HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1987/05/27 AGENDA
City Planning Commission
Chula Vista, California
Wednesday, May 27, 1987 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. Request for reconsideration of a tentative subdivision map for Bel Air
Ridge, Chula Vista Tract 87-7
2. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-87-7: Reconsideration of a tentative subdivision
map for Bel Air Ridge, Chula Vista Tract 87-7 located
at the northeast quadrant of East 'J' Street and Paseo
Ladera - Louis S. Cohen & Associates
3. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) GPA-86-6: Consideration of a General Plan Amendment
from Medium Density Residential (4-12 du/ac ) to Retail
Commercial for 4.3 acres located at the southeast corner
of Otay Lakes Road and East 'H' Street - Kelton Title
Corporation
(b) PCZ-86-E: Consideration to rezone 4.3 acres located
at the southeast corner of Otay Lakes Road and East 'H'
Street from R-1 to C-C-P Kelton Title Corporation
4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-87-17: Consideration of an appeal of the Planning
Director decision conditionally revoking the home occupation
permit at 467 Second Avenue - Carl R. Davidson (Continued)
5. Consideration of Final EIR-87-3 Rancho del Sur
AGENDA -2- May 27, 1987
6. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) PCZ-87-I: Consideration to rezone 108.3 acres from
R-l-P-4 to R-l-P-6 and R-3-P-12 in Rancho del Sur Phase 1
Great American Development Company
(b) PCS-87-8: Consideration of a tentative subdivision
map for Rancho del Sur Phase 1, Chula Vista Tract 87-8,
located one-half mile eat of the 1-805 freeway on the
south side of Telegraph Canyon Road at the easterly terminus
of East Naples Street - Great American Development Company
(c) P-87-9: Consideration of adopting plans and standards
for the development and/or maintenance of lots and common
areas within the project - Rancho del Sur Phase I
7. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-87-M: Consideration to rezone 1.36 acres located at
the northeast corner of East 'H' Street and Corral Canyon
Road from R-1-H to P-C La Petite Academy, Inc.
8. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-87-N: Consideration to rezone 0.33 acres located on
the east side of North Second Avenue at the easterly
terminus of 'C' Street from A to R-1 - Wayne Clark
9. PUBLIC HEARING: DRC-87-24: Consideration of an appeal from a decision of
the Design Review Committee regarding the type and height
of fencing approved for the easterly property line of a
proposed 4-unit apartment project at 579 Casselman Street
Street in the R-3 zone Gloria J. Butler Hansen
10. OTHER BUSINESS: Resolution of the City of Chula Vista Planning Commission
adopting a statement of concern with respect to develop-
ment of Otay Mesa
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
COMMISSION COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT AT to the Regular Business Meeting of June 10, 1987 at
7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers
TO: City Planning Commission
FROM: George Krempl, Director of Planning
SUBJECT: Staff Report on Agenda Items for Planning Commission meeting of
May 27, 1987
1. Request for reconsideration of a tentative subdivision map for Bel Air
Ridge, Chula Vista Tract 87-7 - Louis L. Cohen & Assuc.
At the meeting of April 22, 1987, the Commission voted to recommend denial of
tentative subdivision map PCS-87-7 for Bel Air Ridge. Some of the concerns
expressed by the Commission were that lot sizes were too small and that exceptions
requested from R-1 development standards would result in overcrowding standard
sized homes on inadequate size lots. The applicant has submitted a replacement
map substantially revising the lot sizes and proposed development standards,
and is requesting a reconsideration of the project by the Commission, based
upon the changes made which increased proposed lot sizes and brought proposed
development standards more into conformance with R-1 standards.
James A. Hutchison & Assoc.
Civil Engineers
4400 Palm Ave., Suite "G" · La Mesa, CA 92041
(619) 6970445
April 30,1987
JN 601-03
120:60143087
Honorable Chairperson and Commissioners
Chula Vista City Planning Commission
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92012
SUBJECT: Chula Vista TM 87-7, Bel Air Ridge
A public hearing for Tentative Map 87-7, located at the northeast
corner of Paseo Ladera and J Street was held by you on April 22,
1987. During that hearing, your body made several comments which
have prompted a replacement map that:
· Eliminates the lot under 6,000 square feet
· Reduces excavation
Utilizes approved development standards
We therefore respectfully request that the Chula Vista City
Planning Commission rehear TM 87-7 at your meeting on May 27,
1987.
Very truly yours,
~Mm~es~z~ES A HUTCHIS~N & ASSOC
Hutchison
cc. Planning Director
~IAY 0 1 i~
PLANNING DEPARTUENT
(;HULA V)STA, CAUFORN)A
1
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 1
2. PUBLIC HEARING PCS-87-7 Consideration of tentative subdivision map
for Bel Air Ridge Chula Vista Tract 87-7 Louis S.
Cohen and Associates
A. BACKGROUND
1. The applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map known as Bel
Air Ridge, Chula Vista Tract 87-7 in order to subdivide a 12.2 acre parcel of
land into 46 lots to be developed for single family dwellings, with one open
space lot; the project site is located north of East J Street adjacent to the
eastern boundary of E1 Rancho Del Rey Unit 6D. The area is designated on the
E1 Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan for a density of 2-4 d/u per acre. Thus the
subdivision is in compliance with the plan.
2. An Initial Study, IS-87-33, of possible adverse environmental impacts
of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on
March 30, 1987. The Environmental Review Coordinator concluded that there
would be no significant environmental effects and recommended adoption of the
Negative Declaration.
3. This project was heard at the meeting of April 22, 1987. At that
time, the Commission voted to recommend denial of the tentative map, stating
concerns that lot sizes were too small and that exceptions requested from R-1
development standards would result in overcrowding standard size homes on
inadequate sized lots. It was felt that the resultant street scene would
become stifling and monotonous. The applicant, in response to these concerns
has revised the map and development standards, and has requested that the
Commission grant a reconsideration of the project based upon substantial
changes which have increased the proposed lot sizes and brought the proposed
development standards more into conformance with R-1 standards.
B. RECO)~ENDATION
1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts
and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-87-33.
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 Bel Air Ridge, Chula Vista Tract 87-7, subject to
the following conditions:
a. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of full
public improvements for all streets shown on the Tentative Map
within the Subdivision. Said improvements shall include but not
be limited to: pavement and base, curb, gutter, sidewalk, sewer
and water facilities, drainage facilities, street trees, street
lights and signs. Said improvements shall be guaranteed prior
to approval of the Final Subdivision Map.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 2
b. All streets shall conform to the requirements contained in the
Chula Vista Subdivision Manual.
c. East "J" Street shall be designed for 35 mph. The minimum
distance between intersections shall be 250 feet, measured from
centerline to centerline.
d. Developer shall submit a preliminary alignment (horizontal and
vertical) for East "J" Street from the southerly subdivision
boundary to the existing improvements to the southeasterly.
Said alignment shall include existing topography to demonstrate
that the road can reasonably be constructed.
e. Specific methods of handling offsite storm drainage shall be
subject to detailed review by the City Engineer prior to
approval of grading or improvement plans. Design shall be
accomplished on the basis of the requirements of the Subdivision
Manual.
f. Graded access shall be provided to all drainage structures,
including outlets. This requirement may be waived if the City
Engineer determines that the outlet to storm drains can be
adequately maintained by an open space maintenance district.
Paved access shall be provided to drainage structures located in
the rear yards of lots.
g. The drain pipe shown along the rear of lots 1 through 5 shall be
eliminated. If this is not possible, paved access shall be
provided and gates constructed in all fences to provide access
to drainage structures.
h. Developer shall obtain and grant to the City any offsite
easements for drainage or street purposes prior to approval of
the Final Map.
i. A drainage swale shall be provided to the toe of slope southerly
of lots 35, 43, 44, 45, 46, and 47.
j. Developer shall enter into a development agreement to
participate in a Facilities Benefit district for the
construction of offsite improvements impacted by the subject
project.
k. Developer shall pay Casa del Rey Reimbursement charges in
accordance with Resolution 10349.
1. The subject property is wi thin the boundaries of the proposed
Assessment District 87-1 (East "H" Street Assessment District).
The developer shall agree to not protest formation of the
Assessment District 87-1 and to not protest inclusion of the
subject property in said District.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 3
m. Open Space Lot A shall be dedicated to the City in fee title as
open space. The developer shall request the inclusion of open
space lot A in the formation of open space district 13 prior to
the recordation of the final map.
n. The subdivider shall be required to pay Park Acquisition and
Development in lieu fees prior to recordation of the Final Map.
RCT fees will be required prior to issuance of building permits.
p. The development standards submitted by the applicant shall be
recorded and will constitute the basic regulations to be
utilized in applying the PC zone to the subdivision and in
construction within the subdivision.
o. A bench shall be provided in the manufactured slope at the rear
of lots 12-13 and 15-20, adjacent to open space lot A. The
bench shall have a minimum width of 7 feet, and shall contain a
drainage interceptor designed in conformance with the 1986 City
of Chula Vista Design Standards. The drainage interceptor shall
be included in open space lot A and shall be maintained within
that open space maintenance district.
q. The subdivider shall install public fire hydrants at three
locations within the proposed subdivision. The exact location
and type of hydrant will be determined by the City Fire Marshal.
r. Copies of the CC&R's shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for review and approval prior to recommendation of
the Final Map.
The following are not conditions of approval but will be required
under the authority of the Chula Vista Municipal Code:
a. The development shall pay Traffic Signal Participation fees in
accordance with City Council policy prior to issuance of
building permits.
b. The developer shall pay school fees in the amount of $1.50 per
square foot of residential construction to the school districts
prior to obtaining building permits for the project.
c. The developer shall pay all applicable sewer fees, including but
not limited to Sewer Participation Fee, prior to issuance of
building permits.
d. The developer shall underground all existing overhead facilities
lying within the Subdivision. All utilities serving the
Subdivision shall be undergrounded.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 4
e. All grading work shall be done in accordance with the City of
Chula Vista Landscape Manual and Grading Ordinance 1797 as
amended.
f. The developer shall install street trees in accordance with
Section 18.28.10 of Chula Vista Municipal Code.
g. The developer shall comply with all applicable sections of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code. Preparation of Final Maps and all
plans shall be in accordance with the provision of the
Subdivision Map Act, Subdivision Ordinance and the Subdivision
Manual of the City of Chula Vista.
C. DISCUSSION
Adjacent zoning and land use.
North - PC utility easement, dedicated open space
South - PC - single family residential
East - PC - vacant, (single family residential and open space
proposed)
West - PC - single family residential, open space
Existing site characteristics.
The subject property is a 12.2 acre vacant parcel surrounded on the east,
south and west by E1 Rancho Del Rey Unit #6, and E1 Rancho Del Rey SPA.
Property to the north constitutes a utility easement and dedicated open
space. The open space to the north is a part of the south leg of Rice
Canyon.
The site is located along a ridge adjacent to an open space canyon and a
portion of a second north-south ridge. Ridgetop elevations are about 460
feet with the canyon bottom elevation on the northern border of the site
at 340 feet. The steeper canyon slopes onsite are approximately 30
percent.
Present access to the site is through the terminus of Paseo Ladera.
Proposed development.
The project consists of the subdivision of 12.2 acres of land into 46
residential lots and a dedicated open space lot consisting of 1.07 acres.
The subdivider proposes to construct single family detached homes for a
gross density of 3.77 du/ac. It is anticipated that the homes would range
between 1,300-1,800 square feet. However, detailed plans outlining the
characteristics of the product type have not been submitted to date.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 5
Grading of the property would involve 320,000 cubic yards of balanced cut
and fill. This would result in a maximum cut of 25 feet and a maximum
fill of 40 feet. Approximately 18 acres would be graded, some off$ite.
Approximately 18% of the total excavation is necessary to extend East "J"
Street and would be required regardless of the design of the proposed
subdivision.
The proposed road network for the subdivision consists of two residential
through streets which would be extensions of the proposed street network
outlined in the E1 Rancho Del Rey SPA {referred to as "A" and "D"). "D"
Street is proposed to be installed as a half street pending construction
of this portion of E1 Rancho Del Rey. Two cul-de-sacs access from "A" and
"D", one on each street, and would serve lots 7-13 and 36-47. East "J"
Street is proposed to be extended along the southwest property boundary.
Proposed street names are to be determined in conjunction wi th the
developers of E1 Rancho Del Rey and are being evaluated by the Planning
Department.
The proposed tentative subdivision at 3.77 du/ac is in conformance with
the General Plan. The project area is not within the E1 Rancho Del Rey
SPA, and has no specific plan of its own. However, the site design
conforms to development both existing and proposed within this portion of
E1 Rancho Del Rey, and development standards submitted substantially
conform to development standards for surrounding areas.
The development standards follow the general format for R-1 development,
with the following exceptions.
1. Since dedicated right-of-way for utilities along East "J" Street is
4.5 feet rather than 2.5 feet for properties surrounding the
subdivision, a 33 foot building setback from East "J" Street is
proposed rather than the standard 35 foot setback. Given the fact
that additional right-of-way is required for this subdivision, staff
has no objection to the 33 foot setback in that it constitutes no
visible difference between the two setbacks.
2. The standard side yard setback of l0 feet on one side and 13 feet for
both sides would be applied to this subdivision with the exception
that the developer is requesting a 5-foot setback on each side or 10
feet for both sides in the case where a 3-car garage was scheduled
for construction on the lot. The standard 10-foot separation
required between units would remain the same.
3. In standard R-1 developments up to 30% of lots created in a
subdivision may be less than 7,000 square feet, but may not be less
than 5,000 square feet. The proposed subdivision design has listed
all lots to be 7,000 square feet or larger. The average lot size for
the map is approximately 8,000 square feet.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 6
4. In a standard R-1 development at least 90% of all lots must have a
lot width of 60 feet or more, excepting cul-de-sacs. The remaining
10% must have at least a 50-foot lot width. The developer in this
case is requesting an exception to reduce the percentage of lots with
a 60 foot width from 90% to 70%. The remaining 30% would have a lot
width of at least 52 feet (excluding cul-de-sacs).
Tentative map.
The tentative map, as conditioned, conforms with the applicable City
zoning standards and the City's subdivision regulations. In addition,
revisions to the tentative map have increased the minimum lot size and
brought development standards more in line with traditional R-1
development regulations. Thus, it is appropriate to recommend approval.
