straddles the property line between the
two parcels. A 10 foot easement exists along the southerly side of the front
parcel which serves as access to the rear parcel. A large portion of the two
parcels is paved and used for parking for the commercial uses fronting on
Street. The rear house was once used as an antique store but is presently being
used for residential purposes.
3. On November 10, 1981 the Chula Vista Parking Place Commission, by a vote
of 3-2, recommended that the City Council expand the boundaries of the Parking
District to include the subject site. The City Council will consider the
expansion prior to or concurrent with the rezoning consideration. Expansion of
the district boundaries to include the applicant's property would allow the site
to be redeveloped without providing onsite parking.
4. The subject property is located at a point where two land use designations
interface on the General Plan (Professional Office and High Density Residential).
Accordingly, the subject property may be zoned either R-3 or C-O and still be in
conformance with the General Plan.
City Planning Commission Page 6
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981
D. ANALYSIS
1. Under normal circumstances, I would be very reluctant to recommend
approval of commercial zoning for any property which faces and receives its
access from what is considered to be a residential street. However, I believe
that the circumstances existing in this particular case warrant the rezoning.
The circumstances are:
a. The subject property is very narrow (45') and relatively small
(approximately 6000 sq. ft.) and would be very difficult to develop residentially
(except as it exists).
b. The property is substantially bordered by commercial uses. The
properties to the west and south are zoned for and developed with offices. The
property to the north, while zoned R-3, is a commercial parking lot serving the
offices on "F" and Church Streets. The commercial zoning on the property on the
east side of Del Mar extends 120 feet north of "F" Street while the present C-O
zoning on the west side extends only 100 feet.
c. The subject property is functioning in part as a commercial use by
providing parking for the other commercial uses fronting on "F" Street. In
addition, the rear dwelling has been used commercially in the past.
2. All things considered, the property is not well suited for residential
use and rezoning the property for office use will enable the applicant to remodel
and upgrade the property for that use. The applicant has indicated he is prepared
to renovate the front dwelling to be used as a dental office. It should be noted
that unless the Parking District boundaries are expanded by the City Council to
include this lot, the applicant will have to remove the rear dwelling and the
garage in order to use the front structure for commercial purposes. The removal
of the rear buildings would be necessary to comply with city parking standards.
DAVIDSOI~ ST.
MF SF I MF SFI TF I
I I
SF I
MF
TF TF
SF MF
TF
TF
II
F"
Z ' I RECREATION
CENTER
NORMAN
PARK
CENTER
-- ~
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981 Page 7
5. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-82-7, request for mini-market
with gasoline sales at 720 "H" Street, Atlantic Richfield Co.
A. BACKGROUND
1. The Atlantic Richfield Company is requesting permission to convert an
existing service station building into a 24 hour AM/PM market with the sale of
gasoline at 720 "H" Street in the C-V-P zone.
2. An Initial Study, IS-82-14, of possible adverse environmental impact of
the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Committee on November 12,
1981. The Committee concluded that there would be no significant environmental
effects and recommended adoption of the Negative Declaration.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impact and
adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-82-14.
2. Based on the findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a
motion determining that the proposed sale of convenience goods will offer a
convenience to the motoring public and approving PCC-82-7, subject to the following
conditions:
a. A landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted for approval
along with the application for a building permit to remodel the
existing building.
b. Accent colors on the building shall be in the orange and brown hues,
similar to those depicted on the monument sign.
c. Both freestanding signs shall be removed. A monument sign, approxi-
mately 8)~' in height and 12 ~' in length shall be permitted.
d. The maximum letter height for the 24 hour sign on the building shall
not exceed 20".
e. No storage or display of merchandise shall occur outside of the
building.
f. Window signs shall not exceed 10% of the window area.
g. The site plan shall be revised as shown on Exhibit "A"
h. The placing of any signs on the site, other than those authorized by
the conditions outlined, shall be deemed as reason to cause the
Planning Commission to revoke this conditional use permit.
City Planning Commission Page 8
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981
C. DISCUSSION
1. Adjacent zoning and land use:
North C-V-P "H" Street Transit Station
South R-3 Mobile Home Park
East C-V-P Service station
West R-3 Easement road and apartments
2. Existing site characteristics.
The subject property is a 22,360 sq. ft. (0.5 acre) parcel with 180 feet of
frontage along the south side of "H" Street approximately 250 feet east of I-5,
and has a lot depth of 124 feet. The site is presently developed as a service
station which was constructed in 1965. The 1,280 sq. ft. service station building
is located near the rear property line and in the approximate center of the lot.
