Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1984/12/19 AGENDA City Planning Commission Chula Vista, California Wednesday, December 19, 1984 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER INTRODUCTORY REMARKS APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MEETINGS OF October 24 and December 5, 1984 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. PUBLIC HEARING: P£A-85-1: Consideration of proposed amendment to Chapter 19.66 of the Municipal Code relating to noise measurement and regulations 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-82-3: Consideration of extension for temporary classrooms at 470 'L' Street Church of Christ (Continued) 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft EIR-85-1: Bayfront Specific Plan 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-85-11: Requests master plan of development to modify church and school facilities, 760 First Avenue - St. John's Parish 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of tentative subdivision map for C-Del Mar, Chula Vista Tract 85-2, Northwest corner 'C' Street and North Del Mar Avenue - Mitchell N. Angus AGENDA -2- December 19, 1984 6. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-85-1: Consideration of an amendment to the approved Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area Plan - Financial Scene, Inc. 7. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) PCM-85-3: Consideration of a 177-unit apartment project (Beacon Cove) on lots 329 and 330 of Hidden Vista Village subdivision on the south side of East 'H' Street (b) PCM-85-4: Consideration of a shopping center (Terra Nova) located at the southeast quadrant of 1-805 and East 'H' Street DIRECTOR'S REPORT COMMISSION COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT AT to the Regular Business Meeting of January 9, 1985 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers To: City Planning Commission From: George Krempl, Di rector of P1 anning Subject: Staff Report on Agenda Items for Planning Commission Meeting of December 19, 1984 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Amendment to Chapter 19.66 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, Performance Standards, as they relate to Noise Measurement and Regulations A. BACKGROUND Earlier this year, the City Council directed that the staff prepare new noise regulations for the City as well as purchase new noise monitoring equipment. This was in response to specific noise complaints in the Otay Valley Road Area and complaints that Chula Vista's standards and equipment were outmoded. Therefore, in October 1984, the Building and Housing Department purchased more sophisticated noise monitoring equipment to supplement the current handheld sound level meters. That equipment included a noise profiling dosimeter with analyzer, printer and storage interface and a two-channel audio frequency recorder. The dosimeter allows for sound amplitudes to be computer recorded and a distribution plotted as to frequency and intensity with a time history analysis. The type recorder will actually record the sounds with date and time noted. This dual capability plus on-site visual observation and field notes will insure effective enforcement of any new regulations. As to the noise regulations per se, City staff has consulted with SANDAG, the regional planning agency, reviewed local noise regulations in effect in other jurisdictions and reviewed the "Model Community Noise Control Ordinance" prepared by the State of California Department of Health. Noise regulations were also proposed by Community Systems Associates, Inc. in conjunction with their preparations of an implementation and design manual addendum for the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area. In November, the City contracted with a noise consultant from the Bay Area, Mr. Neil Martin, to evaluate the design manual noise proposals and a prototype state-of-the-art ordinance now in effect in National City. Many of his recommendations have been consolidated into the current text being considered for adoption. B. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission forward the proposed noise standards and amendments to the City Council with a recommendation for adoption. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 2 C. DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS: The ordinance proposal includes eight main section headings as follows: general provisions, definitions, exterior noise limits, interior noise limits, prohibited acts, special provisions {exemptions), exceptions, and enforcement. The essence of the regulations are contained in Tables III and IV of the text. These tables indicate the decibel levels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighting network. The standards are by land use type; for example, residential single unit, multiple dwelling, commercial, light and heavy industry. The noise levels are also differentiated between the time of day, 7 a.m. to l0 p.m. or l0 p.m. to 7 a.m. Table IV indicates maximum noise levels and duration for interior noise sources received by a neighboring dwelling unit. These provisions replace in a much more comprehensive and detailed fashion the existing performance standards contained in Chapter 19 which are referenced in terms of frequency ranges and octave bands. In addition to the new noise regulations proposed in the Zoning Ordinance, the Police Department will continue to enforce Chapter 17.24 of the City Code as to "Noise and Disorderly Conduct" involving motorcycles and motor vehicles, loud speakers, phonographs, animals and so on. While some refinement of those provisions may be forthcoming as amendments, the staff feels that these provisions have not been a problem and are reasonably enforced by the Police Department on a complaint basis. In summary, the measurement techniques, standards, enforcement mechanisms, and new equipment should assure the City and the community that noise hazards and nuisances can be prevented and controlled. WPC 1558P CHAPTER 19.66 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND NOISE CONTROL Chapters: General Provisions Definitions Exterior Noise Limits Interior Noise Limits Prohibited Acts Special Provision (Exemptions) Exceptions Enforcement Appendices GENERAL PROVISIONS Sections: Title. Declaration of findings and policy. Criteria. The ordinance codified in this title shall be known and may be cited as "The Noise Control Ordinance" of the City of Chula Vista. Declaration of findings and policy. Whereas, excessive noise and vibration are a serious hazard to the public health and welfare and the quality of life, and Whereas, the people have a right to and should be ensured an environment free from noise and vibration that may jeopardize their health or welfare or degrade the quality of life; Now, therefore, it is the policy of the city to prevent noise and vibration which may jeopardize the health or welfare of its citizens or degrade the quality of life. Criteria. As criteria for this chapter, Table I is a chart showing sound leve~ and their expected impact in terms of human response. Table II is a list of National Goals for Noise Reduction as set forth by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in their publication "Toward a National Strategy for Noise Control" April 1977. TABLE I SOUND LEVELS AND HUMAN REPSONSE No i se Common Sounds Level (dB) Effect Carrier deck 140 Painfully loud Jet operation Air raid siren Jet takeoff (200 feet) 130 Thunderclap Discotheque 120 Maximum vocal effort Auto horn {3 feet) Pile drivers llO Chain saw {2 feet) Garbage truck lO0 Power lawn mower {4 feet) Heavy truck {50 feet) 90 Very annoying City traffic Hearing damage {8 hours) Al am clock (2 feet) 80 Annoying Hair dryer Vacuum cleaner (5 feet) Noisy restaurant 70 Telephone use difficult Freeway traffic Man's voices {3 feet) Air conditioning unit 60 Intrusive {20 feet) Light auto traffic 50 Quiet {lO0 feet) Living room 40 Bedroom Quiet Office Library 30 Very quiet Soft whisper (15 feet) Broadcasting studio 20 10 Just audible 0 Hearing begins -2- This decibel (dB) table compares some common sounds and shows how they rank in potential harm to hearing. Note that 70 dB is the point at which noise begins to ham hearing, that 60 dB is the threshold of stress response and 45 dB disturbs sleep. To the ear, each l0 dB increase seems twice as loud. TABLE II A. To take all practical steps to eliminate hearing loss resulting from noise exposure; B. To reduce environmental noise exposure to an Ldn value of no more the 75 dB immediately; C. To reduce noise exposure levels to Ldn 65 dB by vigorous regulatory and planning actions; D. To strive for an eventual reduction of noise levels to an Ldn of 55 dB. DEFINITIONS Sections: Terminology. A-weighted sound level ~mbient noise level. Enforcement office(r). Construction. Continuous sound. Cumulative period. Day/night average sound level (Ldn). Decibel. Demolition. Equivalent sound level (Leq). Emergency work. Environmental noise. Fixed noise source. Impulsive sound. Intermittent sound. Intrusive noise. Multiple dwelling. Mufflers or sound dissipative device. Noise disturbance. Noise sensitive zone. Public right-of-way. Public space. Pure tone. Real property boundary. Sound amplifying equipment. Sound level meter. Vibration perception threshold. Weekday. -3- Teminology. All terminology used in this title, not defined in this chapter shall be in conformance with the American National Standards Institute standard ANSI Sl.1 - 1971 A~oustical Terminology (attached for reference). A-weighted sound level. "A-weighted sound level" means the sound level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighting network. The level so read is designated dB(A) or dBA. Ambient noise level. I'Ambient noise level" means the composite of noise from all sources near and far. In this context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location and time. Enforcement office(r). "Enforcement office(r)" means the City employee and/or police officer having lead responsibility for enforcing this chapter; and, the City employee having responsibility for making noise surveys, noise analyses, noise investigations and for the administration of this chapter. Construction. "Construction" means any site preparation, assembly, substantial repair, alteration or similar action, for or of public or private rights-of-way, structures, utilities or similar property or similar activity upon public or private structures or land. Continuous sound. "Continuous sound" means sound which is of a steady and uninterrupted nature of a specified time period. For the purposes of this title, the minimum time period shall be one hour. Cumulative ~eriod. "Cumulative period" means an additive period of time composed of individual time segments which may be continuous or interrupted. Day/night average sound level (Ldn). "Day/night average sound level (Ldn)" means a twenty-four hour average of the A-weighted sound level, with the level during the period l0 p.m. to 7 a.m. increased by l0 dB(a) before averaging. It is denoted I'Ldn." Decibel. "Decibel" means a unit for measuring the amplitude of sound, equal to twenty times the logarithm to the base l0 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is 20 mi cropascal s. Demolition. "Demolition" means any dismantling, intentional destruction or removal of structures, utilities, public or private right-of-way surfaces, or similar property. Equivalent sound level (Leq). "Equivalent sound level (Leq)" means the average sound level measured over a stated time period. Emergency work. "Emergency work" means any work performed for the purpose of preventing or alleviating the physical trauma or property damage threatened or cause by an emergency. -4- Environmental noise. See "Noise disturbance--environmental" as defined in Section Fixed noise source. "Fixed noise source" means a stationary device which cre.ates sounds while fixed or motionless, including but not limited to residential, agricultural, industrial and commercial machinery and equipment, pumps, fans, compressors, air conditioners, and refrigeration equipment. Impulsive sound. "Impulsive sound" means sound of short duration, usually less than one second, with an abrupt onset and rapid decay. Examples of sources of impulsive sound include explosions, drop forge impacts, and the discharge of firearms. Intermittent sound. "Intermittent sound" means sound which is not continuous or which is of a cyclic or repetitive nature. Intrusive noise. "Intrusive noise" means that noise which intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency and time of occurrence, and tonal or informational content as well as the prevailing ambient noise level. Mobile noise source. "Mobile noise source" means any noise source other than a fixed noise source. Multiple Dwelling. "Multiple dwelling" means a building or portions therefor designed for or used exclusively for residence purposes by three or more families or housekeeping units, living independently of one another. Noise disturbance. Any noise exceeding the noise level limits for a designated receiving land use category specified in Table III, or the prohibited actions as specified in Section shall be deemed to be a noise disturbance. A. Noise Disturbance--Enviro~nental. Those noise disturbances resulting from land use activity normally permitted under the land use code, but which exceed the noise level limits set by this code for that particular land use. Environmental noise sources are specified in, but not limited by the list in Appendix A. B. Noise Disturbance--Nuisance. Those noise disturbances, other than environmental noise disturbances, which because of their unusual presence are considered harmful to health and well-being, annoying, obnoxious and unpleasant. Nuisance noise disturbances are specified in, but not limited to, the examples in Appendix A. Noise sensitive zone. "Noise sensitive zone" means any area designated by the Planning Commission for the purpose of ensuring exceptional quiet. -5- Public right-of-way. "Public right-of-way" means any street, avenue, boulevard, highway, bikeway, sidewalk or alley or similar place which is owned or controlled by a government entity. Public space. "Public space" means any real property or structures thereon which are owned or controlled by a governmental entity. Pure tone. "Pure tone" means any sound which can be judged as audible as a single pitch or a set of single pitches by the enforcement officer or police officer. Real property bounda~. "Real property boundary" means an imaginary line along the ground surface, and its vertical extension, which separates the real property owner by one person from that owned by another person, but not including intra-building real property divisions. Sound amplifyin~ equipment. "Sound amplifying equipment," as used means any machine