D. FINDING
Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the tentative
subdivision map for Bel Air Ridge, Chula Vista Tract 87-7, 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 subdivision is in conformance with the E1 Rancho
Del Rey Specific Plan Area in effect over this region.
b. Circulation
The proposed street network is designed to conform to the
circulation network outlined in the E1 Rancho Del Rey Plan and
thus with the General Plan.
c. Housing
The proposed subdivision would serve to increase available
housing stock consistent with the area.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 7
d. Conservation
The proposed project will not substantially effect the south leg
of Rice Canyon, which runs along the northern boundary of the
project, and there are no significant natural or cultural
resources which are present which would impact the conservation
element of the General Plan.
e. Park and Recreation, Open Space
The subdivision provides dedication of substantial open space
and the developer is required to pay Park Acquisition and
Development fees in lieu of dedicating and improving parkland.
f. Seismic Safety
The proposed subdivision is located in the vicinity of the La
Nacion fault system. This fault system is considered only
potentially active and does not pose a substantial threat to the
project.
g. Safety
The site is within the response time of both police and fire
services.
h. Noise
The resulting single family units will be required to meet UBC
standards in terms of acceptable interior noise limits.
i. Scenic Highway
The site does not abut a scenic route or gateway.
j. Bicycle Routes
Adjoining streets have not been designated as bicycle routes.
However, "J" Street is designed for a 50' curb to curb width
which will accommodate bicycles together with on-street parking.
k. Public Buildings
No public buildings are planned for 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 3784P/2659P
negative declaration-
PROJECT NAHE: Bel Air Ridge
PROJECT LOCATZON: Northeast of the intersection of E. "J" Street and Paseo
Ladera
PROJECT APPLICANT: Louis S. Cohen & Assoc.
11835 Olympic Blvd., Suite 605
Los Angeles, CA 90064
CASE NO: [S-87-33 DATE: March 30, 1987
A. Project Setting
The subject property is natural open space with only a few dirt roads
traversing' the ridgelines. Portions of E1 Rancho del Rey were
historically brushed and grazed (Chambers Consultants and Planners 1983),
but there is no recent evidence of such disturbance onsite. New
single-family residential use is present on the west across Paseo Ladera
and to the south and southeast, albeit is -separated by undeveloped open
space. Land to the north is the steep natural open space of the south leg
of Rice Canyon.
The site occupies a north-south tending ridge, an adjacent canyon, and a
portion of a second north-south ridge. Ridgetop elevations are about 460
feet with the canyon bottom elevation on the northern border of the site
at 340 feet. The steeper canyon slopes onsite are about 30 percent.
Soil types onsite include Olivenhain cobbly loam (OhC) on the ridgetops
and Linne clay loam (LsF) on the lower slopes and canyon bottoms.
The project site is covered almost entirely by a singular vegetative
type-southern coastal sage scrub. This vegetative cover consists of low
scrub species with an admixtur~ of medium-sized shrubs found primarily in
the draws' and lower on the the north-facing slopes. Low scrub species
include California sagebrush, flattop buckwheat, common encelia, and white
sage. Medium-sized shrubs include laurel sumac, lemonadeberry, and toyon.
Elements of a phase of coastal sage scrub referred to as maritime desert
scrub is present, but is loosely distributed throughout the low scrub
onsite. This phase represents a northern extension of Baja California
flora into southwestern San Diego County. Species present onsite normally
associated with this phase include San Diego sunflower, jojoba, pygmy
spike-moss, and San Diego barrel cactus.
Southern California grassland is present in the general vicinity on heavy
soils or as patchy areas forming a mosaic throughout the low scrub cover.
This vegetative cover is present in two areas adjacent to the project
boundaries which may be affected by offsite grading.
city of chula vista planning department CI1YOF
environmental review section_CHULA VI Ai
-2-
The property is expected to support a representative contingent of
wildlife commonly associated with low scrub habitats in southwestern San
Diego County. The natural character of the site, the presence of water
from local urban areas in the adjacent canyon, dense protective cover on
and adjacent to the site, and extensive adjacent natural open space areas
all contribute to the maintenance of a viable wildlife population on the
property. A standard assortment of amphibians, reptiles, birds and
mammals are recorded in the area.
No plant species recorded for the property are listed as threatened or
endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 1983a) or the
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG 1985).
Two State-listed plant species potentially occur in the grasslands
adjacent to the site--San Diego thornmint and Otay tarplant. Both of
these species can only be accurately field checked in the spring. Both
species have been recently, recorded for E1 Rancho del Rey (MBA 1985,
Recon 1986).
No Federal or State-listed animal species were observed or are expected on
the subject property (USFWS 1983b; CDFG 1980).
A number of animal species are considering decl'ining, sensitive or of
local concern. These species are not presently officially listed by
wildlife agencies, but if they continue to decline they will become
candidates for official status review and listing consideration.
Sensitive habitats within the study area include grasslands and coastal
sage scrub. Grasslands are a declining vegetative and wildlife habitat
within the San Diego region. This is especially true for native
grasslands. Native grasslands onsite possess the potential to support the
high interest plan species. Grassland habitats would be expected to
support healthy populations of prey species which larger predators that
seek cover in adjacent habitats depend upon. Grassland habitats situated
within ~ mosaic of coastal sage scrub habitats such as is the case onsite
would be expected to increase the species diversity and carrying capacity
of the adjoining habitats.
Low scrub habitat is still fairly common in San Diego County but is
rapidly declining along the coastal plain. It has been suggested that on
the order of 70 percent of this habitat within the County has been lost or
modified by man (Oberbauer, 1979). The extent of maritime desert scrub is
naturally limited to the southwestern corner of the County and remains
only in the project area, and on limited areas of Rancho Otay, western
Otay Mesa, and a couple of isolated points along the coast. With the
advent of the Second Border Crossing and increasing growth in the local
area, this habitat is substantially threatened. Declining species
associated closely with and dependent on coastal low scrub habitat include
the cactus wren and black-tailed gnatcatcher and a number of declining
plan species.
-3-
The Museum of Natural History locality records do not document any known
fossil localities within the project site. However, during residential
development of E1 Rancho del Rey immediately to the west, a number of very
significant marine fossils were discovered and salvaged from sandstones of
the San Diego Formation. These fossils include marine vertebrates
(sharks, bony fishes, whales, dolphins, fur seals, walrus', sea cows) and
marine invertebrates (clams, scallops, snails, crabs) (Berta and Demere
1986, Demere 1986, Domning and Demere 1984). Because of the richness and
importance of the San Diego Formation fossil beds this formation is
considered to possess a very high paleontological resource potential.
The most significant geological feature in the project vicinity is the La
Nacion fault system. This fault system is considered only potentially
active and does not pose a substantial threat to the project. Expansive
soils may be present on the project site but this potential problem can be
mitigated by remedial grading.
Most of the elements of community infrastructure are present to serve the
project. Those which are not will be provided by the subdivision.
B. Project Description
The project consists of the subdivision of 12.2 acres of land into 47 lots
for single family detached homes, for a gross density of 3.85 DU/AC. It
is anticipated that the homes would range between 1,300-1,800 sq. ft. and
sell for $125,000-$149,000. Grading of the property would involve
$320,000 cubic yards of balanced cut and fill. This would result in a
maximum cut of 25 ft. and a maximum fill of 40 ft. About 18 acres would
be graded, some offsite.
Access to the subdivision would primarily be to Telegraph Canyon Road via
Paseo Ladera. Secondary access can be obtained via E. J Street through E1
Rancho del Rey, Unit #6 to the west.
Development of the site is contingent upon the exchange of property
between 'the subdivider and adjoining land owners.
C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans
The proposed project is compatible with the Planned Community Zoning of
the property and E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan for the property.
D. Identification of Environmental Effects
The entire property would be graded for a residential development.
Offsite grading will occur on all sides of the site. The incremental loss
of a few Ferocactus viridescens, and small populations of Selaginella
cinerascens and Viguiera laciniata are not considered significant adverse
effects. The incremental loss of coastal sage scrub and the reduction of
habitat for the coast horned lizards and orangethroated whiptail are
likewise not considered significant adverse effects. The loss of three
potential pairs of black-tailed gnatcatchers is considered an adverse
though nonsignificant effect.
-4-
All of these declining resources are not noteworthy onsite or in adjacent
areas affected by offsite grading. From a larger local perspective, these
resources have been recently detailed and analyzed as part of the
environmental review for the surrounding Rancho del Rey. The project does
not compromise or affect open space plans for the adjacent canyon as part
of the new Specific Plan for Rancho del Rey and onsite resources are
protected within the larger open space design of Rancho del Rey. Thus,
the cumulative effects of the loss of habitat and declining species onsite
is not considered significant.
Given the paleontological resource potential of the geological rock units
{formations) discussed above, it is suggested that development of the
project site will result in impacts to significant paleontological
resources (principally the fossiliferous deposits of the San Diego
Formation). These impacts will occur when mass grading operations cut
into the fossil-bearing layers in this formation.
Adverse impacts could result if development of the project were to occur
on expansive soils known to be present in the vicinity of the project.
E. Mitigation necessary to avoid significant effects
1. Biological Resources
Given that no significant adverse biological impacts were identified
for the project, no specific mitigation efforts are warranted. It is
reco~,~ended though, that the lower portions of the manufactured
slopes on the northern border of the development be landscaped with
native vegetation to enhance the canyon open space area and reduce
the overall biological effects of the project.
2. Paleontological Resources
Mitigation of the impacts discussed above can be insured by
implementing the following measures:
a. Prior to issuance of a mass-grading permit, the developer should
present a letter to the City of Chula Vista indicating that a
qualified paleontologist has been retained to carry out the
resource mitigation. IA qualified paleontologist is defined as
an individual with a MS and Phd in paleontology or geology who
is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques.)
b. A Qualified paleontologist should be at the pregrade meeting to
consult with the grading and excavation contractors.
c. A paleontological monitor should be onsite at all times during
the original cutting of previously undisturbed sediments of the
San Diego labove elevation 420 feet) formations to inspect cuts
for contained fossils. (The aerial distribution of this
-5-
formation is summarized on the geological map of Kuper 1977.)
Periodic inspections of cuts involving the Sweetwater Formation
(below elevation 420 feet) is also recommended. (A
paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has
experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials.
The paleontological monitor should work under the direction of a
qualified paleontologist.)
d. In the event that well-preserved fossils are discovered, the
paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) should be allowed to
temporarily direct, divert, or halt grading to allow recovery of
fossil remains in a timely manner. Because of the potential for
the recovering of small fossil remains such as isolated mammal
teeth, it may be necessary to set up a screen-washing operation
on the site.
e. Fossil remains collected during this salvage program should be
cleaned, sorted, and cataloged and then with the owner's
permission, deposited in a scientific institution with
paleontological collections such as the San Diego Natural
History Museum.
All other potentially significant impacts can be mitigated through
standard development regulations and requirements.
F. Findings of Insignificant Impact
1. There are no significant natural or cultural resources which are
present which require further mitigation to avoid significant
environmental impacts. Adequate public services are present to
support the project.
2. The project conforms to the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan and will
not substantially effect the "South Leg of Rice Canyon" which runs
along the northern boundary of the project. Because the project
co~forms to the long-term goals of the community, no short-term goals
will be achieved to the disadvantage of any long-term goals.
3. Cumulative impacts have been evaluated in the environmental documents
for E1 Rancho del Rey (see reference section). Impacts from this
project are so minimal as to avoid any substantial project related
impacts.
4. The project will not result in the emission of any pollutants or
hazards that could adversely impact human beings. Nor will the
project expose people to any substantial hazards.
G. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista: Mando Liuag, Associate Planner
Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer
Duane Bazzel, Associate Planner
Len Hansell, Building and Housing Department
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer
Applicant's Agent: James A. Hutchison & Assoc.
4400 Palm Avenue, Suite G
La Mesa, CA 92041
2. Documents
Beauchamp, R. Mitchel. 1986. A Flora of San Diego County,
California. Sweetwater River Press, National City. 241 pp.
Everett, W.T. 1979. Threatened, Declining and Sensitive Bird
Species in San Diego County. Audubon Society Sketches.
July 1979.
JHK and Associates. 1987. Rancho del Sur (Phgse I) Traffic Impact
Analysis.
Laudenslayer, William F., Jr. and William E. Grenfell, Jr., eds.
1983. A List of Amphibians, Reptiles, Birds and Mammals of
California. Outdoor California. January-February. 44(1):5-14.
Lawrence, Fogg, Florer, and Smith. 1964. A Special Study of Storm
Drainage Facilities, Supplement to the Chula Vista General Plan.
Michael Brandman Associates. 1985. A comparative evaluation of
Specific Plans for E1 Rancho del Rey with respect to sensitive
.biological resources, prepared for the Gersten Companies,
Chula Vista, California.
Oberbauer, T.A. 1979. Distribution and dynamics of San Diego County
grasslands. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, San Diego State
University, San Diego.
Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc. 1986. Report of a
Biological Survey of a 100 Acre Parcel on the South Side of
Telegraph Canyon Road at Medical Center Drive.
Recon. 1986. Biological impact analysis and mitigation plan for the
SPA-1 Development Unit of the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan,
prepared for McMillin Development company, National City,
California.
SANDAG. 1985. Final Series Regional Growth Forecast, 1980-2000.
San Diego County Department of Sanitation and Flood Control. 1975.
Comprehensive Plan for Flood Control and Drainage, San Diego
County Flood Control District Zone 4. August.
-7-
Smith, James Payne, Jr. and Richard York. 1984. Inventory of Rare
and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. California Native
Plant Society, Spec. Publ. No. 1 (3rd Edition). September, 1984.
State Water Resources and Regional Water Quality Control Boards.
1975. Comprehensive Water Quality Control Plan Report, San
Diego Basin, July.
Thorne, R.F. 1976. The Vascular Plant Communities of California, in
J. Latting (ed.), Symposium Proceedings: Plant Communities of
South California. California Native Plant Society, Spec. Publ.
No. 2. 1-31 pp.
TMI Environmental Services. 1986. Archaeological Survey of the Mary
Birch Ranch - Phase I, Chula Vista, California.
U.S. Soil Conservation Service. 1973. Soil Survey, San Diego Area,
California. December.
WESTEC Services, Inc. 1985. E1 Rancho' del Rey Specific Plan
Amendment. Final EIR, prepared for City of Chula Vista,
California, EIR-83-2.
Wigington, Parker J., Clifford W. Randall, and Thomas J. Grizzard.
1983. Accumulation of Selected Trace Metals in Soils of Urban
Runoff Detention Basins, October, Volume 19, No. 5, Water
Resources Bulletin, pgs. 709-717.
WESTEC S~rvices, Inc. February 1987. Cultural Resource Survey of
the Cohen Property, Cbula Vista, California.
WESTEC Services, Inc. February 1987. Biological Survey for Bel Air
Estates (sic) (TM-8?-7), Chula Vista, California
Chela Vista Municipal Code
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.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
WPC 3745P/O175P
EN 6 (Rev. 5/85) ~.~If~
city of chula vista planning department CI~OF
environmental review section CHUL~ VJ~'/
EL RANCHO REY EL RAN HO DEL REY
6D 2-4"1 J/AC SP&~ IDY PLAN
UNDEVI[LOPED
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
IAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES.