The canopy covered pump islands (two self-service islands) are located in front
of the building adjacent to "H" Street. The service bays, which face to the east
toward the entry drive to the mobile home park, have not been engaged in the
servicing of automobiles since September of this year. Access to the site ~s
provided by two driveways on "H" Street and one driveway from the driveway to
the mobile home park. Landscaping consists of raised brick planters along the
side property lines and the front.
A retaining wall is constructed along the southerly property line because
the service station site is approximately 3-4 feet higher than the mobile home
park site to the south. The wall extends 2½ to 3 feet above the service station
pad. When the station was first constructed over 15 years ago, residents of
the adjacent mobile home park requested that the wall be kept as low as possible
to insure northerly views from'the park. A recent check by the department with
the park's manager has verified that the desire to retain the lower wall still
prevails, therefore, staff has not recommended a change to the wall height.
3. Existing signs.
Aside from the normal signs on the building there are two freestanding pole
signs on the property.. One sign, standing 25 feet in height and containing 72 sq.
ft. of sign area, is located at the northeast corner of the site; the other sign,
60 feet in height and approximately 180 sq. ft. in area, is located at the south-
west corner. Because the code allows only one freestanding sign per lot, the signs
are technically nonconforming; however, the smaller sign is in conformance with
the regulations of the code with respect to height and size (35 ft. maximum height,
and 150 sq. ft. of sign area), whereas, the larger freeway oriented sign is not.
4. Proposed conversion.
The applicant intends to remodel the existing building into an AM/PM market.
The exterior of the building will also be remodeled and painted white with red and
blue color bands. Signing will consist of the typical AM/PM market signs on the
building, including a sign indicating "24 hours." The freestanding sign at the
northeast corner is to be replaced with an 8½ foot high monument sign utilizing
a variety of colors, some of which are repeated on the buildina, ~nd with a slump
block base.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981 Page 9
5. Other markets.
There are three other establishments within the general vicinity which offer
a similar service. These are: 1) the 7-Eleven store at the southeast corner of
Woodlawn and "H" Street; 2) the Keg 'N Bottle at the northeast corner of Oaklawn
and "H" Street; and 3) the Thrifty Service Station at the southeast corner of
Oaklawn and "H" Street. The Thrifty station has a mini-snack area, whereas the
Keg 'N Bottle can best be described as a liquor delicatessen even though it does
offer such items as cleansing products and other goods. The 7-Eleven store is,
of course, classified as a retail market. All of these establishments are in the
C-T zone.
6. Mini-markets in C-V zone.
At the present time retail markets, such as the one proposed, are not listed
as allowable uses in the C-V zone. However, Section 19.38.020 G of the zoning
ordinance authorizes the Planning Commission to permit establishments which serve
the needs of visitors if the Commission finds that such uses are of the same general
character as other permitted uses. Among the permitted uses are motels, restaurants
and theaters, and antique stores. Certainly a small convenience market is compat-
ible with such uses and has no more adverse impacts than such uses and can be
found to be of the same general character as those permitted uses.
D. ANALYSIS
1. Auto repai~ facilities.
Previous reports on applications of this type have discussed the value of
automobile repair facilities in close proximity to the freeways. However, this
is more of a concern along 1-805 where service stations are the only auto repair
facilities available. This concern is not so relevant along I-5 because of the
proximity of the many auto repair shops along Broadway.
2. Operations and compatibility of proposed use.
While other convenience stores are located close by the proposed ARCO mini-
market, they probably cater more to nearby residents while the proposed ARCO
mini-market will cater, at least in part, to visitors to the area who are stopping
primarily for gas. Other customers may be residents of Chula Vista who stop
primarily for gas and who may make an additional purchase while paying for the gas.
The proposed use is compatible with nearby uses in terms of design, hours of
operation and intensity of activity.
3. Refinement of plan.
If the request is approved the site plan will need refinement which can be
adequately addressed at the building permit stage rather than through the precise
plan procedure since the site is already developed. The 24 hour sign is out of
proportion with the other proposed signs and should be reduced in size. The
monument sign is more desirable than the existing pole sign but should be set back
at least 5 feet from the property line in order to avoid sight distance problems.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981 page l0
4. Removal of freeway oriented sign.
The freeway oriented pole sign is nonconforming and should be removed. The
sign has existed for 16 years which is a sufficient time span to have recouped the
original investment.
E. FINDINGS
1. That the proposed ~ee at the particular location is necessary or desirable
to pro ~de a ser ~ce or facility which will contribute to the general well bein~
of the ne~hborhood or the conmunity.
