Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1981/10/28 AGENDA City Planning Con~nission Chula Vista, California Wednesday, October 28, 1981 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER APPROVAL OF MINUTES - ~leeting of October 14, 1981 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Consideration of request for extension of tentative subdivision map for Carabella, Chula Vista Tract 80-13 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-82-5, request to operate family amusement center at 895 Third Avenue - Lawn and Stuessy 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Affordable Housing Policy and adoption of amendments to the zoning ordinance relating to Affordable Housing definitions and uses (Continued from agenda of October 14, 1981) DIRECTOR'S REPORT COMMISSION COMMENTS To: City Planning Commission From: D.J. Peterson, Director of Planning Subject: Staff report on agenda items for Planning Commission Meeting of October 28, 1981 1. Consideration of request for extension of tentative subdivision map for:Carabella, Chula Vista Tract 80-13 A. BACKGROUND On June 10, 1980 the City Council approved the tentative map for Carabella, Chula Vista Tract 80-13, for the development of a one lot (16,150 sq. ft.) condominium project consisting of ll townhouse units at 457 "D" Street in the R-3 zone. The tentative map is due to expire on December 10, 1981 and the developer is requesting a one year extension. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion approving a one year extension of the tentative subdivision map for Carabella, Chula Vista Tract 80-13; the map will then expire on December 10, 1982. C. DISCUSSION The developer has submitted the final subdivision map which is presently being processed by the city. There have been no significant changes in the immediate vicinity or any changes to the regulations governing condominium projects which affect the original findings or conditions of approval. Therefore, it is appro- priate to grant the request. ~' STREE I00' ~'00' City Planning Commission Page 2 Agenda Items for Meeting of October 28, 1981 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-82-5, request to operate famil~ amusement center at 895 Third Avenue - Lawn and Stuessy A. BACKGROUND 1. The applicant is requesting permission to establish an amusement center featuring video games, pinball machines and table games, at 895 Third Avenue in the C-C zone. The 0.7 acre parcel is presently occupied by a paint store (Frazee Paint). The applicant intends to occupy a new 2950 sq. ft. single story commercial building to be constructed at the northeast corner of the property to the rear of the paint store. 2. An Initial Study, IS-82-10, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Committee on October 15, 1981. The Committee concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the Negative Declaration. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-82-10. 2. Based on the findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a motion to approve the request, PCC-82-5, to establish an amusement center at 895 Third Avenue, subject to the following conditions: a. A 6 ft. high wall shall be located along the south property line between the existing building and a point at the southeastern corner of the parking lot where the wall will meet the 6 ft. zoning wall required by Section 19.58.360 of the zoning ordinance. b. The proposed building shall be located either on the northerly property line or a wall placed between the northeast corner of the building and the northerly property line and a gate placed near the northwest corner of the building. c. Windows shall be placed on the south and west elevations of the proposed building. The windows shall be designed to be in keeping with the windows in the existing building. d. Illumination for security purposes shall be provided on site, subject to the approval of the Planning Director. e. A bicycle rack for at least ten bicycles shall be provided within close proximity to the entrance of the proposed building. f. Any continued disturbance or problems shall cause the conditional use permit to be reviewed by the Planning Commission for the purpose of determineing whether the use should be allowed to continue. City Planning Commission Page 3 Agenda Items for )leeting of October 28, 1981 C. DISCUSSION 1. Adjacent zoning and land use. North C-C Pacific Telephone Company South C-C & C-O Service station and vacant East R-1 Vacant and single family dwellings West C-C Commercial shopping center 2. Existing site characteristics. a. The project site is a 140 ft. by 224 ft. parcel located on the east side of Third Avenue and 150 feet north of "L" Street. The property is presently developed with a 5400 sq. ft. commercial structure which, together with the parking (26 spaces), occupies the front 156 feet. The rear 68 feet is vacant, of which the easterly 20 feet is traversed (north to south) by the unimproved Telegraph Canyon drainage. Access to the site is provided by a single two-way driveway located along the northerly frontage. The existing single story building has a stucco exterior with wood trim and is located l0 feet from the southerly property line and 5 feet back from the street. The rear area is lit by a freestanding electrolier. b. The vacant properties to the south and to the east are also traversed by the Telegraph Canyon drainage. The drainage flows into a box culvert under "L" Street. A row of eucalpytus trees is located along the east side of the channel on the R-1 property. 