or device for the amplification of the h~nan voice, music or any other sound. Sound amplifying equipment, as used in this title, shall not be construed as including standard automobile radios when used and heard only by occupant{s) of the vehicle in which installed, or warning devices on authorized emergency vehicles, or horns or other warning devices on other vehicles used only for traffic safety purposes. This definition shall include remotely located loudspeakers attached to and/or operated from a vehicle. Sound level meter. "Sound level meter" means an instrument, including a microphone, an amplifier, an output meter, and frequency weighting networks for the measurement of sound levels, which meets or exceeds the requirements pertinent for type S2J~ meters in American National Standards Institute specifications for sound level meters, S1.4-1971. Vibration perception threshold. "Vibration perception threshold" means the minimum ground-borne or structure-borne vibrational motion necessary to cause a normal person to be aware of the vibration by such direct means as, but not limited to, sensation by touch or visual observation of moving objects. The perception threshold shall be presumed to be a motion velocity of 0.01 in/sec over the range of 1 to lO0 Hz. ~ "Weekday" means any day, Monday through Friday, which is not a 1 ega~ay. -6- EXTERIOR NOISE LIMITS Sections: Maximum permissible sound levels by receiving land use. Corrections to exterior noise level limits. Maximum permissible sound levels by receiving land use. A. The noise standards for the various categories of land use as presented in Table III and set forth in terms defined in the City land use code set forth in , shall, unless otherwise specifically indicated, apply to each property or portion of property substantially used for a particular type of land use reasonably similar to the land use types shown in Table III. Where two or more dissimilar land uses occur on a single property, the more restrictive noise limits shall apply. B. Additional land use classifications may be added by action of the City Council to reflect both lower and higher existing ambient levels than those shown. C. Where doubt exists when making identification of receiving land use, the planning director may make an interpretation. D. No person shall operate or cause to be operated, any source of sound at any location within the city or allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled by such person, which causes the noise level to exceed the environmental and/or nuisance interpretation of the applicable limits given in Table III. E. 1. Environmental noise shall be measured by the equivalent sound level {Leq) for any hour. 2. Nuisance noise shall be measured as a sound level not to be exceeded at any time. 3. Sound levels by receiving land use shall be measured at the boundary or at any point within the boundary of the property affected. 4. Fixed location public utility distribution or fixed transmission facilities, located on or adjacent to a property line shall be subject to noise level limits of this section measured at or beyond six feet from the boundary of the easement upon which the equipment is located. Corrections to exterior noise level limits. A. If the noise is continuous as defined in Section , the Leq for any hour will be represented by any lesser time period wi thin that hour. Noise measurements of a few minutes only will thus suffice to define the noise level. 7 B. If the noise is intermittent as defined in Section , the Leq for any hour may be represented by a time period typical of the operating cycle. Measurement should be made of a representative number of noisy/quiet periods. A measurement period of not less than 15 minutes is, however, strongly recommended when dealing with intermittent noi se. C. In the event the alleged offensive noise, as judged by the enforcement officer, contains a steady, audible sound such as a whine, screech or hum, or contains a repetitive impulsive noise such as hammering or riveting, the standard limits set forth in Table III shall be reduced by 5 dB. D. If the measured ambient level exceeds that permissible in Table III, the allowable noise exposure standard shall be the ambient noise level. The ambient level shall be measured when the alleged noise violations source is not operating. TABLE III EXTERIOR NOISE LIMITS 1, 2 1. Environmental Noise - Leq in any hour. 2. Nuisance Noise - Not to be exceeded any time. Noise Level [dB (A)] Receiving Land Use Cate§or~ l0 p.m. to 7 a.m. 7 a.m. to l0 p.m. All residential (except 45 55 multiple dwelling) Multiple dwelling residential 50 60 Commerc i al 60 65 Light Industry - I-R and I-L Zone 70 70 Heavy Industry - I Zone 80 80 -8- INTERIOR NOISE LIMITS Sections: Maximum permissible dwelling interior sound levels. Correction for character of sound. Maximum permissible dwellin~ interior sound levels. A. No person shall operate or cause to operate, any source of sound within a residential dwelling unit or allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled by such person, which causes the noise level when measured inside a neighboring receiving dwelling unit to exceed the environmental and/or nuisance interpretation of the applicable limits given in Table IV. TABLE IV Type of Time Noise Level (dBA) not Land Use Interval to be Exceeded Any 1 min in 5 min in Time 1 hr 1 hr Multi-family l0 pm - 7 am 45 40 35 Residential ? am - lO pm 55 50 45 B. If the ambient noise level inside the receiving dwelling unit exceeds that permissible within any of the noise limit categories in Table IV, the allowable noise exposure standard in that category shall be the measured ambient for a cumulative period of five minutes in any hour, ambient plus 5 dB{A) for one minute in any hour and shall not exceed the ambient plus 10 dB(A) at any time. Correction for character of sound. In the event the alleged offensive noise, as judged by the enforcement officer, contains a steady, audible tone such as a whine, screech, or hum, or is an impulsive and repetitive noise such as hammering or riveting, or contains music or speech conveying informational content, the standard limits set forth in Table IV shall be reduced by 5dB. 9 PROHIBITED ACTS Sections: No i se disturbances prohi bi ted. Specific prohibitions. Vibration. Stationary non-emergency signaling devices. Emergency signaling devices. Noise sensitive zones. Noise disturbances prohibited. No person shall unnecessarily make, continue, or cause to be made or continued, any noise disturbance. Specific prohibitions. The acts set forth in this chapter, and the causing or permitting thereof, are declared to be in violation of this title. Vibration. Operating or permitting the operation of any device that creates a vibration which is above the vibration perception threshold of any individual at or beyond the property boundary of the source if on private property or at one hundred fifty feet from the source if on a public space or public right-of-way. Stationar~ non-emer~enc~/ signal in9 devices. A. Sounding or permitting the sounding of any electrically operated or electronically amplified signal from any stationary bell, chime, siren, whistle, or similar device, intended primarily for non-emergency purposes, from any place, for more than 120 seconds continually, in an hourly period, or intermittent sounding over a 5 minute period in any hour. Emer~enc~ si~nali n~ devices. A. The intentional sounding or permitting the sounding outdoors of any fire, burglar, or civil defense alarm, siren, whistle, or similar stationary emergency signaling device, except for emergency purposes or for testing, as provided in subsection B of this section. B. 1. Testing of a stationary emergency signaling device shall not occur before 7 a.m. or after 7 p.m. Any such testing shall use only the minimum cycle test time. In no case shall such test time exceed 60 seconds. 2. Testing of the complete emergency signaling system, including the functioning of the signaling device, and the personnel response to the signaling device, shall not occur more than once in each calendar month. Such testing shall not occur before 7 a.m. or after 10 p.m. The time limit specified in subsection B(1) shall not apply to such complete system testing. - l0 - C. Sounding or permitting the sounding of any exterior burglar or fire alarm or any motor vehicle burglar alarm for more than 15 minutes is prohi hired. Noise sensitive zones. A. Creating or causing the creation of any sound within any noise sensitive zone, so as to exceed the specified land use noise standards set forth in therefore, provided, that conspicuous signs are displayed indicating the presence of the zone; or B. Creating or causing the creation of any sound within or adjacent to any noise sensitive zone, containing a hospital, nursing home, school, court or other designated area, so as to interfere with the functions of such activity or annoy the occupants in the activity; provided, that conspicuous signs are displayed indicating the presence of the zone. -ll - SPECIAL PROVISION (EXEMPTIONS) Sections: Warning devices. Outdoor activities. Exemptions from exterior noise standards. Federal or state pre-e~ted activities. WarninO devices. Warning devices necessa~ for the protection of public safety, as for example, police, fire and ambulance sirens, and train horns, are exempted from the provisions of this title. Outdoor activities. The provisions of this title shall not apply to occassional outdoor gatherings, public dances, shows, and sporting and entertainment events (excluding regularly scheduled school athletic events), provided the events are conducted pursuant to a permit or license issued by the city relative to the staging of the events. The permit authority, as set forth in Section of the land use code, may, aside from this title, regulate and control noise caused by such outdoor activity. Exemptions from exterior noise standards. The provisions of Section shall not apply to activities covered by the following sections: A. Street sales--prohibited unless exception is granted per Section B. Construction/demolition; C. Stationary non-emergency signaling devices; D. Emergency signaling devices; E. Motor vehicles operating on public right-of-way; F. Wherein noise limit exceptions or excesses are specifically provided for in the issuance of any temporary use permit pursuant to in or City Council approval of any parades, civic functions or gatherings, such specifics shall prevail. Federal or date pree~ted activities. Any other activity to the extent regulation thereof has been preempted by state or federal law. -12- EXCEPTIONS Sections: Special exceptions. Special exceptions. A. The City Council is authorized to grant exceptions for any environmental noise provision of this title, subject to limitations as to area, noise levels, time limits, and other terms and conditions as the city council determines are appropriate to protect the public health, safety, and welfare from the noise emanating therefrom. This section shall in no way affect the duty to obtain any permit or license required by law for such activities, not shall it apply to nuisance noises. B. Any person seeking exceptions pursuant to this section shall file an application with the planning director. The application shall be submitted and processed in the same manner as conditional use permits. The application shall contain information which demonstrates that bringing the source of sound or activity for which the exception is sought into compliance with this title would constitute, an unreasonable hardship on the applicant, on the community, or on other persons. -13- ENFORCEMENT Sections: Violations and penalties. Environmental noi se. Nuisance noise. Enforcement of noise disturbances that are both environmental and nuisance. Violations: Additional remedies--Injunctions. Violations and penalties. A. It is a violation for any property owner{s) and/or person{s) in control of property to permit, or cause, a noise disturbance to be produced upon property owned by them or under their control. B. It is a violation for any person or persons to create or allow the making of noise disturbance as provided by this title at any location in the city. C. The violation of this title by making or allowing an environmental noise disturbance shall be an infraction. Enforcement of environmental noise violations shall follow the procedures set forth in the land use code for zoning violations. D. The violation of this title by making or allowing a nuisance noise disturbance shall be a misdemeanor notwithstanding the provisions of Section Section provides for the method of enforcement wherein noise may be in violation of both the environmental and nuisance noise disturbance provisions. Environmental noi se. A. Classification of environmental nose. The enforcement officer shall determine that any given obtrusive noise condition that falls within the definition of environmental noise disturbance, pursuant to Section is an environmental noise. The enforcement officer may use Appendix A, attached to ordinance codified in this title, as an aid in making such determinations. The planning director may make "determinations" as provided for by land use code, Section classifying noise sources not specifically mentioned in Appendix A. B. Responsibility. The building and housing director shall be responsible for investigation and enforcement of environmental noise disturbances. C. Guidelines. The building and housing director may, from time to time, promulgate guidelines for administration and enforcement of the provisions of this title pertaining to noise violations. -14- D. Abatement shall terminate enforcement action. No complaint or further action shall be taken in the event that the cause of the violation has been removed, the condition abated or fully corrected within the time period specified in a notice of violation issued by the enforcement officer. Nuisance noi se. A. Classification of Nuisance Noise. The chief of police shall determine that any given obtrusive noise condition that falls within the definition of nuisance noise disturbance, pursuant to Section is a nuisance noise. The chief of police may use Appendix A, hereto, as an aid in making such determinations. At the request of the chief of police, the planning director may make "detemninations" as provided for by the Chula Vista Land Use Code, Section for classifying nuisance noise sources not specifically mentioned in Appendix A. B. Responsibility. The chief of police shall be responsible for investigation and enforcement of nuisance noise disturbances. C. Guidelines. The chief of police may, from time to time, promulgate guidelines for administration and enforcement of the provisions of this title pertaining to nuisance noise violations. D. Abatement Order. The officer responsible for enforcement of any provisions of this