The proposed use will provide a convenience service to motorists and travelers
who desire to purchase convenience items while buying gas. The convenience
market is located directly across from the MTDB trolley station at a traffic
signal so as to be in a position to provide service for the commuter.
2. That such we will not, under the tire,stances of the particular case,
be detrimental to the health, safety or general wel ~re of persons residing or
working in the ~cinity, or inj~miovs to property or imprownents in the ~cinity.
The conversion of a full service gas station into a mini-market will not
adversely affect nearby residential uses. The lubrication bays have been
inactive for the past three months and the station is already open on a
24 hour basis.
3. That the proposed ~e will ccmply with the regulations and conditions
speci~ed in the code fer s~h we.
The proposed project will require approval of a building permit prior to
construction; said permit process will insure that the project meets the
requirements of the Uniform Building Code and the Municipal Code.
4. That the granting of this conditional we per~it will not adversely
affect the G~neral Plan of the City or the adopted plan ofany go vernnental c~ency.
The proposed use is in keeping with the commercial designation of the General
Plan for this area.
MF
M TDB G
Trolley Stotion MF
"H" STREET
Go$
Sfafion
MF
Mobile
MF
MF
MUELLER
ELEMENTARY
negative declaration
PROJECT NAME: Atlantic Richfield Company
PROJECT LOCATION: 720 'H' Street
PROJECT APPLICANT: Atlantic Richfield Company
CASE NO. IS-82-14 DATE: November 12, 1981
A. Project Setting
The project is located within an existing service station at 720 'H' Street. The
site is presently developed and there are no substantial natural or significant
cultural resources present. No known geologic hazards are located near the project
site.
Adjacent land uses include a mobile home park to the south, a service station to
the west, the mobile home park access drive and multiple family dwellings to the
east, and the San Diego Trolley Station across 'H' Street to the north.
Bi Project Description
The applicant proposes to locate a small accessory retail food sales area within
an existing service station. This project requires a conditional use permit to
authorize a change in land use and is therefore not exempt from environmental
review. The project involves interior remodeling, the placement of wall shelving,
racks, coolers, counters, etc.
C. Compatibility with zoning and plans
The current service station operation is a continuing non-conforming land use, as
defined in the Chula Vista Municipal Code. The proposed changes in the structure
and addition of retail sales items will require a conditional use permit in order
to qualify as a conforming land use in the present C-V-P zone.
The project site is located on a designated "Gateway" to the City, as per the Scenic
Highways Element of the Chula Vista General Plan. Architectural compatibility,
landscaping, signs, etc. will be reviewed for conformance with the General Plan
principles by the Planning Commission and Design Review Committee. The proposed
land use is compatible with the General Plan land use designation of Visitor
Commercial.
D. Findings of insiqnificant impact
1. The project is void of any significant natural or manmade resources and
there are no known earthquake faults in the vicinity of the project.
2. The land use as proposed is consistent with the land use element of the
General Plan and the project is not anticipated to achieve short term to the
disadvantage of long term environmental goals.
city of chula vista planning department l/I"l:~,~
environmenlal review laotian
IS-82-14 2
3. Project implementation is not anticipated to result in any impacts which
could interact to create any substantial cumulative effect on the environment.
4. The project will not cause the emission of any harmful substance which
could prove detrimental to the health or welfare of humans.
E. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista Steve Griffin, Associate Planner
Duane Bazzel, Assistant Planner
Bill Harshman, Associate Engineer
Tom Dyke, Building Department
Ted Monsell, Fire Marshal
Applicant George Ryan
2. Documents
IS-80-27, ARCO Mini Store
City of Chula Vista Municipal Code and General Plan
PCC-82-7, Atlantic Richfield Company
The Initini Study Anpl [o,~hion an~l ,~vnluation fcrms documenting the
findin(:s o[ no sl,:nlf-[c~nt in:pnct nfo on file and available for
puhlkc revlr~w nt ~ h~ ~'I..,~1,~ ~.'ista Planning Dept. , 276 4th Avenue,
Chu[a Vi:;ta, CA 92010.
city of chula vista planning department ~
environmental review section
~N 6
City Planning Commission Page ll
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981
6. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista
Tract 82-5, Centre Villas, 344-354 "G" Street - Hoffman and
Salganick
A. BACKGROUND
1. The applicant is requesting approval of a tentative subdivision map known
as Centre Villas, Chula Vista Tract 82-5, in order to develop a one lot condominium
project consisting of 26 units on 1.1 acres located at 344-354 "G" Street in the
R-3 zone.
2. An Initial Study, IS-81-33, of possible environmental impacts of the
project was conducted by the Environmental Review Committee on March 26, 1981.