3. Proposed development. a. The owner of the property proposes to construct a 2,950 sq. ft. single story commercial building at the northeast corner of the site. The "L" shaped structure will have two restrooms and a 507 sq. ft. storage room. The building will be located 4 feet from the northerly property line and 23 feet from the easterly property line. An additional 13 offstreet parking spaces are proposed, bringing the total onsite parking to 39 spaces. The majority of the new spaces (10) will be located immediately south of the proposed building. Neither the building nor the parking will encroach into the drainage channel and both will be located above the 100 year flood level of the channel. b. The proposed building will be very similar in design to the existing building. It will be of contemporary architecture with a stucco exterior, however, there will be no wood trim and no windows except those adjacent to the entry. The only sign proposed is a 12 sq. ft. (2' x 6') sign located on the face of the building. The existing freestanding sign is presently at its maximum area and height, however, it contains two sign modules which could be easily modified to identify both uses. 4. Proposed use. The applicant intends to lease for ten yeams and occupy the entire proposed new building. The amusement center will contain approximately 37 video games, 5 pinball machines, 2 pool tables and 2 foosball games. In addition, there will be an attendant's counter area and a snack area {vending machines) with two tables and City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 28, 1981 Page 4 and chairs near the entrance. The proposed hours of operation are: Monday through Thursday, ll:O0 a.m. - lO:O0 p.m.; Friday and Saturday, 11:00 a.m. - 12:00 midnight; and Sunday, ll:O0 a.m. - 8:00 p.m. At this time the employees will be the two applicants and their spouses. One person will be in attendance from the time of opening until closing; the second person will arrive at 3:00 p.m. and stay until closing. There will be no hired security. Security will consist of periodic checking of the premises by the management. The applicants intend to offer special rates and make the facility available to various senior citizens groups and other organizations. 5. Department comments. The Police Department was contacted regarding the proposed use. They have e~pressed no adverse comments regarding the proposed use. D. ANALYSIS 1. The subject property possesses some characteristics which are appropriate for a video game center and some which are not. On the positive side, the property fronts on Third Avenue, a busy commercial street, and it is surrounded on three sides by commercial uses. On the negative side, the property backs up to a single family residential area and the location of the building on the property is such that it is fairly isolated and not amenable to informal surveillance by adult passers by or by police. All things considered, the location is less than ideal. 2. The other factor which merits consideration relates to the extent to which young people may indulge in inappropriate behavior outside, the building. The presumption has been that, as a gathering spot for young people, there is likely to be some vandalism, noise or other disruptive behavior, which may spill over into adjoining residential areas and adversely affect them. To a certain extent, this is controllable by the proper management of the center. The walls required by the code and the recommended conditions of approval should deter young people from using the residential streets to the east and the drainage channel as a route to the center. The condition requiring windows in the south wall of the building and the activity associated with the paint store will provide a measure of sur- villance which should help to deter inappropriate behavior outside the building. 3. The building is proposed to be constructed 4 feet from the northerly property line. Normally, this site plan issue would not be a concern, but because of the proposed use it should be addressed. The four foot area is a potential access point from the east which should be discouraged and is also an area where trash may collect. For these reasons, the building should be moved to be located either on the property line or the area at the northeast corner of the building be walled off and a gate placed in front of the building so the area can be inspected and maintained. 4. Pursuant to Section 19.58.360 of the municipal code a 6 ft. zoning wall will be required along the easterly edge of the parking lot to separate the commercial area from the residential area to the east. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 28, 1981 Page 5 E. CONCLUSION The planning considerations in this case do not point clearly to a recom- mendation for either denial or approval. All things considered, however, it is my conclusion that a properly managed game center, constructed in conformance with the recommended conditions of approval, is an acceptable use in this location. F. FINDINGS 1. That the proposed u~e at the particular location is necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well-being of the neighborhood or the community. The proposed use is located on a major street within the central urbanized area of the city. There are no other amusement centers within close proximity, therefore, the use will provide a service in an area where none is presently provided. The residential area to the east will be protected upon construction of the building and walls in accordance with the recommended conditions of approval. 2. That such use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. The building will be oriented away and screened from the residential uses by the buildings and walls. In addition, the residential uses are separated by a natural drainage channel. The conditions placed on the use will insure that the adjoining uses are not adversely affected. 3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the code for such use. The project meets the parking requirements for such use and a zoning wall will be required. 4. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City or the adopted plan of any governmental agency. The General Plan designates this area as a commercial district in which this type of use would be most compatible with other allowed uses. I I OFfiCES ] I OFFICES (C.V. I PACIFIC TELEPHONE CENTER MF I I I I I I r I ' I ~ ~ SERV SFI ~ L ~V I GIRL SI CLUB I CHURCH I I =i GOLF COURSE / / / / ' THIRD AVENUE / / / \ / / - negative 'declaration PROJECT NAME: Fun Factory PROJECT LOCATION: 895 Third Avenue Chula Vista, CA PROJECT APPLICANT: R. Scott Lawn and Ar]o F. Stuessy 590 E. Telegraph Canyon Road Chu]a Vista, CA 92010 CASE NO. IS-82-10 DATE: October 15, 1981 A. Project Setting The proposed project would be located on a 31,472 sq. ft. commercial lot at 895 Third Avenue, which presently contains a 5,400 sq. ft. retail commercial structure, 26 parking spaces and appropriate landscaping. The proposed project would be located at the northeast corner of the lot. There are no significant natural or man-made resources located on or near the site. The Telegraph Canyon Creek flood channel runs north to south adjacent to the easterly boundary of the site. Commercial uses are located north, west, and south of the site and residential units are located to the east. B. Project Description The project involves the construction of a 2,950 sq. ft. one-story structure which will house a proposed video arcade, complete with video game machines and pinball machines. An additional 13 parking spaces are proposed for the new commercial structure. The facility will employ 1 to 2 employees, and is proposed to operate from 11:00 a.m; to.lO:O0 p.m. Monday through Thursday; 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday; and 11:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Sunday. C. Compatibility with zoning and plans The proposed amusement center will be subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will assure compliance with the Municipal Code and will consider compatibility with adjacent land uses. D.Identification of environmental effects 1. Drainage Telegraph Canyon Creek drainage channel travels north to south along the easterly edge of the project site. The lO0-year flood line is located adjacent to the proposed building site. Proper engineering and building techniques will assure a stable foundation and structure adjacent to an area subject to inundation. 2. Noise The proposed use will be contained within a proposed one story wood-frame structure, therefore noise levels associated with the operation of video machines will be self-contained and insulated. Noise emanating from children arriving and leaving city of chula vista Planning departmenl ~ environmental review section IS-82-10 2 the premises would be considered single event nuisance noises which could occur adjacent to the proposed use with increased activity and potential off-premise loitering. The single family home located to the east would be the major receptor of these impacts, although the drainage channel and a vacant lot are located between the proposed use and any living areas. These impacts are not anticipated to be significant environmental impacts, but rather issues that should be dealt with through the Conditional Use Permit process to determine compatibility of adjacent land uses. E. Findings of insignificant impact 1. The project will not adversely effect any natural or man-made environmental features present in the project setting, nor will the project generate any pollutants that will have a potential to significantly degrade the quality of the environment or curtail the range of the environment which supports the biosystem. 2. The project is in conformance with the long range general goals of the City of Chula Vista and will not attain short term to the disadvantage of long range goals. 3. The proposed video arcade will not have any impacts that are anticipated to interact and cause any substantial cumulative affect on the environment. 4. The project will not result in the generation of any air pollution, light, aesthetic blight nor any other hazard to the welfare or health of any human beings. F. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista - Steve Griffin, Associate Planner Roberto Saucedo, Associate Engineer Tom D~e, Building Department Ted Monsell, Fire Marshal Duane Bazzel, Assistant Planner 2. Documents IS-81-46, Campbell's Starcade IS-81-49, Sports World Arcade The Initial Stu(l¥ Appl Lc.~tion and ,~valuation forms documenting the findinqn o£ no si~mificant imp~ct are on file and available for public review lit [hk~ Chul,~ Vista I'lanninq Dept., 276 4th Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 9201(3. AL REVIEW COOF~Z~ATOR city of chula vista planning department ~--~ environmental review tectio~ City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 28, 1981 Page 6 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Affordable Housing Policy and adoption of amen~[he zOni_~9_ ordinance relating to Affordable ~-~i[i~ ~nd b~e~ A. BACKGROUND 1. The City Council, after the conclusion of its workshop of January lO, 1981, on low and moderate income housing, instructeU staff to prepare a compre- hensive program on affordable housing, and to submit its drai~t of such to the Council for review and action. The Council stressed that the said program should be based upon private-sector inout and should call for a high level of private- sector participation. 2. Pursuant to Council instructions, the City Planning and Community Develop- ment Departments, in conjunction with representatives from the private sector,* produced ~ Draft Affordable Housing Policy, which, with its proposed implementing zoning amendments, is attached to this report as Exhibit A. The Draft Policy was preliminarily considered by the City Council on August ll, 1981 and was referred to the City Planning Commission for public hearing and recommendation. 