The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
LOUIS S. COHEN ~ ASSOCIATE~
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
LOUIS S. COHEN & ASSOCIATES
McMILLIN FINANCIAL, INC., GENERAL PARRCiERSHIP
HOME CAPITAL COPJ~.r GENEILAL PARTNERSHIP
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list
the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation
or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
LOUIS S. COHEN & ASSOCIATES is a California Corporation. wholly owned bv LOUIS S.
COHEN. Before the map records, the entire subdivision will be owned by ~UIS S.
COHEN & ASSOCIATES.
3. If any person identified pursuant to (l) above is a non-profit organization or a
trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit
organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
NONE
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No X If yes, please indicate person(s)
IPerson is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint ventuFe, assoc!~ti?n,
~ club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trus~, receiver, syno~ca~e,
this and any other county, city and county, city~ municipality, district or other
IPolitical subdivision, or any other group or combinat~ acting
as
a
unit."
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)) ./~_/~/, (~_,~/,/~//~ ~ 1/21/87
S~§nature~7 applicant/date
WPC 0701P T,OIITS S- COHEN
A-110 Print or type name of applicant
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 1
3(a) PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-86-6, proposal to amend the plan diagram of the
Land Use Element of the Chula Vista General Plan by
the redesignation of two adjoining parcels of land,
which have an a99regate area of about 4.32 acres, and
are located in the southeasterly quadrant of East "H"
Street and Otay Lakes Road, from "Medium Density
Residential" to "Retail Commercial."
A. BACKGROUND & HISTORY
1. The subject request is a component of a joint application for the
redesignation of a certain 4.32-acre site located in the
southeasterly quadrant of East "H" Street and Otay Lakes Road from
"Medium Density Residential" to "Retail Commercial," and the rezoning
of the said site from "R-l" to C-C-P." The approval of the
redesignation request {General Plan Amendment), which is the subject
matter of this report, is prerequisite to the consideration of the
proposed rezoning, PCZ-86-E.
2. The proposed General Plan Amendment and rezoning would enable the
applicant to submit project plans for the development of the site in
question.
3. Environmental Review
An Initial Study, IS-87-1, of possible adverse environmental impacts
of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator
on August 14, 1986. The Environmental Review Coordinator concluded
that there would be no significant environmental effects, and
recommended that the Negative Declaration be adopted.
4. .On December 17, 1986, the City Planning Commission adopted that Draft
Negative Declaration issued under IS-87-1, and conducted a public
hearing on GPA-86-6. Subsequent to the closure of this hearing,
motions to deny and approve the proposed general plan amendment
failed by 3-to-3 votes. The Commission did not consider the
proposed, dependent rezoning request.
The City Council, on February 3, 1987, considered the applicant's
appeal from the action of the Planning Commission, and by a 4-to-1
vote, referred the subject matters back to the Commission for
rehearing and reconsideration. The Council's action included the
instruction to the Planning Department that notices of the rehearing
be mailed to the owners of property situated within 600' of the
subject site.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 2
B. RECO)~MENDATION
That the City Planning Commission:
Recommend that the City Council deny the applicant's request for the
amendment of the Chula Vista General Plan.
C. BASIC INFOR)~ATION
1. Subject Property
The subject property consists of two parcels of land, which are
physically separated by a steep slope. Both parcels are vacant.
2. Existing General Plan Designations (Please see Exhibit A.)
North High School Site
South Medium Density Residential
East )ledium Density Residential
West College Site
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use (Please see Exhibit B.)
North R-1 High School
South R-1 Church
East R-1 Church
West R-1 College
D. ANALYSIS
1. The involved site is an integral part of the Southwestern College
Estates area. The retail commercial needs of this area are, in part,
met by the applicant's existing neighborhood shopping center on the
easterly side of Otay Lakes Road, opposite Southwestern College, and
immediately north of the site of the proposed Navy Housing
Development. This 5.29-acre center is not fully developed.
2. The Southwestern College Estates area, within the near future, will
also be directly served by a neighborhood shopping center slated for
development at the northwesterly corner of East H Street and Otay
Lakes Road. In addition to this center and the existing one
discussed in the above paragraph, the residents of the area are
commercially served by the shopping facilities constituent to the
Bonita Commercial Strip, and the large shopping precincts situated at
1-805/Telegraph Canyon Road, and 1-805/East H Street.
3. Exhibit C embodies a tabular analysis of commercial zoning in Chula
Vista, and examines this zoning in the light of the traditional
rule-of-thumb employed by city planning practitioners, as well as the
standards suggested by leading writers. This exhibit points out the
extent of commercial overzoning in Chula Vista. Admittedly, most of
the involved commercial territory and overzoning is geographically
based to the west of 1-805.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 3
4. To the east of 1-805, the situation, however, is becoming similar.
The estimated 21,500 residents of this area, according to the
planner's rule-of-thumb, should be served by about 33 to 43 acres of
commercially-zoned territory. In actuality, this area is currently
served by 70 acres of commercial territory, and an additional 50
acres of con~nercial land has been allocated to EastLake I. These
figures indicate that the commercial overzoning experienced to the
west of 1-805 is now traveling east, into the newer settlements of
Chula Vista.
5. While the development of nearby EastLake should increase the demand
for convenience goods and services, it would be prudent to assume
that much of this demand will be met within the 50-acre, retail
commercial enclave of the proposed Village Center at EastLake I, or
within the more than 50 acres of commercial proposed for EastLake II
area.
6. The Applicant's Marketing Report.
The marketing report, prepared by Market Profiles for the applicant,
concludes that the trading area of the subject site, by mid-1987,
would have a population of nearly 9,000, and a deficiency of gross
leasable area of approximately 84,400 square feet. This deficiency,
according to Market Profiles, would increase to 272,000 square feet
by 1991.
The conclusions embodied in the marketing report are primarily
predicated upon the assumed rapid growth of EastLake, and do not take
into consideration the EastLake Corporation's proposal to eventually
develop more than 100 acres of commercial territory on site. These
conclusions, furthermore, do not reflect the significant volume of
retail sales conducted at the regions' several Navy Exchanges and
Commissaries. The subject trading area is inhabited by a large
number of military and retired military families, and its retail
expenditures within traditional centers would be consequently lower
than those of most trading areas of similar size.
In light of the above factors, the Planning Department's position,
that the subject area is commercially overzoned, remains unaltered.
This position is partially supported by the lack of developmental
progress at the applicant's nearby convenience shopping center.
7. Although the applicant contends that he alone would financially
suffer from the inappropriate redesignation of the subject site to
"Retail Commercial," nothing could be further from the truth. The
owners of the commercial site located at the northeasterly corner of
East "H" Street and Otay Lakes Road and the tenants within the
applicant's existing neighborhood center could also realize financial
reverses. Furthermore, commercial overzoning could adversely affect
the profit picture along the Bonita Road commercial strip.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 4
8. The applicant's allegation that the site in question is not suitable
for residential use, and should therefore be generally planned and
classified commercial, tends to lack substance. Actually, the
subject site is well located for the accommodation of residential
clusters. It is also well located for the accommodation of an
institutional use, such as a church, private school, or day care
center.
9. In summary, the Planning Department believes that the Southwestern
College Estates area is served by ample, commercially-zoned
territory, and that its residents, as well as those of adjacent
settlements do not require the establishment of new shopping areas.
The redesi§nation proposal under consideration is not supported by
the submittal of studies which controvert the Department's position.
E. CONCLUSION
The Planning Department does not find that the proposed General Plan
Amendment would meet a discernible community or neighborhood need, but
would increase commercial overzoning in Chula Vista. (Please see
Exhibit C.)
WPC 3808P
: :~ R~ .s:.: :_:: :_::::: ..... ~* .....
:'"ii!!ii: '"
......
· .' · · '_.LOW ......
'" [~ ~E$1r EN.'KIA~:~ ......
..... : .' :::: :
· ~ ~ · -.:.-.::..
· ~...
...... :~'.~..
:!'"' iii'
:::. :~'.':~:i :
....
~.P.:~P.I
iiii ....... ::
· ..:::: ...... ~-,' :..'
:...: ....
........... .:.....
: ::: .
:::~'":::i::::::'" ~'- ....... ::
'"
~ '" ii::::::
::: -" · ..... :::
:M:E D:.::: :::: :
:Ot~N~; SOUTHWESTERN *- ~.~IT:X::::::::::
:: .~JReflT.'t~L:" '
::R~s~:: ...?::
~:?!!?~:: COLLEGE :: ....
-',.;: :::::
I BONITA VISTA ~
VAC. ~ (~
MFD1 EAST "H" STREET
TIFFANY
PARK
'FIFFANY
Subject ~
Property -~ F~
HARVARD
VAC.
¥g¢.
EXHIBIT C
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
Advance Planning Division
State of Commercial Zoning: City of Chula Vista
October l, 1986
1. Territory Classified Commercial 918.10 Acres (100%)
2. Territory Developed with Commercial Uses 569.8 Acres (62%)
3. Territory Developed wi th Non-Commercial Uses 215.53 Acres (23%)
4. Vacant Commercial Territory 132.77 Acres {15%)
5. Conclusion: 38% of the commercially-zoned
territory of the City of Chula Vista, or
348.3 acres, are either vacant or devoted to
the accommodation of non-commercial uses.
6. The city planner's traditional rule-of-
thumb calls for the allocation of 1.5 to 2.0
acres of land to the commercial service of
1,O00 population. At this rate, the estimated
120,DO0 of Chula Vista should be served by
180 to 240 acres of commercially zoned territory.*
*Standards of the rule-of-thumb:
Neighborhood Commercial 0.5 acres/1,O00 capita
Community Commercial 0.5 acres/1,O00 capita
Regional Commercial 0.4 acres/1,O00 capita
Office, Highway, Visitor, Heavy Commercial O.1 to 0.6 acres/1,O00 capita
Certain planning authorities have addressed the matter of the acreage required
to provide combined neighborhood and community level commercial goods and
services to 1,000 persons and have developed the following formulae:
Gallion & Eisner, The Urban Pattern, 3rd ed.
1.00 Ac./1,O00 persons
William H. Claire, Handbook on Urban Planning
0.92 Ac./1,O00 persons
F. Stuart Chapin, Jr., Urban Land Use Planning
0.75 Ac./1,O00 persons
Urban Land Institute, Shopping Center Development Handbook
1.08 Ac./1,O00 persons
De China & Koppelman, Planning Design Criteria
1.05 Ac. to 1.10 Ac./1,OUO persons
WPC 3172P
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
IAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES.
The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
KELTON TITLE CORP.
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
KELTON TITLE CORP.
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list
the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation
or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
Louis L. Kelton
3. If any person identified pursuant to {1) above is a non-profit organization or a
trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit
organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
None
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of Cfty
staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No × If yes, please indicate person(s)
Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association,
~ club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate,
this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, district or other
political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as ~ unit."
(NOTE: Attach additional pa ge s as necessary.)
Signature of appl~fcant/date
Mark Kelton, Vice President
WPC 070IP
A-IlO Print or type name of applicant
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 1
3(b) PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-86-E Consideration to rezone 4.3 acres located
at the southeast corner of Otay Lakes Road and East
"H" Street from R-1 to C-C-P - Kelton Title Corporation
A. BACKGROUND
1. The proposal is to rezone 4.3 acres of property located at the
southeast corner of Otay Lakes Road and East "H" Street from R-1
(Single Family Residential) to C-C-P (Central Commercial with Precise
Plan). The approval of the companion request, GPA-86-6, to amend the
General Plan from Medium Density Residential to Retail Commercial, is
prerequisite to the approval of the rezoning.
2. On December 17, 1986, the Commission adopted the Negative Declaration
issued on IS-87-1, and conducted a public hearing on GPA-86-6.
Subsequent to the closure of this hearing, motions to deny and
approve the proposed general plan amendment failed by 3-to-3 votes.
The Commission did not consider the proposed, dependent rezoning
request.
The City Council, on February 3, 1987, considered the applicant's
appeal from the action of the Planning Commission, and by a 4-to-1
vote, referred the subject matters back to the Commission for
rehearing and reconsideration. The Council's action included the
instruction to the Planning Department that notices of the rehearing
be mailed to the owners of property situated within 600' of the
subject site.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion to deny PCZ-86-E.
C. DISCUSSION
Adjacent zoning and land use.
North R-1 Bonita Vista High School
South R-1 Church
East R-1 Church
West R-1 Southwestern College
Existing site characteristics.
The site consists of two vacant parcels totaling 4.3 acres with
approximately 550 ft. of frontage on both Otay Lakes Road and East "H"
Street. Both parcels have been graded into level pads, with the easterly
parcel elevated some 20 ft. above the westerly parcel.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 2
General plan.
The General Plan shows the property as Medium Density Residential, 4-12
dwelling units per acre. The applicant's request to amend the General
Plan to Retail Commercial is the companion application to this rezoning
request.
D. ANALYSIS
The analysis contained in the staff report on the companion application,
GPA-86-6, is incorporated herein by reference. In summary, this analysis
shows that the commercial needs of the college area are and will be met
by an existing, underutilized commercial center on the east side of Otay
Lakes Road opposite the College, a planned neighborhood center at the
northwesterly corner of East "H" Street and Otay Lakes Road, the existing
shopping facilities constituent to the Bonita commercial strip and 1-805
at both East "H" Street and Telegraph Canyon Road, and the proposed
50-acre Village Center commercial area within EastLake.
In conclusion, the Department found that approval of the request would
(1) not meet a discernable community or neighborhood need, {2) increase
commercial overzoning in Chula Vista, and (3) that the development and
revitalization of the existing neighborhood center to the south and to
the west should be a prerequisite to the serious consideration of
establishing new retail commercial districts in the College area.
WPC 3338P
I
M~R ~ I~11'1'~ ;
'
I BONITA VISTA
VAC,. ---tlJ [_~
var.,. I
rlt9:~o PNt~'~ E. "H" STREET
SUBJECT
PROPERTY
~o! ,oc^'ro. )
__ 400~ ~
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 1
4. PUBLIC HEARING PCM-87-17; Appeal from conditional revocation of home
occupation permit for handyman service at 467 Second Avenue
- Carl R. Davidson (Continued)
A. BACKGROUND
This is an appeal from a decision of the Zoning Administrator
conditionally revoking the home occupation permit to conduct a handyman
service at 467 Second Avenue in the R-1 zone. The item was continued from
the meeting of May 13, 1987, at the request of the applicant.
The matter is categorically exempt from environmental review as a Class
5(d) exemption.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion to deny the appeal and thereby uphold the decision of the
Zoning Administrator to revoke the home occupation permit for a handyman
service at 467 Second Avenue, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant has the ability to reestablish the home occupation if
he fully complies with the terms and conditions of his home
occupation permit dated January 21, 1986.
2. Notwithstanding the above, the applicant has 120 days, or until
September 13, 1987, within which to relocate and move the home
occupation use from the premise.
