HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1981/10/14 AGENDA
City Planning Commission
Chula Vista, California
Wednesday, October 14, 1981 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILEHT PRAYER
APPROVAL OF MINUTES ~ Heetings of September 30 and October 7, 1981
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-82-4 for construction of 48 unit
senior citizen project at the northwest corner of Fifth and
Park Way - Bordi, Sutherland and Palumbo
(continued from the meeting of September 16, 1971)
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of rezoning 21 acres on the south side of
Orange Avenue at Brandywine Avenue from R-1 and R-I-IO-H-P
to R-3-P-12 - Star Corporation
3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of tentative map for Chula Vista Tract 82-3,
Star/Orange, at Orange Avenue and Brandywine Avenue - Star
Corporation
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Affordable Housing Policy and adoption of
amendments to the zoning ordinance relating to Affordable
Housing definitions and uses
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
COMMISSION CO,lENTS
To: City Planning Commission
From: D.J. Peterson, Director of Planning
Subject: Staff report on agenda items for Planning Commission
Meeting of October 14, 1981
1. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-82-4 for construction of
48 unit senior citizen project at the northwest corner
of Fifth and Park W_~, - Bordi, Sutherland and Palumbo
A. BACKGROUND
1. This item was continued from the September 16, 1981 Planning Commission
meeting in order that the financial aspects of the project could be evaluated to
determine if greater benefits to prospective purchasers and renters could be made
available in exchange for the density bonus and other concessions being considered
by the City.
2. During the meeting a number of questions were raised regarding the
drainage and parking. The report will also address these issues. The applicant
has prepared a memo, dated October 6, 1981, which also addresses these issues. A
copy nf. th~memo is enclosed Jn Plannina. Comm.imsion ~ackets. A copy of the September 16
repor~ to the bommlsslon is a/so enc~os~a in the packets.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impact and
adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-82-1.
2. Based on the findings in Section "D" of this report, adopt a motion
recommending that the City Council approve the request, PCC-82-4, for the exclusive
use of low or moderate income senior citizen housing project at the northwest corner
of Fifth and Park Way subject to the following conditions:
a. The development shall be made available for rent or sale to low or
moderate income senior citizens meeting the following criteria:
1) Age:
The head of household shall be 60 years of age or older to
qualify for purchase, rental, or lease of any unit.
2) Income qualifications:
Ownership: Purchaser income shall be equal to or less than
120% of the current HUD-published SMSA median income.
The median income will be updated annually. The
current qualifyina income, based on the SMSA median,
is $18,000 for a one-person household and $20,550
for a two-person household.
Rental: Same. Owner shall enter into an agreement with
the City giving preference to Section 8 certifi-
cate holders, in which event the owner will incur
no qualifying fee costs.
3) Sale Price:
Maximum sales price shall be 2.5 times the qualifying income
of a one-person household for the mortgage amount, and assuming
a 10% down payment to arrive at the sales price. The current
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for ~eting of October 14, 1981 Page 2
sales price is $50,000.
4) Resale Restriction:
A grant deed restriction will be required giving the City
first right to purchase, which the City will transfer to an
income-qualified buyer. The sales price maximum will be the
seller's purchase price plus the purchase price multiplied by
a factor of the increase in the median income for a one-person
household since purchase. The seller will pay the cost of the
determination of buyer's income qualification.
5) Rent Restriction:
The maximum allowable rent will be a HUD-published Section 8
Existing program fair market rent (FMR) for a one-bedroom unit
less the HUD-published utility allowances for those utilities
paid by the tenant. The fair market rent is revised annually.
Currently, the HUD-published rent and utility allowances would
yield a maximum rent of $290 to $306, depending upon the
utility type and payment arrangement.
6) Any adjustment in the criteria listed in paragraphs 1-5 shall be
the responsibility of the City's Housing Coordinator. Such
adjustments shall be made only to reflect changes in HUD
regulations or the availability of new financing mechanisms.