3. During the said August meeting, certain representatives of the private sector, who had served On the Housing Policy Formulation Committee, expressed concern over the Draft Affordable Housinq Policy, and generally alleged that the ~roposal lacked essential specificity. The Council, therefore, asked the Community Development Department to solicit written comments from the Committee's membership, and to transmit copies of such to the City Planning Commission. Cooies of the said comments, and a copy of Housing Coordinator David Gustafson's lette~ of solicitation, are attached to this report as Exhibit B. 4. In the "Analysis" section of this report, the Draft Policy is briefly evaluated and summarized by the City Planning Department, and discussed in detail by the Community Development Department. The matter of the specificity of the plan, which was placed into issue by representatives of the private sector, is jointly addressed by the two departments. 5. An Initial Study, IS-82-7, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Committee on September 10, 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 on IS-82-7. 2. Adopt a resolution, and recommend therein that the City Council adopt the Draft Affordable Housing Policy, and enact the retated amendments to the Chula Vista )~unicipal Code. *Private and staff representatives met as the Housing Policy Formulation Committee. City Planning Commiss .) Agenda Items for Meeting-of October 28, 1981 Page 7 C. ANALYSIS Cit Plannin Discussion and Sumnary l. The submitted Draft Affordable Housing Policy has been developed in accordance with Council's instructions. Its provisions emphasize private-sector leadership, without reducing local government's responsibility for the fostering of adequate housing in well-planned neighborhoods for all economic seuments of the Chula Vista Planning Area. ~ 2. The Draft Policy was developed with the active participation of representa- tives from the real estate, financial, and construction professions and industries. These private individuals sparked the project's synthesis, and invested the Draft Policy with direction and meaningful content. Their contributions should make the policy in ~uestion workable in the real world of housing development. 3. The Draft Policy embodies a self-contained housing plan. It recites policy statements which are designed to address and resolve the housino problems which confront the Chula Vista Planning Area. These statements commi~ the City to the expeditious processing of affordable housing proposals and, under certain circum- stances, to the waiver of municipal fees, the underwriting of the cost of construct- ing public improvements, and the granting of residential density bonuses in connec- tion therewith. The Policy also calls for the greater utilization of mobile homes and factory-built housing, and encourages the submittal of proposals for demonstra- tion projects "which utilize experimental planning, development and design techniques to produce well-ordered, affordable housing." 4. While the Draft Affordable Housing Policy is designed to function as an independent local plan, its text is compatible with the provisions of the existing Housing (General Plan) Element, the Revised Housing Element, which will soon be considered by the City Planning Commission, and the State Department of Housing and Community Development's 1977 Housing Element Guidelines. Community Development Discussion 5. The private sector has identified areas of City participation in the develop- ment process and land use regulation which contribute to the cost of housing develop- ment. The Draft Policy attempts to minimize these negative impacts and to provide compensating assistance in areas and to the degree deemed feasible. The Draft Policy contains, the following major components: a. Preplanning conferences with developers focusing on affordable housing resources. ' b. Encouragement of demonstration projects. c. Zoning text amendment for affordable housing developments. d. "Fast track" processing. e. Density bonuses. f. Waiver of development fees. g. Financial assistance to developers for public improvements. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 28, 1981 Page 8 h. Encouragement of mobilehome/factory built housing projects. i. Pursuit of state and federal housing assistance programs. j. Rent restriction/resale control provisions on assisted units. k. City monitoring of Affordable Housing supply. 6. If the Affordable Housing policy and the zoning text amendments are ultimately adopted by the Council, the Community Development Department will recommend to the Council and to the Redevelopment Agency the creation of a fund created from Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and the Redevelopment Agency Housing Fund, to provide financial assistance to affordable housing de- velopments. 