C. DISCUSSION
This action was initiated as a result of a complaint filed by a
neighboring property owner. Attached are several exhibits documenting the
matter from the issuance of the permit on January 21, 1986, up to the
present.
Please refer to the attached minutes from the April 6, 1987,
administrative hearing for a detailed discussion of the circumstances and
findings leading to the Zoning Administrator's decision.
WPC 3831P/2659P
t~ ~ ST,
.... VANCE
RC
12--/IDSON'S BUILDING MAINTFI~ NCE
467 Second Ave.
(:hula Vista, CA 92010
· ' ' 427-3494
COMPLETE MAINTENANCE & REPAIR SERVICES
~7 SECOND AVENUE CHU~ VISTA, CA 92010
(619) 427-3494
CARL DAVIDSON
.......... I1PR 2 2 19~7
i--' 'PLANNING D~ARTMEltT.
': , ......... CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
CrlY OF
CHUIA VISI'A
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
April 10, 1987
Mr. Carl Davidson
467 Second Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010
Dear Mr. Davidson:
Attached are the findings and action from the Zoning
Administrator Hearing held on. April 6, 1987. With
respect to what conditions and conduct of a home
occupation would be acceptable, we would refer back.
to the terms by which the original Home Occupation
Permit was approved. The only exception we could
recommend might be in terms of the power tools utilized
and horsepower.
Should you wish to appeal to the Planning Commission
for further consideration, please notify us in writing
by 5:00 p.m. on April 22, 1987.
Sincerely,
e ~Krempl
Planning Director
GK:je
Attachment
576 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA V~STA. CALIFORNIA 92010/(619) 691 5101
April 6, 1987
City of Chula Vista Planning Department
Case No. PCM-87-17: Revocation of Home Occupation Permit Public Hearing for
Mr. Carl R. Davidson property located at 467 Second Avenue
Those Present: Mr. George Krempl, Zoning Administrator Mr. Steve Griffin, Associate Planner
Mr. Michael Fox, Zoning Enforcement Officer
Mr. Carl Davidson, Applicant
Mr. & Mrs. Jim Chiles, residents of 476 Second Avenue
Action:
The home occupation permit for a handyman service at 467 Second Avenue is revoked,
subject to the following exceptions:
1. The applicant has the ability to reestablish the home occupation if
he fully complies with the terms and conditions as expressly laid out
in his Home Occupation Permit authorization dated January 21, 1986.
2. Notwithstanding the above, the applicant has 120 days within which to
relocate and move the home occupation use from the premise.
Hearing Discussion:
Mr. Steve Griffin testified as to the requirements for allowance for a home
occupation as stated in Section 19.14.490 of the Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Griffin also alluded to the application filed and signed and approved by
Mr. Davidson dated January 21, 1986. Said application reads, in part, that the
home occupation will not alter or change the residential character or purpose
of the home; that the home occupation will not create any appreciable increase
in traffic; that the home occupation will not require additional parking spaces;
that the home occupation will not require the employment of outside persons
other than domestic help, and that the home occupation will not create a nuisance
by reason of noise, dust, odor and soforth.
Mr. Davidson, on the application, indicated in the negative in response to all
of those issues. Further, Mr. Davidson indicated that he would be storing
materials inside a metal shed involving or amounting to 5,000 cubic feet. The
Home Occupation Permit was approved subject to further conditions by staff.
The storage would be limited to half the garage area, approximately 20' x 20';
that the remaining garage area would be used to park vehicles; that there would
be no work conducted onsite; that there would be no trash bins stored onsite
except for typical 32 gal. residential containers.
Mr. Michael Fox then testified as to his investigation of the site based on a
complaint extending from November 19, 1986 through March 17, 1987 in which case
Mr. Fox either visited or had contact with the applicant on numerous dates,
including December 2, December 4, December 15, January 6, January 22, January 26,
February 4 and March 4. The facility was doing business as Davidson's Building
Maintenance and Handyman Service. Violations noted by Mr. Fox included excess
Page 2
vehicle parking, vehicles not owned by applicant, employees entering and exiting
the site, conducting business on premise, potential noise, the location of a
commercial trash dumpster onsite and various assembly and actual contractor
type work occurring on premise. The violations were not corrected, thus initiation
of the revocation hearing.
Mr. Davidson testified as to the nature of the business; indicated that he did
work for real estate and property management groups, not for the general public.
He has been in business for nine years and two years at this address. Most of his
pickup service calls come in on Monday. He does no advertisement; his business
is by word of mouth and business card. There are four work vehicles parked onsite
when not in use. There is no foot traffic to the site; customers are invoiced.
Mr. Davidson further indicated the business is conducted between 8:00 a.m. and
6:00 p.m., six days per week, Monday through Saturday. He has four employees who
take care of service calls; they pick upa work vehicle in the morning, may return
periodically during the day, and then drop off the vehicle in the evening--at which
time accumulated trash from the job sites is deposited in the dumpster. Since being
advised of the potential zoning violation, only two of those four employees come
to the site by their own personal vehicle, the other two come by bicycle.
Mr. Davidson indicated that he owns and has onsite from time to time some six
personal vehicles, including a Cadillac, a Toyota, a van, a Chevy one-ton, a '72
Chevy and a '72 Ford, as well as the four vehicles used in the business. As far
as machinery on premise, Mr. Davidson indicates that he makes screens onsite and
uses one circular saw, I 1/2 hp.; he also has one other miter saw. It was pointed
out that per the terms of the Zoning Ordinance, that horsepower is limited to a
total of 1 hp. capacity unless the use permit has been issued by the Planning
Commission.
Mr. Davidson indicates that this is not a typical R-1 lot, but is substantially
larger and deeper; that the prior owner, Mr. Holmes, conducted a plumbing business
on premise for many years. He acknowledges that he has expanded beyond the limits
of his original Home Occupation Permit but feels that he is compatible with the
area and does not pose any problem for his neighbors. In support thereof, a
petition is submitted signed by some six adjacent property owners. Mr. Griffin
clarifies that there is no record of a prior Home Occupation Permit approved for
this premise. The property is and has been zoned R-1 as are the adjoining properties
fronting on Second Avenue and in the general vicinity.
Mr. & Mrs. Chiles testified that they are a neighbor across the street from the
applicant and do not view his use as posing any detriment to the general neighbor-
hood. Mr. Chiles mentions that he has his own personal saw, i 1/2 hp., that he
uses on premise for his own personal use. Mrs. Chiles indicates that she believes
that at one point in time this residence did have a garage associated with the
principal dwelling.
Findings
The Zoning Administrator, in denial of the applicant's request to continue his use
at the present level (i.e., in support of revocation of this Home Occupation Permit)
indicates that this is in fact a commercial enterprise and the buisness has
expanded significantly beyond the parameters of the conditions by which the home
occupation was originally established. The lot in question and topography certainly
are considerations in terms of whether or not any type of home occupation would
Page 3
be appropriate on this premise. Certainly the lot circumstance was recognized
when staff approved the original home occupation in January 1986. Unfortunately,
this business has expanded beyond the bounds of what is traditionally and
reasonably acceptable in an R-1 single family neighborhood residential setting
to something in between the normal home occupation and what might be construed
as a commercial storefront operation conducted entirely within a commercial zone.
The Zoning Administrator would note that the purpose of a home occupation is to
be customary and incidental and secondary to the residential use; that the home
occupation should not alter the exterior of the property or affect the residential
character of the neighbohood and that there should be no outside employees. A
home occupation is intended to be engaged in strictly by the resident occupants
of the residence. In this case, the exterior of the property has been significantly
altered in terms of numerous non-resident vehicles being parked on premise. The
fact that outside employees are engaged in this business and that those outside
employees make use of office space onsite, that those outside employees have occasion
to load and unload materials onsite, that those outside employees have occasion
to come back to the site during the day to complete paper work, accept phone calls,
make new deliveries and soforth are all indications of the non-residential or
business nature of the use.
The Zoning Administrator finds that the vehicle parking, the outside employment
and the office activity for those outside employees is totally unacceptable and
contrary to the intent of a Home Occupation Permit. In addition, the Zoning
Administrator notes that the City Council recently has passed a Zoning Ordinance
Amendment requiring that every new residence, or every expansion of residence or
potential conversion of garage area into living space involves a requirement
for an enclosed garage providing two parking spaces. In this instance, originally
the garage was to have been half storage and half available for vehicle parking.
It is now totally impacted by storage. The numerous vehicles that the applicant
has are parked throughout the driveway area. Finally, the commercial trash
dumpster is also not something one would normally encounter in a single family
residential area and while Chula Vista Sanitary has increased the capability
of a single family resident of having a trash facility larger than 32 gal. size,
this is still a far cry from a commercial dumpster facility.
For all the above reasons, the Zoning Administrator denies this request. The
applicant is notified that he has ten days within which to file an appeal to the
Planning Commission if he so desires.
"~E, ~TH~' ~ UNDER~xGNED, ARE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBuRS OF CA~L DAVIDSON~
~67 SE~ND AV~UE , CH~A VISTA~ CA. 9Z010. ;~E HAVE NO ~MPL~NTS
~UANDING ~g O~R~NG A ~L BU~NESS(DAVID~N BUILDING M~NT~CE)
FROM ~S REaD'ICE. SHOED ['IE ~ HAV~ ANY P~O~S V~TH T~S, CR~
H~S L~T ~S I~O~A~ON ?ffTH US, THaT ~E MRY ~NTA~ ~M P~N~LY.
~GNATURE ~DRESS T~HONE ~
CllY OF
CHU[A VISI'A
BUILDING AND HOUSING DEPARTMENT
April 2, 1987
ZONING OFFICER STATEMENT
On November 19, 1986 the Building and Housing department received a
complaint regarding a business being conducted at 467 Second Avenue. Also
mentioned was the parking of up to 12 cars every morning, people assemblying
in the back yard and huge amounts of garbage in a dumpster being picked up
every week.
On December 2, 1986, I researched the Home Occupation files and found an
active permit in the name of Carl R. Davidson, doing business as Davidson's
Building Maintenance a hand,an service.
On December 4, 1986, I went to investigate the complaint. When I arrived
at 467 Second Avenue I saw two small pick-up trucks backing out of the driveway
at this address and proceed northward on Second Avenue. Looking up the driveway
I saw five (5) vehicles parked and a Sani-tainer at the end.
I identified myself to Mrs. Davidson and talked to her about the business
activity. Mrs. Davidson stated that her husband employs workers and they park
their cars in the driveway. I gave Mrs. Davidson my business card and asked
that her husband call me. I then asked Mrs. Davidson's permission to look at
the rear of the property, she consented. Besides the cars and Sani-tainer I
observed a large metal shec~aterials of construction at the rear of the property.
I then left the property. ~
Mr. Carl R. Davidson contacted me on the telephone in the afternoon. He
was angry and asked who had complained. He said he employs people to do repairs
to properties for a Realty company. These people park their cars at his place
and use two pickups he provides. He stores material in the metal shed and needs
the Sani-tainer for the volume of trash accumulated which is picked up weekly.
I went over the terms of the Home Occupation Permit with him. Mr. Davidson
replied he would continue to do business and if necessary would surround his
property with a fence and expand rearward into the ravine area of his property
where he would be out of s~of everyone. I told Mr. Davidson that I would
send him a correction notice. SYC.~rr
On December 15, 1986, I sent Mr. & Mrs. Davidson a correction notice
citing a violation of Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.14.490 and attached
a.copy of the code section to the correction notice.
276 FOURTH AVENUE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 92010/(619) 69~-5007
(Page two)
On January 6, 1987, I stopped in front of 467 Second Avenue. I saw
several vehicles parked in the driveway and the San$-tainer at the end.
I also noticed 4 x 4 wood posts set along the south side of the driveway
which I do not recall being there before.
On January 22, 1987, I called the complainant. I was advised that the
situation had not changed.
On January 26, 1987, I sent Mr. & Mrs. Davidson a compliance order
citing a violation of Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.14.490.
On February 4, 1987, I stopped in front of 467 Second Avenue. I saw
several vehicles parked in the driveway and the Sani-tainer at the end.
On March 4, 1987, I called the complainant. I was advised that the
violation still continued and now there was apparently also cutting of
material with machinery at this address. Further questioning revealed
that the cutting was intermittent and not regular.
On March 17, 1987, I sent a request to the Director of Planning for
consideration of the revokation of the Home Occupation Permit in the name
of Carl R. Davidson of 467 Second Avenue, Chula Vista, Ca. 92010 for the
continued violation of Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.14.490.
M~lchael ~. Fox
Zoning Enforcement Officer
CITY OF OHULA VISTA
City of Chula Vista
HOME OCCU?ATION ~ERHIT~ ~./ Property is zoned:
Last FirstI Initia.1
Address: ~_C¢~ ~c;cc:~..<~ ~ ~__~,/~ ~kJiSL Area~cf q ~C))c)Number
House No. St_Feet ~ City . ~, State ~
DBA (Name of Business):~ ~?h_;,~%o~.S ~/J',~ ~-'~f)i~-~q'C--'r+~7___~__
\
· ·
Type of Business:
1. Will the home occupation alter or change the residential
character or purpose of the home or apartment? Yes
2. Will the home occupation create any appreciable increase in traffic? Yes
3. Will the home occupation require additional parking spaces? Yes
4. Will the home occupation require the employment of persons
other than domestic help? Yes i---] No
5. Will the home occupation create a nuisance by reason of noise,
ordust, other odor, causes? vibration, fumes, smoke, electrical interference' Yes [] No
6. Will there be any indoor or outdoor storage of materials,
equipment or supplies? ~ I Yes ~. No
If "yes", please state where i~si c_ l'~e-Jt~/ ~-¢ and amount ~-i~O0 cu.ft.
7. Will there be any mechanical equipment used in connection with
the home occupation, other than clerical or domestic appliances? Yes
If "yes" the applicant must. obtain approval of the Planning Commission
for equipment in excess of one (1) horsepower, by filing an application
for a "Planning Commission, Reques~ for Action".
Please read: "I declare under the penalty of perjury that the
foregoinQinformat~on is true and correct."
Note:
There shall be no external display of products, merchandise or any sign to identify
the home occupa.tion. A permit shall be revoked by the Zoning Administrator upon
violation of any requirement, condition or limitation, unless such violation is
corrected within fifteen (15) days of notice of violations. Any permit may be
revoked for repeated violations.
Conditions of approval . _-~'-~:~x~r,,~ L..,~T~'~ ,~7~ (/=z~ L~-~'-aK',~ A~t'"c'a
In the event of denial, revocation, or object'on.s .to the li~m!~ations placed, thereon, an
appeal may be made to the Planning Commissio~n within ten ~/[OJ'days of the determination.
A pproved"~ ~~ /~ Date:_[
Denied [] i)l anp,i'ng Departme'nt ~Representati ve /
7/79
19.14.490 Home occupations-Permit required when-Restrictions and
requirements-Revocation when-Appeals.