section may issue an order requiring abatement of a sound source alleged to be in violation within a reasonable time period and according to guidelines which the chief of police may prescribe. Such orders of abatement may be verbally administered. Failure to comply may be held as a violation of this title. Enforcement of noise disturbances that are both environmental and nuisance. A. Where investigation reveals that offending noise violates both the environmental noise regulations and the nuisance noise regulations, the offense shall be enforced as a nuisance noise violation unless the chief of police makes a specific finding that the environmental noise regulations more nearly apply, in which case the environmental noise regulations shall apply. B. Nothing contained in this provision shall limit the City's ability to prosecute noise violations as both environmental and nuisance noise. Violations: Additional remedies--Injunctions. As an additional remedy, the operation or maintenance of any device, instrument, vehicle or machinery in violation of any provision of this chapter which operation or maintenance causes or creates sound levels or vibration exceeding the allowable limits as specified in this chapter is declared to be a public nuisance, and may be subject to abatement sumnarily by a restraining order or injunction issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. Additionally, no provision of this title shall be construed to impair any common law or statutory cause of action, or legal remedy therefrom, of any person or injury or damage arising from any violation of this title or from any other law. -15 - AP PEND ICES Sections: Description, effect, and adoption. Appendix A--Adoption. Appendix A--Designated. Description, effect, and adoption. Appendices as described i n Chapter may be adopted to supplement this title. The effect of such appendices as well as adoption, amendment, and other administrative procedures shall also be provided in Chapter Appendix A--Adoption. Appendix A to this title, codified in Section is adopted concurrently with the adoption of the ordinance codified in this title. Appendix A--Designated. APPENDIX A CLASSIFICATION OF NOISE SOURCES ENVIRO~qENTAL NOISE NUISANCE NOISE Air-conditioning units (fixed) Air-conditioning units (improperly mai ntai ned) Animal shelters Animal, pets Auto and vehicle repair in conjunction Auto and vehicle repairs on with permitted commercial or residential sites industrial activity Carbide ignitors and similar devices producing impactive noise Commercial activities normally Commercial activities, other than found in connection with a those permitted which are causing permitted activity a nuisance. Also, outdoor commerical sales activities Construction/demol ition activities {of a temporary nature) Industrial activities normally Industrial activities, other than found in conjunction with a enviro~nental and causing a permitted activity nuisance Loading and unloading in conjunction Loading and unloading, other than with permitted uses environmental, and causing a nuisance - 16- ENVIROI~4ENTAL NOISE NUISANCE NOISE Loose shutters, squeaky gates, clattering drain covers, and other conditions resulting from inadequate property Machinery and con~ressors (fixed or Machinery and co~ressors other maintained in conjunction with a than environmental pemitted activity) Off-road vehicles Outc~ing, shouting, screaming, whistling, singing Powered model toys, devices, vehicles and equipment Power tools normally found in Power tools, other than conjunction with permitted uses environmental. Also, hobby activities Lawn mowers Pumps - Same as machinery and Pumps - Same as machinery and compressors compressors Private parties, gatherings, assemblages of limited duration Public address and public assembly, Public address and public assembly, indoor and outdoor, as permitted indoor and outdoor, as "te~orary use use" or as an assembly other than e nvi ronmental Radios, stereos, T.V.'s sound amplifiers, musical instruments, drums Signaling devices (non-emergency Signaling devices (non-emergency) stationa~ mobile utility truck radio speakers Outside phone bells School bells Emergency: Burglar alarms Auto theft alarms Sound trucks WPC O040B - 17 - City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 1 2. PUBLIC HEARING: (Continued) Consideration of conditional use permit, PCC-82-3, for extension of temporary classrooms at 470 "L" Street - Church of Christ A. BACKGROUND In August 1984, the Planning Commission granted the Church of Christ located at 470 "L" Street permission to continue to use two previously approved temporary classroom structures until December 12, 1984. As a condition for the PLanning Commission to consider any further extensions, the applicant was required to submit a noise study to detemine the amount of noise generated by the school and its activities and provide recommendations for possible mitigation on any adverse impacts. This item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of December 5, 1984, in order that the noise study required by the Commission as a prerequisite to continued use of the temporary classrooms could be evaluated by staff. The time to review the study was shortened by the rescheduling of the Planning Commission meetings in the month of December due to the seasonal holidays. B. RECO~IENDATION Adopt a motion approving the use of the temporary classrooms until July 8, 1985, subject to the following: 1. The south-facing door of the temporary classrooms shall remain closed du~ng class sessions. 2. The buildings shall be removed from the premises no later than August 7, 1985. 3. The applicant shall construct a solid 6' high masonry wall on the south property line. Permits shall be obtained by January 19, 1985, and construction to be completed by March 1, 1985. Failure to complete the wall by said date shall constitute an immediate revocation of this conditional use permit causing the need to vacate and remove the temporary classroom buildings. C. DISCUSSION The following represents the sequence of events, conditions, and processes for the Church of Christ located at 470 "L" Street. 1. The church site of 1.7 acres was approved by the County Planning Commission in 1969. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 2 2. In 1978, the County approved an amendment to the project authorizing a lO0-student elementary school subject to: a. Striping the parking lot .to accommodate the necessary play area (approximately lO0'xl90') b. Installing landscaping and fencing. c. Precluding loud speakers or amplification systems audible beyond the property boundaries. 3. In May of 1981, the property was annexed to the City of Chula Vista. 4. In August of 1981, the church received authorization from the City Planning Commission to: a. increase the school size from 100 students to 175, b. increase the church parking by adding the parking area (extending to Fifth Avenue), c. locate two temporary classrooms on-site near "L" Street for a period of three years. 5. In May of 1982, the church received approval from the Zoning Administrator to relocate the temporary classrooms near the southeast corner of the property per the original time schedule. {NOTE: The adjacent property owners indicated no objection to the southeast location for the period specified.) 6. In August 1984, the Planning Commission approved the use of the temporary classrooms until December 12, 1984, with any future extensions predicated on the submittal of a noise study. 7. Most recently the conditional use permit was extended one week until December 19 because of the change of Planning Commission meetings in December. Noise Study The noise study has been reviewed by the Environmental Review Coordinator. The study indicates the following: 1. The background noise in the area and experienced by the residents in the immediate vicinity is primarily attributable to the traffic on "L" Street, activities at the high school and from the I-5 freeway {located some 4000 feet away). City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 3 2. The noise on the church/school site is primarily generated by playground activity. The noise levels at recess time are generally at the same level as the background noise because the activities are more structured. However, the noise is punctuated by children yelling. 3. The noise levels during the lunch breaks exceed the background noise level because activities are less structured. 4. Mitigation can be accomplished by the construction of a masonry wall along the property line which will reduce the decibel level by approximately ll dba. The play activity could be moved to the northwesterly corner of the property, but a masonry wall would still be required for the lots nearest the play area. 5. The noise study concludes that no significant noise was measured with the temporary classrooms in operation. The ambient noise from the area is equal to or exceeds noise coming from the classroom operation. Master Plan Modification The applicant has submitted an application for a modification of the approved master plan which is scheduled for Planning Commisson consideration on January 9. The proposed modifications include: the construction of a new classroom structure; the use of the original classrooms as office space; and, the relocation of the play area to the northwesterly portion of the property. A masonry wall is proposed on the common property line of the lots abutting the play area. D. ANALYSIS The focus of the noise study essentially addresses the school outdoor activities and does not include specific information on the impact of the temporary classrooms on adjacent properties. No adverse impacts were discovered for the normal classroom activities, although some noise may be generated periodically by students when going and leaving the classrooms. The main purpose of this hearing is to determine if the temporary classrooms should be allowed to continue operations at the present location or whether they should cease. If the classrooms are discontinued and removed, the students could attend other classes in the main building causing an increase in classroom size or the size of the school could be reduced ujtil permanent classrooms are constructed. The noise issue will remain regardless of whether the temporary classrooms remain or not based on the location of the play yard. The amount of noise generated by the temporary classrooms is considered insignificant. As a condition of continued use of the temporary classrooms, the Planning Commission could require that a masonry wall (estimated to be $16,000 $20,000) be constructed along the southerly property line. This action would City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 4 substantially reduce noise impacts to the south. It could take as long as 2 to 3 months before the wall is completed which would leave 3 or 4 months in the remainder of the school year. The applicant has also submitted a revised master plan which proposes to relocate the play area away from the residents on Westby Street. If this revised plan is approved, it could make the wall along the south line unnecessa~ to mitigate school noise, however, it would be beneficial to the residents in reducing the background noise and providing a permanent visual barrier. Considering the above factors and short time remaining to the end of the school year, the staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the extension subject to the conditions listed in this report. WPC 1540P ''-< ~ I STREET CHULA VISTA SIERRA WAY  $1E:R~ WAY PROdEC'I' ..~. sc. oo. AREA IEET ' ~ ~'~ENTA Ry ARIZONA STREET ~ City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page I 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft EIR-85-1: Bayfront Specific Plan A. BACKGROUND The subject of this EIR is the implementation of the Chula Vista Bayfront Local Coastal Programing through the adoption of a general plan amendment and specific plan. The Bayfront Land Use Plan was prepared to satisfy the Local Coastal Program (LC~requirements of the California Coastal Act. No EIR was prepared on the LCP because the adoption of the LCP was exempt from CEQA provisions. Despite that exemption, the implementation of the LCP by the City of Chula Vista is subject to CEQA provisions and, thus, requires the preparation of an EIR. This report is to serve as a master environmental assessment. This document provides an environmental data base of the resources and constraints of the project area and addresses the environmental impacts of the proposed project. This master report will facilitate future environmental review of subsequent development plans by providing a data base to determine the scope of the additional environmental documentation required for each individual project. This Draft EIR was prepared under a contract between the Redevelopment Agency and RECON. This DEIR was issued for public review on November 2, 1984. The State Clearinghouse review will be completed on December 17, 1984 and the City's comment period will conclude with the closing of the public hearing on the document. B. RECOMMENDATION Take any testimony relevant to the EIR and close the public hearing. The Final EIR and project have been scheduled for the January 9, 1985 Planning Commission meeting. C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The 790-acre Bayfront Planning Area is located west of Interstate 5, between C and Palomar streets. The area lies within the coastal plain and exhibits very little topographic relief. The dominant land uses include nearly built-out industrial operations generally south of G Street, agriculture (Vener Farms), and vacant fill areas to the north. Several areas containing wetlands (e.g., Sweetwater Marsh) also dominate the landscape. The existing land use designations are indicated in the Chula Vista Bayfront Land Use Plan, which has been approved by the California Coastal Commission and the Chula Vista City Council. These land uses will be implemented upon approval by the Coastal Commission and City of Chula Vista of the proposed specific plan, which this report addresses. The specific plan will supersede the provisions of the existing zoning. The City of Chula Vista proposes to adopt the Bayfront Land Use Plan as a general plan amendment, specific plan, and revisions to the Subdivision Ordinance, thus implementing the plan. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 2 The specific plan proposes several types of new development for the Bayfront, predominantly within the agricultural and vacant areas north of G Street. These uses include multi-family residential units at three locations, highway-related commercial in four areas, commercial office park in three locations, marine- related commercial use at the northern boundary, a hotel, an area of specialty retail, industrial/business park, neighborhood parks and public open space, landscaped parking areas, infill areas of general industrial, and the preservation of several wetland areas. For details of the proposed land uses see Figure 4 and Table I of the Draft EIR. D. ANALYSIS 1. Geology/Soils Potential liquefaction impacts exist because of the characteristics of the sand and silt deposits and high water table which occur over portions of the area. Prior to final project design, additional test borings are recommended (particularly in the D Street fill area). Adherence to appropriate building codes will also reduce the potential hazard for ground shaking. 2. Land Form/Visual Quality The proposed project will significantly alter the visual character of the project area and, because of the height of structures, there will be some blockage of distant views from I-5 to San Diego Bay. However, the proposed development of the Bayfront would do much to enhance the degraded visual quality associated with the existing land uses. Implementation of the plan will result in numerous parks at points of visual access along the edge of wetlands and San Diego Bay. The mitigation provided as design measures in the plan will reduce the visual impact; however, the visual change will remain significant. 3. Noise The major source of noise is from vehicular traffic associated with I-5. However, there is a rise in elevation adjacent to the freeway from D Street to H Street, which serves as a barrier to the traffic noise. Future development of the project will result in traffic volumes along Tidelands Avenue, E Street, and F Street that will be great enough to create noise in residential areas in excess of the City's standard (65 dBA). However, these impacts can be mitigated through the construction of acoustical barriers along the roadways adjacent to residential areas. The specific height and location will be determined during the subdivision phase of future development. 4. Biolo~s/Land Use A major portion of the project includes valuable wetland habitat (about 200 acres). An extensive mitigation program has been incorporated into the project to reduce impacts to biological resources. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 3 It could be interpreted that there is an apparent conflict between the conclusion of the DEIR and the findings of the Coastal Commission (Page 47) regarding impacts to biological resources associated with the wetlands, including effects on rare and endangered species. This is because the Coastal Commission action was taken, after extensive public hearings, relative to findings of conformity to the Coastal Act, includin9 the balancing of the interests of local jurisdictions with the protection of valuable coastal resources. The Coastal Commission action regarding biological impacts was based in large part on an analysis of biological issues prepared by Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. after field investigations during various seasons of the year. This was in contrast to reports from U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Fish and Game, which had less scientific substantiation. In contrast, CEQA provides for a multi stage reviewing process including the consideration of the EIR as an informational document and subsequent consideration of CEQA findings evaluating the feasibility of mitigation measures and project alternative. Additionally, while the Coastal Commission hearings have been concluded, the City's processing of the environmental documents and the specific plan have not yet had the benefit of such a hearing process. An example of the lack of complete data to complete the balancing of Coastal interests would be the less intense alternative described in the EIR. Although this alternative could clearly reduce the level of impacts to insignificance, it is not considered to be economically feasible and does not meet the legitimate land use objectives of the City of Chula Vista and is not consistent with the land use assumptions of the SANDAG Series 6 Growth Forecasts. The existing industrial land use in the southern part of the Bayfront Plan was integrated with the Midbayfront portion by locating business park uses in the .adjacent area. Therefore, the plan is not expected to conflict with neighboring uses. In addition, the northern part of the plan is designed to provide an integrated community with residential, commercial, industrial, park, and recreation uses. Therefore, no significant land use impacts are anticipated. 5. Water Qualit~/H~droloq.y Development of the site would alter both the existing hydrologic conditions and the water quality associated with the marsh and upland areas. Mitigation proposed as part of the project includes a storm-drain system which would preclude drainage directly into the wetland habitat without adequate filtering of sediments or trapping of pollutants. As a result, these water-quality impacts are not considered significant. 6. Transportation/Circulation Just before the preparation of this staff report the Traffic Division of the Engineering Department has concluded a more detailed analysis of the traffic study prepared by Federhart & Associates and the traffic section of the DEIR. Discussions between the Traffic Engineer and consultants are currently under way and a verbal report will be made at the Planning Commission meeting. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 4 E. COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR Attached are letters commenting on the Draft EIR. The State Clearinghouse review period will not end until December 17, 1984 so additional letters are expected. Also, the Resource Conservation Committee will be meeting on December 17, 1984 and they may have comments. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 1 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-85-11; request to approve the master plan for St. John's Parish at 76~ Avenue - Rector, Wardens and Vestrymen of St. John's Pari sh A. BACKGROUND 1. The St. John's Parish Church located at 760 First Avenue in the R-1 zone, is requesting approval of a proposed master plan of development to modify and expand the existing church and school facilities. 2. An Initial Study, IS-85-11, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on October 25, 1984. The Environmental Review Coordinator concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommended that the Negative Declaration be adopted. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-85-11. 2. Based on findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a motion to approve the request, PCC-85-11, subject to the following conditions: a. A master landscape and irrigation plan for the entire property shall be submitted and ap proved by the City's Landscape Architect prior to approval of any building permits. The plan may contain phases which coincide with the proposed phased construction schedule. b. A six-foot high masonry wall shall be constructed along the westerly property line. Said wall shall be reduced to 3-1/2 feet in height within the front setback along "K" Street and Kearney Streets. A pedestrian opening shall be provided at the terminus of Millan Street. A wall may be required along the southerly property line adjacent to the single family dwellings by the Director of Planing upon the determination that said wall is necessary to protect those residences. c. The chain link fencing along First Avenue shall be replaced with wrought iron fencing to match the existing entry way. This shall be accomplished with Phase II. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 2 d. The architecture of all proposed structures and additions shall either match or be compatible with the existing structures and shall be subject to approval by the Director of Planning. e. The parking areas shall be screened by either a 3-1/2 foot high wall, landscaping mounding or combination thereof. f. A parking lot lighting plan for the new parking area shall be submitted and approved prior to construction of Phase II. C. DISCUSSION 1. Adjacent zoning and land use. North R-1 Single family dwellings and Kearney Street South R-1 Single family dwellings and "K" Street East R-1 Single family dwellings, First Avenue and Hilltop Park West R-1 Single family dwellings and terminus of Millan Street 2. Existing site characteristics. The subject property is a 3.94 acre parcel with 260 feet of frontage along the south side of Kearney Street and 630 feet along the west side of First Avenue. The southwesterly corner of the property al so abuts "K" Street. Topographically, the property slopes downward from Kearney Street toward "K" Street. A natural drainage channel {Telegraph Creek) cuts diagonally across the southeasterly portion of the property. The property is currently developed with a church and school {primary grades). The church has a seating capacity of 233 seats and the school has an enrollment of 226 students. The church and administration buildings are situated on the northerly portion of the site and the school classrooms (4 structures) are located in the center of the property with a playground located on the southerly portion. The existing parking (58 spaces) is located along the westerly portion of the property with a single access from Kearney Street. A storage building is located at the south end of the parking area. The school grounds are fenced with chain link fencing. The fencing along the westerly property line consists of wood and chain link. 3. Proposed master plan. The applicant has submitted a master plan of development for the modification and expansion of the church and school facilities to occur in four phases over a period of approximately ten years. The phases are as fol 1 ows: Phase I - to begin immediately. l) Construction of a 6-foot high masonry wall along the westerly property line; City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 3 2) Restriping of existing parking lot to increase the amount of parking from 58 spaces to approximately 65 spaces; 3) Construction of a 2,000 sq. ft. classroom addition to an existing classroom structure; 4) Remodeling a classroom restroom {2); and 5) Construction of a new two-story 2,840 sq. ft. classroom/storage structure. (The existing storage building will be removed.) The school enrollment will be increased from 226 students to 275 students. The increase will not require additional parking spaces. The parking area restriping will enable the applicant to be closer to the present parking requirement of 67 spaces for the 233 seats in the church. Phase II - 3 to 4 years l) Construction of a parish hall addition (2,400 sq. ft.) to the west side of the church; 2) Construction of a 2,276 sq. ft. office/teacher lounge structure; 3) Construction of a 750 sq. ft. assembly structure; and 4) Provide a new parking area with approximately 36 spaces to the north of the church. An entrance will be provided on First Avenue. Phase III - 7 to 8 years. 1) Remodeling of the main church sanctuary providing to increase the seating from 233 to 352 seats {an increase of ll9 seats). Phase IV - approximately in l0 years l) Enclosing the drainage channel and regrading of the southeast corner. Other proposed modifications include: a revised landscape and irrigation plan; a parking lot lighting plan; and, fencing or walls. D. ANALYSIS The church and school have been in existence for over 25 years without any significant change since it was first developed. Approval of the master plan of development will enable the applicant to incrementally modify and expand the facilities over a period of time as funds become available. The proposed increase in parking will enable the applicant to bring the number of required spaces into Code compliance (1 space required for every 3-1/2 seats in the main sanctuary). The first phase will increase the school enrollment and correct certain inadequacies of the existing development, such as increasing the amount of parking by restriping and most importantly the construction of a 6 foot high City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 4 masonry wall along the westerly property line which should minimize any potential noise and visual impacts. A pedestrian opening at the terminus of Millan Street as presently provided should be required in order to permit access from that street by students living nearby. The closest structure to the adjacent residential area to the west will be the classroom/storage room which will maintain a 20-foot setback. The parish hall addition will be located over 45 feet from the property line. A master landscape and irrigation plan should be submitted which revises the existing landscaping in accordance with the proposed phase development. E. FINDINGS 1. That the proposed use at the 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 church and school have existed over 25 years. Approval of this request will permit orderly modification and expansion of these facilities. 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 applicant will construct a masonry wall along the westerly property line which will reduce the existing and anticipated impacts regarding noise and visibility. 3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the code for such use. All proposed structures must meet the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. The project meets the Code requirements regarding parking and setbacks. 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 government agency. The General Plan is not affected by the granting of this request. WPC 1532P/OO15Z negative declaration PROJECT NAME: St. John's Church and School PROJECT LOCATION: 760 First Avenue PROJECT APPLICANT: Rector, Wardens and Vestrymen of St. John's Parish 760 First Avenue, Chula Vista, California 92010 CASE NO: IS-85-11 DATE: October 25, 1984 A. Project Setting The proposed project site consists of a 3.77 acre existing church site located at' the southwest corner of First Avenue and Kearney Street. An existing sanctuary, classrooms, and parking facilities characterize the project site. In addition, a school playground area and unimproved drainage channel are located at the southern portion of the site. There are no known earthquake faults or endangered plant or animal species located in the project vicinity. Adjacent land uses consist of single-family dwellings on the south and west side; Kearney Street and single-family dwellings on the north side, and; First Avenue and single-family dwellings on the east side of the project site. B. Project Description The proposed project consists of a phased church remodel and expansion program involving the construction of 3,920 sq. ft. of additional classroom space and 1,920 sq. f~. of storage floor space contained in two structures; the construction of a 2,400 sq. ft. parish hall; the construction of a 400 sq. ft. church addition; the construction of a 750 sq. ft. assembly building; the construction of a 1,276 sq. ft. office/teachers' lounge; various interior remodeling; the encasement of approximately 250 feet of an existing on-site drainage channel, and; the addition of 40 on-site parking spaces. Phase 1 of the master plan will involve the construction of the additional classroo~storage buildings that will result in an increase of the existing church school size from 226 students to 275 students, the interior remodeling of restroom facilities, and the addition of 40 parking spaces. Phasing of the remaining master plan is unknown at this time. C. Compatibilit~with Zoning and Plans The proposed church expansion plans will require approval by the Planning Commission of a conditional use permit. city of chula vista planning department environmental review section D. Identification of Environmental Effects 1. Drainage The City Engineer has indicated that the existing drainage facilities at the southeast portion of the site and the drainage pipe extending under First Avenue are substandard and that during periods of heavy runoff, flooding could occur. Standard engineering requirements will dictate the required drainage improvements when encasement of the present channel is proposed. 