7. Occupancy of units provided under the Affordable Housing policy would be restricted to low- and moderate-income households, as defined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Income eli- gibility determinations would be made on all households, with earned income, assistance payments, and reasonable yield from liquid assets calculated in the income determi nation. The degree of financial assistance to projects (items f and g above) would be decided on a case-by-case basis by the Council, based on the number and type of affordable units and on their degree o£ affordability and on availability of funds. The Matter of Specificity With regard to the lack of specificity as to "how fast is fast-tracking"; "what fees would be waived"; and what public improvements would be waived, these matters are highly variable depending on the type of project. The answers may differ from one location to another and would differ from one location to another and would differ from General Plan Amendment, rezoning, and tentative map applications to relatively simple conditional use permit applications. Accordingly, the recommended policy is worded generally in those areas. How- ever, staff would be very specific in dealing with individual applications. EXHIBIT A AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA I. INTRODUCTION The City of Chula Vista, a)ong with the San Diego region as a whole and much of the nation, is experiencing a serious shortage of affordable housing in both the ownership and the rental categories. There are numerous components to the housing cost escalation, some of which are impacted by, or could be impacted by, the actions of the City. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista desires to work in concert with the private sector to promote the development and preser- vation of adequate affordable housing in the City: The City perceives its role as facilitating that endeavor by removing certain impediments to development which esc~atecost, while maintaining its concern for well-planned neighborhoods and appropriate land use, and by utilizing its fiscal and programmatic resources where feasible, while assuring that appropriate benefit to low and moderate- income households results. Such facilitation is aimed at creating a climate in which the private sector can operate in the same spirit to accomplish the goal for which they must appropriately take the leadershdp--the provision of adequate housing to all segments of the community. The formulation of this program was a joint effort of the City Council, City staff, representatives of housing related industries, and citizens of Chula Vista. It is informed by the principles of good urban planning, the pragmatics of municipal fiscal concerns, and the economic forces of the marketplace. II. POLICY COMPONENTS A. Prior to the submittal of residential development plans for processing, developers interested in constructing affordable housing shall have the option of conferring with staff from the departments of Community Development and Planning on the matter of affordable housing. At such pre-planning conferences, developers shall be apprised of the components of the City's Affordable Housing Policy, as well as any pertinent federal, state, or local assistance programs. City assistance through such mechanisms as tax exempt revenue bonds and equity participation shall be considered. The generation of specific affordable projects is the goal of such conferences. B. The City of Chula vista shall encourage the proposal of demonstration projects which utilize experimental planning, developmental, and design techniques in an effort to produce well-ordered, affordable housing. C. The City Council shall adopt an "Affordable Housin9 Development" amendment to the Municipal Code which provides for the development of affordable projects. "Affordable Housing Development" shall be de- fined as follows: A-2 Affordable Housin~ Development for low or moderate-income hou~ehold~ means a residential project within which a minimum of twenty-five percent of the housing units are reserved for low- or moderate-income households, as defined by the California State Department of Housing and Community Development. D. The City Manager's office shall have discretion to "fast track" the pro- cessing of Affordable Housing Developments, considering such options as: - Directing City staff to grant priority processing to a project. - Assigning an "expeditor" from the Community Development Department staff to monitor and guide the processing of a project. - Authorizing the processing of some or all of a project's plans to be done by private contractors, with the cost of ~uch con- tracting borne by the developer. Additionally, the City shall employ the following procedures: ~ Checklists and organizational routines which facilitate processing. - Architectural and site design review invested in the Zoning Administrator, Appeals of the Zoning Administrator's decisions to be filed with the Planning Comm}ssion within ten days. - Areawide environmental impact report studies which could be utilized wherever feasible to minimize processing time. £. In any residential zone, the City of Chula Vista will consider granting density bonuses to allow for the inclusion of units affordable to low and moderate-income households. Such bonuses should not adversely affect the order, amenity, or stability of adjacent land uses and would not augment density bonuses mandated under Section65915 of the State Government Code or any other density programs. F. In any residential zone, the City of Chula Vista shall grant 25% net density bonuses for Affordable Housinq Developments, where such bonuses would not augment density bonuses mandated under Section 65915 of the State Government Code or any other density programs. G. Certain municipal filing and processing fees for Affordable~Housin~ Developments shall be waived a~d reimbursed to the City fro,,~ Co~m~unity Development Block Grant funds or the Redevelopment Agency Housing fund. Thi~ co~lponent si~all be subject to the availability of tilose funds. H. The City shall consider financially assisting Affordable Housing Developments with the construction of certain public improvements necessary to the development, and the City si~all be re~mburseo from Co~unity Development Block Grant funds or the Redevelopment Agency Housing fund. This component shall be subject to the availability of those funds. A-3 I. The City of Chula Vista shall promote the development and preservation of mobilehome parks and mobilehome or factory-built