In any R zone, a customary home occupation may be permitted subject to a
home occupation permit granted by the planning director which is merely
incidental and secondary to residence use. Each such permit shall be
accompanied by a filing fee as set forth in the master fee schedule. The
following are typical home occupations: fine arts, handicrafts, dressmaking,
millinery, laundering, preserving, home cooking, route salesman; or secondary
office of a doctor, dentist, lawyer, architect, engineer, teacher or member of
another recognized profession. The home occupation shall not:
A. Involve the use of power equipment using m~tors of more than a total of
one horsepower capacity or the equivalent thereof, unless a use permit
therefor shall have been issued by the planning commission;
B. Generate vehicular traffic in excess of that associated with a residential
use;
C. Create a nuisance by reason of noise, dust, odor, vibration, fumes, smoke,
electrical interference, or other causes;
D. Permit any external display of products, merchandise, or any sign to
identify the home occupation. A home occupation permit shall be revoked
by the planning director upon violation of any requirement of this
chapter, or upon any conditions or limitation of any permit issued, unless
such violation is corrected within fifteen days of notice of such
violation, and any such permit may be revoked for repeated violation of
the requirements of this section or of the conditions of such permit.
In the event of denial of any permit, or the revocation thereof, or of
objection to the limitations placed thereon, appeal may be made in writing to
the planning commission, whose decision shall be final. (Ord. 2011 § 1
(part), 1982: Ord. 1212 § 1 (part), 1969: prior code § 33.1314.)
EI¥_F.D
1,1AY 1 8
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PLANNING DEPARTNIENT
IAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP IN~SV~AAL~A~IONS
IWHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
ICOMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES.
The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the n~mes~f all persons having a financial intergst in the ap~l~ication.
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list
the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation
or own!n9 any partnership interest in the partnership.
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or a
trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit
organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, Board~,. Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
YesNo_~ If yes, please indicate person(s)
IPersonis defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association,I
~ club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, tru~ re~l~e~,.synd~e,
I
this and any other county, city and county, city, municipam~ty, OlS~r~c~ or er
Ipolitical subd~ws~on, or any other group or combination acting as a un t.
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)~ ~j~_~~ ~-~/1~/~>~
Signature of applicant/date
WPC 0701P
A-110 Print or type name of applicant
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 1
5. CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-87-3 Rancho del Sur
A. BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the draft of this document on
May 13, 1987. As was noted at that meeting a letter of comment was received
by the State Clearinghouse from CALTRANS and has been included in Sec. lO.O
(comments and responses) of the final EIR. Also a letter from the Parks and
Recreation Department noting acceptance of the Park plan for the project has
been added to this section.
As is discussed below, various sections of the final EIR have been revised or
updated and an additional alternative of lower density development has been
included. It should be noted that discussing project alternatives is required
by state law to focus on those alternatives which could reduce or eliminate
significant environmental impacts. In this instance all potentially
significant imapcts have been mitigated or otherwise avoided.
Since the issuance of the draft EIR the property has been annexed to the City
and the current zoning is R-l-P-4. Also the project has been substantially
altered since the preparation of the EIR resulting in a lower density and
greater park area. This was done in response to environmental and planning
issues and does not result in any additional significant environmental impacts.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Certify that EIR-87-3 has been prepared in accordance with CEQA, the State
CEQA Guidelines and the environmental review procedures of the City of Chula
Vista and that the Planning Commission will consider the information in the
EIR as it reaches a decision on the project.
C. REVISIONS
Various revisions to the Draft EIR were made for the final document; they are
summarized as follows:
1. Pg 2-5
A table noting acres, number of units, lot size and density by
subsections and overall has been added. (This table does not reflect
the recent reductions in density).
2. Pg 4-6
Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes measured in late 1986 by the City
of Chula Vista are shown in Figure 4-4; future volumes, year 2005,
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 2
are also presented. Traffic along Telegraph Canyon Road reaches a
high of 26,800 ADT just east of 1-805 and decreases to approximately
15,500 ADT east of Medical Center Drive. Oleander Avenue has an ADT
of 7,900 south of Telegraph Canyon Road, and Medical Center Drive
volumes are 4,700 ADT.
Pg 4-14
A column has been added to Table 4-3 to show what the level of
services would be after mitigation is implemented {LOS C).
Pg 4-13 and 4-16
If the predicted high rate of growth is experienced over the next two
years and if Rancho del Sur is developed, operation at the
intersection of the northbound 1-805 off- and on-ramps with Telegraph
Canyon Road will drop to LOS F during both the morning and evening
peak periods. By changing the lane assignments on the existing
eastbound approach to 1-805 to allow double lefts and two through
lanes, operation at the intersection can be improved. Since the
northbound on-ramp to 1-805 has two lanes, this appears to be a
relatively simple adjustment that would not require ometric changes
to the interchange. Based on the assumptions of t~sanalysis, the
addition of one eastbound lane allowing a double left-turn while
maintaning two through lanes would provide an acceptable LOS (C).
This is a recommended condition of approval of the tentative
subdivision map with Phase I of the project.
5. Pg 4-17 and 4-18
The latest capacity and enrollment figures for local schools is
provided.
6. Pg 4-25
A number of alternatives are being studied by MWD to secure
additional water supplies for the future. Negotiations to obtain
additional water from the Imperial Irrigation District have been
conducted between the Metropolitan Water District and the Imperial
Irrigation District. If successful, the water obtained through these
negotiations would recover 25 percent of the amount lost to the
Arizona allocation. Negotiations are currently at a standstill,
however, until the finalization of an EIR which addresses the impacts
of transferring conserved water out of the Imperial Valley (Rhodes
1986). No other supplemental water sources have been secured at this
time.
7. Pg 4-26
According to the draft Central Area Water Master Plan prepared by
OWD, the Rancho del Sur development would have an average demand of
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 3
0.312 mgd. The Otay Water District has indicated that its current
facilities are adequate to meet the needs of the Rancho del Sur
development. However, meeting water demands from any subsequent
development in the area would adversely impact the existing
facilities. If existing proposals to construct new and expanded
facilities within the Water District are approved and implemented,
provision of adequate water service would represent no impact to the
District.
8. Pg 59 and 60
Because the Con, unity Hospital is located southeast of the Rancho del
Sur development, a concern exists that ambulance operations may
produce an adverse noise impact on future residences within the
development, particularly during nighttime operations. The criteria
used to assess the potential for sleep disturbance was taken from a
paper entitled "Noise an~le~: A Literature Review and a Proposed
Criterion for Assessing ~tTecs by Dr. Jerome L. Lukas (1975). The
following table shows the percentage of the population who would be
expected to be awakened or to have their sleep shifted from a deeper
stage to a lighter stage for a given Sound Exposure Level or SEL.
The SELs given in the table would represent the level measured inside
a bedroom.
% of Subjects Experiencing
Indoor SEL Sleep Disturbance
66 dBa 20
69 dBA 30
72 dBa 40
75 dBa 50
78 dBA 60
82 dBA 70
85 dBA 80
These data should not be considered as absolute. However, the data
provides a good indication of the potential for sleep disturbance due
to individual events.
The noise generated by ambulance operations at the hospital would not
significantly affect the ambient noise levels onsite. Ambulance
sirens generate approximately 95 db(A) at 100 feet. Currently, the
hospital receives approximately three emergency ambulance trips per
day (over a 24-hour period), while operating at 76 percent capacity
(Formanski, 1987). The typical distribution of the trips over the
24-hour period was not available, because it varies. Ambulances
typically only use their sirens at intersections; therfore, the site
currently does not experience significant single-event noise. In the
future, the project proposes to construct the East Naples/Medical
Center Drive intersection. Ambulances would then be required to use
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 4
their sirens at the new intersection. If the hospital operates at
100 percent capacity, the hospital may then
receive approximately four to five ambulance trips per day. Assuming
that standard building shell construction attenates approximately 20
db(A), then indoor noise levels would be estimated to be 75 dB{A);
according to the previous table this noise level would disturb 50
percent of the residents directly adjacent to Medical Center Drive,
if the ambulance would come at night. Due to the relative
infrequency of ambulance trips, the single-event noise impact onsite
would be insignificant.
9. Pg 6-4
A reduced density alternative has been added. It assumes 433
single-family dwelling units would be developed on the 108.3 acres,
or 4 DU/AC. A table has been provided on pg 1-9 and 1-10 for an easy
comparison of the impacts of the alternatives.
Changes have been made in the summary to reflect the above noted
revisions to the main text.
WPC 3900P
City Planning Commission Page 1
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 2?, 1987
6. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) PCZ-87-I: Great American Rancho del Sur south of
Telegraph Canyon Road, the east terminus of East
Naples Street, rezone from R-l-P-4 and R-1-H to R-l-P6
and R-3-P-12 - Great American
A. BACKGROUND
1. This application involves a request to rezone 108.3 acres located on
the south si de of Telegraph Canyon Road wi th the property bisected by
Medical Center Drive and the extension of East Naples Street.
The property was annexed in January 1987 with a prezoning designation
of R-l-P-4 which included all of the property with the exception of a
lO-acre parcel already located in the City and zoned R-1-H and
abutting the prezoned property immediately to the south. An
additional lO acres of land prezoned R-l-lO(P) which was part of the
original annexation is not included in this rezoning request.
2. The Environmental Impact Report filed on this project was subject to
final Planning Commission action as an earlier agenda item scheduled
on the same meeting date.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the findings contained in Section E of this report, adopt a
motion recommending that the City Council enact an ordinance to change the
zoning from R-l-P-4 and R-1-H to the following:
1. From the centerline of the San Diego Gas & Electric easement, the
properties lying west of said area identified in the development
standards as area 4 and 5 shall remain zoned R-l-P-4.
2. All of the areas lying east from the centerline of the San Diego Gas
& Electric easement extending to the center of Medical Center Drive
shall be designated R-l-P-5. This includes planning areas 2 and 3 as
identified in the development standards.
3. The area lying east of Medical Center Drive and north of the
extension of Naples Street shall be zoned R-3-P-12 identified as
planning area 1.
4. The area lying east of Medical Center Drive and south of the Naples
Street extension identified as future development, approximately
2-1/2 acres in size, shall remain as R-1-H.
City Plannin§ Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 2
5. The rezonin§ of the above named properties with the attachment of the
P Modifying District shall be subject to the Precise Plan Design
Guidelines as adopted for Rancho Del Rey Sur Phase I with the
notation that the detached products as identified in areas 2 and 3 as
well as the multiple-family area identified in area 1 shall be
subject to the specified City's design review process requiring
approval of the City's Design Review Committee as it relates to site
plan and architectural approval. All improvements shown such as
fencing, walls, landscaping, park development, and pedestrian paths
shall be installed concurrent or prior to the issuance of building
permits for specific phases.
C. DISCUSSION
1. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use
Area Zonin~ Land Use
North R-1 and C-O Single-family dwellings and office
structures
South R-1-P 5.5 and R-1-H Single-family dwellings and
hospital facilities
East R-1-H Vacant property
West R-1 and R-l-lO Single-family dwellings, park and
school site
2. Existing Site Characteristics
The subject 108+ acres located on the south side of Telegraph is a
portion of a larger ownership under the control of Great American
Development with future development planned to the south and the east
which, because of planning and annexation issues, is not being
considered at this time.
The proposed rezoning request for R-l-P-6 encompassing all of the
area lying east of Medical Center Drive was formatted to accommodate
the development of some 286 single-family detached homes to be
provided on lot size ranging from 3800 sq. ft. to over 7,000 sq. ft.
The remaining area lying east of Medical Center Drive is proposed for
multiple-family development at approximately 12 dwelling units per
acre. A private recreational area of just under 2 acres was
originally proposed and has since been modified and expanded to total
nearly 4 acres and is now listed as a public park proposal.
The project site is largely on a plateau sitting well above Telegraph
Canyon Road with a combination of rather steep slopes and minor
canyon penetrations extending into the development. The site is
bisected by a 250' wide San Diego Gas & Electric easement running
from a southwest to northeast direction. The main access to the
development will be via Medical Center Drive and the extension of
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 3
East Naples Street with dedicated residential streets being proposed in a
series of loops or cul-de-sacs emanating from Naples Street.
The extension of East Naples Street east of Medical Center Drive will
provide the necessary access to the proposed multiple-family
development planned at the northeast corner of Medical Center Drive
and Telegraph Canyon Road. The proposed multiple-family area is a
knoll which drops approximately 100 feet from the southerly property
line to the northwest corner at the intersection of Medical Center
Drive and Telegraph Canyon Road.
3. General Plan
The General Plan land use designation for the subject property is
medium density calling for a range of 4 to 12 dwelling units per acre
on a gross basis. Thus the General Plan would allow for a low of
432 dwelling units and a high of nearly 1300 dwelling units with a
medium range of nearly 800 dwelling units. With the final
recommendation from the staff, and with the applicant's concurrence,
the project as planned will total closer to 486 units which is very
close to the low end of the General Plan range.
With the exception of the isolated areas such as the Community
Hospital and the commercial office area immediately to the north, the
General Plan designation for the surrounding area is a 4 to 12
dwelling unit range.
4. Proposed Development
The applicant has submitted a subdivision map and precise plan
guidelines for the development of the entire project setting forth
the more traditional 6,000 to 7,000 sq. ft. lot pattern for areas 4
and 5 {the area lying west of the San Diego Gas & Electric easement)
while proposing lots in the 3,800 to 4,500 sq. ft. for area 2
(approximately 70 lots lying north of Naples Street and west of
Medical Center Drive), area 3, which is identified as the site lying
south of East Naples Street, has been earmarked for 4,500 to 5,000
sq. ft. lots which is very comparable to the area immediately
adjacent known as Fox Hills. The primary difference between area 3
and the adjacent Fox Hills development lies in the fact that the Fox
Hills project was developed at approximately 5.5 dwelling units per
acre with private streets utilizing reduced front setbacks; whereas
area 3 on the applicant's proposal will feature public streets and
more traditional front yard setbacks.
The multiple-family area located on the east side of r~edical Center
Drive has a net area of 16.6 acres and, thus, at the proposed 12
dwelling units per acre, the applicant would be allowed to develop a
total of 200 dwelling units as opposed to the 220 units identified in
the original application. The reason for the discrepancy lies in the
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 4
fact that the applicant's original estimate for this site was shown
at 19.5 acres which apparently included to the center line of Medical
Center Drive and also included the extension of East Naples Street
which is now proposed for dedication, thus the net area of the site
is now 3 acres smaller.
D. ANALYSIS
The rezoning requested is closely interrelated with the Precise Plan
Design Guidelines which are included as part of the package as well as the
proposed subdivision map for this area. The applicant's original request for
R-l-P-6, 6 dwelling units per acre, for all of the area lying west of Medical
Center Drive has gone through significant refinement with the applicant, his
planning consultant, and the applicant's engineer working closely with staff
to develop a density and lot configuration for areas 4 and 5 (those areas
lying west of the San Diego Gas & Electric easement) to be more in keeping
with the traditional lots which lie adjacent to these areas i~ediately to the
west. The end result is the development of a subdivision map with a
combination of 6,000 and 7,000 sq. ft. lots.