The Committee concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects
and recommended that the Negative Declaration be adopted.
3. On July 16, 1981 the Design Review Committee approved the project with
conditions.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and
adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-81-33, together with the following
mitigation measures:
a. The developer shall not oppose the formation of any assessment district
formed for the purpose of providing adequate storm drain facilities to
serve the project area.
b. The developer shall coordinate with the City's Landscape Architect
concerning the disposition of the existing pepper tree located on
the project site. An effort shall be made to retain this tree, if
feasible.
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 Centre Villas, Chula Vista Tract 82-5, subject to the following conditions:
1. The following work within the right-of-way shall be completed or guaranteed
prior to approval of the final map.
a. The developer shall remove all existing driveways on "G" Street
adjacent to the project.
b. The developer shall remove the existing curb along "G" Street ~djacent
to the project and replace same with curb and gutter.
c. The developer shall replace all cracked or displaced sidewalk along
"G" Street adjacent to the project.
C~ty Planning Commission Page 12
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981
2. Prior to approval of the final map, the developer shall obtain either,
a. A 10 foot wide drainage easement corresponding to the proposed
flow of water to Vance Street across the existing parking lot on
adjacent property, or
b. A notorized letter from the ~wner indicating his acceptance of
run-off from the project across or onto his parking lot.
3. Prior to approval of the final map, the developer shall submit calcu-
lations indicating the depth of flow in the gutter along Vance Street
resulting from the runoff generated by the project. Should the capacity
of the street be too small to accommodate the additional runoff generated
by this project the developer shall provide retention facilities to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
4. Prior to approval of the final map, the developer shall enter into an
agreement with the City not to protest the formation of a future 1911
(or other) improvement district to provide adequate storm drain facilities
to serve the project area.
5. The developer shall prepare a grading and drainage plan for the site;
said plan shall be submitted to the City and approved by the City Engineer
prior to approval of the final map.
6. The developer shall not restrict the natural drainage pattern from
property east of the project site.
7. The developer shall record Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's),
which shall be subject to the approval of the City Council, concurrently
with the recordation of the final map.
8. The City of Chula Vista shall be made a party to the CC&R's which shall
include but not be limited to the following:
a. Prohibition against the installation of individual outside antennae.
b. Provision for the maintenance of all common areas, required fencing,
buildings, carports, and parking areas including driveways.
9. No building permits will be issued until such time as the school districts
have given written notice to the City that they are able to provide school
facilities for the residents of the project.
10. One onsite fire hydrant shall be provided between buildings "D" and "F"
as required by the Fire Marshal. The hydrant shall have one 4-inch outlet
and one 2½ inch outlet. Required fire flow is 2,000 gpm.
City Planning Commission Page 13
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981
C. DISCUSSION
1. Adjacent zoning and land use:
North R-3 Women's Club and single family dwellings
South R-3 Multiple family dwellings
East R-3 Multiple family dwellings
West R-3 Single family dwelling
2. Existing site characteristics.
The project site consists of three relatively level parcels containing 1.1
acres on the south side of "G" Street between Third and Fourth Avenue and opposite
Garrett Avenue. The three parcels are each developed with a single family
dwelling which will be removed to make room for the proposed development.
3. Proposed development.
a. The developer intends to construct 26 two bedroom condominium units.
The units will be of contemporary Spanish design with blue tile mansard roofs,
bluish-gray stucco exteriors, wood trim, and stuccoed accent wing walls. There
will be six buildings as described in the following table:
Building Description
"A" Single story seven car garage
"B" Duplex townhouse (2 units)
"C" Fourplex townhouse (4 units)
"D" Two story eightplex, 4 units on each floor (8 units
total) with 7 car garage attached (north side facing
Building "A")
"E" Fourplex townhouse (4 units) with 6 car garage attached
(west side)
"F" Eightplex townhouse (8 units) with 8 car garage attached
(north side)
b. The townhouses and first floor units will each have 144 sq. ft. patios
and the second floor units will have 95 sq. ft. balconies. The amount of private
open space for each unit exceeds the minimum requirements of the code.
c. The developer will provide 200+ cubic feet of private storage located
adjacent to the unit within either the patio or balcony area.
d. The code requires a total of 45 parking spaces on site. The developer
provided a total of 46 spaces. There will be 28 garage spaces and 18 open spaces.