subdivisions. It shall apply suitable components of this policy to the creation of A_~_f- fordable Housing Developments utilizing this type of housing. It shall preserve such housing through the appropriate use of the MHP exclusive mobilehome park zone designation. Additionally, the City shall endeavor to acquire mobilehome park sites with Community Development Block Grant funds or other housing assistance funds to make those sites available to developers on terms which will facilitate their development as Affordable Housing Developments. J. Those Affordable Housing Developments.assisted by the City through density bonuses, fee waivers, public ~mprovement assistance, "fast- tracking," or development standards reductions shall be reserved for low and moderate-income occupancy. That reservation shall be accomp- lished through the use of rent restriction agreements and deed restric- tion resale controls. K. The City of Chula Vista shall continue to pursue feasible state and federal housing assistance programs involving City action, and it shall encourage the participation of the private sector in partnership programs. It shall continue to recognize the role of the Community Development Block Grant Program in the enhancement of housing oppor- tunities in the City, through both new construction and property re- habilitation. L. The City Community Development Department, with the assistance of the Planning Department, shall monitor the private and public production and maintenance of affordable housing within Chula Vista and shall annually report findings to the City Council. Where this monitoring activity indicates that Chula Vista's land use, subdivision, or housing policies or regulations could be amended in order to foster the production or protection of essential affordable housing, the said departments shall officially recommend appropriate action. III. CONCLUSION The Affordable Housing Policy of the City of Chula Vista represents a recognition of the exigencies of the current housing market, a definition of the proper muni- cipal role in that market, and an outreach to the private sector to pursue its proper role in response to those exigencies. The policy exists to promote the production and conservation of housing in Chula Vista in appropriate balance. Finally, it is intended to be therapeutic to the current market conditions, and it therefore will be implemented for as long as that monitoring of those conditions indicates need for its components. EXHIBIT B September 22, 1981 To: Jim Peterson, Director of Planning Via: Paul G. Desrochers, Community Development Director~)- From: Dave Gustafson, Housing Coordinator ~ Subject: Affordable Housing Policy Committee Comments As you know, the City Council directed staff to solicit comments from members of the Affordable Housing Policy Committee regarding the degree of specifity of some items in the policy. Those comments were to be conveyed to the Planning Commission at their consideration of the Affordable Housing Policy. I have attached the letter which I sent to members of the Committee requesting those comments. In response to that letter, I have received, to date, three letters from Committee participants. They are attached. As the deadline stated in my letter was Septem- ber l, 1981, I don't expect any other comments. Most of the responses are on general issues regarding the policy. One or two of them are significant, and I am taking a closer look at them. However, only the letter from the South San Diego Bay Cities Board of Realtors raises points which address the comments requested. Those points are as follows: 1. How fast is "fast-tracking"? 2. What fees will be waived? If fees are waived, what dollar amount of savings would be realized by the developer? 3. What are the experimental planning and design techniques which will produce "well-ordered, affordable housing"? 4. What public improvements would the City construct on behalf of the developer? Amounting to how much savings? If public funds are not available, is there another source of subsidy that the City has in mind to earmark for affordable housing? These are the only comments which I feel should be conveyed to the Planning Commis- sion. I feel it would be appropriate to schedule the Affordable Housing Policy for Plan- ning Commission consideration at the next possible opportunity. When I know when that will be, I will notify the Policy Committee members by letter. DKG:rms Attachments CALIFOF*NIA August 14, 1981 SEE REVERSE FO~ LIST OF ADDRESSEES Dear Affordable Housing Policy Group Member: At the Chula Vista City Council meeting of August 11, 1981, the Council referred the draft Affordable Housing Policy to the Planning Commission. The draft policy and ordinance will under- go environmental review prior to going to the Commission. The earliest that environmental review could be completed and the policy taken to thc Planning Commission would be mid-September. Members of thc Affordable Housing Policy Group have conveyed to the Council their concern that the policy lacks the specificity in some areas to be an effective tool in reducing development costs. Principal concern was given to the lack of a maximum processing time and to the non-identification of waived fees and eligible public improvements. The City Council therefore directed staff to solicit further comments of the group members on these subjects, and to convey those comments to the Planning Commission with thc draft policy. ;Ve hare appreciated your participation, and we would welcome your further assistance on this issue. Nritten comments should be addressed to me and received by September l, 1981. A copy of the draft policy is enclosed for your convenience. Sincerely, David K. Gustafson Housing Coordinator DKG:ah Enclosure I?6FOURTH AVENUE CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92010 TELEPHONE 575-5047 ts. Sharon Spurck Mr. Jon Miller So. San Diego Bay Ctties Jot Miller Realty Board of Realtors 397 Third Avenue, Suite C 182 Palm Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 hnperial Deach, CA 92032 Ir. Terry Sheldon ~Ir. Tom Shipe, ~.lanager 7.254 Moore, Suite 202 Crocker I~ational Dank San Diego, CA 92110 481 Droach~ay Chula Vista, CA 920!