Area 2 which features a 50 ft. wide by 75 ft. deep lot running adjacent to
the easement as well as a 50x80 to lO0 ft. lot in the interior--will provide
smaller detached lot for the area lying north of Naples Street. Area 3 which
is immediately adjacent to Fox Hills will feature a 50xgO to 100 ft. long lot,
thus providing a 4,500 to 5,000 sq. ft. detached product. All of the
single-family detached homes will feature public road systems with setbacks,
maximum building area and patio standards included in the Precise Plan Design
Guidelines.
The applicant had originally proposed a private park area located
partially within the San Diego Gas & Electric easement; however, after further
consultation ~ith the City Parks Department, the applicant has agreed to
expand the park to nearly 4 acres in size with nearly 2.8 acres lying under
the easement and developed in a more intense fashion with three lighted tennis
courts being the primary recreational facility included in the park.
Generally speaking, an applicant is required to provide dedication and/or
improvements of parkland area in accordance with locations and criteria
defined in the Chula Vista General Plan. In this instance, with the close
proximity of Greg Rogers Park, it was not anticipated that an additional
public park area would be needed. However, in reviewing the proposed housing
development and the applicant's willingness to expand the park size if the
City were willing to take on the overall maintenance of the park area, it was
the conclusion of the Parks & Recreation Director that an expanded public park
facility with the lighted tennis courts as well as other amenities would be a
welcome supplement to the Greg Rogers facility.
The applicant has included a pedestrian walk system which will link the
proposed park with the existing Gre§ Rogers Park. For consideration of the
expanded park facility, the applicant will be requesting a waiver of certain
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 5
park fees which are required payment in lieu of park development. The
decision to waive in part or all of the required park fees will be a decision
for the City Council to evaluate based on the recommendation of the Parks &
Recreation Director.
The proposed multiple-family development called for in area 1 requests the
density of 12 units per acre on the net 16.6-acre site, thus allowing for a
maximum of 200 dwelling units. A preliminary grading plan, as well as a
schematic development proposal provided by the developer, anticipates the
creation of slope banks along Telegraph Canyon Road as well as Medical Center
Drive leaving a building development area of approximately 12 acres. Thus,
the density within the buildable area would be just under 17 units per acre or
very close to the City's traditional R-3-G garden apartment development. This
density would afford the applicant the opportunity to provide a substantial
amount of common open space throughout the project while complying with the
City's parking standards.
The immediate area to the south of area 1, while zoned R-l-H, is now owned
by the Sweetwater School District with the original plans calling for the
construction of a junior high school. The District has since indicated that
it is highly unlikely that they will be building a junior high school at this
location; thus, the ultimate land use plan between the proposed
multiple-family residential development planned for area 1 and the Chula Vista
Community Hospital further to the south is unknown at this point. It is
staff's recommendation that the area identified as future development lying
along the east side of Medical Center Drive be retained in an R-1-H zoning
pattern until a more cohesive development program is developed for this entire
area.
It is staff's opinion that the multiple-family dwellings being provided in
area 1 provides an excellent mixture of housing types to supplement areas 2,
3, 4, and 5 while retaining the overall density for the entire 108 acres near
the low end of the General Plan range. We, therefore, support the rezonings
as listed in our recommendation.
E. FINDINGS
The P Precise Plan Modifying District may be applied to areas when the
following is evident: that the property or area which the P Modifying
District is applied is in an area adjacent and contiguous to a zone allowing
different land uses and development of a precise plan will allow the area so
designated to coexist between land uses which might otherwise be
incompatible. The attachment of the P Modifying District will enable the City
to control vehicular access and provide site plan and architectural review for
the mixture of housing types planned for the area in accordance with precise
plan design guidelines being adopted for the area. These guidelines will
include both sign and landscaping controls to ensure compatibility with the
existing developments in the area.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 6
The basic underlying zoning regulations do not allow the property owner
and/or the City appropriate control or flexibility needed to achieve an
efficient and proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent
zones, The attachment of the P Modifying District is in keeping with the
prezoning of the property with the zoning breakdown more in keeping with the
variety of developments planned for the area. The maximum density of 12
dwelling units per acre planned for the eastern portion of the property is in
keeping with the upper end of the General Plan range while the proposed 4
dwelling unit per acre maximum planned for the west end of the property is in
keeping with the lower range of the General Plan.
WPC 3897P
PROJECT
LOI
LAND USE LEGEND Exhibit A
Parks & Public Open Space
Agriculture & Reserve
tied. Density Residential (4-12) Rancho Del Sur
High Density Residential (13'26] PROJECT SITE:: 108 A,C.
Retail Commercial
Professional & Administrative
General Industrial ~ o ,oo~ ~
Research & Limited Industrial north
E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan
~' PREZONEO ~ '
" / · R-l-P(4) #
"PROPO 'SED, ' R-3-P(12
",R- 1'~P(~6).
~ '~, / ·
C.V.
HILL
C-O:F
~-S-4
'~ VAC,~
' ~ VAG.
A-70
(COUNTY) Exhibit
VAC.
norLh
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 1
6. PUBLIC HEARING (b) PCS 87-8: Consideration of a tentative
subdivision map for Rancho del Sur Phase I South o)
Telegraph Canyon Road, East of Foxboro Avenue
A. BACKGROUND
1. The applicant has submitted a tentative map known as Rancho del Sur,
Phase I, Chula Vista Tract (PCS-87-8) which provides for the division of
108+ acres of property into 3 types of development, consisting of Unit I
which is proposed for attached multiple family housing as well as a future
development site, Unit II which is identifying 70 detached single-family
lots at a minimum size of 3,750 square feet, Unit III which features 54
single-family lots--a typical size of 4,500 5,000 square feet, and
Units IV and V which feature 162 single-family detached lots varying from
6,000 to 7,000 square feet. The project site is located south of
Telegraph Canyon Road and east of Foxboro Avenue. The rezoning of the
property to accommodate the proposed subdivision and land was the subject
of a previous item on this agenda. Therefore, if the rezoning is
recommended for approval the subdivision will be in compliance with the
zoning recommended.
2. The Environmental Review for this project, reference EIR 87-3 was the
subject of a Public Hearing as a previous agenda item. Mitigation
required in the EIR will be included as part of project design and/or
conditions listed in this report.
B. RECOMMEDATION
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
Rancho del Sur, Phase I, Chula Vista Tract 87-8 subject to the following
conditions:
1. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of full public
improvements for all streets shown on the Tentative Map within the
Subdivision. Said improvements shall include but not be limited to: A.C.
pavement, base, concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk, medians, sewer and
water facilities, drainage facilities, street trees, street lights and
signs. Said improvements shall be guaranteed prior to approval of any
final subdivision maps.
2. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of East Naples
Street from Foxboro Avenue to Medical Center Drive. Improvements shall
conform to the typical section for East Naples Street contained in the
Tentative Map except that the right-of-way on the northerly side may be
reduced to a total of 30 feet, measured from the centerline of the roadway
for that portion of the right-of-way outside the subdivision boundary.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of 5-27-87 Page 2
Said right-of-way shall be acquired and dedicated to public use prior to
approval of any Final Maps. The roadway of East Naples shall be widened
an additional 4 feet in those locations where residences front on said
street.
3. The developer shall be responsible for the design and construction of
Telegraph Canyon Road from the existing ultimate improvements to the
easterly Subdivision boundary to the satisfaction of the Director of
Public Works as a condition of the first final map. Telegraph Canyon Road
shall be designed to Chula Vista Prime Arterial Street Standards.
4. Transitions from ultimate improvements to existing improvements on
Telegraph Canyon Road and Medical Center Drive shall be provided to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. Transition improvements shall include,
but not be limited to A.C. pavement, A. C. dike and appropriate drainage
facilities. Additional right-of-way required to provide said transition
shall be obtained prior to approval of the Final Subdivision Maps
requiring said transition improvements. Permits may be required by the
County for work beyond City limits.
5. Concurrent with Phase I the applicant shall be required to provide (A)
eastbound Telegraph Canyon Road left turn to northbound 1-805 consisting
of dual left turn lanes of sufficient length as determined by the City
Engineer. Said Telegraph Canyon Road lanes shall be designed to
accommodate two through lanes eastbound {B) westbound right turn to
northbound 1-805, providing improvements to both lane widths and turn
radii.
6. Traffic control plans for all work in Telegraph Canyon Road and Medical
Center Drive shall be approved by the City Engineer concurrent with
approval of improvement plans for said streets.
7. The developer shall obtain notarized letters of permission to grade
offsite prior to issuance of grading permits.
8. Developer shall annex to the special sewer rate district served by the
Chula Vista Woods pump station for units which require this system.
9. Paved access shall be provided to all sanitary sewer manholes. Graded
access shall be provided to all storm drain structures including inlet and
outlet structures.
10. The developer shall grant easements for all offsite public sewer and storm
drain prior to approval of any final map requiring those facilities. A
joint use agreement with SDG&E may be required within SDG&E easement.
ll. Sewer manholes shall be provided at all changes of alignment and grade.
Sewers serving 10 or less equivalent dwelling units shall have a minimum
grade of 1%.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of 5-27-87 Page 3
12. Specific methods of handling storm drainage are subject to detailed
approval by the City Engineer at the time of submission of improvement and
grading plans. Design shall be accomplished on the basis of the
requirements of the Subdivision Manual and the Grading Ordinance (#1797 as
amended).
The developer shall submit calculations to demonstrate compliance with all
drainage requirements of the subdivision manual to include, but not be
limited to, dry lane requirements. Calculations shall also be provided to
demonstrate the adequacy of downstream drainage structures, pipes and
inlets.
13. The developer shall grant to the City street tree planting and maintenance
easements along all public streets within the Subdivision.
14. Lot lines shall be located at the top of slopes. Lots shall be so graded
as to drain to the street or an approved drainage system. Drainage shall
not be permitted to flow over slopes.
15. An erosion and sedimentation control plan shall be included as part of the
grading plans.
16. All buildings shall meet current Federal Flood insurance standards.
17. Developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City to
participate in a Facilities Benefit District for the construction of
offsite improvements impacted by the subject property. The developer may
receive credit in participation of the Facilities Benefit District for the
portion of Telegraph Canyon Road which is constructed beyond the
subdivision boundary.
18. The developer shall comply with all relevant Federal, State and Local
regulations, including the Clean Water Act. The developer shall be
responsible for providing all required testing and documentation to
demonstrate said compliance as required by the City Engineer.
19. Access rights along the frontage of Lot 5 to Medical Center Drive shall be
relinquished on the Subdivision Map for Unit 1.
20. The developer shall dedicate and construct a public park area as
identified on the map totaling 3.8 acres (reference Lots L and M) with 50
percent credit given for the acreage lying under the gas and electric
easement with amenities to be provided as approved by the City's Parks and
Recreation Director which include, but are not limited to, three lighted
tennis courts, a tot lot area, picnic tables, a cabana, drinking
fountains, park signage, and noise/privacy walls to protect residents from
the adjacent park activity which includes the tennis courts. In addition,
a jogging track, trails, trees and shrubs, and turf will be supplied on
the park site with access to Greg Rogers Park as well as a barrier to
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of 5-27-87 Page 4
define the separation between the open space area and the developed park
system. Waiver of any and all park fees will be subject to City Council
approval.
21. Development of the parcels shown on the subdivision map must be in
accordance with the Precise Plan design guidelines adopted for Rancho del
Sur, Phase I.
22. All landscaping including decorative walls and retaining walls shall be
subject to the approval of the City Landscape Architect. Such approval
shall include a time schedule for the proposed construction of these
amenities.
23. The applicant shall request the formation of an open space maintenance
district to address open space lots A, B, O, S, F, G, and N as identified
on the plan.
24. The minimum lot size in areas 4 and 5 shall be 6,000 square feet with a
maximum of 40 percent of the 162 lots allowed below 7,000 square feet.
Retaining walls should be provided within areas 4 and 5 to insure a
minimum buildable pad depth of 85 feet for all lots.
25. Open space lots C, D, E, H, I, J, P, Q, R, U, V, and T shall be deleted
from the open space category and placed back under private ownership.
26. Street names will be provided prior to City Council action on the
tentative map.
27. Copies of the CC&Rs shall be submitted to the Planning Department for
review and approval prior to the recommendation of the final map.
28. A 20' wide access easement shall be provided from St "A" through unit #1
to serve the property at the east end of Lot 1.
29. Lot 33 shall be delted and the grading adjusted to minimize the fill slope
towards Telegraph Canyon Rd.
30. Prior to the issuance of building permits for units 2 or 3 the applicant
shall submit a report prepared to the satisfaction of the Environmental
Review Coordinator which demonstrates that the most current
state-of-the-art methods are being used to achieve the lowest feasible
interior noise levels in all second story levels adjacent to Medical
Center Drive.
The following are not conditions of approval, but will be required under the
authority of the Chula Vista Municipal Code:
1. The developer shall pay Traffic Signal Participation fees in accordance
with City Council policy prior to issuance of building permits.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of 5-27-87 Page 5
2. The developer shall pay all applicable sewer fees, including but not
limited to Sewer Participation Fee, prior to issuance of building permits.
3. The developer shall underground all existing overhead facilities lying
within the Subdivision. All utilities serving the Subdivision shall be
undergrounded.
4. All grading work shall be done in accordance with the City of Chula Vista
Landscape Manual and Grading Ordinance 1797 as amended.
5. The developer shall install street trees in accordance with Section
18.28.10 of Chula Vista Municipal Code.
6. The developer shall comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code. Preparation of Final Maps and all plans shall be in
accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, Subdivision
Ordinance and the Subdivision Manual of the City of Chula Vista.
C. DISCUSSION
Reference adjacent zoning and land use as well as existing site
characteristics refer to rezoning discussion.
Proposed Development
In addition to Unit I which is proposed to be retained as a single-multiple
family development lot, three different single-family detached building
programs are planned. Approval of the subdivision map as proposed subject to
the conditions recommended by staff will allow the developer to proceed with
the sale or development of the lots in accordance with the precise plan
guideline being established for this project.
Unit II which proposes the development of 70 lots with a minimum size of 3,750
square feet calls for a 50-foot wide lot with a minimum depth of 75 feet.
This minimum depth would be used only for those lots which back up to the 250
foot wide San Diego Gas & Electric easement, lhe lots increase in length from
between 80 to lO0 feet for the interior portion and would allow for a maximum
building area in excess of 2,000 square feet with more traditional setbacks
provided. While the setbacks would allow for a first-story building to
encroach within ten feet of the front property line, the garage setback would
be a minimum of 15 feet with the second story setback at 20 feet. These
setbacks coupled with the public road system which includes additional area
between the sidewalk and the front property line would insure a standard
parking space to be accommodated in front of each of the garages planned for
the development. A rear yard of a 15-foot depth is also established.