C. DISCUSSION
The following are responses to the questions raised at the September 16 Commission
meeting:
1. Drainage.
The Engineering Department has reviewed the drainage issue (see attached
memo of September 22, 1981) and has indicated that the existing drainage facilities
have been designed to accommodate a 50 year storm and that covering the channel
will not affect that capability.
2. Traffic.
Fifth Avenue presently has a traffic volume of 7070 average daily trips (ADT)
and is rated at a "C" level of service, which translates into free flowino traffic.
There is no impirical evidence available to support the testimony presented on
September 16 regarding severe traffic congestion on Fifth Avenue.
There have been no traffic counts taken on Park Way, however, predicated on the
traffic volume on "G" treet (south of and parallel to Park Way) it is estimated to
be considerably less than the 3700+ ADT on "G" Street. The 36 foot curb to curb
width of Park Way allows for parking on both sides of the street and two 10-foot
travel lanes in accordance with adopted city standards for a residential street.
City Planning Commission Page 3
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 14, 1981
3. Parking.
Considerable testimony was given at the last public hearing regarding existing
and potential parking problems in the general vicinity. Part of the existing
problem apparently stems from overflow parking generated by the Grace Baptist Church
during services. The church is located across the street and north of the proposed
project. Another factor contributing to the problem is the number of apartment
projects built in the area which do not comply with present city offstreet parking
standards. While no specific parking study has been conducted, informal observations
by the staff indicate that the street parking area in front of the subject property
is not used to any large exten~ for most of the week.
While I intuitively have concern over a parking ratio of less than one for each
unit, the experience of other cities and of responsible people who are expert in
senior citizen's housing developments seems to indicate that there is no basis for
such concern. ! suppose there is a "natural selection" process which operates to
some extent so that some elderly persons who do drive a car will simply not live
where no offstreet parking is available to them. All things considered and despite
some remaining doubts, I am willing to recommend the propo§~d ~ratfo of one space for
each 1.2 units.
4. Appropriateness of the location.
It is my opinion that the subject property is appropriately, if not ideally,
suited for a senior citizen housing project. It is adjacent to a bus route and
is fairly close to the commercial areas and hospital.
5. Financial aspects of the project.
The City's Housing Coordinator has reviewed the project in more detail and has
concluded that the projected selling price and rental ceiling placed as conditions
of approval will allow this plan to qualify for the density increase under
Sections 19.04.201 and 19.58.390 of the zoning ordinance. Because of present high
interest rates (developer has used 20% in his estimated cost figures) there is some
doubt that any non-subsidized proposal would be financially successful. Under the
circumstances ! think the plan represents an honest effort to provide affordable
senior housing at this location. However, both the Housing Coordinator and I agree
that the projected selling price of $50,000, coupled with the unit size (550 sq.ft.)
make the success of the project questionable.
6. Design.
On September 17, 1981 the Design Review Committee approved the proposed plans
subject to the following conditions:
a. Construction details for a raised planter along the westerly property
line shall be submitted concurrent with building, landscaping, and
irrigation plans.
b. A fence plan shall be submitted to staff incorporating staff recommenda-
tions concurrent with building plans.
City Planning Commission Page 4
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 14, 1981
c. A demolition permit will be required prior to the removal of the
existing structure on the site.
d. Proposed location for utility meters (gas and electricity) and
electrical transformers shall be submitted to staff at the design stage
or as soon as the information becomes available from the appropriate
utility companies.
e. The grading plan shall be coordinated with the project landscape
architect to soften the proposed 2:1 slope banks shown on the prelim-
inary grading plan. Retaining walls will be required to eliminate slope
banks in narrow landscape areas, such as adjacent to the northerly drive-
way.
f. The southerly driveway shall be modified to provide a 3 foot wide
planter area adjacent to the west property line.
g. The landscape plan to be approved by the city shall address the
raised planter boxes by incorporating Used brick material to match the
building. The concrete parking and access lands shall include materials
and/or design patterns to provide relief from the designated paved
parking lot.
h. No artificial brick shall be used on the project, and particularly
at the rear side (west) where it has no natural point of support;
revised elevations shall be submitted for staff approval.
i. Brick material on the front and end elevations, if used, shall be
terminated below the roof line and the eave carried through; revised
elevations shall be submitted for staff approval.
j. The balconies shall be designed to provide a greater degree of privacy
for the unit, either through the use of a planter box or mostly solid
rail; revised plans shall be submitted to staff for approval.