~ ir. Gary Oellien Satt Industries of San Diego !.ir. Paul Adams )737 Camino del Rio South Ilells Fargo - .,_al Estate Suite 309 Loan Department San Diego, CA 92108 5gg Broadway, 2nd Kloor San Diego, Cf, 92101 · is. Noma Delanev .'ir. Bob Kuntz, !.lanager 1683 Swallow Drive Central Fed'l. Svngs. & Loan ~l Cajon, CA ~2;)20 396 E Street Chula Vista, CA q2010 Ir. Dan Brennan Century 21 ~'!r. !.!ayne Clark 325 Telegraph Canyon Road ~onita Duildings, Inc. 4!90 .]ontta Road Shula Vista, CA 92910 bonita, CA 92002 'ir. John Sorensen Hr. Phil ~!alltng Sorensen Realty Dutlding Contractors Assn. 5012 Central 5333 )iission Cen;er ~oad 2ontta, CA 92002 San Diego, CA 92108 ir. Chuck Smith Mr. Dick Drow:~ Creaser & ¥lam, dck Dev., Inc. P.O. Box 1919 1050 Pioneer Uay, Sdi~e Bonita, CA 92092 E1 Cajon, CA 92020 REALTOR t P.O. BOX 1027 · CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 92012 · (714) 425-6000 RECEIVED September 8, 1981 SIP14 Communi Development Dept. TO: City of Chula Vista David K. Gustafson Housing Coordinator FROM: South San Diego Bay Cities Board of Realtors Local Governmental Relations Cormmittee RE: Chula Vista Affordable Housing Policy Dear Mr. Gustafson: At your request, the South San Diego Bay Cities Board of Realtors has reviewed the above referenced "Housing Policy" and submit the following corm~ents: 1. The Policy as formulated is in no way objectionable to the Board of Realtors, and we believe that it is adequate rhetoric to fulfill any requirements the City may have to establish a "Policy" on affordable housing. 2. However... it is our belief that there is no state- ment of policy in the reoort which would, in fact, pro- duce any low or moderate income housing. The policy lacks specific information with regard to: (a) How fast is "fast-tracking'~? (b) ~,~at fees will be waived? If fees are waived, what dollar amount of savings would be realized by the developer? (c) What are the exoerimental planning and design techniques whic~ will produce "well-ordered, affordable housing"? (d) At a time when the emphasis is on reducing public expenditures, the above procedure to produce affordable housing seems dependent on increased public expenditures. (e) What public improvements would the City con- struct on behalf of the developer? Amounting to how much savings? If public funds are not available, is there another source of subsidy that the City has in mind to ear-mark for City of Chula Vista David K. Gustafson Page 2 affordable housing? Additional comments regarding affordable housing that the South San Diego Bay Cities Board of Realtors feel are of paramount consideration in contributing to future development of affordable housing are as follows 1 It is essential to affect a change in homeowner attitudes toward growth and development. If the community would expand its housing stock to accomodate a broader economic range of citizens, some of the severity of the housing problem would be eliminated. 2 If standards or density bonuses can be relaxed for one type development (affordable housing), they are, obviously, not needed to ensure the health and safety of the public. Rather, such development standards are superfluous and unnecessary. The City should re-evaluate these standards and modify or eliminate unnecessary regulations for all development, thus for all segments of society. 3 In our communities, we must strive for a balance between the better environment and the strong economic and sensible approach to the growth we need to provide housing. 4. The City must look seriously at some of the factors that cause the price of housing to go up. (a) Lack of land that the government allows to be developed. (b) Unnecessary permits and fees. (c) Cost of delays. (d) The bureaucracy - there are many jobs whose existance is to regulate and control building and development. As the number of planners, hous- ing coordinators, etc., increases so does the price of housing. (e) The public attitude that is against growth .and change. Perhaps, we must reduce our expenditures if we are to house our people. 5. It is essential to chan~e the attitudes of our local gov- ernment officials with re~ard to housing. They must begin to consider "cost". ~en costs come undo"control", then the supply of housing can be increased. 6. In the City of Chula Vista, or any community, the profit motive must be able to take affect or no one will build housing but the government. We thank you for the opportunity to comment on this very serious issue. It is our belief that no housing will be forthcoming, esp- ecially housing within the price range of the majority of our citizens, unless the local communi.ty will look to its own citizens and public City of Chula Vista David K. Gustafson Page 3 employees, and begin on the local level to cut the unnecessary costs that have become attributed to the cost of producing housing. John R ~o~sen-, President South San Diego Bay Cities Board of Realtors Sh~a~ S~ u~rman Local Governmental Relations Committee CROCKER flriTlOnriLBrinK CHULA VISTA OFFICE I 481 BROADWAY, CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92010 MAILING ADDRESS: POST OFFICE BOX 1415, CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92012 August 21, 1981 David K. Gustafason, Housing Coordinator City of Chula Vista, CA 92010 After having had an opportunity to review the Affordable Housing Policy for the City of Chula Vista