Area III, which abuts the Foxhill Development, calls for lots of 50 foot in
width with a minimum depth of 90 feet, with a more typical depth of between 95
and lO0 feet. Building areas and setbacks are comparable to area II and again
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of 5-27-87 Page 6
planned with a public street system. It should be noted that the adjacent
Chula Vista Woods development which became fairly controversial in the
subdivision stage features 50 by 70 foot lots with relatively narrow private
street systems having reduced front setbacks with both sidewalks and parking
occurring on only one side of the street. This combination creates a rather
crowded appearance as you drive through the Woods development.
The development standards proposed for Rancho del Sur including the public
street system is a concerted effort on the part of both the applicant and the
staff to avoid any comparison or duplication of the Chula Vista Woods
project. Lot L and M form the proposed 3.8 acre public park development that
will front along Naples Street and encompass a portion of the San Diego Gas &
Electric easement. The area lying west of San Diego Gas & Electric easement
identified as areas IV and V is proposed at 60-foot wide lots with a minimum
lot area of 6,000 square feet and a lot average in excess of 7,000 square
feet. Staff has placed a condition on the map that would limit the number of
6,000 square-foot lots to no more than 40 percent of the unit IV and V area.
The development standards proposed for areas IV and V are consistent with the
City's R-1 standards.
In conclusion, the developer has been consistently adjusting lot sizes upward,
reducing the number of lots, reducing density, and expanding the park area in
response to staffs' concerns and in response to input from the hearing
processes to date. The resulting subdivision represents a final product of
mixed lot sizes and building products near the lower range of the General Plan
designation for this area.
D. FINDINGS
Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, a tentative
subdivision map for Rancho del Sur, Chula Vista Tract 87-8 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. The subdivision will provide for the extension of East Naples
as a collector road system intersecting with Medical Center Drive, and
will also provide secondary access to the substreet and provided in the
Chula Vista Woods subdivision directly to the south of this development.
3. The project is in substantial conformance with the Chula Vista General
Plan as follows:
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of 5-27-87 Page 7
a. Land Use
The proposed subdivision falls within the density range set by the
Chula Vista General Plan with the overall density calculated near the
lower end of the range.
b. Circulation
The proposed street network is designed to conform to the circulation
network outlined in the Chula Vista General Plan including the
widening of Medical Center Drive to function as an arterial road as
well as providing for the extension of East Naples Street as a
residential collector.
c. Housing
The proposed subdivision will provide for several varieties of
housing types to serve various economic groups.
d. Conservation
The proposed project will provide the retention of open space through
much of the San Diego Gas & Electric easement as well as providing
for retention of certain open space areas in a natural state as well
as a reconfigured state along Telegraph Canyon Road to preserve and
enhance the scenic qualities of that system.
e. Parks and Recreation and Open Space
The subdivider proposes to develop 3.8 acres of active park land
which is in excess of the requirement specified in the Chula Vista
Municipal Code and has agreed to participate in the planning and/or
the development of Greg Rogers Park as a community facility. In
addition, open space is being provided in a natural and relandscape
condition along both Telegraph Canyon Road as well as East Naples and
Medical Center Drive in combination with walls and berms and is some
cases increased parkway widths with meandering walks to enhance the
overall quality of the development.
f. Seismic Safety
A portion of the subdivision, specifically unit I, is bisected by a
trace of the La Nacion fault which is noted in the Environmental
Impact Report appears to be mitigable through proper planning and
design and construction practices. This would include review by
qualified geologists of the project site plans including the
incorporation of setbacks associated with development in the vicinity
of the La Nacion fault.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of 5-27-87 Page 8
g. Safety
The site is within acceptable response times for both fire and police
services. Community Hospital is within 1/4 to 1/2 mile to the
subject site.
h. Noise
Certain portions of the project adjacent to Telegraph Canyon Road and
Medical Center Drive are subject to noise contours which will require
the construction of berming and/or walls of sufficient size to
mitigate the impact. Project design standards reflect the
construction of the necessary walls and/or berming. The construction
of the adjacent residential development will be such that the UBC
standard must be met as it relates to providing acceptable interior
noise limits for the multiple family area. A condition has been
included to address the single family home construction.
i. Scenic Highway
Telegraph Canyon has been identified as a scenic route. The
applicant is providing landscaping. The grading standards coupled
with the proposed design review of the buildings proposed in this
area to ensure compliance with the scenic highway standards in
addition the proposed signing plan as well as existing signing is
being integrated into a comprehensive program to comply with the
scenic route requirements.
j. Bicycle Routes
Sufficient road width is being provided on both East Naples Street
and Medical Center Drive to accommodate bicycles together with
limited on-street parking.
k. Public Building
No public buildings are planned for the property other than the
development of the park site on lots L and M. There are no public
buildings identified on the General Plan for this area.
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 of the Chula Vista and
the available fiscal anO environmental resources.
WPC 3896P
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 1
6. PUBLIC HEARING (c) P-87-9: Consideration of Adopting Plans and
Standards for the Development and/or Maintenance oF
Lots in Common Areas within Rancho del Sur
A. BACKGROUND
This item involves consideration of the Precise Plan for the Rancho del
Sur subdivision which is the preceding agenda item. The Environmental Impact
Report is also included as an earlier item.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the findings contained in Section D of this report, adopt a
motion recommending that City Council approve the Precise Plan Design
Guidelines for Rancho del Sur, Phase l, subject to the following conditions:
1. Unit 1 shall be subject to Design Review processing by the Chula
Vista Design Review Committee.
2. Units 2 and 3 shall be subject to Design Review by the City Zoning
Administrator.
3. Units 4 and 5 shall be subject to Chula Vista Planning staff site
plan review in accordance with the Rancho del Sur standards.
C. DISCUSSION
The Rancho del Sur Precise Plan Design Guidelines set forth the standards
for the four distinct areas; namely; Unit 1 which is set aside for the more
traditional multiple family area at 12 dwelling units per acre will fall under
the review of the Chula Vista Design Review Committee with criteria
established in keeping with the City's present R-3 sta~a~. Areas 2 and 3
which are planned for the wide and shallow lots vary s g y in that Unit 2
is established to accommodate the 50' x 75' size lot with the various setbacks
and building areas defined in the standards. Area 3 will be established for
the 50' wide lot with a minimum depth of 90' reflecting similar setbacks with
a slight increase in the building area. Areas 4 and 5 which are designed to
accommodate the traditional single-family dwelling with a mixture of 6,000 and
7,000 square foot lots carries with it the standard setbacks established for
R-1 areas as well as a floor area ratio of .45 and a maximum building height
of 28'. For this reason staff is recommending that the site plan and
architectural review required for areas 4 and 5 be in keeping with the
standard R-1 zone. Patio standards for each of the areas is outlined in the
patio development schedule. While architectural plans have not been developed
for any of the areas, specific architectural guidelines are included to
establish design principle to be used as guide for designers and builders of
this project. The landscape architecture program including types and
locations of walls and fences to be used throughout the development are
clearly outlined in the landscaping concept program. A perimeter wall which
will help reduce noise impacts on the project will provide both esthetic and
practical protection to be used in conjunction with the landscaping program.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 2
In addition, privacy fences will be used for the interior lot lines as
well as certain perimeter areas that are not highly visible. Wrought iron
view fencing will be utilized for rear yards oriented to open areas will allow
homeowners to maximize the view potential. Cross sections of the various
conditions are outlined in the graphic standards to help clarify the various
conditions. Recreation facilities are being coordinated with the Parks and
Recreation Department as well as providing pedestrian linkage between the
proposed neighborhood park to be located along Naples Street linking the
development back to the Greg Rogers park to the west. Major landscaping
elements are provided along both Telegraph Canyon Road and Naples Street with
Naples Street featuring a wide parkway on both sides with a meandering walk,
with the intersections highlighted by additional landscaping as well as entry
signs which are incorporated into the walls, highlighted by complimentary
planting. The primary maintenance of these areas will be covered through an
open space maintenance district, include the areas adjacent to Medical Center
Drive and Naples Street as well as the major slope banks along Telegraph
Canyon Road. The ~ublic park area will be dedicated to the City and will
become the responsibility of the community as a whole. Individual property
owners located within this development will be responsible for landscaping
maintenance within their private yard areas. The remaining area within the
gas and electric easement will be included as part of the open space
maintenance district.
D. FINDINGS
1. Such plan will not under the circumstances of the particular case be
detrimental to health safety or general welfare or persons residing
or working in the vicinity or injurious to property improvements in
the vicinity; the circulation system in the lots have been designed
to accommodate the proposed development. The conditions of approval
outlined in the subdivision map, as well as the adopted development
standards, will insure that the development will create an acceptable
living environment.
2. Such plans satisfies the principles of the application of the P
modifying district as set forth in Section 19.56041; the proposed
developments will be required to be constructed in accordance with
the Precise Plan Guidelines as established with the approval of this
project subject to the rezoning and subdivision map conditions.
3. That an exception granted which deviate from the underlying zone
requirements shall be warranted only when necessary to meet the
purpose and the application of the P Precise Plan Modifying
Districts; at this time no exceptions are proposed which would
deviate from the requirements of the underlying zone in accordance
with the Precise Plan Guidelines being adopted.
4. The approval of this plan will conform to the General Plan of the
adopted policies of the City; the project is in keeping with the
goals, objectives, and densities as established in the Chula Vista
General Plan.
WPC 3898P
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
IAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES.
The following information must be disclosed:
I. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
1)Great American Development Company 4) Matthew Ronald Loonin
2)William Patrick Kruer 5)Jack A. Guhman
3)George Thomas Kruer 6)John Wo Gardner, Jr.
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
Same Six (6)
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list
the names of all individuals owning more than I0% of the shares in the corporation
or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
Great American First Savings Bank
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or a
trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit
organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
N/A
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No × . If yes, please indicate person(s)
IPerson is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association,
soc--6E'~"[ club, fraternal organization, corporation~.estate,. ~ru~ req~iye~,.syndic~:,
this and any other county, city and county, c~ty, municipality, o~s~rlct or o r
· combination' ' ' as a un it."
political subdivision, or any other group or acting
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.) y TZ' (
~fU ~;~'~' a~4~ c%t~t/dat e
WPC 0701P ~-~t~
A-110 Pr f~t~o¥ tppe na~e of ~p~licant
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 1
7. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-87-M - Consideration to rezone 1.36 acres located
at the northeast corner of East "H" Street and Corral
Canyon Road from R-1-H to P-C - La Petite Academy, Inc.
A. BACKGROUND
1. The request is to rezone 1.36 acres located at the northeast corner
of East "H" Street and Corral Canyon Road from R-1-H (Single Family
Residential/Hillside Modifying District) to P-C (Planned
Community/Bonita Long Canyon SPA Commercial Recreational land use
designation) in order to construct a 7,500 sq. ft. child daycare
facility.
2. An Initial Study, IS-87-51 of possible adverse environmental impacts
of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator
on May 15, 1987, who 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-87-51.
2. Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council enact an ordinance
to change the zone for 1.36 acres located at the northeast corner of
East "H" Street and Corral Canyon Road from R-1-H to P-C (Bonita Long
Canyon SPA Commercial Recreational land use designation) as shown on
Exhibit A attached hereto.
C. DISCUSSION
The site is triangular in shape and consists of a knoll of natural terrain
elevated above both abutting streets and a permanent EastLake open space
lot to the north. Single family homes within the Bonita Long Canyon SPA
P-C zone are located to the west of the site across Corral Canyon Road,
and vacant R-1-H zoned property is located to the south across East H"
Street. The General Plan designates the site as well as surrounding
properties for medium to low density residential use.
The proposal involves the construction of a child daycare facility
consisting of a ?,500 sq. ft. building with related playgrounds,
landscaping, and on-site parking for 28 vehicles. A single driveway off
Corral Canyon Road would provide access to the site. The facility would
accommodate up to 185 children between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 6:30
p.m., Monday through Friday.
The Bonita Long Canyon SPA P-C zone provides for a Commercial Recreational
land use designation. This designation provides that:
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 2
"Uses shall be limited to the following; tennis courts, swimming pool,
racquet ball court, basketball court, recreation building which shall
serve the membership and guests and shall not be open to the public at
large. This facility shall be permitted to sell on-site the following
items: food, sporting goods and accessories as these items shall be
available only in conjunction of the use of the facilities by the members
and guests. Daycare centers shall be included as permitted use. The
intent of this commercial recreation site is not to provide general or
neighborhood commercial facilities."
The design of the structure is identical to the La Petite facility at East
"J" Street and Paseo Del Rey which recently receive a Chula Vista
Beautification Award. The site would be graded to create two pads--wi th
the structure and play areas located at a higher elevation than the
parking area. A generous landscape buffer would be established adjacent
to both street frontages. The Design Review Committee will consider the
plans on May 21 and the results will be reported to the Commission.
D. ANALYSIS
The property is isolated by virtue of the abutting streets and open space
lot. Due to the size and configuration of the parcel, and its
relationship to East "H" Street and Corral Canyon Road, it would be
difficult if not impossible to develop the property with single family
homes and create a suitable livin~ (.nvironment for the residents. The
rezoning would brin~ the property under the provisions of the Bonita Long
Canyon SPA Commercial Recreational designation which only allows for
membership recreational facilities or daycare centers.
The daycare ~se appears to represent an excellent option for the site. It
is desirable to locate daycare centers as close as possible to the
residents they serve. The site is surrounded by established and
developing single family areas and is conveniently situated at the
inte~se~tio~ of two major streets. T~ere ~,re presently no other daycare
facilities in the immediate area.
The site also presents few if any compatibility problems. As noted above,
the property is surrounded by major streets and an open space area. the
closest noise receptors are the single family homes located to the west
and on the opposite side of Corral Canyon Road from tile site. These homes
face to the west, away from the site, and are located approximately 150
ft. distant from the nearest point of the playground area.
The site is conti~iuous to the Bonita Long Canyon SPA, and the Commercial
Recreational designation is consistent with the purpose an(! land use
patterns estaklished ~y that plan. Thus, the proposal is consistent with
the implementation of the General Plan for planned communities involvin9
large trac~s of land and variety of land uses.
For these reasons, we recommend approval of the request.
UPC 3889P
!
/
BONITA LONG
· CANYON SPA
'~_ /PROJECT AREA
-----_____ I(R-1-H TO
o
°
negative declaration_
PROJECT NAME: Bonita Long Canyon, La Petite Academy
PROJECT LOCATION: Northeast corner of East "H" Street and Corral Canyon Road
PROJECT APPLICANT: La Petite Academies, Inc.
llO0 Main St., Kansas City, MO 64196
CASE NO: IS-87-51 DATE: April 27, 1987
A. Project Setting
The project site is located north of East "H" Street and to the east of
Corral Canyon Road. It is adjacent to the EastLake Planned Community.