4. Design Review.
Approval of the project by the Design Review Committee (DRC-81-12) included
the following conditions:
City Planning Commission Page 14
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981
a. The landscape plans required with building permit application shall
incorporate the following:
1) Plans for utilization of the rear 15 feet of the lot as a common
open space area for occupants of building "F";
2) The disposition of the existing pepper tree located on the site
(prior to any demolition);
3) Vertical growth characteristics for plant material within
parking lot planters; and
4) Add planting areas between the garage doors within the parking
lot areas.
b. A curb radius shall be installed on the planter adjacent to parking
space 31.
c. The proposed turn-around space shall be painted for identification.
d. The typical windows shown on the end elevation of building "C" shall
be utilized on buildings "B", "E" (upper floor only) and "F".
e. Trash enclosures shall be treated with exterior stucco to match the
building colors.
f. Private patio fences shall be trimmed with a wood cap.
g. A demolition permit shall be required prior to the removal of any
structures.
D. FINDINGS
Pursuant to Section 66473.5 and 66412.2 of the Subdivision Map Act, the
tentative subdivision map for Centre Villas, Chula Vista Tract 82-5 i's recommended
for approval based on the following findings:
1. The site is surrounded by R-3 zoning and is physically suited for multiple
family residential development.
2. The design of the project will not affect the existing public improvements,
such as streets, sewer, drainage, etc., which have been designed to avoid any
serious health problems.
3. Approval of this project will not adversely affect the public service needs
of the residents of the city or available fiscal and environmental resources.
4. The subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and its elements as
follows:
a. Land Use - The deisity of 23 units per acre is in keeping with the
General Plan designation of 13-26 units per acre.
b. Circulation - The development is not required to dedicate or improve
additional streets.
City Planning Commission Page 15
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981
c. Housing - The project will provide needed housing in the community
and a choice of home ownership.
d. Conservation - The site is void of any significant wild life and
there are no natural or manmade resources present on site.
e. Parks and Recreation - The developer is required to pay fees in lieu
of dedicating and improvin~ park land.
f. Seismic Safety and Safety - The development is not adjacent to or
near any known earthquake faults and is well within the response
time of the fire station located on "F" Street.
g. Noise - The structures will be constructed to meet the Uniform
Building Code requirements with respect to noise attenuation.
h. Scenic Highway - "G" Street is not a designated scenic route.
i. Bicycle Routes - "G" Street is not a designated bicycle route.
j. Public Buildings - No public buildings are designated on the project
site.
5. Pursuant to Section 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 of Chula Vista and the available fiscal and environmental
resources, and determined that the subject property is well suited for residential
development.
II G"
I MFII I I I I I
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ~~ ,,., .,:~'P"--',/-"T
I
MF I I I I I
VANCE ST.
TF MI=
SF MF I
I I Il
I I I I
I I I I II
I I
ROOSEVELT ST
I I i I I I I I
t ~ I I ! I I I t I
' ' ',~ ' ' , I
I
I
I
I I r-----
! I I I I L
I I i i I
~ i
i i
I,
COND1 T iC,"~,D
negative declaration
PROJECT NAME: Hoffman & Salganick Condos
PROJECT LOCATION: 344, 350, 354 G Street
PROJECT APPLICANT: Hoffman & Salganick 330 Oxford #112
Chula Vista, CA 92011
A. Project Setting
The project involves approximately 1.1 acres of property which is
presently divided into 3 lots containing 3 dwellings at 344, 350
& 354 G Street. Adjacent land uses consist of multiple and single
family dwellings to the south, multiple family dwellings to the east
a vacant lot to the west and the Chula Vista Women's Club and single
family dwellings to the north across G Street.
The project site is void of any significant wildlife and there are
no significant natural or man-made resources present, although one
mature pepper tree is located onrsite. Expansive soils may be
present on the site and there are no known geologic hazards within
the project vicinity.
B. Project Description
The applicant proposes to remove the existing single family dwellings
and accessory structures in order to construct 26 two bedroom units,
18 contained in four two-story townhouse structure. In addition,
28 one-car garages are proposed along with 17 open parking spaces.
C. Compatibility with zoning and plans
1. Soils
The City Engineering Dept. has indicated that expansive soils
are present in the project area, therefore a soils report should
be prepared and recommendations incorporated into the project
to ensure stable construction.
2. Drainage
The increase in the amount of surface runoff which empties into
existing storm drain systems resulting from this project will
be insignificant. It should be noted that future development
within this drainage basin will warrant increasing the capacity
of existing downstream storm drain facilities.
city of chula vista planning department
environmental review section
IS-81-33 (2)
3. Aesthetics
The developer proposes to remove one mature pepper tree in order
to construct the proposed project. The developer should
coordinate with the City's Landscape Architect concerning the
disposition of the tree. An effort should be made to retain
this tree if feasible.
4. Parks
The existing park acreage in Park District No. 3 is 8.6 acres,
and the current requirement for this district is 22.4 acres.