2. Aesthetics The construction of additional parking facilities designed to accommodate 40 vehicles will likely result in a proposal for exterior parking lot lighting. Standard Planning Department criteria require that all exterior lighting be shielded from excessive glare on adjacent public right-of-way areas and residential areas. 3. Noise The proposed expansion plans will result in the addition of 49 students to an existing total of 226 students and will likely result in an increase of noise within and around the children's playground area. Noise levels occurring due to children playing on the premises are considered nuisance noises which could occur adjacent to a few existing residences abutting the playground area. 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 with adjacent land uses. 4. Transportation The expansion of church facilities and classroom space will result in an incremental increase in the number of vehicle trips in and out of the project. The City's Traffic Engineer has indicated that all street intersections in the project vicinity are currently operating at level of service A and will continue to do so with the anticipated increase. While the proposed expansion will result in additional vehicle trips on Kearney Street, and the increase may be noticed by residents in the area it will not decrease street capacities significantly and is not considered a significant adverse impact. E. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Effects All potentially significant impacts can be mitigated to a level of insignificance through standard development regulations. F. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. The site is void of any significant natural or manmade resources, and there are no geologic hazards present on or ngar the site. 2. The proposed church and school expansion 'is compatible with the General Plan and associated elements and is not anticipated to achieve short-term to the disadvantage of the long-term environmental goal s. 3. No impacts are anticipated to occur which could interact to create a substantial cumulative effect on the environment. 4. The project will not cause the emission of any harmful substance or create any significant traffic hazards. G. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista Steve Griffin, Associate Planner Roger Oaoust, Senior Civil Engineer Duane Bazzel, Assistant Planner Tom Dyke, Building Department Ted Monsell, Fire Marshal Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer Applicant's Architect Felipe M. Esquivel, AIA 2. Documents Chula Vista General Plan The Initial Study application and evaluation forms documenting the findings of no significant impact are on file and available for public review at the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010. O~/NTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR WPC 1409P EN 6 (Rev. 12/82) city of chula vista planning department environmental review section EN 6 (Rev. 12/82) HILLTOP KING ST. STREET PARKING SUMMARY DESIGNATED USE REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED ADDITION OFFICE SPACE (17 EMPLOYEES) 17 ~17 - CL/~R00MS: 7,,'b EXISTING SEATS (233 @ 17) 13 13 (~ NEW SEATS @ 17) 3 3 S ,TS . @ ~.5) ~ P/~ISH }t/~1_: EXISTII~ PROPOSED CHURCH REMODEL - - (D~o,,~.~to, 2~ s.,. ,~5 - RESTRIPED EXIST. PARKING.SPACFiS ,.,,,.,.,65 NEW PARKING SPACES ..,,.,,,.,... .... ,,..,38 TOTAL PARKING SPACE~ 101 City Planning Commission Agenda Items ~or ~ee~lng oT uecemDer i~, ~ wage 1 5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-85-2 -Consideration of tentative subdivision map for C-Del Mar, Chula Vista Tract 85-2 - Mitchell N. Angus A. BACKGROUND 1. The applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map known as C-Del Mar, Chula Vista Tract 85-2 in order to subdivide 1.32 acres of property located at the northwest corner of "C" Street and North Del Mar Avenue in the R-1 zone into 8 single-family lots, 6 of which will have 58 feet of lot frontage {the Code requires 60 feet). 2. An Initial Study, IS-85-18, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on December 7, 1984. The Environmental Review Coordinator 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 impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-85-18. 2. Based on the findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the tentative subdivision map for C-Del Mar, Chula Vista Tract 85-2, subject to the following conditions: a. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of street improvements as shown on the Tentative Map for "C" Street and Del Mar Avenue. Said improvements shall include, but not be limited to: A.C. pavement, monolithic curb, gutter, and sidewalk, street lights, and street signs (4 "No Parking At Any Time" signs). b. The developer shall be responsible for the extension of sewer lines in "C" Street easterly to Del Mar Avenue and Del Mar Avenue northerly to the centerline of Shirley Lane, in accordance with City standards. c. The developer shall dedicate to the City of Chula Vista adequate land at the southeast corner of Lot #8 to accommodate a 20-foot radius property line return. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 2 d. The developer shall be responsible for building a transition for at least 50 feet north of the proposed monolithic curb, gutter, and sidewalk on Del Mar Avenue. Said transition shall include, but not be limited to A.C. pavement, base, and A.C. berm in accordance with Regional Standard Drawing G-5. C. DISCUSSION 1. Adjacent zoning and land use. North R-V-15 (Co.) Vacant South R-1 Vacant and South Bay Pioneers East R-V-15 (Co.) Single family dwellings West R-3-G-D 60 unit apartment 2. Existing site characteristics. The subject property has 442 feet of frontage along the north si de of "C" Street and 123 feet along the west side of North Del Mar Avenue. The site is developed with a single family dwelling which is located on the easterly portion of the property. Topographically, the property is a narrow knoll which projects to the west and ranges in elevation from 83 feet (east end) to 60 feet {west end). The right-of-way width of "C" Street in front of the subject property is 70 feet and is unimproved except for an asphalt paving strip. North Del Mar Avenue has a 60 foot right-of-way and is also unimproved except for a paving strip. North Del Mar Avenue has a street grade of approximately ll% toward "C" Street which has an approximate 2% downgrade to the west. The closest sewer is located in "C" Street and stops at the westerly end of the property. 3. Tentative map. The developer proposes to subdivide the property into 8 single family lots, 6 of which will front on "C" Street with the other 2 lots fronting on North Del Mar Avenue. The five lots in the center of the development will have 58 feet of street frontage. The Code requires a 60 foot lot width in the R-1 zone which can be reduced subject to Planning Commission and City Council approval. The two lots on North Del Mar Avenue are less than 7000 sq. ft., containing 6000 sq. ft. {lot 7) and 5353 sq. ft. (lot 8). The developer will be requesting that the northerly 7 feet of "C" Street be vacated, leaving a right-of-way width of 63 feet. If approved, lot 8 will have a lot area of 6000 sq. ft. The two lots below 7000 sq. ft. are allowed by Code. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 3 The property will be graded to create level pad areas for each lot. Approximately 14,000 cu. yds. will have to be exported. Even so, each pad will be higher than the adjoining street except for lot 7 which is approximately at the same level as North Del Mar Avenue. D. ANALYSIS The proposed subdivision is a relatively traditional design which meets the requirements of the Municipal Code except for (1) lot widths of 58 feet and (2) lot 8 which is currently proposed at less than 6000 sq. ft. The lots with 58 feet of street frontage have an area of 7134 sq. ft. and 7540 sq. ft. if the street vacation is approved. The proposed lot widths are adequate to allow development. As indicated earlier, lot 8 will contain 6000 sq. ft. with the street vacation. The street vacation is justifiable since "C" Street will still have a right-of-way 63 feet, more than the 56 feet normally required for such streets. The subdivision shows certain driveway widths, locations and grades. It should be noted that these driveway locations and configurations are not being approved at this time. E. FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the tentative subdivision map for C-Del Mar, Chula Vista Tract 85-2, is found to be in conformance with the various elements of the City's General Plan based on the following: 1. The site is physically suitable for the residential development and the proposal conforms to all standards established by the City for such projects. 2. The design of the subdivision will not affect the existing improvements -- streets, sewers, etc. -- which have been designed to avoid any serious problems. 3. The project is in substantial conformance with the Chula Vista General Plan Elements as follows: a. Land Use The proposed development is in keeping with the residential classification of the General Plan. b. Circulation The development will install the street improvements adjacent to the property. No streets are proposed through the development. c. Housing The project will provide additional single family housing opportunity for the residents of the community. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 4 d. Conservation - The property is devoid of any endangered plant or animal species. e. Park and Recreation, Open Space - The developer is required to pay Park, Acquisition and Development (PAD) fees of $300.00 per lot, a total of $2400.00. f. Seismic Safety - There are no known earthquake faults transversing the property. g. Safety The site is within the response time of the Fire Station located on "F" Street. h. Noise - The dwellings must meet the U.B.C. regulations. i. Scenic Highway - The site is not adjacent to a designated scenic route. j. Bicycle Routes - The street sections will accommodate bicycle traffic. k. Public Buildings - No public buildings are proposed on the property. 4. Pursuant to Section 66412.2 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Commission certifies that it has considered the effect of this approval on the housing needs of the region and has balanced those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City and the available fiscal and environmental resources. WPC 1527P/OO14Z CITY STATE HWY. 5 4 I'L __OUSDALE DRIVE MF I , of Chula Vista · ' ~SF I I SF I SF I .... J e Home VAC Park - -- Soutbay SF! SF;SCS¢, SF L__. ' Pioneers : STREET , ,,,, , , [_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' - ~ ~ i · ~~' ~-, ~ N.W. Car of C street 8 Del Mar negative declaration PROJECT NAME: Angus/Del Mar Avenue Subdivision PROJECT LOCATION: Northwest corner of "C" Street and Del Mar Avenue PROJECT APPLICANT: Mitchell N. Angus, 3953 Bandini St., San Diego, CA 92103 CASE NO: IS-85-18 DATE: December 7, 1984 A. Project Settin9 The project site consists of a 1.32 acre lot containing one single-family dwelling. The lot presently slopes down from east to west approximately 25 feet in elevation and is situated above the elevation of adjacent "C" Street. There are no ~nown earthquake faults that would affect the property nor are there any endangered plant or animal species located in the project vicinity. Adjacent land uses consist of a single-family dwelling to the north, a single-family dwelling to the east across Del Mar Avenue, an alcoholic rehabilitation use across "C" Street to the south and multiple family dwellings to the west. B. Project Description The project consists of the subdivision of 1.32 acres into eight single-family lots, the largest of which will be 7,134 sq. ft. and the smallest of which will be 5,354 sq. ft. A total of 3,600 sq. ft. of earth will be exported from the site to prepare building sites. A 7-ft. wide strip of street right-of-way is requested to vacated along the north side of "C" Street. C. Compatibilit~with Zonin9 and Pl,ans The proposed subdivision conforms with the R-1 zone and the "medium density" designation of the City of Chula Vista General Plan. D. Identification of Environmental Effects 1. Soils Expansive soils may be present on the project site and manufactured slopes will require erosion control landscaping. A soils report will be required in conjunction with grading plans and building pemits as a standard engi neeri ng requi rement. 2. School s The local elementary (Rosebank) and junior high (Chula Vista) schools are currently operating above capacity levels. The developer will be required to pay fees to the appropriate school districts to assure that adequate classroom space will be available for students generated by this project. ~ city of chula vista planning department environmental review section 3. Parks and Recreation Facilities ~ To provide adequate park facilities for residents of this subdivision, the developer will be required to pay park acquisition and development fees in-lieu of land dedication prior to recordation of the final subdivision map. E. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. The project will not degrade the quality of the environment and standard, engineering requirements will mitigate any adverse environmental impacts. 2. The project will not achieve short term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long term goals.- 3. The proposed subdivision will not have significant cumulative impacts that will result in adverse environmental impacts. 