draft, I would like to make the following comments and/or questions: Referring to pase 2~ item D: A question arises: If some developments are given priority, will other developments have to be processed more slowly? If so, will these delays cause an increase in their respective costs? Pa~e 3~ item J: Deed restriction resale controls that reserve (for 20 years) "fasttracking" or development standards reductions would prohibit the Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) or the Federal Home Loan Bank from buying loans. Consequently, no secondary mortgage market would exist for these types of loans. I believe that these restrictions would be next to impossible to finance. One df the key areas to the success of the affordable housing policy is the ability to finance the project. If I can be of further assistance with respect to this project, please feel free to contact me.  erely, THOMAS L. SHIPE Assistant Vice President and Manager RECEIVED copy: file AUG 24 1981 Community Development Dept. ion miller realty R E C E I V E AUG 8 1 1981 1,~r. David K. Oustaf'son Housing Director 0eweb e.t City 0f Chula Vista 276 [ourth ~ve. Chula V~sts, California 9POLO August 2~, 1921 In response to your letter dated August 14th with reference to the ouestien of affordable housing, my suggestion to the policy presented are as follows: 1. Affordable housing and its development will only be possible when Bov't and Private Enterprise work together to eliminate much of the red gape that is currenly putting a straight jacket on the building and housing industry. 2. Thc idea present in the policy t~ab by fast tr~cking, reduction of certain fees etc. should apply only to projects labeled "Affordable ttousing" a farce. If thc ~rocesc is to }~ve any meaning at all should npply to the to*a! process of development, not just a particular project. 3. I donor believe t}mt 5he city shm~ld be in the business of buying for development for the following reasons;, Z. Iii the end thc cost and burden falls upon the taxpayer. B. ;~en Gov't gets involved in the purchase of land t]mt it bel~ins to deal with inflate~ prices. C. It elimi~tes the process of ~he free r~.rket. 'i. ~ good rxarmls of r,h~ th,', ~v't rho,~ld n~t be ~n the housing ~rket i~ the Condo Development on ~ourth & Center. Should the taxpayer bail out ~ developer? I think not. If a pl'oject cannot generate its ~n capital and fraud on its ~wn m~rits it should not be the taxpayer t~.t suffers from 5. ~ Leq;:-ve that thc Afq'ordsb]e Housing e~estion will be answered and so!v~d whenl A. Thc free market is a!]ewed to function as it sho;;ld. u. ;~Q~er, Oov'~ fi~lly understands t~t a problem can be solved without s~di Liens ~ !egis~ation C. T}mt a new efforg oi Lrust needs tc be btdlt bet~%,een the private *n~] f;ov't ~genc!es. HOME / INCOME / ACREAGE / EXCHANGE I sl:o believe %~mh 'th~, prnci,~s [~{~ ~,!c sre currenL13 involved in is very wlJd a~ i'~ sl!~'~s fllrcot oo~unic~lcn i,~,~':cen ~he Cit,~, ~.nd ~he },re~ ~'~r'.:cL I for ese h~ve ar?re~:J~i~:d the opportoni6y o~ mceting wigh you and lt. ~ierson discuss ~:hc, ebov( annocrns, if no6hing else it al!o%~:s for a be~er undere~nding each ~:her. Sinoerely, negative .Jeclaration PROJECT NAME: Affordable Housing Policy PROJECT LOCATION: City of Chula Vista PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Chula Vista Planning Dept. P. 0. 8ox 1087 Chu]a Vista, CA 92012 NO. IS-82-7 DATE: September 10, 1981 A. Background On June 4, 1981 the Environmental Review Committee adopted a Negative Declaration for a revision to the Housing Element of the General Plan. Many of the concepts proposed in the current "Affordable Housing Policy" proposal were addressed in IS-81-44. B. Project Description The attached draft Affordable Housing Policy attempts to minimize processes and regulations which contribute to the cost of housing and provide assistance and coordination to the extent feasible. C. Compatibility with zoning and plans Adoption of the proposed policy will result in a subsequent zoning text amendment to incorporate the revised policy. The proposed density bonuses discussed in the policy will not be at variance with the General Plan or CPO Series V growth projections. 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 draft Policy (Para. II, E & F) could result in impacts 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 polution levels to within State and Federal standards. 2. Land Use The implementation of the density bonuses recommended in the proposed Policy have the potential to adversely effect adjacent land uses, although the Policy 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 IS-82-7 2 3. Community 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. .Energy Increased population densities could create an increase in consumption and demand for existing energy resources, although city-wide population projections will not be exceeded. 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 Affordable Housing Policy, and precisely the density bonuses (Section II, E & Fl, 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 Affordable Housing Policy 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. IS-82-7 '~' 3 v F. Consultation 1. Individuals and organizations City of Chula Vista Steve Griffin, Associate Planner Duane Bazzel, Assistant Planner Bill Harshman, 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 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) IS-81-44, Housing Element The Initi,tl ~ · " A[>:~] ~on ,]n~ ' · t.l](,~ LC.It ,~v.]luation ~orms documenting the findin~:.q ()t no ~l(~I1lf[C,nnt lK1pflCt are on file and available for public review ,~t ~n~ Chu[,~ Vista Pla~nLnq Dept., 276 4th Avenue, Chula Vista, CA ~tE VIRO~..E~T~L ~VI~W city of chula vista planning de~artmenl environmental review leclien