The proposed project will generate the need for 1.38 acres of
parkland which can be satisfied by payment of in-lieu park fees
which will be used for acquisition and development of additional
park acreage.
5. Schools
The local elementary and junior high schools serving the project
area are currently approaching capacity enrollment. This
project, combined with proposed projects in the same vicinity,
will serve to increase enrollment to maximum capacity levels.
The developer shall comply with public facilities policies and
ensure adequate classroom space for new students.
E. ~itigation necessary to avoid significant effects
1. The developer shall not oppose the formation of any
assessment district formed for the purpose of providing adequate
storm drain facilities to serve the project area.
2. The developer shall coordinate with the City's Landscape
Architect concerning the disposition of the existing pepper
tree located on the project site. An effort shall be made
to retain this tree if feasible.
(The following measures are standard development regulations
and are advisory only):
3. A soils report shall be prepared and all recommendations
are to be incorporated into the project.
4. The developer shall provide the City with written assurance
from the school districts that adequate educational facilities
are available for all new students.
F. Findings of insignificant impact
1. The site is void of any natural or man-made resource,
although one mature pepper tree is Dresent. Proposed mitigation
will ensure the proper disposition of the existing tree. Expansive
soils may be present, however, proposed mitigation will ensure
stable construction.
2. The proposed residential development is consistent with
the General Plan and associated elements and is not anticipated
to achieve short term to the disadvantage of long term environ-
mental goals.
3. No impacts are anticipated to occur which could interact
to create a substantial cumulative effect on the environment.
4. The project will not cause the emission of any harmful
substance or noise which could prove hazardous to the health
and welfare of human beings.
G. Consultation
1. Invididuals and organizations
City of Chula Vista Steve Griffin, Assoc. Planner
Roger Daoust, Senior Eng.
Shabda Roy, Assoc. Eng.
Tom Dyke, Bldg. Dept.
Ted Monsell, Fire Marshal
Duane Bazzel, Asst. Planner
John Nash - Applicants designer
2. Documents
IS-81-32 Bergh Condominiums
The Initial Study Application and evaluation forms documenting the
findings of no significant impact are on file and available for
public hearing at the Chula Vista Planning Dept. 276 4th Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 92010 ' '
/
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COOP~DINATOR
city of chula vista planning department ~
environmental review section
g~ 6
City Planning Commission Page 16
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981
7. PUBLIC HEARING: Amendment to E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan to redesignate
high school site in Ranchero Sectional Planning Area to
Low Density Residential
A. BACKGROUND
The 50 acre parcel of land located on the southerly side of the extension of
East "J" Street, between the SDG&E transmission line and the extension of Paseo
Ladera, is designated "high school" on the plan diagram of the E1 Rancho Del Rey
Specific Plan. The Sweetwater Union High School District, notwithstanding this
designation, has officially notified the City of Chula Vista that it does not
intend to establish an educational facility on the subject site. (The subject
parcel of land and surrounding territories are depicted on Exhibit A.)
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council redesignate the subject
50 acre site within the Ranchero Sectional Planning Area from "high school" to
"low density residential, 2-3 DU/acre" on the plan diagram of the E1 Rancho del
Rey Specific Plan.
C. ANALYSIS
1. While the preparers of the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan recognized
the City of Chula Vista's responsibility to generally depict the sites of future
schools on the diagrams of specific plans of developing territories, they also ~
recognized that the school districts might, for a variety of reasons, eventually
reject such sites. The text of the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan, under Section
III. E. 4, at page 7, addresses the subject matter, and provides:
"The plan diagram shows the location of areas to be devoted to schools and
parks. For the most part such areas are not now owned by the City or a school
district, so their depiction on the plan represents only policy. Should a
development plan be filed on an area shown on the plan as "park" or "school"
and a public agency decides not to purchase or reserve the land as allowed
by State Law and local ordinance, the land use and residential density to be
permitted will be determined by the Planning Cemmission and the City Council
in consideration of such factors as topography, surrounding land use or land
designation, accessability and traffic problems."
2. 'The above quoted provision establishes an alternative designation of
rejected school or park sites, and therefore obviates the necessity for general
or specific plan amendments in connection therewith. Nevertheless, confusion is
avoided by appropriately amending the specific plan subsequent to the decision not
to acquire the designated property for school or park use. In the case of the
designated school site, the Sweetwater Union High School District decided not to
acquire or reserve the site at the time of review of the E1 Rancho del Rey #6
tentative map. Accordingly, the tentative map was approved with residential uses
in the area designated as "high school." The overall density of E1 Rancho del Rey
Unit 6 was 2 DU/acre, so a designation of "Residential 2-3 DU/acre" is appropriate.