4. The proposed subdivision involves grading which will have temporary noise and dust impacts but with adherance to standard development requirements, significant impacts to human beings will not result. G. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations: City of Chula Vista Steve Griffin, Associate Planner Duane Bazzel, Assistant Planner Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer Ted Monsell, Fire Marshal Tom Dyke, Building Dept. Roger Daoust, Sr. Civil Engineer 2. Documents: Chula Vista General Plan The Initial Study application and evaluation forms documenting the findings of no significant impact are on file and available for public review at the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010. WPC 1536P EN 6 (Rev. 12/82) city of chula vista planning department environmental review section EN 6 (F)ev. 12/82) City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 1 6. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-85-1 - Consideration of an amendment to the Rice Can,/on Sectional Planning Area Plan - Financial Scene, Inc. A. BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting an amendment to the Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan of the E1 Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan. The amendment consists of the following revisions: l) the redesignation of 3.0 acres of "commercial/recreation" to "retail commercial"; 2) the density transfer of 36 units from the north side of East "H" Street to the south side; 3) a reduction of required low and moderate income housing units from 232 to 153; 4) a revision of the construction phasing schedule; and, 5) authorization to construct two-story homes on two corner lots. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR-79-8) for the Rice Canyon SPA was certified in February 1979. There are currently several proposed modifications to the plan and staff has evaluated these changes, of which this is a part, and determined that there will be no new significant impacts resulting from these changes which were not considered in the EIR. The analysis of the previously prepared EIR is in the addendum attached to EIR-79-8. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Certify that EIR-79-8 and the addendum have been prepared in accordance with CEQA, the State EIR guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista and that the information contained in the EIR was considered in reviewing the project. 2. Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the proposed revisions to the Rice Canyon SPA Plan subject to the following condition: a. The two-story homes on the corner lots shall be subject to site plan and architectural approval by the Director of Planning. C. DISCUSSION (See attached letter) Redesi~nation of commercial In March 1984, the City Council considered a request for a senior housing project (150 units) on the south side of East "H" Street which involved the shift of 3+ acres of "commercial/recreation" land opposite Ridgeback Road to the area immediately adjacent to the "retail commercial" area. The senior City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 2 project was not approved; however, the shift was granted by Council who requested that the developer determine if said area could be better utilized if made a part of the commercial development. Since then, the developer has revised the development proposal to include this property and is now requesting that the area be redesignated to "retail commercial." The development proposal known as Terra Nova Plaza is a later agenda item. Density transfer In April 1984, the City Council approved a revised development plan for the Windjammer project located at the northwest corner of East "H" Street and Hidden Vista Drive. The revised plan contained lO0 units, whereas, the original plan contained 102 units. The reduction in units was due to a change in the development concept from a series of multi-unit {4, 6 and 8 units) structures to the utilization of more duplexes. This development concept is also being contemplated for the area lying between Hidden Vista Drive and Ridgeback Road on the north side of East "H" Street. No specific development plans have been submitted at this time; however, it is anticipated that the revised plan will be reduced from 394 units to a maximum of 360 units or 34 units less. The revised plan will require an amendment to the SPA Plan. The applicant is requesting that the 36 units {2 + 34 : 36) originally proposed on the north side of East "H" Street be transferred to the south side. The 36 units would be located within a project known as Beacon Cove located on 12.33 acres. The project would be increased from 140 units to 176 units or from 11.35 DU's/acre to 14.27 DU's/acre. {Note: The E1 Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan allows up to 18 DU's/acre.) The Beacon Cove development is also scheduled for consideration as a later agenda item. Reduction in low and moderate units In 1980 the Rice Canyon SPA was approved with an increase in density from 839 to approximately 1200 units. The increase was due in part to the expansion of residential land use into an area originally designated for open space {south side of East "H" Street) and the commercial land. In addition, the increase was partially based on a commitment on the part of the developer to provide 232 low and moderate income units under the Section 8 housing program. The 232 units represented 19.$% of the total number of proposed units. That program is no longer in existence. The General Plan Housing Element establishes that developments containing 50 units or more must explore methods of providing a minimum of 10% of the units for low and moderate housing. The applicant is requesting that the number of required low and moderate income units be reduced to 153 units or to 12.9% of the total number of units. The 153 units will be provided in three projects, of which 81 units will be low-income rental units with the remaining 72 units to be in the moderate for sale price range. Community Development is in concurrence with the revised commitment. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 3 Revision of construction phasing schedule The Construction Phasing Schedule was adopted together with the approval of the Rice Canyon SPA and was an attempt to anticipate development to which certain improvements would be required. Because of market demand, certain projects such as the single family areas have moved much more rapidly than originally anticipated and others have been delayed. At this point in time, 552 units have either been constructed or are in the process of construction. Based on the original schedule, approximately lO00 units would have been either started or completed as of this date. The final units were to have been started in April of 1985. The developer is requesting that the schedule be revised extending the project until the fall of 1986. Two-storj/ homes on corner lots The developer is requesting permission to construct two two-story homes on two corner lots {lots 296 and 314) in the single family detached residential areas, citing the unusual shape and dimensions of these lots. The developer is prepared to design the homes so as to give the illusion of single story construction from the street. D. ANALYSIS Commercial redesi ~nati on At the request of the City Council, the developer has included the 3+ acres of commercial/recreation into the proposed plans of the commercial shopping center. Redesignating this acreage to retail commercial will enhance the layout, utility and economic viability of the commercial parcel. DensitJ/ transfer The provisions of the E1 Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan allows for the transfer of density from one area of the SPA to another. This provision is in recognition of the various kinds of development which could occur within each residential classification. In this instance, the developer has changed the development concept on the north side of East "H" Street from structures containing 4 to 8 units to a duplex and four-plex concept which is typically developed at less density. The transfer of density to the south side to accommodate a more conventional multiple family development design will not adversely affect that project. The development proposal for the multiple family project is a later agenda item which is being recommended for approval. Reduction in affordable housing The reduction in the number of low and moderate income units from 232 to 153 units will leave the development with nearly 13% of the total number of units within the Rice Canyon SPA devoted to low or moderate income housing. This percentage exceeds the minimum 10% percentage established by the General Plan and represents one of the few projects in recent years within the City City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 4 that has actually been able to produce either low or moderate income housing. It is, therefore, appropriate to recommend approval of the request. The fact that the units will be dispersed throughout the area and will be rental as well as for sale units is more desirable than the original proposal to concentrate these units in one area--on the south side of "H" Street. That proposed concentration of 232 low income units could have been more detrimental than beneficial. Revision to construction schedule One of the primary purposes of the schedule is to provide the City some assurance that the development will proceed in an orderly manner and that i~rovements be coordinated with the development. In this case, the street improvements have been completed ahead of schedule and development has been proceeding in an orderly fashion. The extension of the timetable into lg86 is in recognition of the fact that the development has changed hands and original development proposals have also changed. The staff has no objections to the change and recommends approval. Two-stoK7 construction The main purpose of limiting corner lots to single story construction is to provide for an open feeling into the street. The proposed sloping roof design and architectural treatment of the homes would meet this intent. This adjustment would affect only two lots within the development. The lots in question are odd shaped, thus the use of a two-story house will allow for less lot coverage and more open space. WPC 1546P ADDENDUM TO EIR-?9-8, HIDDEN VISTA VILLAGE (TERRA NOVA) 12-10-84 A. INTRODUCTION The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista and Section 15126 of the State CEQA Guidelines provide that when an EIR has been completed, no additional EIR need be prepared unless one of the following conditions exist: 1. Changes are proposed in the project which will involve new significant environmental impacts not considered in the previous EIR; 2. Substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which involve significant environmental impacts not considered in the previous EIR; or 3. New information which could identify significant environmental impacts or measures which could reduce the severity of significant environmental impacts have been identified and were not discussed in the previous EIR. Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines provides that an agency may prepare an addendum to an EIR when the above noted circumstances exist. This document is to describe the proposed project revisions and evaluate any potential impacts which could result and establishes the reasons that no significant impacts would result from the project revisions. This addendum does not have to be circulated for public review but must be considered by the decision-making authority along with the Final Environmental Impact Report prior to a decision being made on the project. B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The following is a summary of the proposed revisions to the Terra Nova Project in the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. (Additional specific information is provided in attachments to this addendum. They include: l) a statistical breakdown of the original Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area, the currently approved plan, and the proposed revisions, 2) a land use map indicating the changes in commercial acreage and number of various dwelling units and 3) a revised phasing schedule for the project.) 1. Redesignation of the commercial recreation land use on the south side of East "H" Street to retail commercial. The existing land use plan for the Rice Canyon SPA has approximately 3 acres of commercial recreation land use designated for the area south of East "H" Street between the retail commercial center and the higher density residential uses to the east. This proposal would change that designation to a retail commercial use so that the proposed retail shopping center could be expanded in this area. 2. Density transfer from the north side of "H" Street to the area on the south side ot ~H" Street. Ihe approved design tor the residential land use on the north side of "H" Street includes a series of condominiums contained in buildings with 4, 6, and 8 dwelling units with some standard flats over townhouse residential units. The project proponent is proposing to redesign this site at a lower density permitting dwelling units and structures of 2 and 4 dwelling units. This would result in the reduction of 36 dwelling units on the north side of East "H" Street that the applicant is proposing to transfer to the south side of East "H". 3. Reduction of the dwellin~ units for low and moderate income families from 232 to 153 units. The approved residential land use on the south side of East "H" includes the construction of 232 low/moderate income units under a Section 8 New Construction Program. This program is no longer funded by the Federal Government and, therefore, it is proposed that 81 low income households be provided on the south side of East "H" Street and 72 for-sale moderate income households be provided on the north side of East "H" Street in the condominium project area. 4. Construction Schedule. Because of the delays in construction of the condominium and multi-family areas due to revisions in the project and the reconfiguration of commercial land uses, the original development schedule is no longer viable. Therefore, the project applicant has provided a new construction phasing schedule which is shown in the attachment to this addendum. 5. Authorization to construct two-story houses on corner lots. The current regulations on this Sectional Planning Area include the prohibition of two-story dwelling units on corner lots in the single family area. The developer is requesting that in two instances {lots 296 and 314), two-story structures be allowed subject to design review by the Planning Department. C. PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS The Environnental Impact Report for this project includes an evaluation of 23 issues. Most of the mitigation for potential impacts have been implemented prior to construction, during construction, or are ongoing over the development of the project. There are, however, several issues which could be affected by the proposed revisions in the project. These include community social factors, air quality impacts, acoustical affects, and transportation and access. 