Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1983/04/13 A G E N D A City Planning Commission Chula Vista, California Wednesday, April 13, 1983 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meetings of February 23, March 9 and March 23, 1983 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of modification to conditional use permit, PCC-79-6 - Girls/Boys Club 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of modification to the Ranchero SPA, PCM-83-4 3. Report on selection of boundaries and preparation of preliminary plan for the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area DIRECTOR'S REPORT COMMISSION COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT AT to the Study Session of April 20, 1983, at 5:00 p.m., in Conference Rooms 2 & 3 and to the Regular Business Meeting of April 27, 1983, at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers. To: City Plann'~'-' Commission A~ From: Bud Gray, Director of Planning Subject: Staff report on agenda items for Planning Commission Meeting of April 13, 1983 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of modification to conditional use permit~ PCC-79-6 - Girls and Bo~s Club A. BACKGROUND 1. In November 1978 the City Council upheld the decision of the Planning Commission granting a conditional use permit to the Girls and Boys Club for the establishment of a new facility at 1301 Oleander Avenue at the south end of Greg Rogers Park. The facility is presently under construction. 2. The applicant is now requesting a modification to the development plan by adding a second access driveway approximately 225 feet south of the proposed driveway. The second driveway will also be opposite the approximate mid-point between Redwing Road and Oak Place. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion approving the request for a second access driveway for the Girls and Boys Club at 1301 Oleander Avenue. C. DISCUSSION 1. Under normal circumstances, approval of a second access driveway would not require Planning Commission consideration and action. However, at the time of approval there was considerable concern by the adjoining residents regarding traffic and the location of the proposed driveway. Because of this concern, the matter has been scheduled for public hearing. 2. The location of the approved driveway is directly opposite Redwing Road. This location was based on the determination by the Safety Commission that it would simulate a four-way intersection and facilitate a left turn lane on Oleander Avenue in the future should the need arise. Residents on Redwing Road felt the driveway location would cause a problem by increasing traffic on their street by motorists bypassing the major streets (Palomar and Oleander). If such were to be the case, once the club is opened, the City would look into the possibility of making Redwing Road a cul-de-sac street. 3. The request for a second driveway has been promoted by a series of changes to the original development plan since the approval of the conditional use permit. The building has been scaled down in size by the elimination of the proposed swimming pool and building has been shifted to the north. The new location of the building has enabled the applicant to provide parking all around the building where the original plan did not have parking on the south side of the building. In addition, the final grading plan has a lower pad level in relation to the street and reduces the slope banks along Oleander Avenue. The lower pad level now makes it feasible to provide a second driveway, where previously, it was not practical because of the grades. The second driveway is much better located with respect to the new parking arrangement. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of April 13, 1983 Page 2 4. The Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposed second driveway and has determined that it should not create any significant traffic problems or hazards. The proposed driveway lies between Redwing Road and Oak Place. However, it is sufficiently south of Redwing Road to allow ingress and egress without any difficulty. Oak Place is a cul-de-sac street with just 14 houses, representing a rather insignificant amount of traffic at Oleander. D. CONCLUSION 1. The second access driveway will pose no significant problems. The driveway is better located with respect to the parking arrangement allowing for a speed dispersal of vehicles entering and leaving the site. The second driveway will also function as a pedestrian entry from the south. In view of these factors, it is appropriate to recommend approval of the request for a second driveway. WPC 0290P T~RUSH (:HULA VISTA COUNTY ! PARKVIEW ~ ! LOCATOR PCC-79"-6 GIRLS ~ BOYS CLUBS GREG RO~EF~ PARK o' ~o' ~oo' ,JUNIPER ST. ~ City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of April 13, 1983 Page 3 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of modification to Ranchero Sectional Planning Area Plan - E1 Rancho Del Re~ A. BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting a modification to the Ranchero Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan approved by the City Council in 1980 (Resolution No. 10102). The modification consists of changing the structure type for 76 lots (Lot 111 through lot 186 of the E1 Rancho Del Rey Unit No. 6 subdivision) from single family attached dwellings with a common lot line (couplets) to single family detached dwellings with one side of structure located on the side property line (zero lot line construction). B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the request, PCM-83-4, to change the structure type for lots lll through 186 from single family attached dwellings (couplets) to zero lot line single family detached dwellings. The approval is subject to the adoption of the modified Development Standards dated March 31, 1983, with the following changes: 1. A minimum separation of 10' shall be required between dwellings. 2. The required 10' side and 15' rear yard shall be level areas (5% grade or less). 3. The owner or developer shall record covenants, conditions, restrictions, and easements on the zero lot line units for drainage, roof or eave projections; access for purposes of maintenance, repair, or remodelin9 of lot line structures, compatibility of materials, textures, and color; and related matters. Such deed restrictions and easements, which shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation of the subdivision map or maps creatin9 designated zero lot line lots, shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Planning. 4. The required wall plan shall include a design to accommodate an increase in the front wall (4' high) to 6' subject to approval of the Director of Planning. C. DISCUSSION 1. Ranchero SPA The Ranchero SPA consists of 181+ acres located between Telegraph Canyon Road and East "H" Street with its Easterly boundary at Paseo Ladera and its westerly boundary located between Lori Lane and La Senda Way (North side of East "J" Street.) The primary streets are East "J" Street and Paseo Ladera. The total number of dwelling units within the SPA is 365 units. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of April 13, 1983 Page 4 2. Unit "B" of E1 Rancho Del Rey No. 6 The proposed modification is to delete the couplet concept in Unit "B" and use zero lot line single family dwellings. The lots within Unit "B" have a minimum lot size of 4500 sq. ft. and a minimum street frontage of 42 feet. The minimum lot depth is 100 feet. Unit "B" abuts the SDG&E easement on the east and the San Diego Otay Water pipeline easement on the south. Access to Unit "B" is provided by two streets connecting to East "J" Street. 3. Proposed dwelling units The applicant has submitted three basic floor plans as follows: Unit Floor Area Dimensions Stories Bedrooms Plan #1 1160 s.f. 32' x 61' One Two Plan #2 1416 s.f. 32' x 69.5' One Three Plan #3 1589 s.f. 32' x 59.5' Two Three Each unit will have a two car garage and straight-in driveways. The architecture of the homes will be contemporary Spanish design with a stucco exterior, tile roofs, mini-paned windows, and a stucco front entry wall. 5. Development Standards The development standards (attached hereto) provide for a minimum 10' wide side yard opposite the zero lot line and a 15' minimum depth rear yard. The applicant has indicated that the 15 foot rear yard will be level. Because the units have straight-in garages, the majority of the garages (75%) will be 19.5 feet from the front property line (22 feet from back of walk). The other 25% of the garages is proposed to have a 15 foot setback (17.5 feet from back of walk) and slide up garage doors. The type of garage door will enable a car to park closer to the door and most cars will not hang over the sidewalk. When the Ranchero SPA was approved in 1978, the City approved development standards which now require certain modifications: 1. Corner lot designs necessitate a minimum 10' building separation be included to avoid possible future setback problems. 2. Because of the limited lot size and amount of usable open space, the 15' rear and 10' side yard should be identified as level areas. 3. The roof overhang now indicated by the latest architectural design, coupled with the need to address potential drainage and maintenance questions indicates that the owner should record CC&R's with the subdivision map which address those issues. 4. The architectural plans show a 4' front entry wall with each house. This wall is an integral part of the building design because of the side entry to the units, therefore, an approved plan to accommodate requests to increase the height to 6' for security should be covered with the initial wall plans. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of April 13, 1983 Page 5 D. CONCLUSION The change in the development concept from couplets to zero lot line construction does not affect the approved tentative subdivision map. While there is a desire to provide for a variety of housing types in the E1 Rancho Del Rey area, the deletion of the couplet housing type is not considered a significant item in the Ranchero SPA. The zero lot line replacement unit fits well on the subdivided lots being developed. WPC 0294P RICE DEL CENTRO 6-10 ! REY EL s-~ DIEGO I WATERLINE EA~EMEN T LADERA SAN DIEGO GAS ELECTRIC 3-5 CA$.4 L£GE'NO REY Unit A = 108 SFD Unit B = 76 Duplex Uflif C - 150 Totg/ $~5 ~. U.s NO SCALE Revised 3/31/83 PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE RANCHERO SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN DEVELOP~ENT STANDARDS The current Ranchero Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Development Standards are proposed to be modified to delete the "Single Family Residential: Attached" category and add the "Single Family Residential : Zero Lot Line Units/42' Lots" category in its place. SINGLE FAUILY RESIDENTIAL: ZERO LOT LINE UNITS/42' LOTS All lots proposed to be developed for zero lot line units (units with dwellings, accessory garage structures, and walls constructed on side lot lines) shall be governed by the provisions of the ~-1-5 Single Family Residence Zone (Chapter 19.24, Title 19 of the Chula Vista ~unicipal Code) except as specified below: 1. The provisions of Section 19.24.070 relating to lot coverage, lot area, lot width, and yard requirements shall be amended as follows: a. Lot Coverage: All buildings, including accessory buildings and structures, shall not cover more than 45 percent of the lot. b. Lot Area: 4,500 square foot minimum c. Lot Width: 42 feet minimum Front Yard: 15 feet except that at lots ~.~here driYeways extending from garages are approximately perpindicular to the front property lime, a m~nimu~ front yard of 19.5 feet shall be maintained between the front property line and the garage door. The 19.5 feet front yard requirement shall be waiYed in lieu of the standard 15 feet front yard when Yerticsi sliding roller garage doors are used. A maximum o ~ cf the units within this development may cualif" :<,r the ~,:aiver of the t0.5 feet garage setbacl: cuzrement. r,.~ · 10 feet, except that a 20 foot o. ~ .... erzor Side Yard: e>:~erior side yard ska[1 be maintained adjacent to East "J" Street. f. One Side Yard: 0 feet g. Both Side Yards: 10 feet Ran~hero Scctional Planrui~g Area Plan _. ~elopment Standards Page 2 h. Rear Yard: 15 feet The City may require the owner or developer of zero lot line units t~ record covenants, conditions, restrictions, and easements to provide for drainage; roof or eave projections; access for purposes of maintenance, repair, or remodeling of lot line structures, compatibility of materials, textures, and color; and related matters. Such deed restrictions and ease- ments, x.zhich shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation of the subdivision map or maps creating designated zero lot line lots, shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Com~ision or, on appeal, the City Council. Uot~Jithstanding the provisions of Chapter 19.62, no garage shall be converted for living purposes. Any additions to buildings or structures shall be limited to one-story in height. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of April 13, 1983 Page 6 3. REPORT: Selection of Boundaries and Preparation of Preliminary Plan for the Ota~ Valle~ Road Redevelopment Area A. BACKGROUND 1. On January 13, 1983, the Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency designated the Otay Valley Road area as a redevelopment survey area. 2. California State Community Redevelopment Law stipulates that the procedure for declaring a redevelopment area as a result of the study of a redevelopment survey area begins with the City Council directing the Planning Commission to declare area boundaries and to prepare a Preliminary Plan for the proposed redevelopment area. 3. Resolution No. 11191 of the City Council, dated March 22, 1983, directs the Planning Commission to select redevelopment area boundaries and to prepare a Preliminary Plan for the Otay Valley Road redevelopment survey area. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt the resolution selecting the boundaries of the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area as depicted by the attachment to the resolution. 2. Direct staff to prepare a Preliminary Plan for the designated redevelopment area for the Commission's consideration. C. DISCUSSION 1. Purpose. State law allows cities and counties to undertake redevelopment projects. Such projects expand the limited powers of cities and counties to enable the upgrading of areas which are demonstrated to suffer from a range of physical and economic problems, which State law collectively calls "blight." Redevelopment powers allow localities to take actions in project areas which will reverse or alleviate blighting forces. 