3-5 ' J -:5
6-10
a DEL
REY
~-5
k-6
:~-5
PARK
~A NCHERO~'" ~- ~ '
LADERA
(3-5)* 6-10
IBJECT
k-6
PARK
· .. casa del rey
Centerline of
Geologic Faults
- San Diego Otay
Waterline Easement
--, .,, ,/V *(~-~)=,i.'~/~,,o-..o,'e .EXHIBIT A
Redesig ation of Senior High School
i ~800, (l¥ledium/l.ow Density site in the RANCHERO SPA.
Residential Development)
City Planning Commission Page 17
Agenda Items for Heeting of December 2, 1981
8. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Revised Housin~ Element of the General Plan
A. BACKGROUND
1. The City Council, on September 16, 1975, adopted Resolution No. 7897,
amending the Chula Vista General Plan by the inclusion of Parts 1 and 2 of the
Housing Element. On November 17, 1977, the State Department of Housing and
Community Development amended its Housing Element Guidelines and required most
of the city and counties in California to substantially revise their local housing
elements.
2. The proposed new Housing Element is primarily designed to bring Chula
Vista's element into a state of consistency with HCD's revised guidelines. The
State Attorney General is of the opinion that these guidelines constitute
mandatory criteria and are not merely advisory.
3. An Initial Study, IS-81-44, of possible adverse environmental impacts of
the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Committee on June 4, 1981.
The Committee concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects
and recommended adoption of the Negative Declaration.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Find that adoption of the new Housing Element will have no significant
environmental impact and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-81-44.
2] Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the new
Parts 1 and 2 of the Housing Element of the General Plan of Chula Vista.
C. ANALYSIS
1. Part I of the Housing Element has been completely revised. While Part I,
as originally adopted, was based upon data and information procured from the
Federal Decennial Census of 1970, Part I, as revised, is primarily based upon the
Special State Census of 1975. Although it might be reasonably argued that the
revision of this part of the element, which is the survey which identifies local
housing problems and needs, should have been delayed until the detailed results
of the 1980 Decennial Census are published in the spring of 1982, it must be
recognized that HCD ha~ promulgated that local housing elements be founded upon
the best readily available data. The State Department of Housing and Community
Development has not objected to the use of 1975 data.
2. Part 2 of the Housing Element embodies the substance of the plan and includes
its goals, objectives, statements of policy, and action program. The proposed
amendments to Part 2 are both substantial and meaningful. They comprehensively
increase this municipality's commitment to the provision of decent housing
in suitable living environments to low and moderate income families, and add much
purchase to its continuing housing efforts. The important changes proposed by the
new element are discussed in the following paragraphs.
City Planning Commission Page 18
Agenda Items for Meeting of December 2, 1981
3. The amendments recite the housing programs that the City of Chula Vista
has undertaken subsequent to the 1975 adoption of the Housing Element and commit
the city to the continuation of the said programs. The plan also designates the
departments and agencies which shall be responsible for administration and execu-
tion of the Element and its several local, state and federal programs. Furthermore,
the proposed plan recommits the City of Chula Vista to its past successful
participation in the SANDAG's "regional fair share allocation" housing program
for lower income families and individuals.
4. The amendments restress the city's encouragement of experimental develop-
ment and the utilization of "new" planning concepts. The plan calls for the
increased use of the cluster, garden, townhouse, patio home, garden apartment,
condomini.um, manufactured housing, and mobile home subdivision residential
concepts. These concepts, if properly implemented, could substantially increase
Chula Vista's housing stock for all economic groups and individuals.
5. The amendments place considerable emphasis upon the retention and expan-
sion of the Chula Vista Planning Area's stock of mobile homes. They refer to
the city's recently adopted MHP, Exclusive Mobile Home Park Zone, and the
E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan's promotion of additional mobile home park
developments as the direction this municipality is following. If this direction
is coupled ~with intuitive, imagainative, and bold action site and development
planning on the part of the private and public sectors, a portion of Chula Vista's
affordable housing problem could be substantially resolved.
The new and expanded Affordable Housing Program of the Action Program embodies
this municipality's blueprint for the fostering of housing for those households
which are least able to compete for decent shelter. This subprogram calls for a
partnership of the private and public sectors.