1. Community Social Factors. A1 though there is proposed to be a substantial reduction in the provision of housing for low and moderate income families, the impacts relative to those identified in the Final EIR are not significant. At the time that the EIR was prepared, it was anticipated that between lO0 and 140 units would be available for low and moderate income housing {Section 3.14.3, page ll4). With the project now proposing to provide 153 units of low and moderate income housing, there is no substantial difference between the impacts identified in the EIR and those which would result due to project revisions. 2. Air Quality/Noise. As is noted later in this addendum, the increase in vehicle trips resulting from the proposed revision is not substantial and would not create any perceivable difference insofar as air quality impacts or acoustics. The traffic generated by the residential uses would be the same or slightly less than the existing approved plan. There would be a shift of dwelling units from a medium density area to a higher density area which could result in a slightly lower traffic generation factor per dwelling unit while maintaining the same number of total dwelling units. The con~nercial development would generate 3% more ADT {626 trips) than the approved project. This increase is not substantial enough to result in air quality or acoustical impacts. 3. Transportation/Access. The project proponent has submitted a traffic study to the City of Chula Vista which was prepared by Federhart and Associates (9/20/84) which was subsequently reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer and several questions and comments were made to the traffic consulting firm. Subsequently, on December 3, 1984, a letter responding to those questions was submitted. Both of those documents are attached to this addend~n. The previous traffic study was prepared for a project which included a 190,000 sq. ft. center including a variety of uses including retail, office, restaurants, banks, and a theater as well as an 8.5 acre auto sales park. The current proposal contains approximately 295,000 sq. ft. of floor area including retail, office, and restaurant-type uses. These subsequent documents have been evaluated by the City's Traffic Engineer and they substantiate the determination that the analysis in the Final EIR for Hidden Vista Village is adequate for this proposed project. This conclusion is reached subject to two assumptions. They are: (1) That the improvements {i.e., travel lanes, turning lanes, traffic signals, interchange/intersection geometrics, etc.) will be installed to accommodate the traffic as projected in these traffic studies. (2) The intersection of East "H" Street with Hidden Vista Village Drive and the main access drive to Terra Nova Plaza will function marginally with the improvements as stated in the traffic study. These improvements include signalization, the provision of dual left hand turn lanes, deceleration lanes for the major entrance to the shopping center, adequate for through traffic lanes, and generally adequate geometrics for the proposed street system and its intersections. D. CONCLUSION The evaluation of the proposed project revision, the approved Final Environmental Impact Report and the subsequent information submitted by the applicant and revie~d by City staff indicates that there will be no significant environmental impacts that will result from the project revisions which were not evaluated in the Final EIR for the Hidden Vista Village project (EIR-79-8). Therefore, it is recommended that the Planning Commission and City Council recertify EIR-79-8 along with this addendum prior to their consideration of the proposed project revisions. WPC 1538P City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 1 7.(a) PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-85-3; Consideration of an amendment to the Rice Canyon SPA providing for consideration of a 12+ acre residential development on lots 329 and 330 of Hidden Vista Village (Beacon Cove) - Financial Scenes, Inc. A. BACKGROUND This item involves a request to amend the approved Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area Plan of the E1 Rancho del Re¥ Specific Plan in order to approve the Precise Plan for Beacon Cove residential development. The proposed project is located on the south side of East "H" Street between the extension of Ridgeback Road and Kernel Place. Action on the Environmental Impact Report, EIR-79-8 and the addendum for the Hidden Vista Village development was covered as a preceding agenda item. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council adopt a resolution amending the Rice Canyon SPA to permit the development of a 177-unit multiple family project on lots 329 and 330 of Hidden Vista subject to the following conditions: a. A minimum of 34 units or approximately 20 percent of the 177 units shall be designated for low-income families subject to the approval of an agreement between the developer and City Council. (Note: 46 additional low income units were previously required on lots 331 and 332 located immediately to the west of the subject property.) b. Joint access agreements between lots 329 and 330, as well as a joint access and maintenance agreement between the adjacent lot 331 to the west shall be recorded in accordance with the approved site plans. c. Lots 329 and 330, approximately 12.3 acres shall be designated for residential land use at a maximum density of 177 units or approximately 14.4 units per acre. The development shall adhere to the City's R-3 zoning standards and the adopted Chula Vista Design Manual subject to the approval of the Design Review Committee. d. The designated roof material shall be changed to lightweight concrete. C. DISCUSSION Approve SPA Plan. In 1980, the City Council approved the Sectional Planning Area Plan for the Rice Canyon area of E1 Rancho del Rey ERDR Specific Plan, as well as the tentative subdivision map, Hidden Vista Village covering the entire 420 acres City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 2 designated as the Rice Canyon area. Under the provisions of the ERDR Specific Plan text, the City al so approved the residential development of areas designated for commercial and recreation purposes along the south side of East "H" Street with the exception of Lot 331 which was to be developed with recreational buildings, tennis courts, swimming pools, etc.. Lot 331 and the adjacent lot 332 were recently modified with a development plan approved for the construction of 232 residential apartment units. That project is under construction at this time. The plan for the subject property was orginally established for a 140-unit apartment/condominium project. However, the amendment preceding this item was seeking consideration to transfer density of 36 units from the north side of "H" Street to the subject property to allow for the construction of a 176-unit project. Under Specific Plan zoning, as originally established by the City of Chula Vista, the City Planning Commission and City Council serve as the design body for proposed projects. Since the Design Review Committee is now in place, the normal practice has been for the Planning Commission to review the item and to forward it on to the Design Review Committee for input and recommendation prior to consideration by the City Council. D. ANALYSIS Project Setting The project consists of approximately 12.3 acres of property w~th nearly 10 acres of usable area which will be used for the development with the remaining 2+ acre located in a major natural slope bank along the southerly boundary. The subject property has over 1,500 feet of frontage along East "H" Street and is aligned bet~een the e~tensio~ a~ ~id,3eback Road and ~erqel Place which will be a public road located immediately at the east end of the project. One additional access point will be provided along East "H" Street, however, left turns will be prohibited into the site at this point due to a median construction in "H" Street. Major access routes into the project will be at the west end coming from Ridgeback Road and the east end coming from Kernel Place. Project Description The project consists of a 177-unit apartment contained in 11 two-story buildings of 16 units each and one additional unit identified as the Manager's office located in the recreational building. The following is a breakdown of the proposed project; there will be two basic floor plans--Il6 two-bedroom units, totalling approximately 880 sq. ft.., and 60 one-bedroom units of 630 sq. ft.. each along with a one-bedroom manager's unit which is just over 600 sq. ft.. in area. The applicant is proposing some 297 parking spaces located parallel to "H" Street which will be located behind a berm slope bank which varies in width from 30 to 60 feet. There are a total of 56 compact parking spaces provided which represents about 15% of the total spaces provided, whereas the R-3 ordinance standards limit compact parking to 10 percent of the required parking. The applicant has sufficient room to modify his parking arrangement to provide a total of 257 standard spaces and 36 compact spaces City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 3 which would bring the project into compliance with the 10% compact allowance. The total number of spaces provided under this change would be 293 or 10 more than required by the Code. It should be noted that all resident and guest parking spaces will be provided on-site as parking will be prohibited along East "H" Street. A number of amenities have been provided within the project, namely each unit on the ground floor will have a fenced private open space area of approximately lO0 sq. ft.., whereas each second story unit will have a 60 sq. ft.. balcony area. In addition, lO0 cubic feet of storage has been provided for each unit. That will require modification to comply with condominium standards and will have to be enlarged so that 150 cubic feet of storage is provided for one-bedroom units and 200 cubic feet provided for two-bedroom units. The project features a large 1/2 acre open turf area towards the west end with approximately a 1/2 acre of open space near the center of the project devoted to a pool and recreation building with a tot lot located off the laundry area and an area immediately to the east of the pool area which is designated for volleyball and again is about 1/2 acre in size with further open turfed area and play areas of a smaller design located further to the east. It should be noted that the subject property is approximately the same area as the project under construction immediately to the west, wherein the density is approximately 25% less, thus a substantial increase in common open space is evident within this project. Architecture The architecture of the proposed buildings is a contemporary design featuring a combination of stucco and wood trim with a proposed asphalt shingle roof. Because of the visibility of this project and the fact that the development immediately to the west is also using asphalt shingles, the Planning staff is proposing that the roof material be modified featuring a lightweight concrete shake to provide a little different architectural feeling to this project. Approval of this project coupled with the multiple family development that is now under construction to the west will create a continuous multiple-family development pattern which will extend over 1/2 mile from the proposed commercial development located on the south side of "H" Street. E. CONCLUSION The proposed development is in compliance with the requested amendment to provide for the density shift from the north side of "H" Street to the south side and represents a similar design to the multiple-family development to the west which is already under construction. It is our conclusion that the overall density of the subject property being substantially less than the development to the west provides for more common open area. The landscape buffer area being provided adjacent to East "H" Street is wide enough to provide a good landscaping screen for the adjacent parking area. We have, therefere, recommended that you approve this project subject to further review and recommendations by the Design Review Committee in conjunction with the conditions set forth in this report. WPC 1541P City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page I 7.(b) PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-85-4; Consideration of an amendment to the Rice Canyon SPA providin~ for consideration of a 31 acre commercial shoppin~ center (Terra Nova) - Pacific Scene A. BACKGROUND The subject property (except for the easterly three acres) has been designated for commercial development with the approval of the Rice Canyon SPA in 1980. Development of the property was conditioned upon the approval of plans by the City Council. The addition of three acres of commercial property to the site is the subject of an earlier agenda item. The development proposal now encompasses 31 acres located on the south side of 'H' Street, directly east of 1-805. The Environmental Impact Report, EIR-79-8, and the Addendum, were considered for certification on an earlier item, therefore, no additional action is required. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the Terra Nova Plaza Shopping Center plan including the design standards for land use and signing,subject to the following conditions: 1. The minimum setback for all building and parking areas shall be 30 ft. 2. All trash areas shall be approved by the City's Planning Director with two specific building development plans to insure maximum architectural screening of the area. The trash facilities located adjacent to 'H' Street shall be relocated within the site. 3. The roof plan diagram shall be modified to reflect roof tile on all four edges of the freestanding pad buildings. 4. All exterior flooring and decorative hardscaping shall be included with the landscape plan for approval by the City's Landscape Architect. 5. Additional landscaping is suggested for the areas adjacent to 1-805, the north facing knoll located to the rear of Longs and Safeway, and within the CalTrans right-of-way. The applicant shall be required to contact CalTrans and submit a revised plan/program for approval by the City's Landscape Architect. 6. The 15 parking places shown penetrating the open space along 'H' Street (perpendicular to it) shall be removed. 