D. FINDINGS
1. That the proposed use 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 co,~nunity.
The proposed development at this location will provide affordable senior housing
in an area with transportation, shopping, and churches in close proximity,
thereby, contributing to the well being of this segment of the community.
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 proposed senior citizens project will probably have smaller impact on the
neighborhood than would result from normal apartment construction in the R-3
zone. Construction of the project would not overload the street system or
adversely affect drainage through the area.
City Planning Commission Page 5
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 14, 1981
3. That the proposed use wil~ comply with the regulations and conditions spec-
ified in the code for such use.
The use is restricted to low and moderate income seniors and is conditioned
upon compliance with city requirements. The code provides for deviations
from the basic requirements of the underlying zone when such deviation will
allow the development of low-moderate income senior housing.
4. That the granting of this conditional use will not adversely affect the
general plan of the city or the adopted plan of any governmental agency.
The use will not adversely affect the city's General Plan which advocates
residential land use for this area and recognizes the need to provide housing
for low and moderate income senior citizens.
BORDI. PALUMBO & SUTH£RLAND
1615 Sweetwater Road, Suite D
National City, California 92050
October 6, 1981
TO: Chula Vista Planning Department Staff and Planning Commission
From: Owner of Proposed Park 5th Avenue Senior Citizens Project
Reference: City Planning Commission meeting September 16, 1981, agenda
item 3, Public Hearing - Conditional use permit PCC-82-4
for construction of 48 unit Senior Citizens project at the
Southwest corner of Fifth and Parkway.
Recognizing the concern of the Commission and the Planning Department
Staff relative to theeconomicsof a Senior Citizen Condominium Project,
at this time we are requesting consideration be given to a Senior Citi-
zen Rental Project which would provide the moderate to Iow income
Senior with quality housing now. Therefore, we wish to propose the
project in both forms.
In response to the arguments of the opponents of the proposed project
the following data has been collected and is herewith submitted for your
consideration.
The two basic issues from the opponents of the project seem to be first
the adequacy of parking and second the efficiency of the drainage
channel.
We believe the City Engineering Department is best qualified to address
the question concerning the drainage channel. However, we propose to
cover only a portion of the channel to provide additional parking and it
is inconceivable how this project could have any adverse effect on the
flow of water through the channel.
The majority of opposition comments were directed toward "inadequate
parking". On August 6, 1981, the Environmental Review Committee
concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects caused
by the project and recommended that a negative declaration be adopted.
We have conducted spot checks of the area and have never found any
parking on the west side of Fifth Avenue between the property lines of
the proposed site.
In summary, we believe the proposed project is ideally suited for the
area and offers a solution to the needs of our seniors.
1of 5
ISSUE:
^dequac¥ of 40 on-site parking spaces.
Gove~nmental guidelines for senior housing:
Units / Parkin~l Space
HUD 3-4 (1)
City of San Diego 3 (1)
County of San Diego 2 (1)
Existing Seniors Projects:
Location Units Spaces Comments
Congregational
Towers C.V. 186 42 6 waiting
Horton House S.D. 150 0 27 persons w/cars
San Diego
Housing S.D. 150 0 Units are approximate
La Casa Balboa S.D. 88 31 Parking never full
Villa Sao
Miguel (Cardo) I~.S.D. 180 56 Now selling
Villa Merced I S.S.D. 102 32 Under construction
The
Springs I_.M. 129 47 66 persons w/cars
As proposed the project provides 40 on site parking spaces for the 48 units
for a ratio of one space for every 1.2 units. The ratio of one space for
1.2 units far exceeds government guidelines and current ratios of existing
senior housing in San Diego County.
At the last meeting of the Planning Commission a comment was made that a
secured parking area would force guests to park off site. We feel that
security parking for the residents of the project is a desired ammenity.
However, if the Commission feels otherwise, the security gates can be
eliminated.
In addition to the 40 on site parking spaces, 16 off street spaces are avail-
able on the west side of Fifth Avenue, immediately in front of the units,
between the property lines making available 56 spaces for the 48 units.
2of 5
ISSUE
ParkincI and traffic conqestion near the site.
A survey was COnducted September 16 thru September 30, 1981, during
day and evenings hours on weekdays and on Sunday during church
services.
No cars were observed parked on either side of Fifth Avenue or Park Way
within the property lines, except on Sunday when two cars were parked
on opposite side of the street in front of 351 Fifth Avenue. (Note: A
car was parked on Park Way close to the west property line during the
entire survey period).
Parking is heavy on Park Way to the west of the site in front of the Royal
Apartments, which provides approximately 1'15 spaces for 129 units. This
on-street parking does not spill-over on to the subject site.
3of 5
ISSUE:
Chanqe of property usaqe to multiple units for seniors.
The corner lot of the project is zoned R-3 as are the adjoining properties.
The existing, older single family homes will, in the future, give way to
multiple units. The negative declaration states that the project is in
accord with long range goals of the city plan.
Thus, it is not practical or productive of land use to build new single
family homes on the site, which can provide an excellent "non-commercial"
atmosphere for senior citizen housing.
4of 5
ISSUE:
Affordability of units to Iow and moderate income seniors.
The projected price of $50,000 includes about $8,000 of loan costs and
$5,000 of land cost. In addition, the provision for solar hot water and
space heating is about $2,000 per unit, but will reduce utility costs greatly.
Moderating interest rates are necessary to reduce the price of the units
as condominiums.
A mortgage rate of 12% will reduce loan costs by $2,000-$3,000 per unit,
and will bring monthly payments into the $400 range.
As a rental project, our calculation indicate rents could be kept in line
with government requirements for moderate to Iow income seniors.
5of 5
September 22, 1981
File: HYO01
TO: D.J. Peterson, Director of Planning
~/
VIA: John Lippitt, City Engineer '/r ~
~.~.?/
FROM: Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Proposed Development at Northwest Corner of Fifth Avenue
and Park Way
During the public hearing concerning a conditional use permit for construction
of a senior citizen project at the subject location, several references were
made to drainage problems affecting the site. Also mentioned was the existence
of a drainage easement along the frontage of the property.
My impression at the time was that the Fifth Avenue frontage was being
discussed. However, a review of Chula Vista Drawing No. 79-103D indicates
that a 15 foot drainage easement lies along the northerly right-of-way line
of Park Way across the westerly 25 feet of property.
During calendar year 1980, a drainage facility was built under a City contract
within Park Way. The drain, which is 10 feet wide and 5 feet deep works in
combination with a 65"x40" metal pipe arch within the easement and a 54" pipe
partly within the easement to provide capacity for flows from this drainage
basin resulting from a storm expected to occur once in 50 years.
The trapezoidal channel which was built with the Park Way Place Subdivision
was designed for flows on a once in 50 years frequency (both of these frequencies
consider reductions of flow due to the newly completed retention basin in
Memorial Park).
If the channel is covered as a result of this project or some other project,
that capacity will be maintained. Any plans prepared for a covering of the
channel will be required to include provisions for maintaining it.
The portion of the watercourse between the project and Fifth Avenue is not
affected by development of the project site and is expected to be left in its
existing condition until that adjacent property is put to some more intensive
use.
RLD:fpw ~ _ ~ ,,:~ ..... ~
September 9, 1981
TO: Mando Liuag, Associate Planner ~,
FROM: Dave Gustafson, Housing Coordinator
SUBJECT: Proposed Senior Housing Project at Fifth and Parkway
Here are the conditions which I feel should be attached to the Senior Housing
Project at Fifth and Parkway to bring it into compliance with the senior Zoning
Text Amendment:
1. Age: To comply with the state definition of elderly households, I
would suggest that the head of household for qualifying buyers be 60
years of age or older.
2. Income Qualifications: The income for the qualifying household should
not exceed 120% of the HUD-published SMSA median income. That income
figure for a one-person household is currently $18,000, and for a two-
person household, it is $20,550. The City would contract with the
County Housing Authority to do income determinations at a set fee per
determination, with the developer reimbursing the City for fee costs
on the initial sale, and with Community Development Block Grant funds
reimbursing the City for fee costs on resales.
3. Sales Price: The maximum sales price should be $50,000, calculated
by multiplying the annual eligibility income of a one-person house-
hold ($18,000) by 2.5, a normal underwriting standard, to determine
the maximum mortgage amount, and assuming a 10% down payment. This
calculation yields what I believe to be currently an overmarket sales
price.
4. Resale Controls: Resale of the units should be controlled for 20
years through grant deed restrictions. The units could be resold
only to income-eligible buyers. Appreciation on the units would be
restricted to the percentage of increase in the HUD-published SMSA
median income figures for one and two-person households.
5. Rent Restrictions: If the developers choose to rent the project,
the maximum rents allowable should be no more than 30% of 80% of
the SMSA median income for a one-person household. The maximum
rent includes all utility costs. If some utilities aren't paid
by the tenant, the usual circumstance, Section 8 Existing utility
allowances can be used to calculate the allowable rent level. I
will provide you with those allowances shortly. Based on current
median income data, the allowable monthly rent including utilities
would be $375, which is overmarket at this time. However, fore-
casts are that rents will represent an increasing percentage of
income, so usage of this calculation should yield affordable rents
for low-income people while assuring feasible rent structure for
the developer. Grant deed restrictions should assure this rent
restriction for 20 years.
DKG:ah
PARK FIFTH AVE CONDO PROJECT
Cost and Profit Projections
Land $ 240,000
Improvements 1,485,000
Loan 346,000
Sales and Closing 190,000
2,261,000
Profit 10% 226,000
Total Cost 2,48?,000
Per Unit 51,800
(With City Fees Waived)
Cost 2,487,000
Less Fees ~1,000
Total Cost 2,406,000
Per Unit ~0,100
PA~K FIFTH CONDO PROJECT
Cost Projections
Land
Purchase 5/81 176,000
Carrying cost to 5/83 (16.5% + Tax) 64,000
240,000
Improvements
Structure 35,000 sq ft @ $30 1,050,000
Plans &Engr, DRE, Title 30,0OO
City Fees 50,000
Parking & Driveway 75,000
Solar - Hot Water 25,000
Solar - Space Heat 50~0OO
Grad&rig, F~13, Landscape 20,000
Elevator 30,000
Intercom, Security 20,000
1,350,0OO
Contingency 10% 135,000
1,485,0OO
Loan Fees
Points - loan and T/O 4% of
1,800,0OO 72,000
Interest - 20% on 915,000 for 18mo 274,000
346,000
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of September 16, 1981 Page 6
3. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-82-4 for construction of 48 unit
senior citizen pro~ect at the southwest corner of Fifth and
Park Way - Bordi, Sutherland and Palumbo
A. BACKGROUND
1. The applicant is seeking permission to construct a 48 unit senior citizen
housing project on 0.8 acres (34,894 sq. ft.) of property located at the northwest
corner of Fifth Avenue and Park Way in the R-3 zone.
2. An Initial Study, IS-82-1, of possible environmental impacts of the project
was conducted by the Environmental Review Committee on August 6, 1981. The Committee
concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommended
that the Negative Declaration be adopted.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Open the hearing and take testimony, then continue the hearing to October 14
to allow additional time for staff to evaluate the financial aspects of the proposal
to see if greater benefits to prospective purchasers and renters can be made avail-
able in exchange for the density bonus and other concessions being made by the City.
C. DISCUSSION
1. Adjacent zoning and land use:
North R-3 Single family dwellings and three unit condominium project
South R-3 Single family dwellings
East R-3 Single family dwellings, apartments and church
West R-3 Apartments (128 units on 2.41 acres)
2. Existing site characteristics.
a. The subject property is comprised of five relatively level parcels, four
of which are vacant and each measures approximately 61' X 121' The fifth parcel,
located at the northwest corner of Fifth and Park Way, measures 57' X 95' and is
developed with a single family dwelling.
b. There is an existing concrete lined channel located along the westerly
boundary line of the project. The channel, which flows from the northeast to the
south toward Park Way, has a flap gate system which allows a portion of the apartment
project to the west to drain. Since the apartment project's elevation is slightly
lower than the elevation of a 100 year storm, the gate is closed during high water
flows, causing water to pond behind the gates until the water in the channel drops
and the gates open, releasing the ponded water.
c. There are four large trees located within the parkway along Fifth
Avenue, which will remain.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of September 16, 1981 Page 7
3. Proposed development.
a. The proposed project involves the development of a three story, 48 unit
condominium complex for senior citizens. To make room for the project, the existing
single family dwelling at the corner will be removed and the majority of the open
concrete lined channel will be covered with concrete panels (only the most northerly
25' will not be covered). The building will be 16 feet from Fifth Avenue, with some
projections to within 10 feet, and 15 feet from Park Way. The first floor will have
l0 units located on the east side of the building nearest Fifth Avenue, and a
recreation room, restrooms, kitchen, laundry, utility room and 14 carports on the
west side of the building. The other two stories will each have 19 units. Each
unit will have one b~droom and a floor area of 530 square feet, composed of a living
room, kitchen, one bathroom, plus a 60 sq. ft. patio or balcony, as well as private
storage space off the patio or balcony.
b. Access to the units will be from interior corridors on all floors
running through the center of the building. There will be an elevator and an
interior stairway in the middle of the building and exterior stairways at the
north and south ends. Entries are also provided on both sides of the building in
the middle and at each end.
c. Besides the 14 carports there will be 26 open parking spaces located
on the west side of the project over the covered channel for a total of 40 onsite
parking spaces. Access to the parking will be provided by a one way system with
cars entering from Fifth Avenue and exiting on to Park Way. Security gates and
fencing will be provided around the parking and the exterior stairways. The security
gates will be card actuated.
d. The building will be of contemporary design with a shake roof, beige
stucco and simulated brick veneer exteriors with dark brown trim and balconies.
The patios on the ground floor will be enclosed by a wall, faced with simulated
brick veneer. The project will be considered by the Design Review Comittee on
September 17, 1981.
4. Exceptions to the code.
The project as designed will require the granting of various exceptions to the
requirements of the Municipal Code. The exceptions are as follows:
a. Reduction in the required setback along Fifth Avenue from 25 feet to
l0 feet;
b. Reduction in required offstreet parking from 49 spaces to 40 spaces
(a ratio of one space per 1.2 units); and
c. Increase in density from 32 units per acre to 60 units per acre.
5. Previous variance.
The four vacant parcels which make up the subject property contain a total of
.67 acres and were previously part of the 128 unit apartment complex to the west.
The apartment project, when first developed in 1965, contained 3.1 acres and would
have been permitted a maximum of 134 units (43 units per acre). However, the 128
units were constructed on the westerly 2.4 acres (a density of 53 units per acre)
City Planning Co~ission
Agenda Items for ~.~eting of September 16, 1981 Page 8
and the easterly 0.67 acre was left vacant and the natural drainage channel
unimproved. In January, 1980 the Planning Commission approved a variance (PCV-80-6)
to allow the 0.67 acre to be separated from the apartment complex and divided into
four lots with the condition that only single family dwellings could be built on the
lots. The final map on the subdivision (Parkway Place) has since been filed and
recorded as have the CC&R's restricting the use of the four lots to single family
development.
D. ANALYSIS
i. This application was filed under Section 19.58.390 of the zoning ordinance,
which requires City Council as well as Planning Commission approval and authorizes
those bodies to approve projects which do not conform to the normal regulations of
the zoning ordinance pertaining to setbacks, minimum unit size, offstreet parking,
density, etc. These exceptions are authorized in recognition that the needs of
senior citizens may be different from those of other groups and in order to
encourage development of housing for seniors.
2. From the standpoint of location the site, while not ideal, is acceptable
for a senior citizen housing project. It is located directly adjacent to a bus
route (Route 705) and within relatively easy access to major shopping located at
Fifth and "H" Street. There are no major supermarkets within close proximity but
the bus route should prove adequate to meet the needs of this type of shopping for
the residents.
3. The areas of most concern are the requested exceptions to the requirements
of the code regarding setbacks, parking and density. Acceptability of setback
reduction relates to the ability of the site to accommodate the proposed development.
As mentioned earlier, the westerly portion of the site is taken up by the drainage
channel. To place the building either adjacent to or over the drainage channel would
pose an unreasonable hardship. Technically, the reduction of setback is l0 feet,
however, because of the offsets in the building, the majority of the building will
be located 15 feet from the front property line. The front property line itself is
located 20 feet from the face of the curb and there is an existing 12½ foot wide
parkway with four mature street trees located between the sidewalk and the street.
Therefore, the three story building will actually be located 30 to 35 feet from the
travelled right of way. In our judgment, the site adequately accommodates the
proposed use.
4. One of the recommended conditions of approval is that the units remain
available to senior citizens, 60 years of a§e and older. It is felt that persons
of that age will not have as great a need for private transportation as those who
are younger, and therefore, this project should not generate as much need for
offstreet parking. In addition, the site is adjacent to public transportation,
which also tends to reduce the need for parking. The applicant is proposing to
provide a parking ratio of one space per 1.2 units, which is much higher than other
senior citizen housing projects within the San Diego area (see attached Negative
Declaration).
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of September 16, 1981 Page 9
5. Section 19.04.021 of the Municipal Code defines "Senior Housing Developments"
as those which are "established or maintained for the exclusive use of low or
moderate income senior residents." In order to keep the per unit cost down, so that
low and moderate income senior residents may qualify, the applicant is proposing to
construct 48 units on the project site. Even at this density preliminary figures
indicate that units sold as condominiums may not be at an acceptable price range
(see attached memo from Housing Coordinator).
E. CONCLUSION
More time is necessary fur staff review of the costs, proposed sales price and
possible rents as described in the September 9, 1981 memo from the Housing Coordin-
ator and the applicant's cost breakdown (copies enclosed in packets). At this point,
I am concerned that the substantial density bonus being discussed does not seem to
be reflected in the possible rents and sales prices of the units.
negative declaration-- _
PJ~r),IECT NAME: Park Fifth Avenue Condominiums
PROJECT LOCATION: 374 Fifth Ave.
PROJECT APPLICANT: Bordi/Sutherland/Palumbo
1615 Sweetwater Rd.
National City, CA 92050
CA~;E NO. IS-82-1
DATE: August 6, 1981
A. Project Site
The project is located at the northwest corner of 5th Ave. and
Parkway. There is an existing single family dwelling located
at the corner and for additions for single family dwellings
along Fifth Ave. h~ve been approved.
There is an existing concrete lined channel along the western
property line. The property is otherwise void of any natural
resources or substantial hazards which oould effect the project.
The concrete lined channel has a flap gate which drains a portion
of the apartment project to the west of the project site. During
a 100 year storm the water flowing through the channel closes the
gate and because the channel is higher than the ground level to
the west, water will pond until the level of water in the channel
is below that of the flap gate. The gate would then open and the
area to the west would drain into the channel.
B. Project Description
The proposed project involves a 48 unit condominium project for
senior citizens. This type of use is permitted as an unclassified
use subject to the 9rantin9 of a conditional use permit by the
Planning Commission and City Council.
In reviewing such a proposal the Plannin9 Commission and City
Council may modify requirements for parking, open space, density,
etc. if the project is available for occupancy by seniors only.
Development of the site would include covering the drainage
structure with concrete panels to provide parking. This will
require the granting of an encroachment permit. A total of 40
parking spaces are shown on the plan. This would be less than
one parking space per dwelling unit. A first floor recreation
center is also proposed. The density of the project would be about
60 dwelling units per acre with an estimated population of about
100 people.
cily of chula vista planning department
environmental review section
IS-82-1 2
The project proponent is investiqating the possibility of using
solar hearing for domestic water and space hearing.
C. Evaluation of Potential Environmental Effects
1. Drainase
There is an existing drainage problem created by the flap gate
during a 100 year flood. This condition will not be sub-
stantially altered by the project as it is proposed.
The proposed spaning of the drainage channel with concrete
panels may create problems regarding access for cleaning and
necessary soil bearing strength for the proposed structure
and vehicles. These problems can be resolved through standard
development regulations.
2. Parkin~
The developer has indicated that the proposed project will
be limited to senior citizen ownership (55 yrs. and older)
therefore it is anticipated that the demand for parking spaces
will be less than that expected from a standard condominium
development.
To support this assumption, the developer has surveyed a few
senior housing developments in the City of San Diego. The
City of San Diego presently requires that residents between
55 yrs. and 62 yrs. be provided 1 space per unit and that if
a unit contains a resident over 62 yrs. then the requirement
is 1 space per 3 units. Projects that were surveyed include-
La Casa Balboa, at Balboa Ave. and Mt. Abernathy, which
contains 31 parking spaces per 88 units. The age requirement
is 55 yrs. or older and according to the manager, the parking
lot is never full; Villa San Miguel, at Alabama St. and
University Ave., which contains 56 spaces for 180 units.
The proposed project provides off-street parking totalling
40 spaces for 48 units, a ratio of 1 space per 1.2 units
which should be adequate provided the project is limited to
seniors only.
D. Findings of insignificant impact
Based on the following findings it is determined that standard
development regulations will mitigate any adverse effects and that
the project will not result in a significant environmental effect.
1. The project will not adversely affect 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 environ-
ment or curtail the range of the environment which supports
the biosystem.
IS-82-1 3
2. The project is in conformance with the long range goals
of the City of Chula Vista and will not therefore attain
short term to the disadvantage of long range goals.
3. The project will not provide any system that could
support secondary development that would cumulate to
a level of being substantial and adverse nor do any of the
insignificant impacts interact to a significant level.
4. The project will not result in the generation of any
significant noise, air pollution, light, aesthetic blight
nor any other hazard to the welfare nor health of any human
being.
E. Consultation
City of Chula Vista Tom Dyke, Plan Checker Shabda Roy, Assoc. Eng.
Steve Griffin, Assoc. Planner
Applicants: Messrs. Bordi, Sutherland, Palumbo,
Dick Mikelson
Documents
IS-75-78
Soils Report by Geocon, June 1978
Letter from Geocon dated May 29, 1980
nn,I .'vnluation '~orms documenting the
impnct nr~, on file and nvailable for
~;tn ~'lanninq D<~pt. , 276 4th Avonue,
COOED I:~ATOR
city of chula vista planning department ~
environmental review section
STREET
I i I I SF [ f I I I I
I I~ ~ .__J I
Il i Il F- 41
--~-
s_f_ d i i~ i
Sf Isfl I I I
CENTER ST.
MF TF ISFf I I
i I I I
ST. ChU
SF
MF I
M t MF
I
pARKWAY
VISTA SQUARE
ELEMENTARY ,
~(~~,~IBordi~ Suth~rland~ Palumbo1
PARKWAY