D, CONCLUSION
'The recommended changes substantially improve.the presently adopted Housing
Element of the General Plan and'would better enable this municipality to promote
the housing Of its residents. The proposed amendments would bring the local housing
element into a state of substantial consistency with the State Housing Element
Guideli.nes of 1977 as promulgated by the State Department of Housing and Community
Development.
negative declaration
PROJECT NAME: Revised Housing Element of the General Plan
PROJECT LOCATION: City of Chula Vista
PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Chula Vista Planning Dept. P. O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 92012
CASE NO. IS-81-44 DATE: June 4, 1981
A. Background
The State Department of Housing & Community Development established April 1, 1980
as the adoption deadline for a revision to the Housing Element of the General Plan.
An extension of time was requested by the City on June 24, 1980 and subsequently
approved by the State (IS-80-64).
B. Project Description
The attached document entitled "The Housing Element of the City of Chula Vista 1981"
is proposed to replace the existing Housing Element as mandated by the State
(25 California Administrative Code, Section 6400, et. seq.). No density bonus above
that forecast by the Series V projections will be allowed.
C. .~9~patibilits with zonin9 and plans
doption of the proposed element will require subsequent zoning text amendments to
incorporate the new a'nd revised policies. The proposed General Plan amendment is
not at variance with the General Plan or other associated elements.
D. Identification of environmental, effects
1. Air Quality
An overall increase in population as a result of the potential use of density
bonuses outlined in the proposed element (Part 2, para. III C, 3 & 4) could
result in impact~ on air quality. However there will be no increase in air
polution emissions above those forecast with Series V growth projections.
Revised RAQS (Regional Air Quality Strategies) have been formulated, based on
CPO Series V growth projections, to improve air quality in the San Diego air
basin and bring air pblution levels to within State and Federal standards.
2. Land Use
The implementation of the density bonuses recommended in the proposed Housing
Element have the potential to adversely effect adjacent land uses, although the
Element does state that bonuses are allowed if they "...would not adversely
affect the order, amenity, or stability of adjacent land uses." Each density
bonus proposal would be subject to additional environmental review.
city of chula vista planning department ~
environmental review section
3. ~ommunits Infrastructure
Increases in population due to density bonuses could have significant effects
on schools and parks. The General Plan has designated school and park locations
and the sizes of these facilities based on population distributions derived
from projected residential densities. Increases in population could cause
significant overcrowding in existing public schools and a shortage of available
park land. However no increase above the maximum limit of the General Plan
and Series V forecast.
4. Ener~
Increased population densities could create an increase in consumption and demand
for existing energy resources, above current projections. This effect could be
mitigated through energy conservation techniques. No increase in overall
population levels would be allowed.
5. Utilities
Increased population densities could result in the need for new energy,
communications, water, and sewer systems above what is currently projected.
Energy and water impacts could be mitigated through conservation techniques.
6. Transportation
With a concentration of developments utilizing density bonuses, significant
cumulative affects could tax existing circulation and transportation systems.
Since traffic forecasts are based on existing General Plan designations and
densities, no significant increase in vehicle trips will ultimately result from
project implementation.
7. Growth Inducement
As discussed in the above impacts, the cumulative effects of implementation of
the Housing Element, and precisely the density bonuses (Part 2, para. III C,
3 & 4), will not have the growth inducing impact of the provision of new systems
or services or an expansion of capacity of existing facilities needed to adequately
serve the population because overall population levels would not be increased.
E. Findings of no significant impact
1. Since the project is not site specific and no increase in density above
the present General Plan ceilings is proposed, there will not be any adverse
impact on the physical environment.
2. The proposed revised Housing Element is not inconsistent with the General.
Plan or any associated elements.
3. There are no impacts anticipated which could interact to create a substantial
adverse effect on the environment.
4. The project will not cause a significant increase in traffic or related
emissions nor is any health hazard anticipated to occur.
F. Consultation
1. Individuals and organizations
City of Chula Vista Dan Pass, Principal Planner
Steve Griffin, Associate Planner
Duane Bazzel, Assistant Planner
Roger Daoust, Senior Engineer
Shabda Roy, Associate Engineer
Tom Dyke, Building Dept.
City of San Diego Environmental Quality Division
City of Walnut - Beverly Sherwood
County of Humboldt - Robert London
2. Documents
City of Chula Vista General Plan 1990
IS-80-64, Housing Element Time Extension (City of Chula Vista)
EQD #80-06-57, Environmental Impact Report for Affordable Housing
Density Bonus (City of San Diego)
Negative Declaration for Housing Element, 1981 (Humboldt County)
Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment 2-81 (City of Walnut)
The Initial Study Application and evaluation forms documenting the
findings of no significant impact are on file and available for
public hearing at the Chula Vista Planning Dept. 276 4th Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 92010 - '
ENVIRO.~ N~TAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
city o! chula vista planning department ~--~
environmental review section
EN 6