2. Blight. According to the State Health and Safety Code, a blighted area is one which is characterized either by unfit or unsafe buildings or by property suffering from economic dislocation, deterioration, or disuse, or both, which conditions inhibit proper utilization of the area to such an extent that the area itself constitutes a burden to the community. Further, it must be found that these conditions cannot reasonably be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise acting alone. The findings of blight are made by the local legislative body after receipt of technical and public testimony. Agenda Items for Meeti~L. ot Aprl~ ~, 1~$ ~ Page 7 3. Procedure. With assistance from the Redevelopment Agency and staff, the Planning Commission selects project boundaries. These boundaries define a proposed project area within or identical to the redevelopment survey area boundaries. The project area boundaries can be amended by action of the Planning Commission and the Agency anytime prior to the formal adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City Council. After the project area boundaries are selected by the Planning Commisison, and at the direction of the Planning Commission, the City staff on behalf of the Agency will conduct a study of the defined area to determine the appropriateness of redevelopment activity and to formulate the Preliminary Plan. The study proposed to generate the data for the test of appropriateness and for compilation of the Preliminary Plan, Environmental Impact Report, and Redevelopment Plan will be done by both staff and private consultants. The Planning Commission will then receive a proposed Preliminary Plan for the project area boundaries, along with recommendations for possible amendment of the project area boundaries in light of study information. The Preliminary Plan is general in nature and does the following: a. Describes the boundaries of the project area. b. Makes a general statement of land use, layout of private streets, population densities, building intensities, and standards proposed as the basis for redevelopment. c. States how the declared purposes would be obtained by redevelopment. d. Declares conformity to the General Plan. e. Describes the general impact of the project on area residents and the surrounding neighborhood. If the Planning Commission is satisfied with the Preliminary Plan, the Commission will forward the plan to the Redevelopment Agency. If the Agency is satisfied with the project area boundaries and the Preliminary Plan, the Agency will direct staff to prepare a Redevelopment Plan. Environmental studies and public hearings will follow, with the possible end result being the formal declaration of a redevelopment area to address clearly-identified blight. 4. Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Survey Area Study. a. Indications of Blight ~ity.Pla~ning~Com~is~.~, ~ genoa ITems ~or Mee~ j of April 13, 1983 Page 8 Conditions exist which indicate that Otay Valley Road should be studied to ascertain its feasibility as a Redevelopment Project Area. Preliminary investigations suggest that blight exists in the area which cannot be remedied by private action alone. Economic disuse appears to be the result of the blighting conditions. Those conditions may be able to be eliminated by redevelopment activity, thus remedying the economic disuse. The economic disuse of the Otay Valley Road area is evident from observation. The Otay River Valley is largely undeveloped industrial-zoned land on the north side of Otay Valley Road, which is principally within our corporate boundaries, and agriculturally-zoned land south of Otay Valley Road, in the unincorporated County. Large amounts of vacant land exist, some of which has been subdivided for industrial park use, while remaining undeveloped and without streets. This general economic disuse of the Otay Valley Road area appears to result from the following two blighting conditions, taken from the definition of blighted areas in the State Community Redevelopment Law: (1) The existence of inadequate public improvements, public facilities, open spaces, and utilities which cannot be remedied by private or governmental action without redevelopment. (2) The existence of lots or other areas which are subject to being submerged by water. The lack of infrastructure has clearly hindered the development of this area. The development cost to provide adequate streets and utilities has made industrial land in the area unattractive to industry. With the costs of infrastructure improvements added to raw land costs, the total improved land costs in the Otay Valley Road area have approached or equalled the improved land costs in North County for comparable development. Most of Otay Valley Road itself is a two-lane undivided road in poor condition, without shoulder or curb. The cost of improving that road to a level which would be acceptable for industrial development of the north side of Otay Valley Road, that being a median two-way turn lane, a shoulder, and a bermed curb, has been estimated by the City Engineer at $2,567,695. With City assistance, a water line of sufficient capacity for industrial development has been extended on Otay Valley Road east to Maxwell Road. However, undergrounding of other existing utilities would be necessary. Additionally, sewer service to the south side of Otay Valley Road would be required, with the installation of a gravity feed system in the river bed being most desirable. The economic disuse of the properties south of Otay Valley Road has also been the result of flood hazard. Many of the agricultural land parcels comprising that finger of the unincorporated County are partially in the river floodway or the lO0-year flood zone. And the locations of those flood designations are not clearly defined. Marketing of these properties is City Planning Commiss'~ ~ Agenda Items for Meet~..~ of April 13, 1983 Pa9e 9 problematical without a clear plan for treatment of the river and a precise definition of the flooding boundaries. The fill required for some parcels as they currently exist in relation to the river makes them of little or no value. Until significant decisions are made, it is difficult to even estimate the available industrial acreage. Exhibit 1 indicates the existing land uses in the Otay Valley Road area and the general boundaries of the river flood designation. b. Survey Area Boundaries. Exhibit 2 indicates the survey area boundaries designated by the Redevelopment Agency. The boundaries encompass approximately 1,085 acres. The western boundary abuts 1-805 south of Otay Valley Road and abuts Oleander north of Otay Valley Road, excluding an existing R-1 development to the west of Oleander. The northern boundary excludes residential-zoned land, while encompassing the Otay landfill, within Chula Vista's corporate limits, and the proposed landfill expansion area in the unincorporated County. The eastern boundary, with the exception of the landfill expansion area, is the City/County boundary. The southern boundary is the boundary line between the unincorporated County south of Otay Valley Road and the City of San Diego, within the floodway of the Otay River. It is recommended that the Planning Commission select the redevelopment survey area boundaries as the redevelopment area boundaries. No new data at this point recommends the exclusion of any portions of the original survey area. Within those boundaries are properties outside the Chula Vista corporate limits. Those properties, the landfill expansion area and the south side of Otay Valley Road, are in the unincorporated County. Under State law, it is possible to conduct redevelopment activities outside of corporate boundaries if the affected properties are contiguous to corporate boundaries and if the jurisdiction in whose boundaries those properties lie authorizes that redevelopment activity. Based on the apparent appropriateness of eventual annexation of the landfill expansion area and the south side of Otay Valley Road to the City of Chula Vista, it is proposed that the County Board of Supervisors be approached for the necessary authorization for the City to include these areas in the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area. Such authorization can occur anytime prior to formal adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City Council. c. Tax Increment and Growth. The current assessed valuation for the survey area is $14,045,812. That valuation does not include the new Hyspan plant, which will be added to the 1983 tax roll. If the base year for redevelopment tax increment calculation was established in this fiscal year as 1982-83, the inclusion of Hyspan in 1983-84 and the normal 2% annual valuation increase would yield a total tax increment to the Agency in 1983 of approximately $27,000. City Planning Commiss~ "' Agenda Items for Meet~,,g of April 13, 1983 Page 10 The Hyspan development was facilitated by public actions, including Community Development Block Grant funding of a water line. If tax increment can be realized from such development through a redevelopment project area, the revenue can be used to finance further growth similar to Hyspan. The provision of infrastructure through redevelopment activity and Community Development Block Grant activity could significantly accelerate the development of the survey area. And industrial development in the Otay Valley Road area would yield substantial benefit to the entire city, providing sales tax revenue and utility tax revenue to the General Fund and increasing emplo~nnent opportunities for City residents. Some assumptions can be made about the rate of absorption which could be stimulated by redevelopment activities in Otay Valley Road and about the tax increment available to provide the infrastructure necessary to accomplish that stimulation. As a demonstration of possible growth and tax increment availability, assume a total net developable acreage of 125 acres. That figure approximates the developable industrial acreage on Otay Valley Road without correction of flood area problems. Assume that this acreage was made more attractive through Redevelopment Agency and Community Development Block Grant provision of infrastructure. Assume that the local and national economy was reasonably favorable to industrial development. Given those assumptions, the following table estimates a reasonable absorption rate for industrial land in the Otay Valley Road area and indicates the tax increment which would be generated, including the annual 2% assessment increase: NEW CONSTRUCTION CUMULATIVE TAX CUMULATIVE YEAR ACREAGE ACREAGE INCREMENT TAX INCREMENT Base (82-83) - . 1 5 (Hyspan) 5 $27,809 $27,809 2 5 l0 51,175 78,984 3 10 20 95,007 173,991 4 l0 30 139,716 313,707 5 15 45 205 320 519,027 6 15 60 272 236 791,263 7 15 75 340 490 1,131,753 8 15 90 410 108 1,541,861 9 15 105 481 120 2,022,981 lO 15 120 553 551 2,576,532 ll 5 125 587 431 3,163,963 Over an eleven year period during which the industrial land would be absorbed, then, the project area would generate over $3 million in tax increment, which would be used as realized to provide the improvements to stimulate this growth. ~ity.Pl~ning~Com~is~ agenaa l~ems Tor ~eet...g of April 13, 1983 Page 11 Significant General Fund revenue to the City should be generated by the full development of our model. Calculated at today's values and rates, and using Hyspan products as a model, the industrial development stimulated by redevelopment activity in the Otay Valley Road area should generate annually $178,000 in utility tax revenue and $191,000 in sales tax revenue for the General Fund. Estimating the annual property tax lost by the General Fund to the Agency's tax increment at $70,000, the net General Fund gain would be approximately $299,000 annually. d. Other City Activities. The City Engineer is currently exploring the possibility of a street improvement assessment district with the property owners having frontage along Otay Valley Road. At this point, the consensus seems to be that a district might be feasible and acceptable for improvements to the north side of Otay Valley Road, those improvements being the previously mentioned median two-way turn lane, a shoulder, and a bermed curb. An assessment district for the south side does not appear to be likely at this time, due to the cost of fill to create the roadway and the difficulty in calculating benefit because of the lack of clarity as to how much of the southern parcels need to be filled to remove them from the flood zone. The improvement of the south side of Otay Valley Road, including right-of-way acquisition, might then be facilitated through the creation of a redevelopment area. Community Development Block Grant funds have been used to install a water line in the Brandywine area to assist with economic development of the Otay Valley Road industrial area. Future Community Development Block Grant dollars could be used to assist in the provision of infrastructure to the area, thus generating jobs for low and moderate income individuals. Those funds could be made available to the Agency as a "bootstrap activity" in the form of low interest loans, to be paid back with tax increment, thereby creating the necessary debt. e. Contact With Area Property Owners. Those property owners involved in the consideration of the assessment district for improvements to Otay Valley Road were apprised of the Agency consideration of designating Otay Valley Road a redevelopment survey area. Among those owners, there was neither support nor opposition at that stage. United Enterprises, a significant property owner on the south side of Otay Valley Road, has expressed opposition to the inclusion of their properties in a redevelopment area. United Enterprises is in receipt of a copy of this report. City Planning Commiss Agenda Items for Meeting of April 13, 1983 Page 12 f. Actions of Other Jurisdictions. Both the City of San Diego and the County of San Diego are engaged in significant planning activities in the Otay Mesa area. A proposed improvement of State Route 117 to freeway status to serve the proposed Otay Mesa border crossing, and the proposed General Plan designation of large amounts of land in the Otay Mesa area as industrial acreage promise significant impact on the Otay Valley Road area. As increased and easily accessible industrial sites become available on Otay Mesa, the development problems of Otay Valley Road may become exacerbated, with market values of industrial sites diminished by supply. Timely industrial development of Otay Valley Road through redevelopment activity appears to be critical to its healthy economic development. g. Study Conclusion. Otay Valley Road is one of the few remaining appropriate areas in Chula Vista for industrial development. That development should occur in a timely fashion to coincide favorably with San Diego City and San Diego County actions regarding Otay Mesa development and the second border crossing. However, it appears that blighting conditions which cannot be remedied by private action alone are inhibiting the timely, appropriate development of Otay Valley Road as an industrial area. A close look should be taken at the possible benefits of development action in pursuing timely, advantageous industrial development of Otay Valley Road. DG:nr WPC 0329X