7. A pedestrian pathway system shall be designated east of the main entry to link and tie together the various freestanding building pads, as approved by the Planning Director. Architectural design and landscape features shall likewise be utilized to integrate these disparate buildings into the overall site development. City Planning Commission A9enda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 2 8. All signs located at the rear of the center, facing towards 1-805, shall be deleted. 9. The "H" and "M" in Housemarts sign shall be a solid color in duplication of the other letters within the sign. 10. The three flags shall be limited to those shown on the approved sign program and shall be limited in size to the general proportions as depicted (4 ft. x 7 ft.). 11. Six parking spaces shown adjacent to the shops located between Longs and Safeway shall be eliminated and replaced with an acceptable combination of landscaping and hardscape, subject to the approval of the City's Landscape Architect. 12. The development standards shall be modified to: (a) Authorize the following land uses by conditional use permit only: (1) cocktail lounges and nightclubs (2) theaters (3) child care centers, preschool use and playground areas (4) automobile service stations (5) car washes (6) business and technical schools (b) Section VII (Off-Street Parking) shall reference the City's adopted parking standards. (c) Design and construction of the major entrance opposite Hidden Vista Drive to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Traffic Engineer. (d) Design and reconstruction of necessary curb, gutter and sidewalk on East 'H' Street in proximity to Hidden Vista Drive to provide for three thru lanes of traffic in each direction, bi~e lanes and double left turn lanes on each approach to Hidden Vista Drive and the major shopping center entrance. Design and construction shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer and City Traffic Engineer. (e) Traffic control easement at the major shopping center entrance opposite Hidden Vista Drive shall be dedicated to the City. C. DISCUSSION The approved Rice Canyon SPA Plan identified approximately 20 acres of commercial land on the south side of 'H' Street at this southeast quadrant of 1-805. The initial approval envisioned a 190,000 sq.ft, retail center, featuring shops, offices, restaurants, banks and a theater. Also included was a separate 8 1/2 acre auto sales park and a one acre parcel owned by CalTrans to be used for a park and ride facility. The arrangement of buildings was considered very schematic and no architectural package was ever considered. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 3 The proposal now pending before the Planning Commission is a requested development approval for 31 acres of commercial development, including nearly 300,000 sq.ft, of floor area, which includes: (a) a complete architectural program (b) a sign program (c) development standards including land use (d) a lighting program (e) a landscape program (f) a specific site plan, including grading D. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The 31 acre site abuts the 1-805 freeway to the west, multiple family housing (now under construction) to the east, 'H' Street to the north and a large city- owned open space, knoll and slope bank to the south. As mentioned previously, CalTrans retains a one acre parcel adjacent to 1-805. The site is planned for a park-n-ride lot in the future with access shown through the shopping center. The bulk of the center has been designed in a "U" shape, facing 'H' Street with the east end, which is nearly at grade with 'H' Street, anchored by an 80,000 home improvement ~uilding. As the center design proceeds westerly, various smaller shops are connected to a drug store and grocery store located at the deepest part of the center (over 600 ft. south of 'H' Street). Additional smaller shops provide the linkage to the west end of the center which is anchored by a 27,000 sq.ft. department store. Nearly 1500 parking spaces are proposed to accommodate the retail center. A total of eight freestanding pads are planned closer to 'H' Street. The largest of the pads is included in the initial architectural package and is designed to accommodate nearly 12,000 sq.ft, of shop area. The remaining pads are -being set aside for potential users such as fast food, service station, banks and restaurants. Five of the eight are shown to accommodate a drive-thru operation. All major loading and limited employee parking will be accomplished to the rear of the center, although trucks exiting the center to the west will be required to traverse the front parking area so as to execute a left turn onto 'H' Street at the intersection of Hidden Vista Drive. Although four points of.access are being proposed into the center, three of the four driveways will provide for right turns only, either in or out, due to a median constructed in 'H' Street. E. PROJECT FEATURES/ISSUES 1. Site Plan Although the main buildings are set back 85 ft. to over 600 ft. from the front property line along 'H' Street, portions of the freestanding buildings or parking areas come within 10-15 ft. of the property line. Grade differences and landscaping will tend to minimize these encroachments. However, a minimum setback of 30 ft. for all buildings and canopys and parking areas would be more appropriate for a center of this size and design. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 4 The other major site plan issue involves the proposed eight freestanding pad areas located at the forefront of the center. While there is no "right" number of acceptable freestanding buildings to be located within a center of this size, having eight separate freestanding pads, unrelated to each other, tends to clutter the area of an otherwise very attractive retail shopping complex. The separate pad areas are generally placed near the public street and in the more remote or underutilized area of a parking lot. The number of freestanding pads, coupled with the proposed drive-thru activity and lack of any building clustering or pedestrian/ landscaping connection between any of these buildings, causes the center to lose its cohesiveness in design. The applicant is contending that the general building alignment of the pads provides individual view corridors from 'H' Street to the major tenants. In addition, they have pointed out that the lower grade elevation of the pads as they relate to 'H' Street will allow motorists on 'H' Street to look over portions of the freestanding buildings into the main center. Several individual trash areas are shown near 'H' Street, near the freestanding pad buildings. These trash areas should be removed along with the "head in" parking spaces shown intruding into the landscape area and a pedestrian walkway plus architecture and design controls enforced to insure continuity of appearance and a tie of the uses. 2. Architecture The bulk of the center (all but seven of the freestanding pad areas), constituting nearly 260,000 sq.ft, of the proposed 295,000 sq.ft, floor space, is included in the initial architectural package. The applicant has included pad building design criteria to guide architectural design of the pad areas. The primary purpose of establishing the design criteria is to insure a uniform architectural character throughout the center. In addition, a separate roof plan has been filed to identify ~the location of the red clay barrel tile which is one of the main architectural elements of this center. That plan will need to be modified to reflect the required use of tile on the not yet designed pad buildings to complete the archi- tectural consistancy within the center. The proposed architecture is characteristic of Spanish colonial style which features a red clay barrel tile, hip and gable roofs, stucco arches-over a partially covered pedestrian walk, with accent colors used on the window muntins and door areas. Stucco building colors will vary slightly to provide identification and variety to the different businesses. A combination of exterior floor coverings, featuring decorative designs in concert with landscaping, will be part of the basic building package. An octagon clock tower approximately 48 ft. in height will be a very architectural feature anchoring the small shops located between the building supply center and the drug store. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 5 3. Signs The project proposes very specific sign criteria for development including provision for removal of any non-authorized signs at the owners expense. The sign criteria is as follows: (a) Major tenants (1) Housemart has a 100 sq.ft.+ channel letter sign on the west facing elevation and an 80 sq.ft, sign facing north towards 'H' Street. (2) Safeway, which is located approximately 600 ft. south of 'H' Street, has 4 ft. high channel letters with sign area of approximately 200 sq.ft. They propose a similar "S" and food sign on the rear facing parapet which would be visible to 1-805, located approximately 400 ft. to the southwest. (3) Longs is proposing a sign program similar to Safeway, using a 4 ft. high letter and 160 sq.ft, sign. Longs is in approximately the same location as Safeway and are also proposing a sign on the rear facing parapet (approximately 160 sq.ft, in area). (4) Marshalls, which will anchor the west end of the center, will have two 80 sq.ft, channel letter signs, one on the front facing east towards the center and the other on the west side facing the 1-805 off-ramp at 'H' Street. The rear of Marshalls is located approximately 200 ft. east of the off-ramp. 'These major tenant signs are well done and raise just two issues with staff. (1) The "H" and "M" in Housemart are designated to be red and white striped, taking on the appearance of barber pole or candy cane effect. In staff's opinion, use of this "trademark" detracts from the overall quality the center is trying to achieve. (2) The wall mounted signs facing the freeway also detract from the overall quality of the center. The proposed architecture, landscaping and flag area planned to the rear, will clearly identify this as a shopping area. The center is designed as a community shopping area, serving the expanding residential area to the east. Retail stores such as Safeway and Longs are not freeway demand oriented stores; signing as proposed would likely trigger other freeway oriented sign requests in the future. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 6 (b) Other shops and miscellaneous The sign criteria varies for the smaller shops. 14" letter size is allowed with sign lengths varying from 10 ft. to 18 ft. depending on shop frontage. 20" letter size is allowed for shops with over 50 ft. of frontage. In addition, 4 sq.ft, size carved or sandblasted pedestrian oriented canopy type signs are allowed. Special areas such as the clock tower and the gabled entry areas are designed for neon tubing over paint. Window signs are limited to I sq.ft. (c) Pads Pad buildings will be allowed 20" high letters with the maximum sign area limited to I sq.ft, lineal foot of 'H' Street building frontage (maximum of 22 sq.ft, for any sign). In addition, one 4 ft. x 6 ft. stucco monument sign will be allowed for each building. The signs will be located on primary east-west access drive serving the pads. (d) Pylon entry A 17 ft. high, 15 ft. wide pylon entry structure constructed of stucco and wrought iron will provide the center identification at the 'H' Street and Hidden Vista Drive entry. Besides identify the Terra Nova Plaza center, four signs of approximately 11 sq.ft, each will identify each of the major tenants. No other signing will be allowed along 'H' Street. (e) Flags Three flag poles measuring 48-56 ft. in height are proposed to be located near the southwest property line abutting the 1-805 freeway. The design proposal includes the American flag, the Mexican flag and a flag identifying Terra Nova Plaza. 4. Landscaping The applicant is proposing a 30-45 ft. wide landscaping area adjacent to 'H' Street with additional tree planting in the parking area and integrated with the building sidewalk area. Heavy perimeter planting has also been included. However, additional coordination of planting is needed with CalTrans for the areas adjacent to 1-805 as well as supplemental tree plantings near the west end of Marshalls parking/loading area. Stamped concrete is indicated as an accent feature at specific entry drives. The use and design of a decorative hardscape material needs further detailed study to arrive at an acceptance design. The primary entry from 'H' Street will lead the shopper on a tree lined drive towards Longs and Safeway which are separated City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of December 19, 1984 Page 7 by several small shops. The area directly in front of the shops is punctuated by landscaping and hardscape. However, six parking stalls are also located in that immediate area. The staff has concluded that this major entry focal point should not be interrupted with parking and strongly urge its deletion in favor of additional landscaping. The actual landscaping materials pallet for the entire plan will require approval by the City's Landscape Architect. 5. Lighting Two types of light standards are proposed: (1) 10 ft. cast iron mercury vapor will be used as a decorative lighting adjacent to the main store fronts and the entry ways. (2) A 25 ft. standard aluminum pole low pressure sodium lamp will be used to light the main parking lot and the rear loading areas. 6. Development Standards The developer has submitted a package of development standards which covers the list of permitted uses, as well as height regulations, lot coverages, storage, landscaping, signing and parking. The standards are similar to the City's C-C zone (Central Commercial) shopping standards with the exceptions that several permitted uses, identified in the proposed standards as service stations, car washes, child care centers, technical schools, are either not provided for in the City's standard C-C zone or they are allowed by conditional use permit. The Planning Department recommends that the following uses be authorized only by approval of conditional use permits: (a) cocktail lounges and nightclubs (b) child care centers, preschool use and playgrounds (c) automobile service stations (d) theaters (e) car washes (f) business or technical schools In addition, Section VII covering off-street parking s~uld reference the adopted City standards for parking in the Zoning Ordinance. F. CONCLUSION The overall architectural quality of the center including sign criteria is well conceived and represents one of the most thorough design approaches presented to the City. Specific issues need additional study by the City's Engineer, Landscape Architect and the City's Design Review Committee. We are prepared to recommend approval subject to the conditions listed and the further reviews identified.