The property has been previously surveyed for archeological and biological
resources'as part of the survey is done for the EastLake and Bonita Long
Canyon projects. No cultural or natural resources were found. The site
is within the headwaters of the Bonita Long Canyon drainage area.
However, due to the minimal amount of drainage volumes and very minimal
amount of increase to the development of this property, no significant
impacts are anticipated.
Access to the property is provided by Corral Canyon Road which currently
has a Level of Service 'IA". Secondary access is along East "H" Street
which currently has a Level of Service "C".
Numerous geological and soils studies have been completed for this
property and its'vicinity. The property has been graded in accordance
with those studies. No substantial impacts is anticipated.
Because of the developed nature of the site, the additional grading to
accommodate the proposed facility will not have any substantial impact due
to landform alteration. The proposed La Petite facility is primarily.a
one-story building with the exception being a bell tower over the ma~n
entry to the structure. This will not result in any significant aesthetic
impact to the area.
B. Project Description
The project consists of a pre-school or daycare center providing
educational, recreational, eating, and sleeping facilities. The entire
structure involves 7,500 sq. ft. with a potential occupancy load of 192
people. Twenty-eight parking spaces are provided for drop-off and pick-up
services for employees and vehicles of the facility.
A total of 6,600 cubic yards of earth would be excavated with about 4,700
cubic yards to placed on the site. The maximum depth of cut will be 12
feet and the maximum depth of fill will be l0 feet.
city of chula vista planning department ~ 't
environmental review eection.CHUb& vmSTA~,
-2-
C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans
The project proposal includes an amendment to the zoning of the property
from R-1 to P-C Planned Community in accordance with the adjoining zoning
which is also Planned Community. Development regulations would then allow
for the proposed use in accordance with the regulations of the P-C zone.
This use would be in conformance with the General Plan.
D. Identification of Environmental Effects
The project site and the proposed use have the potential of being a
receptor of a significant traffic noise impact and a generator of an
acoustical impact. However, given the circumstances with the setbacks
from the major adjoining arterials, East "H" Street and Corral Canyon
Road, and the more than substantial setback and grade separation from the
nearest residential uses, there will be no substantial adverse acoustical
impact.
E. Mitigation necessary to avoid significant effects
As is noted above, due to the siting of the proposed use, there is no
significant acoustical impact, and therefore, no mitigation measures are
necessary.
F. Findings of Insignificant Impact
1. As is noted in the initial study, the proposed project will have no
significant impact on the environment and will not curtail the
diversity in this urbanizing area.
2. The project is in conformance with the General Plan and achieves
those long-term goals and therefore, will not achieve any short-term
goals to the disadvantage of those long-term goals.
3. Because the project will have no significant impact, it in
combination with other projects in the area will not result in any
significant cumulative long-range impact.
4. As is noted above, the most probable impact from this type of
facility is an acoustical impact on nearby residential uses. In this
instance, due to the setback and grate separation, no such impact is
anticipated.
G. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista: Mando Liuag, Associate Planner Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer
Len Hansell, Building and Housing Department
Carol Gore, Fire Marshal
Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer
-3-
Applicant's Agent: Edward J. Cass and Associates 521 Grape Street
San Diego, CA 92101
2. Documents
Chula Vista Municipal Code including the Conformance Standards and
Noise Ordinance contained in the Zoning Section.
General Plan and all elements thereof.
All environmental documents prepared for Bonita Long Canyon and the
EastLake Planned Community and Sectional Planning Area.
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.
ENVIRON~Z~NTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
WPC 3885P
'EN
city of chula vista planning department CIWOF
environmental review section CHULAVISTA
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
IAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS I
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
I
COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES.
The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
LA PETITE ACADEMY, INC. A Delaware Corporation
KELTON TITLE CORPORATION
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
KELTON TITLE CORPORATION
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list
the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation
or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
Robert F. Brozman - LPA Richard Kelton - KTC
Jack L. Brozman - LPA David Kelton - Ktc
Louis L. Kelton - KTC R.J. Swaner - KTC
Mark Kelton - KTC
3. If any person identified pursuant to {1) above is a non-profit organization or a
trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit
organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No × If yes, please indicate person{s)
IPerson is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association,
soc-B-d-f~% club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trus~, receiver, syndicate,
this and any other county, c~ty and county, city~-~municipal~ty, district or other
political subdivision, or any other group or co~n~d~ko~ acti/ng~as a unit."
(NOTE: AttaCh additional pages as necessary.)~/ ))L~/'A~V
Sign)~UubetYof'a~plf~a~t/date
wPC o7olP _
A-110 Yrln~ or type name ot appf~can~
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 1
8. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-87-N - Consideration to rezone 0.33 acres located
on the east si de of North Second Avenue at th~
easterly terminus o~ "C" Street ~rom A %o R-I - Wayne
C1 ark
A. BACKGROUND
1. This item is a request to rezone 0.33 acres from A (Agriculture) to
R-1 (single-family residential) in order to create two single-family
lots on the east side of North Second Avenue at the easterly terminus
of "C" Street.
2. The project is exempt from environmental review as a Class 3(a)
exemption. (Environmental review would be required with development
pl ans. )
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion to continue PCZ-87-N to the meeting of June 24, 1987.
C. DISCUSSION
The property is vacant and located on an east-facing slope above the
Sweetwater Valley. Properties to the north and east are also vacant and zoned
for agriculture, while the properties to the south and west are zoned R-1 and
developed with single-family dwellings.
The front 20-30 ft. of the site slopes down from the Second Avenue
frontage, with a level area behind that approximately 8-12 ft. below street
level and varying in width from 30 ft. on the north to 55 ft. on the south,
and then the property slopes steeply down toward the valley floor. A dense
grove of eucalyptus trees occupy the steeper slopes on the central/easterly
portion of the site.
The 0.33 acres is currently a portion of a larger 1.64 acre parcel. The
proposal is to rezone and split off the 0.33 acres to create two R-1 lots of
approximately 7,000 sq. ft. each. The balance of the larger parcel would be
merged with a 10.35 acre site lying to the east which is presently unzoned.
The applicant has also applied to vacate a 14 ft. strip of Second Avenue in
order to expand the parcels to the west and thereby enhance their
devel opabi 1 i ty.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 2
D. ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing standard 7,000 sq. ft. lots, 60 ft. in width,
for property which is subject to severe development constraints due to the
topography as well as the mature grove of eucalyptus trees. The property
presently has only 50-75 ft. of depth which could be considered usable.
Approval of the street vacation could improve this situation, but the Council
won't be considering the application for at least another month, and the
Engineering Department has stated that they cannot support the full 14 ft.
vacation request.
While the proposal is consistent with the General Plan designation of
Medium Density Residential (4-12 du/ac), the suitability of the property for
the development proposed and the determination of the most appropriate
location for the zone boundary will depend on the success and extent of the
street vacation, and the submittal of detail, engineered plans showing how
dwellings can be accommodated on the usable portion of the site. Since the
street vacation has not been resolved and detail plans have not been
submitted, we are recommending that the matter be continued for one month.
WPC 0837P/3899P
NIXON PL.
PROPI 'SED
UNZONED
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS
IWHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
ICOMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES.
The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list
the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation
or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
3. If any person identified pursuant to {1) above is a non-profit organization or a
trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit
organization oW as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff. Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council. wi.~hin the past twelve months?
Yes ~ No If yes, please indicate person{s)
Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association,
~ club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate,
this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, district or other
political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit."
{NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)~K2~
Signatuye of applicant/date
WPc o?oIP
A-IlO Print ~r type name of applicant
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 1
9. PUBLIC HEARING: DRC-87-24: Consideration of an appeal from a decision
of the Design Review Committee regarding the type and
height of fencing approved for t~e easterly property
line of a proposed 4-unit apartment project at 57~
Casselman Street in the R-3 zone - Gloria J. Butler
Hansen
A. BACKGROUND
This item is an appeal from a decision of the Design Review Committee
approving the use of a 6 ft. high concrete fence along the easterly
property line of a proposed 4-unit apartment project at 579 Casselman
Street in the R-3 zone. The appeal has been filed by the property owner
abutting the site to the east at 575 Casselman.
The project is exempt from environmental review as a Class 3{c) Exemption.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion to deny the appeal.
C. DISCUSSION
The project in question involves the construction of three additional
units in conjunction with an existing single family dwelling to form a
two-story, 4-unit apartment building located on the front portion of the
site with a parking area for eight vehicles located to the rear. Access
to the parking area is provided off Casselman by a 12 ft.-wide driveway
running the length of the easterly property line adjacent to the
appellant's property.
The Design Review Committee considered the project on April 16, 1987, at
which time the plans indicated a 6 ft.-high solid wood fence along the
property line in question. The appellant raised concerns regarding
potential noise impacts from the driveway and requested that the Committee
require the use of a masonry block wall. At the suggestion of the project
proponent, the Design Review Committee endorsed the use of a concrete
rather than wood fence.
The appellant's property is zoned R-3 with a single family dwelling and
attached rental unit. The dwelling is located five feet from the property
line and proposed apartment driveway. There is a combination of chain
link, wood, masonry and bamboo fencing existing on the appellant's side of
the common boundary.
The statement of appeal (please see attached) claims that a concrete fence
is structurally inadequate and will not provide protection from the
vehicle traffic and noise on the driveway. The appellant asks instead
that the Commission require an 8-ft. high masonry block wall.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 27, 1987 Page 2
D. ANALYSIS
The Zoning Ordinance provides that a 6-ft. high maximum solid fence shall
be erected along the property line or zoning boundary to separate
multiple-family zones and/or uses from abutting single family residential
zones or areas. Unless a project is unusually large or the property line
represents an R-3/R-1 zone boundary, the staff has recommended and the
Design Review Committee has required generally no more than solid wood
fencing.
In the present case, the general area is zoned R-3 and in transition from
single to multiple family use. Although the development is a small
apartment project which will generate limited traffic on the driveway, the
project proponent offered to erect concrete rather than wood fencing along
the easterly property line, and along the rear and a portion of the
westerly property line as well in order to retain continuity of the
fencing exposed to common areas.
The concrete fencing is an attractive alternative (please see attached for
one example) and will provide greater noise attenuation than a solid wood
fence. This type of fencing may in fact represent a better noise screen
than a masonry block wall. The project proponent will provide comparative
data which will be reported to the Commission at the hearing.
A masonry block wall is also an attractive alternative, but it is labor
intensive and thus expensive. In order to achieve the desired continuity,
the wall would have to be extended an additional ll5 feet--along the rear
and a portion of the westerly property lines--as well as the 150 ft.
length of the easterly property line. The appellant has not offered to
share the expense for the common boundary, but suggests that the wall be
constructed on the proponent's property and at the proponent's expense.
We believe the additional expense is unnecessary considering the size of
the project coupled with the modest advantage, if any, of the wall over
the concrete fence in noise attenuation.
The appeal also requests that the wall be established at a height of 8
feet. As noted above, the Municipal Code limits residential fencing to 6
ft. maximum. An 8 ft.-high fence or wall cannot be authorized without
granting a variance from the standards of the Code.
For the reasons noted above, we recommend denial of the appeal.
WPC 3892P
"C"
l'~-l',
MC INTOSH
VISTA STREET
..... - .... ~ASSELMAN STREET
"D 'STREE'
FLOWER ~STF
d~'{ LOCATOR
DRC-87-24
Specifications:
· Panels, posts and cap rails have woodgrain
CAPRAIL texture on both sides.
~" · Integral color and concrete ls thoroughly
vibrated and shall attain a minimum
T 4- comprehensive strength of 4000 psi at 28 days.
6 · Steel mesh reinforced panels and rebar
PANEL reinforced posts. Ail rebar shall conform to
A.S.T.M. A615, grade 40.
· Pile foundations at 5' 0" O.C. and are to be
located in undisturbed soil or compacted fill.
6'-0- · Pile foundation depth varies with soil conditions
and wind load.
· Standard color is light brown.
· Other designs will be available in the near
future.
STC Rating:
14 or 22 with posts slots grouted on one side.
--~ ~ I I Wind Load:
4" MIN
DEm'H 15 lbs. per sq. foot, with minimum foundations.
Ill FOOTING For additional product information contact the
[[[~ manufacturer nearest you.
Northern California .,~'ea
Southern California Area
W~L SEC'nON '/~" = ~'-0" Designer Concrete Products, Inc. (213) 323-9255
Central Area
NEBRASKA, Blessing Precast (308) 234 2821
p~c.~r P~L KANSAS, Salina Concrete Products Inc. (913)
.o DALLAS, Superior Concrete Fence of Texas Inc.,
(817) 277-9255
SAN ANTONIO, Fencecrete Inc. (512) 492-7911
~ ~.'-, 5" New England Area
Appco Corporation (617) 473-8355
" Puerto Rico
Levitt Homes (809) 781-9292
I 5" I Information requests relating to availability in other locations, other
P.O Box 2973, Gardena, CA 90247, USA.
TELEX 4998621
OR CALL (213) 323-9259 - (800) 624-WALL
I
.. O 0--J], ' '""~.' Y°urW°°dcrete®representative:
(SECTIOI~ (TOP)
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF CONCERN WITH
RESPECT TO DEVELOPMENT OF OTAY MESA
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Planning Commission is involved with a major
update of the Chula Vista General Plan for lands within its Sphere of Influence;
and
WHEREAS, various regional impacts influence the ultimate development
character and quality of life in Chula Vista, especially Otay Mesa; and
WHEREAS, the City and County of San Diego have designated 3,000 and
2,700 acres of land respectively for industrial uses on their General Plans for
Otay Mesa; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Diego has proceeded and approximately 2,252
acres are either approved or in process for tentative map action and 100 net acres
are under development; and
WHEREAS, there are unmitigable environmental impacts affecting Chula
Vista, especially traffic and air quality; and
WHEREAS, there is no funding mechanism or any time schedule as to when
State Route 905 and State Route 125 might be constructed and the latter is not
even on the State System; and
WHEREAS, the potential expansion of Brown Field would further erode
any land use balance on the Mesa and remove considerable acreage from residential
use; and
WHEREAS, options for alternative land uses are being precluded on the
Mesa by the ongoing approval of subdivision maps on Otay Mesa by the City of San
Diego; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Diego has a Citizen's Advisory Committee on
Growth and Development and various growth control and moratoria are being prepared
for residential development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission on the
27th day of May, 1987, does hereby express its grave concern about the ongoing
planning and development of Otay Mesa, recommends that growth control measures
be instituted on the Mesa for industrial tentative map processing and recommends
that the City of Chula Vista City Council aggressively pursue all legal means to
ensure responsible land planning and implementation for Otay Mesa
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALI-
FORNIA, this 27th day of May, 1987, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT: