HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1987/05/13 AGENDA
City Planning Commission
Chula Vista, California
Wednesday, May 13, 1987 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of April 22, 1987
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft EIR-87-3 Rancho del Sur
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-87-32: Consideration of
an appeal of the City Zoning Administrator decision
disapproving off-site subdivision directional signs
for the Brandywine Townhomes development - Pacific
Coast Advertising Graphics (continued)
3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-87-16: Reconsideration of an appeal of the City
Zoning Administrator decision disapproving a conceptual
site plan for the southwest corner of Broadway and
Flower - Appel Development
4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-86-6: Consideration of a tentative subdivision
map for Jasmine Place, Chula Vista Tract 86-6 located
at 367 Roosevelt Street - T & S Development
5. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) PCS-87-9: Consideration of a tentative subdivision
map for Vista Cortina, Chula Vista Tract 87-9 located
at the southeast corner of Lakeshore Drive and EastLake
Drive - Brehm Communities
(b) P-87-10: Consideration of precise plan and develop-
ment standards for Vista Cortina, Chula Vista Tract 87-9
(c) PCZ-87-O: Consideration to redesignate 22.42 acres
from RP-13 to RP-8 in EastLake Shores - Vista Cortina
AGENDA -2- May 13, 1987
6. 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
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
COMMISSION COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT AT to the Study Session Meeting of May 20, 1987 at 5:00 p.m.
in Conference Rooms 2 & 3
May 8, 1987
TO: City Planning Commission
FROM: George Krempl, Director of Planning
SUBJECT: Staff Report on Agenda Items for Planning Commission Meeting of
May 13, 1987
1. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft EIR-87-3 Rancho Del Sur
A. BACKGROUND
This EIR was issued for public and agency review on April 1, 1986. It is
being circulated through the State Clearinghouse; however, because of the
lack of State Agency involvement in the project, a shortened period was
granted and it will end on noon the 13th of May. The State Clearinghouse
will inform staff that day if there are any comments. As of this date, no
input has been received from any agency or the public.
The Resource Conservation Commission has reviewed the document and found
that it was in compliance with CEQA and recommended that the Planning
Commission certify the EIR.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. If no comments are received on the Draft EIR: certify that EIR-87-3
has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the environmental
review procedures of the City of Chula Vista and that the Planning
Commission will review and will consider the information in the EIR
as it reaches a decision on the project; or
2. If comments are received; schedule consideration of the final EIR for
May 27, 1987.
C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Rancho Del Sur project site is located approximately 3 miles east of
downtown Chula Vita and 5.5 miles north of the United States~exico
International Border. Annexation of the portion of the 108.3-acre project
site which was in the County has now been completed.
The Rancho Del Sur Development involves the construction of 302
single-family dwelling units in four residential subsections and 220
multi-family units in a fifth subsection. In addition, the project is
currently proposing a public park onsite, which would be located with the
SDG&E easement immediately north and south of East Naples Street. The
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13,1987 Page 2
additional area of the park would be located adjacent to the easement
onsite to the southeast of East Naples Street. Approximately 85% of the
site would be graded, with 800,000 cubic yards of balanced cut and fill.
An additional 300,000 cubic yards would be involved in remedial grading
and site preparation. A small portion of the site east of Medical Center
Drive and south of the proposed extension of East Naples Street is
designated for future development, the nature of which is yet to be
determined. When future development in this area is proposed, additional
environmental review will be required.
D. PROJECT IMPACT
Land Use
The proposed project would alter the utilization of the site from
undeveloped open space to an urban development containing both single- and
multi-family dwellings. This change would result in impacts such as
increased traffic flows, decreased air quality, and additional public
service and utility demands. The proposed land uses for Rancho Del Sur
are, however, compatible with the existing and planned land uses in the
vicinity of the project. The project is consistent with applicable land
use policies.
The multi-family and small single-family lots are buffered from nearby
residential development by landscaping and open space such that any
potential adverse impact is reduced to a level of insignificance. No
further mitigation is required as long as adequate buffering of these
sensitive land uses is maintained.
Schools
The Rancho Del Sur project would incrementally affect the Chula Vista
Elementary and Sweetwater Union High School Districts. A cumulative
impact to these school districts will result from this project and other
proposed developments. However, because the required facilities are
currently planned, and assuming construction is completed concurrent with
need and Rancho Del Sur pays the required development fees in accordance
with State Law (Assembly Bill Number 2926), then the cumulative impact
would be mitigated to a level of insignificance.
Transportation
The Rancho Del Sur project is expected to add approximately 4400 average
daily trips (ADT) to the street system in the area. Results from the
analysis of projected traffic volumes at time of project completion
indicate that in all but one case, the acceptable level of service (LOS)
for each intersection will not be exceeded. The exception to this is at
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13,1987 Page 3
the intersection of the northbound 1-805 off- and on-ramps with Telegraph
Canyon Road, where the drop in LOS is caused mainly by the large eastbound
approach volumes. This drop in LOS is expected to occur even if the
Rancho Del Sur project is not completed. In addition, the unsignalized
intersection at Oleander Avenue and East Naples Street would be placed at
near capacity if the expected high rate of growth is experienced prior to
project completion.
To mitigate the unacceptable LOS at the intersection of the northbound
1-805 off- and on-ramps, a change in lane assignments on the eastbound
approach to 1-805 to allow double left turns is recommended. This could
be accomplished by transforming one through-lane into a left turn lane.
The addition of one eastbound through-lane resulting in double left-turns
and two eastbound through-lanes may also be necessary in the long term.
The developer will also be required to contribute a proportionate share to
a fund for roadway improvements.
Biological Resources
Among the sensitive biological resources identified onsite were five plant
species, grassland and coastal sage scrub habitats, and one bird species
(i.e., the California black-tailed gnatcatcher). A cumulative impact to
the biological resources resulting from project implementation is
identified. This effect, however, is not considered to be significant
because of the following factors: few numbers of sensitive plant species
onsite; low to moderate potential for other plant species to occur; low
potential for declining reptiles to occur onsite; few California
black-tailed gnatcatchers onsite; and lack of adjacent natural open space
for habitat. Because of the above factors and the highly degraded nature
of most of the native vegetation onsite, no mitigation is proposed for its
loss. However, recommendations concerning activities within the preserved
open space area are given in the Biological Resources section of the
document.
Landform Alteration/Visual Quality
Development of the Rancho Del Sur project would entail grading of
approximately 85% of the project site and a permanent change from a rural
to an urban landscape. In addition, existing and proposed electrical
lines within the existing SDG&E easement onsite could have an adverse
visual impact. Homes to the north and west, hospital facilities to the
southwest, and motorists along Medical Center Drive would be most affected
by changes in landform and vegetation onsite.
Since the existing topographic relief is relatively low, the degree of
landform alteration proposed would create an adverse but not significant
impact on the view into the project site. In addition, the proposed
landscaping and design concepts associated with project development would
preserve the scenic qualities of the Telegraph Canyon scenic highway
landscape corridor by buffering and screening many views. Implementation
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13,1987 Page 4
of the proposed landscape plan, along with additional grading and design
guidelines, would reduce the visual and landform impacts associated with
the Rancho Del Sur development to a level of insignificance.
Noise
The noise generated by the helipad operations at the hospital would not
affect significantly the ambient noise levels onsite. Modeling of
traffic-generated noise levels indicates that future noise levels at the
facades of the buildings adjacent to portions of Medical Center Drive and
East Naples Street would exceed the City of Chula Vista's guidelines for
residential land uses by up to 4dB(A). Masonry walls and/or berms located
along portions of Medical Center Drive and East Naples Street, in
conjunction with the actual construction of the proposed structures, would
reduce first floor, exterior, onsite noise levels to 65 dB(A) CNEL, i.e.,
within the City's guidelines, thereby mitigating noise impacts to a level
of insignificance.
WPC 3857P
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 1
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-87-32: Consideration of an
appeal of the City Zonin~ Administrator decisio.
disapproving off-site subdivision directional si~n>
· or the Brandywine Townhomes development - Pacifiu
Coast Advertising Graphics (continued)
A. BACKGROUND
This is an appeal from a decision of the Zoning Administrator disapproving
off-site subdivision directional signs for the Brandywine Townhomes
development located at the easterly terminus of Orange Avenue at 1501
basis to
Concord Way. Off-site directional sign? are used on a temporary
help facilitate project sales by directing motorists to a housing
development.
It was necessary to continue the item from the meeting of April 22, 1987,
when it was discovered that the City had failed to receive a Disclosure
Statement with the application.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Adopt a motion to uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator and
thereby deny the request for off-site subdivision directional signs
at locations 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and the north face of sign #6.
2. Adopt a motion to approve the request for sign location #1 and the
west face of sign #6 based on the findings contained in Section "E"
of this report, and subject to the following conditions:
a. The signs shall be installed so as not to interfere with the
visibility of motorists or other on- or off-site signs approved
by the City.
b. All existing off-site subdivision directional signs erected for
the Brandywine Townhomes development and not approved with this
application shall be removed from the City.
c. The applicant shall obtain a building permit for the signs
approved with this application.
d. This conditional use permit is valid for a period of six months
and will expire on November 13, 1987. Upon written request, the
Zoning Administrator may grant two extensions for one-year
periods without renotification or rehearing.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 2
C. DISCUSSION
Original Request
The signs, each measuring 4 sq. ft. in area, and 3.5 ft. in height, were
originally proposed at nine locations, including three locations on East
"H" Street.
Off-site subdivision directional signs are appropriate in cases where the
project location cannot easily be described in advertising media using
simple, direct routes. This can be the case where either the route is
circuitous, or where the route is simple but the distance is great. In
the latter case, the distance involved may require one or more signs to
reinforce the destination to the motorists. Signs not meeting one or both
of these criteria are considered off-site advertising signs which are
prohibited by the Municipal Code.
The Brandywine Townhomes project is located on a major street which
intersects with the 1-805 Freeway only 1/3 of a mile to the west of the
site. Consequently, the Zoning Administrator was unable to make the
required finding that any of the nine (9) proposed off-site sign locations
is necessary to direct motorists to the project, and therefore the request
was denied.
Amended request
The applicant has amended the request on appeal to delete the three East
"H" Street locations, add one location at the southwest corner of Palomar
Street and Orange Avenue, and add an additional west face to a sign
location at the northwest corner of Hilltop Drive and Orange Avenue;the
balance of the request remains the same. Thus the request is now for the
following seven (7) locations:
1. Southwest corner of Palomar Street and Orange Avenue (new request).
2. 1384 Fourth Avenue.
3. 1427 Hermosa Avenue.
4. 1430 Third Avenue.
5. Southeast corner of Third Avenue and Orange Avenue.
6. Northwest corner of Hilltop Drive and Orange Avenue (west face of
sign is new request).
7. 1525 Hilltop Drive.
In support of the appeal, the applicant states, "These signs are necessary
for those potential buyers who have been looking at property within the
City of Chula Vista. It is not always easy to know where you are in
relation to a major thoroughfare such as 1-805 when you are not familiar
with the area. These signs to direct those buyers. The exception to this
is sign no. 1 and the west face of sign no. 6. These signs are to direct
buyers traveling from I-5 through the confusing intersection at Palomar
and Orange and to reinforce their direction when they get to Hilltop."
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 3
D. ANALYSIS
The staff position has not materially changed. We are not in favor of
directional signs to direct potential buyers from one project to another
within the City or from one freeway to another through the City; the
number of off-site signs resulting from this approach would be
overwhelming.
Based on the projects relationship to 1-805, staff is of the opinion that
the two requests added on appeal--sign location #1 and the west face of
sign #6--are justified to direct people to the site. As stated by the
applicant, the intersection of Palomar Street and Orange Avenue could be
confusing to motorists being directed to the project from the I-5 Freeway,
and the west sign face at Hilltop and Orange will lead motorists to the
site. The other requested signs are not oriented to this major route and
become added sign clutter.
For the reasons noted above, we recommend that the Commission (1) uphold
the decision of the Zoning Administrator and thereby deny the request for
off-site subdivision directional signs at locations 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and the
north face of sign #6, and (2) approve the request for sign location #1
and the west face of sign #6 based on the following findings.
E. FINDINGS
1. That the proposed use at the location is necessary or desirable to
provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being
of the neighborhood or the community.
The signing will provide a community service by directing motorists
to available housing within the City.
2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular
case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons
residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements
in the vicinity.
The signing will be located so as not to obscure visibility or create
a traffic hazard.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and
conditions specified in the code for such use.
The proposal, as conditioned, will comply with the regulations
specified in the Code for the use.
4. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely
affect the general plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government
agency.
The proposal as approved is consistent with the policies of the
General Plan as they relate to the visual environment and housing
opportunities.
WPC 3776P/2652P
" -TOW. NHO~ES
" . T O W N l-I: O3~ E $
210"
" TOW. NHO~E$
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.
HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES, INC.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF C.V.
HOME FEDERAL SAVING & LOAN ASSOC.
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES, INC.
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.
NONE
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.
H.O.I. - KLAUS MENDENHALL
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, B d Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes o~ s~ If yes, please indicate person(s)
Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, I
~ 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."
necessar'.) HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES, INC.
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as ~By..~~~/~
Signature of applicant/date
WPC 0701P KLAUS MENDENHALL, PRESIDENT
A-110 Frint or type name of applicant
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page I
3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-87-16: Reconsideration of an appeal of the City
Zoning Administrator decision disapproving ~
conceptual site plan for the southwest corner oF
Broadway and Flower - Appel Development
A. BACKGROUND
This item is an appeal by Appel Development from a decision of the City
Zoning Administrator disapproving a conceptual site plan for a 1.38 acre
retail commercial center at the southwest corner of Broadway and Flower
Street in the C-T zone. The plan has been submitted for the sole purpose
of resolving the issue of whether or not development can proceed on the
1.38 acres fronting on Broadway without regard to the adjoining 2.55 acres
to the west.
The matter was originally heard on April 8, 1987, at which time the
Commission voted 3-3 to approve the appeal and thereby overturn the
decision of the Zoning Administrator (Commissioners Cannon, Fuller and
Tugenberg voting "Yes" and Commissioners Carson, Grasser and Green voting
"No"). Thus the motion failed to receive the necessary four votes and the
appeal was deemed denied. On April 22, 1987, the Commission voted 4-2 to
grant the applicant's request for this rehearing.
The Zoning Administrator's decision was rendered under the authority and
principles established by the Site Plan and Architectural Approval
provisions of the Municipal Code (Section 19.14.420 et seq.). The plan is
not subject to Design Review Committee approval.
On April 8, 1987, the Commission, by a vote of 6-0 with one Commissioner
absent, found that this project will have no significant environmental
impacts and adopted the Negative Declaration issued on IS-87-44.
B. RECO/4MENDATION
Adopt a motion to uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator and deny
the appeal.
C. DISCUSSION
The principles for site plan and architectural approval enumerated in
Section 19.14.470 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code provide, in part, that
the siting of other structures in the immediate neighborhood shall be
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 2
considered in the siting of any structure on the property; that ingress,
egress and internal traffic circulation shall be so designed as to promote
convenience and safety; and that these factors shall be related to the
setting or established character of the neighborhood or surrounding area.
It is the determination of the Zoning Administrator that these principles,
when coupled with the existing zoning pattern in the area, require
coordination in site planning between the subject site and the adjoining
property.
The site plan in question proposes a single structure arranged from north
to south along the entire length of the site and thus fails to provide
vehicular and visual access to Broadway for the C-T zoned acreage located
directly to the west. While the property to the west has street frontage
on Flower and Jefferson Streets, the proposed building location would
preclude access and exposure to Broadway, the primary commercial
thoroughfare. Therefore, it was the opinion of the Zoning Administrator,
that with the adjacent building design, the abutting 2.55 acres had little
if any potential to serve its intended commercial purpose as stated in
Section 19.40.010 of the Municipal Code:
"The purpose of the C-T zone is to provide for areas in
appropriate locations adjacent to thoroughfares where activities
dependent upon or catering to thoroughfare traffic may be
established, maintained and protected. The regulations of this
district are designed to encourage centers for retail
commercial, entertainment, automotive and other appropriate
highway-related activities. C-T zones are to be established in
zones of one acre or larger, and shall be located only in the
immediate vicinity of thoroughfares, or the service drives
thereof."
Also, as stated in part previously, if commercial development of this
adjoining area did subsequently occur, vehicular access would be required
from Flower Street and/or Jefferson Avenue, which are local streets
serving residential properties and a public elementary school, and thus
are not intended nor designed to accommodate commercial traffic. In
consideration of these resulting adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment
of adjacent areas, the Zoning Administrator has been unable to find that
the conceptual site plan meets the principles for site plan approval and
therefore disapproved the plan as submitted.
D. ANALYSIS
The applicant's position is that the adjoining property is not suitable
for commercial development and therefore access from Broadway is
unnecessary (see attached letter). They hope to develop the 2.55 acres
with a multiple family project, and have submitted an application to amend
the General Plan and rezone the site from Thoroughfare Commercial (C-T) to
High Density Residential (R-3) to be considered by the Planning Commission
on June 24, 1987. Approval of the plan for the Broadway frontage,
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 3
however, will in essence render the adjoining acreage unsuitable for
thoroughfare commercial use despite any position the Commission or Council
may take with regard to the General Plan amendment/rezoning.
In support of their position, the applicant also cites an earlier proposal
for multiple family development on the 2.55 acres which was supported by
staff and the Commission. The proposal was submitted in 1985 under the
conditional use permit process which was then available for the
establishment of multiple family developments in the C-T zone provided the
project was located at least 200 ft. back from the street frontage.
Both the staff and Commission (6-0) found the earlier proposal suitable
for the site and recommended approval. The Council later denied the
request, however, and then amended the Code so that the conditional use
permit process could no longer be used for this purpose. The Council
indicated concern with additional residential density in the area and the
loss of a relatively large tract of commercial acreage. They also
believed that any proposal to use commercial property for residential uses
should be evaluated under the broader context of the General Plan and
rezoning process rather than by way of a conditional use permit.
E. CONCLUSION
For the reasons noted in Section C above, we recommend that the Commission
uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator and deny the appeal.
Based upon the present zoning pattern, the site in question should provide
access to Broadway for the adjoining commercial property.
The appropriate manner in which to address the land use issues advanced by
the applicant are through the legislative process by way of a General Plan
amendment and rezoning rather than by way of a site plan. The applicant's
request for a General Plan amendment and rezoning is scheduled for
consideration by the Commission in June and by the Council shortly
thereafter.
WPC 3741P
SFO
SFD
' ~00' 400~[ 'W~. FB;oOw~:rW,a, )
Appel D velopment
CORPORATION
March 12, 1987
Mr. George Krempl
Director of Planning/Zoning Administrative
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula vista, CA 92010
RE: APPEAL OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION OF
MARCH 10, 1987
Dear Mr. Krempl:
This letter shall constitute our written Notice of
Appeal to the zoning Administrator's decision of
March 10, 1987, relating to the conceptual Site Plan
for the 1.38 site at the southwest corner of Broadway
and Flower Street ("the Site").
The decision apparently relies on the stated desire
to require coordination in site planning "between the
subject site and the adjoining acreage." This desire
is further explained in the decision by noting that
the C-T zoned acreage to the west must have access
through the Site in order to serve its "intended
commercial purpose." We respectfully suggest that
the authority provided to the Zoning Administrator by
Chapter 19.14 of the chula Vista Municipal Code, to
promote the orderly and harmonious development of the
City, will be better served by approving the Site
Plan as submitted.
The Site Plan is consistent with the requirements of
the zone, the conditionally approved Tentative Map
and the recommendations of the Planning Department
during hearings for the Multiple Residential Permit
Application considered for the western portion of the
property last year. As noted by the Planning
Department, the western portion is not an appropriate
location for commercial use due to its proximity to
the school, the adjoining residences and the lack of
access to a thoroughfare. The proposed Site Plan
does not alter the existing constraints on the
property's use.
The Chula vista Muncipal Code Site Plan requirements
are intended to address development, through design
and architectural review, of individual sites. A
review of Section 19.14.470 reveals an intent to
construct well designed structures harmonious to the
2254 San Diego Avenue, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92110-2925 (619)291-7647
established character of the surrounding area. The
decision by the Zoning Administrator attempts to use
the Site Plan requirement as a mechanism to rectify
past planning mistakes on property adjoining the site
under consideration and to insure that an
inappropriately planned parcel remain vacant and
unusable. In addition, the adverse impact of
providing access through the Site would be
significant and contrary to the planning principles
stated above.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the
issues raised in the Notice of March 10, 1987. We
look forward to resolving the difference of opinion
at the Planning Commission hearing of April 8, 1987.
Sincerely,
Project Manager ~
RB/ci
cc: Charles Gill
Tony Ambrose
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DISCLOSURE STATEmeNT
APPLICANT"S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIO1;S
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF TUE CITY COU~ICIL, PLANNING
COMAISSION 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.
Bert and Bob Investment Co.
Appel Development Corporation
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
Bert and Bob Invetment Co.
Appel Development 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.
Bert Epstein Steve Appel
Bob Epstein Dan Appel
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. Itave 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)
rperson is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association,
soc--6-~l~T 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(eo~~tir .~ ~ ~' acting as a unit~' ~
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.~/~~ 3/10/87
Signatur~ o a~icant[date] v
WPC 0701P RON BAREFIELD, APPEL DEV~M~TTPMENT CORPORATION'~
A-110 Print or type name of applicant
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 1
4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-86-6 - Consideration of tentative subdivision map
¥or Jasmine Place, Chula Vista Tract 86-6 - T & ~
Development
A. BACKGROUND
The applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map known as Jasmine
Place, Chula Vista Tract 86-6 in order to develop a one-lot condominium
project consisting of 24 units on 0.84 acres at 367 Roosevelt Street in
the R-3 zone.
The project is exempt from environmental review as a Class l(k) exemption.
B. RECOMMENDATION
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 Jasmine Place, Chula Vista Tract 86-6, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Pads and building sites shall be so graded as to drain to the street
in accordance with Section 15.04 of the Municipal Code.
2. A minimum of 0.5% (per cent) shall be used for all swales.
3. The developer shall be responsible for the installation of street
lights (high pressure sodium vapor type) on both Vance Street and
Roosevelt Street.
4. All driveways which are to be abandoned shall be replaced with curb,
gutter and sidewalk.
5. The developer shall be responsible for street widening of 3' on Vance
Street and 5' on Roosevelt Street along the Subdivision boundary.
Said widening shall include but not be limited to: asphalt concrete
pavement, base, concrete curb gutter and sidewalk. A deferral of
said improvements shall be requested and granted prior to the
approval of the Final Map.
C. DISCUSSION
The project site contains 36,700 sq. ft. of land area with frontage on
both Roosevelt and Vance Streets. Adjacent land uses consist of single
family dwellings to the north, south and west, and single and multiple
family dwellings to the east.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 2
The project consists of 24 condominium units in four 2-story structures
and 42 on-site parking spaces. The project design was approved by the
Design Review Committee in November of 1985, and is currently under
construction as apartment units.
The proposal meets the requirements of the Municipal Code for
condominiums, and with regard to private storage, and the subdivider will
be responsible for Park Acquisition and Development fees prior to
recordation of the final map. It is appropriate, therefore, to recommend
approval of the tentative map based on the following findings and subject
to the conditions noted above.
D. FINDINGS
Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the tentative
subdivision map for Jasmine Place, Chula Vista Tract 86-6, 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 site is designated for "High Density Residential"
use.
b. Circulation - The project is served by existing streets and no
streets are required across the property to serve adjacent areas.
c. Housing The project will provide additional home ownership
opportunities for residents of the community.
d. Conservation - The site is located within an urbanized area and
was previously developed.
e. Park and Recreation, Open Space - The developer is required to
pay Park Acquisition and Development fees in lieu of dedicating
and improving parkland.
f. Seismic Safety The property is not near any known earthquake
faults.
g. Safety - The site is well within the response time of the fire
station located on "F" Street.
h. Noise The units meet the requirements of the U.B.C. with
regard to noise.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 3
i. Scenic Highway - The site is not adjacent to a designated scenic
route.
j. Bicycle Routes - The adjoining street is not designated a bike
route, but will accommodate bicycles.
k. Public Buildings No public buildings are proposed on the
property.
4. Pursuant to Section 66412.2 of the Subdivision Map Act, the
Commission certifies that it has considered the effect of this
approval on the housing needs of the region and has balanced those
needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City
and the available fiscal and environmental resources.
WPC 3830P/1648P
I F-'~--
, ST
II ~ II
V ANC E ST.
I
ROOSEVELT
i~Fi i~1 i~l I I
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.
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 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_j~L- If yes, please indicate person(s)
IPerson is defined as: "Any indiVidual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association,
soc--6-E-~F club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trus~, receiver,, syndicate,
this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, oistrict or other
political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit."
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)~/y/~
Si~a~ure ~f ~Kplicant/date
O,OlP
A-110 Print or ~ype name/of applican~
EXHIBIT "A" '
INTEREST IN
CONTRIBUTION PROFITS AND
NAME ADDRESS TO CAPITAL LOSSES
GENERAL PARTNER
T&S Development and 4118 Bonita Rd.
Advisory Corporation Bonita, CA 92002 None None
LIMITED PARTNERS
Errol R. McNeil & 3898 Palm Dr.
Robin J. McNeil Bonita, CA 92002 $30,000 .20833
Misael Tagle & 57 Blue Anchor Cay
Maria Luz Tagle Coronado, CA 92118 $ 6,000 .04166
John R. Hernandez & 160 W. San Ysidro Blvd
Rebecca Hernandez, TR. San Ysidro, CA 92073 $18,000 .12500
Lourdes M. Antunano Ruben Dario 39-5 2Piso
Mexico, D.F., Mexico $ 6,000 .04166
Cloe L. Sayles 148 E St., B 1
Chula Vista, CA 92010 $ 6,000 .04166
Phyllis Learned 72 Vallecito Wy
Chula Vista, CA 92010 $ 6,000 .04166
Phyllis Learned 705 First St.
Theresa Duringer Coronado, CA 92118 $ 6,000 .04166
Susan V. Johnson 267 H St., Apt. B
Chula Vista, CA 92010 $12,000 .08333
Helen E. Dearmin 509 F St.
chula Vista, CA 92010 $ 6,000 .04166
Edsel M. Kasier 263 L St.
Betty M. Kasler Chu!a Vista, CA 92010 $ 6,000 .04166
C. P. Hoxie 935 Monserate
Betty Mae Hoxie Chula Vista, CA 92010 $12,000 .08333
Odette Aguilera 4584 Georgia St, ~5
San Diego, CA 92116 $ 6,000 .08333
Raymond E. Smith 7630 Lake Adlon Dr.
Lena K. Smith San Diego, CA 92119 $ 6,000 .08333
Luis Budillo 4116 Bonita Rd.
Bonita, CA 92118 $ 18,000 .1250
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 1
5. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) PCS-87-9: Consideration of a tentative
subdivision map for Vista Cortina, Chula Vista Tract
87-9 located at the southeast corner of Lakeshoru
Drive and EastLake Drive - Brehm Communities
(b) P-87-10: Consideration of precise plan and
development standards for Vista Cortina, Chula Vista
Tract 87-9
(c) PCZ-87-O: Consideration to redesignate 22.42
acres from RP-13 to RP-8 in EastLake Shores Vista
Cortina
A. BACKGROUND
This proposal involves a tentative subdivision map, precise plan, and change
in land use district for the development of 162 single family residential lots
and two open space lots on 22.42 acres located at the southeast corner of
Lakeshore Drive and EastLake Drive.
The EastLake Master Environmental Impact Report, EIR-81-3, and the EastLake I
SPA Plan Environmental Impact Report, EIR-84-1, have been prepared and address
the environmental impacts of the proposed project.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Certify that EIR-81-3 and EIR-84-1 have been prepared in accordance with
the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, and that the Planning
Commission has reviewed the information contained in each EIR prior to
making a decision on the project.
2. Based on the findings contained in Section E of this report, adopt a
motion recommending that the City Council approve PCS-87-9, P-87-10 and
PCZ-87-O subject to the following conditions.
a. One lot shall be deleted from the west side of Street "D" and the
remaining lots shall be adjusted to provide two additional on-street
parking spaces and two guest spaces at the end of the access drive
serving lots 123 and 124.
b. All streets within the subdivision shall be named prior to City
Council consideration of the tentative map.
c. The fencing plan shall be revised to reflect the following changes
(designations refer to fence designs and locations):
- A2 and C shall be raised to 5 ft. high with bars at 4 inches on
center.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 2
- A1 shall be raised to 5 ft. high with masonry pilasters at 20
ft. on center; or, in the alternative, fence design C as revised
may be used at all A1 locations.
E shall be a solid masonry wall or equal.
B2 and B3 shall have wrought iron at 5 ft. above grade with bars
at 4 inches on center. This design shall be carried across the
rear of lots 27-30.
Revised designs and details shall be subject to staff review and
approval.
d. The development standards shall be revised to contain a detail
listing of development standards and restrictions, as well as a
tabulation of the exact lot size and coverage for each residential
lot. The development standards shall be subject to staff review and
approval and shall be recorded concurrently with the final map.
e. The developer shall dedicate to the City streets A, B and C as shown
on the Tentative Map for public use.
f. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of full
street improvements in all the streets shown on the Tentative Map
within the Subdivision boundary. Said improvements shall include,
but not be limited to: asphalt concrete pavement, base, curb, gutter
and sidewalk, sewer and water utilities, drainage facilities, street
lights, signs, and fire hydrants.
h. The land incorporated in this project lies within EastLake Assessment
Districts 86-1 and 85-2. Participation in those districts is
required as specified in Resolutions 12288 and 12546 of the City
Council.
i. All work within the public right-of-way shall be done in accordance
with the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, the
San Diego Area Regional Standard Drawings and the Design and
Construction Standards of the City of Chula Vista.
j. Lots shall be so graded as to drain to the street. Drainage shall
not flow over slopes.
k. The developer shall grant to the City street tree planting and
maintenance easements along all applicable streets within the
Subdivision. Said easements shall extend to a line lO feet from the
back of sidewalk.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 3
1. The developer shall enter into an agreement with the City wherein
developer agrees to the following:
Pay the fair share of the cost of public improvements to be
provided under the "Public Financing Plan," Phasing Plan and
Development Agreement as needed for access.
No protest to the establishment of a Facilities Benefit
Assessment District. Said District will allow the developer to
anticipate future reimbursement by other benefiting parties.
m. The developer shall grant an access and utility easement to
subsequent owners of Lots 14, 15, 54, 66, 112 and 123. Said easement
shall be shown on the Final Subdivision Map.
n. Sewers serving 10 or less units shall have a minimum grade of 1%.
o. An erosion and sedimentation control plan shall be prepared as part
of the grading plans.
p. The knuckle and cul-de-sac shall be designed and built in accordance
with City Standards.
q. The developer shall submit evidence acceptable to the City Engineer
to demonstrate that the dry-lane requirements are met along all the
streets within the Subdivision.
C. DISCUSSION
The project site consists of 22.42 acres identified as Area R-11 on the
EastLake SPA Plan. The site has previously been graded and is elevated above
Lakeshore and EastLake Drive with views to the west, north and east. The
central portion of the property has been graded to form a second large pad
area yet higher in elevation than the balance of the site. The Camelot
development, an attached residential project, and the lake are located to the
west of the site across Lakeshore Drive, and the Villa Martinique development,
another attached residential project, is located to the north across EastLake
Drive. An open space lot abuts the site to the east and vacant United
Enterprises holdings are to the south.
The site is one of only two remaining uncommitted development areas within the
EastLake Shores neighborhood -- the other being Area R-10 which abuts the
property on the southwest. The EastLake SPA Plan designates the site for
attached development at a target density of l0 dwelling units per acre and a
maximum yield of 201 total units. The EastLake Planned Community (PC)
District Regulations place the site in the RP-13 District which allows for
either attached or detached development with a minimum lot size of 3,000 sq.
ft. Many of the development standards for the RP District such as setbacks
and lot coverage are listed as "SP" which means they are not predetermined but
are issues to be addressed and approved with the Precise Plan.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 4
The project involves the creation of 162 single family lots served by a public
street system with access off both Lakeshore Drive and EastLake Drive. The
project also includes two open space lots with a total area of 2.3 acres. Due
to the elevation of the site and orientation of the lots, many of the
dwellings will enjoy views out from the rear of their homes and lots. A
cul-de-sac has been created in order to exploit the views from the raised
central portion of the site. Thirteen lots will be served by five private
access drives off the public street system -- at the terminus and elbow of the
cul-de-sac, and at the southeast, southwest and northwest corners of the
property.
The lots average at least 40 ft. in width and 85-90 ft. in depth, with a
minimum lot size of 3,200 sq. ft. and an average lot size of 4,030 sq. ft.
The project features four floor plans. One plan is a single-story, three
bedroom unit with 1,169 sq. ft. {22 units/14% of the lots); two are two-story,
three bedroom units with 1,411 sq. ft. and 1,541 sq. ft. {81 units/50% of the
lots); and one plan is a two-story, four bedroom unit with 1,?O1 sq. ft. (59
units/36% of the lots). The architectural style is Mediterranean, with
concrete tile roofs and stucco exteriors. The roof and wall planes are offset
and varied, and stucco pop-outs and "surrounds" along with multi-paned windows
have been used to add substance and interest to the front elevations. Window
openings on second-story rear elevations have also been treated with surrounds
in order to add interest to these exposed portions of the units.
Because of the variation in lot size, average lot coverage for the four floor
plans varies from 18% to 30%, with an average floor area ratio varying from
30% to 42%. With the exception of 15 lots, all of the units will maintain a
minimum 15 ft. front setback (min. 19.5 ft. from inside edge of sidewalk) --
the exceptions being certain lots with the single-story floor plan where front
setbacks have been reduced to as little as one foot (min. 5.5 ft. from inside
edge of sidewalk). Sideyard setbacks will be either 5'/5' or 6'/4' (min. 10
ft. between dwellings), while rear yards will be a minimum 15. ft. usable thus
providing at least a 600 sq. ft. {15'x40') usable rear yard area.
Each of the dwellings will be served by a two-car garage to meet off-street
parking requirements. With the exception of the 15 lots noted above, all of
the driveways will be at least 19.5 ft. from the inside edge of sidewalk which
will provide additional off-street parking. On-street parking will consist of
curb space to accommodate 150 cars, or a ratio of 0.93 on-street spaces per
unit. Two additional guest spaces have been provided at the end of the access
drive serving the three lots at the terminus of the cul-de-sac.
As noted above, the majority of development standards are established with
precise plan approval. Consequently, a set of development standards have been
proposed which will govern future additions {please see exhibit). These
standards include a prohibition against all building additions except open
patio covers with a maximum area of 300 sq. ft. and a minimum 5 ft. rear yard
setback. A maximum total average lot coverage of 40% is also established.
The standards would be recorded with the final subdivision map.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 5
The Precise Plan submittal also includes a landscape concept and fencing
plan. The landscape concept calls for the installation of indigenous plant
materials and irrigation systems on the open space lots as well as the major
slopes interior to the development. The open space lots will be maintained by
the EastLake Maintenance District, while the interior slopes will be owned and
maintained by the individual property owners. The concept plan also calls for
one street tree on each interior lot and two on each corner lot. The
selection of specific plant materials and planting and irrigation plans will
be subject to review and approval by the City Landscape Architect.
The fencing plan shows a wide variety of fence designs, including: a stucco
retaining wall either alone or topped with a 3 ft. high open wrought iron or
solid wood fence where it coincides with sideyard lot lines; a 3.5 ft. high
wrought iron fence with stucco pilasters at 40 ft. on center for the lots
backing on to and elevated above Lakeshore and EastLake Drives; a 3.5 ft. high
wrought iron fence without pilasters for the rear of the elevated lots served
by the cul-de-sac; a 3.5 ft. high solid wood fence for the rear of the
elevated lots along the easterly and southerly boundary of the project; a 5
ft. high solid wood fence for the rear of lots at-grade with adjacent areas to
the south and also internal to the development both between units and on
exterior side yards; and finally, a 5 ft. high wrought iron fence with
pilasters for the common boundary between the site and Development Area R-lO.
D. ANALYSIS
The proposal is consistent with the EastLake SPA Plan and PC District
Regulations. The site is designated for a Residential Planned Concept of
detached and/or attached units with a minimum lot size of 3,000 sq. ft. and a
total yield of 201 dwelling units. The Vista Cortina project will offer a
small lot detached product with a minimum lot size of 3,200 sq. ft. (4,000 sq.
ft. average) and a total yield of 162 units.
The proposed land use designation change from RP-13 to RP-8 is solely for the
purpose of consistency. The only difference between the two is that the RP-13
District allows a lot depth of 50 ft., while the RP-8 District requires a lot
depth of 90 ft. Thus the RP-8 standard is more representative of the deeper
lots proposed in the Vista Cortina project.
Lot coverage and setbacks are established with the approval of the site plan.
The area and bulk figures reflected in the Vista Cortina plan are generally
consistent with the City's zoning standards for small lot (5,000 sq. ft.)
single family detached development which call for 40% lot coverage, 45% FAR
and setbacks of 15 ft. in the front and rear and 5 ft. on the sides. The
exceptions in the Vista Cortina plan are the 15 lots containing the
single-story floor plan which have front setbacks of less than 15 ft. and in
some cases as little as one foot (5.5 ft. from inside edge of sidewalk).
The single-story plan has been used on a total of 22 lots to provide some
height variety to the streetscape and to serve the market that will not
purchase a two-story home.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 6
The provision of adequate on-street parking is always an issue with small lot
developments because reduced lot widths coupled with standard curb cuts
reduces much of the curb-side parking. In the present case, the project
provides an adequate overall ratio of almost one on-street space for each
unit. The problem is more acute on inside corners and curves, however, and
the 18 units located from the elbow to the terminus of the cul-de-sac {Street
D) are served by only seven on-street spaces; a ratio of only 0.4 spaces per
unit. In order to improve this condition, we have recommended that one lot be
deleted from the west side of the cul-de-sac. This would allow the lots to be
adjusted to provide up to two additional on-street spaces and two guest spaces
at the end of the access drive serving lots 123 and 124. The four additional
spaces and one less lot would improve the parking ratio to 11 spaces for 17
units (0.65 spaces per unit).
The fence plan raises several issues. Fencing as a design element becomes
even more important as lot sizes decrease because of the close proximity of
private open space and interrelationship of the dwellings. Fencing should
complement the architecture of the homes and unify the entire project. The
fencing program for Vista Cortina is particularly crucial because of the
project's elevation and thus prominence in relation to surrounding areas.
The wrought iron "view" fencing proposed for the rear of the cul-de-sac lots
(Lot ~'s 106-128) and also the lots backing up to Lakeshore and EastLake
Drives (Lot #'s 1-27) is only 3.5 ft.,high with vertical bars at 6 inches on
center (see fence designs "A2" and "C' in the development standards). While
this may maximize view potential, it will not contain pets or small children
and, in staff's opinion, there will be justifiable pressure from homeowners to
supplement the fencing with individual solutions. Therefore, we have
recommended that this fencing be raised to five feet in height with bars at
four inches on center. This should not adversely effect views, and is in fact
the design used by Brehm for the view lots at Rosewind in EastLake Hills.
Similarly, the fencing shown on the rear of the view lots located along the
easterly and southerly boundary of the project site {Lot #'s 31-60;
inexplicably, lots 27-30 show no above-grade fencing in the rear) is also
proposed at 3.5 ft. high. Although this is solid wood (see fence design "Al"
in development standards) it would provide containment for only the smallest
pets and there would again be valid pressure to increase the height
haphazardly by individual property owners. We believe this fencing should
also be increased to 5 ft. either with the solid wood or a wrought iron fence
as described above to preserve views. If the 5 ft. high solid wood option is
chosen, we would further recommend the use of masonry pilasters at 20 ft.
centers in order to break-up the monotony of this long, straight run of
fencing.
The balance of the fencing program -- for areas exposed to public view at
exterior side yards and between units -- consists of 5 ft. high solid wood
fence. We have strongly encouraged the use of stucco walls at these locations
in order to complement the architecture of the dwellings and unify the
interior of the project. Heavy stucco walls are associated with the
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 7
Mediterranean style of dwelling proposed for Vista Cortina and are the only
design solution referred to in the EastLake Design Manual as appropriate for
Mediterranean projects in EastLake Shores. Consequently, we believe this is a
significant design element and a poor choice for the application of economy
measures and have thus recommended the use of stucco walls or equal subject to
staff review and approval.
Finally, the development standards document is rather vague with regard to its
subject matter. It refers to a maximum "average" lot coverage of 40% and
refers the reader to the adopted Precise Plan for setbacks. We prefer the
approach used for the Cottages development whereby the document contains a
detailed list of standards and restrictions, and includes a tabulation for
each lot showing the exact lot size and coverage for the floor plan it will
accommodate. This approach brings everything together for the benefit of the
property owner as well as the City. This has been recommended as a condition
of approval.
E. FINDINGS
Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the tentative
subdivision map for Vista Corrina, Chula Vista Tract 87-9, 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 project type and yield are consistent with the
EastLake General Development Plan.
b. Circulation The lots will be served by public streets
conforming with City standards.
c. Housing - The project will provide a small-lot detached housing
type consistent with surrounding development.
d. Conservation The project is located on a site which has
al ready been graded for development.
e. Park and Recreation, Open Space - The project will result in the
dedication and improvement of over two acres of permanent open
space.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 8
f. Seismic Safety - The closest identified fault in the area is the
La Nacion Fault located over two miles to the west.
g. Safety - The site will be within an acceptable response time of
fire and police services.
h. Noise - The units will be required to meet the standards of the
UBC with regard to acceptable interior noise levels.
i. Scenic Highway - The project will create an open space lot and
theme wall adjacent to both Lakeshore Drive and EastLake Drive.
j. Bicycle Routes The streets within the project are not
designated bike routes but will accommodate bicycle travel.
k. Public Buildings - No public buildings are planned for the site.
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 3848P
SPA PLAN
EASTLAKE HILLS &
EASTLAKE Hills
OS-3
THE ,LAS
-' (112 units)
.- ....... tTINIQUE
units)
P-3
'CAME
! '{42~ u/ri1
PROJECT AREA
RESIDENTIAL ~ - R~IDE~L
LAND USE DISTRICTS
PROPOSED RP~8
RESIDENTIAL - LA.D USE DISTRICTS
VILLA~ C~ -~ND USE DISTRICTS
~EC1AL ~R~ - ~NO us~ DISTRICTS
~SINE~ CENT~ - UND USE DISTRICTS
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.
,1./,.
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 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, Boar~s~ Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
YesNo~ If yes, please indicate person(s)
IPerson is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, I
soc--6~"~"r 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 co~i~atio~/acting as a unit."
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)|/ tI I///~~~r'l'/.,"TIT~~/~'~/~"~
Sig~tur'~Yf applicant/date'~ '
O OlP
A-110 Print or type name of applicant
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
1.1 PURPOSE
This environmental document addresses the 3073-acre Janal Ranch property,
located in an unincorporated area of the southern portion of San Diego County,
approximately 7.5 miles east of downtown Chula Vista and 7 miles north of the
U.S./Mexico border. The property is located in the County's Otay Subregional
Planning Area but is also shown on the City of Chula Vista's General Plan Land
Use Map. Although the site is generally considered to be within the City's
Planning Area, the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) has not
adopted a sphere of influence for Chula Vista.
The applicant is proposing to amend the Land Use and Circulation Elements of
the Chula Vista General Plan to designate a mixture of residential, commer-
cial, industrial, public and open space land uses. If the proposed project is
approved, other elements of the General Plan would need to be updated where
appropriate to maintain consistency. Additional actions included in the proj-
ect proposal are prezoning of the property to PC (Planned Community) and
annexation to the City of Chula Vista from the County of San Diego.
This document is designed to serve as a Draft Master Environmental Impact
Report (MEIR) for the proposed General Plan Amendment, prezoning and Gen-
eral Development Plan (GDP) and annexation for the Planned Community of
EastLake. The annexation will require approval by LAFCO and the Chula
Vista City Council. Approval of the GPA, draft prezoning and GDP are also
required from the City Council. The objective of this report is to provide a
base of information regarding the resources and constraints of the project site,
and to discuss the environmental effects of the proposed actions, thus permit-
ting the City of Chula Vista to complete the Final EIR without additional
major research effort. Both the annexation and the proposed land use designa-
tion changes are analyzed, in conjunction with the general development plan
associated with the prezoning. This document will serve as a master EIR to
expedite the environment review of future specific developments within the
project area by: 1) providing information the City ean use to decide whether
certain environmental effects are likely to occur and whether those effects
would be significant; 2)providing a .central source of information for use in
preparing individual EIRs and/or negative declarations; and 3) identifying long-
range, areawide and cumulative impacts of individual developments proposed
in the project area.
As noted above, this Draft EIR is intended to serve as a Master EIR for the
EastLake project. The Administrative Guidelines to CEQA provide in Section
15069.5:
"(a) Where a large capital project will require a
number of discretionary approvals from governmen-
tal agencies and one of the approvals will occur
more than two years before construction will begin,
a staged EIR may be prepared covering the entire
project in a general form. The staged EIR should
evaluate the proposal in light of current and con-
templated plans and produce an informed estimate
of the environmental consequences of the entire
project. The aspects of the project before the pub-
lic agency for approval shall be discussed with a
greater degree of specificity.
(b) When a staged EIR has been prepared, a supple-
ment to the EIR shall be prepared when a later
approval is required for the project, and the infor-
matior~ available at the time of the later approval
would permit consideration of additional environ-
mental impacts, mitigation measures, or reasonable
alternatives to the project."
As noted in Table 1-1, Sectional Area Plans, Tentative Maps, and Planned Unit
Development must themselves be subjected to environmental review with
respect to the resources and issues listed in Table 1-1 prior to any approval
which may result in a significant effect on the environment. When subsequent
environmental documents are prepared with respect to later discretionary
approvals, further opportunity to recommend further mitigation measures and
project alternatives.
As provided for by the Administrative Guidelines to CEQA in Section 15002(f),
where subsequent environmental review demonstrates that the project under
consideration and its attendant approvals would cause a substantial adverse
change in the environment, the lead agency must resp~nd~ to such information
by one or more of the following actions:
"(1) Changing a proposed activity;
"(2) Impnsing conditions on the approval of the
activity;
"(3) Adopting plans or ordinances to control a
broader class of activities to avoid the prob-
lems;
"(4) Choosing an alternative way of meeting the
same need;
"(5) Disapproving the project, or
"(6) Finding that changes in, or alterations, the
project are not feasible.
"(7) Finding that the unavoidable, significant
environmental damage is acceptable as pro-
vided in Section 15089."
Table 1-1
SUMMARY OF FUTURE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR EASTLAKE
~ General
Development Sectional Tentative Map/
Issue Plan Area Plan Precise Plan
Land Use X X X
Agricultural Resources X
Transportation and
Circulation X X
Sewer Services X X
Water Availability X
Schools X X
Police Protection X
Fire Protection X X
Energ~ X X (X)
Parks and Recreation X X
Other Utilities end
Services X X
Biological Resources X X (X)
Visual Resources X X (X)
Geology X X
Soils X X (X)
Groundwater ' X
Drainage X X
Mineral Resources X
Water Quality X X (X)
Air Quality X
Socioeconomic Factors X X
Archaeology/History X (X)
Paleontology X X
Noise X X (X)
Key
X - issue ~o be addressed
(X) - issue to potentially be addressed
blank - issue not to be addressed
3
This report is submitted to the City of Chula Vista in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act and EIR Guidelines, as amended Janu-
ary 1, 1981.
In dewing the EastLake Planned Community, the applicant used a planning
process which included environmental studies from the initial stages of the
project. Subsequent to finalizing the General Development Plan for EastLake,
an Environmental Data Base was prepared and submitted to the City of Chula
Vista. This data base was used during preparation of the Environmental Con-
straints Inventory for the project, and, in turn, this EIR. Future planning
studies for EastLake will include Sectional Area Plans, site plans and tentative
maps. The topics for which environmental review may be necessary as these
later plans are submitted are identified on Table 1-1.
1.2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Project Description
The 3073-acre EastLake project site is located in the eastern portion of the
Chula Vista Planning Area in an unincorporated portion of San Diego County.
Upper and Lower Otay Lakes are adjacent to the eastern project boundary, and
Otay Lakes Road traverses the site from west to east. The site's topography is
gently rollings hills, and current land use is primarily agriculture (dry-farmed
barley).
The existing County land use designations are Intensive Agriculture over the
majority of the site, and Very Low Density, non-urban residential uses for the
remaining areas. The Chula Vista General Plan also designates the majority of
the site for Agriculture and Reserve. The northwestern .portion of the site is
designated for Medium Density Residential uses.
The EastLake project as proposed would be developed as a Planned Community
including a mixture of residential, industrial, commercial, office, community
educational and open space land uses. The applicant is requesting a prezone to
Planned Community and adoption of a General Development Plan and phasing
schedule to guide development of the site. To allow such development, a
General Plan Amendment for the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the
Chula Vista General Plan would be required. If the GPA and prezone are
approved, a request for annexation to Chula Vista would be made to LAFCOo
Environmental Analysis
The environmental impacts of the propnsed project are summarized below.
More detailed discussions of impacts and mitigation measures for each issue
are contained in Section III of this report.
Land Use: The proposed changes in land use designations and ultimate devel-
opment according to the General Development Plan were identified to have a
significant impact on agricultural resources. This is discussed further in the
following paragraph. Conflicts with surrounding land uses are not anticipated,
except for the area adjacent to Otay Lakes Park. This potential impact can be
mitigated through specific site design. Internal land uses would De compatible
and no significant impacts would occur. EastLake development would be a
substantial change from City policy regarding land use designations for this
area, and would vary from density assumptions used for Series V population
project~i~ns. As a result of this change in poliey, there could be secondary
effects on traffic, community services and air quality as discussed below.
Agricultural Resources: The majority of the project site contains soils suit-
able for agricultural use which, due to location within the coastal climate,
· would be highly productive given imported water. The loss of the current dry
farmed barley production is not considered significant but the loss of resources
for the potential production of coastal dependent crops would be a significant
adverse impact of project development.
Transportation and Circulation: Traffic generated from development of the
proposed project would represent an increase in total area trips of 16 to
18 percent. On a cumulative basis, this traffic would have a significant
impact on the regional circulation system. Mitigation of the impact is possible
with phased improvements to roadways and intersections constructed in con-
junction with need. At the City's discretion, some of these improvements
should be the responsibility of the developer, while other property owners and
various public agencies would need to construct other links. The major road
improvements which will be needed to avoid significant impacts include:
· SR 125 between the project and SR 54 should be constructed as a four-
lane prime arterial; eventual widening to six lanes with selected grade
separations may be required.
® Otay Lakes Road should be extended south of Telegraph Canyon Road
to an intersection with Orange Avenue; Orange Avenue should be
extended from that point to the EastLake property.
· Several roads (see Appen~dix C) presently designated as collectors will
have to be reclassified as major arterials, including:
Sweetwater Road (SR 54 - Bonita)
Bonita Bridge
Sweetwater Road (SR 54 - Bonita Bridge)
Corral Canyon Road
Brandywine Avenue
· Bonita Road between 1-805 'and the Bonita Bridge wiil need to be
widened to a six-lane divided major artieral.
If project ~evelopment is phased with needed circulation improvements, poten-
tial impacts would be reduced to insignificance. If improvements are not
made, a significant adverse traffic impact would result.
Sewer Services: Sewage generation from the EastLake project would be sub-
stantially higher than that anticipated under current, lower density General
Plan designations. Sewage disposal facilities do not currently exist onsite, and
full development of the project would require extensive construction of both
on and offsite lines or separate sewage treatment facilities. Such improve-
ments would need to be phased with development to avoid significant impacts.
5
First phase construction would have some allotted capacity in the Telegraph
Canyon trunk line, and pumping into existing lines over a short-term period is
being requested by the applicant. If the extension of sewage lines is the option
selecte,~for sewering the project site, there is a potential for contributing to
growth inducement of adjacent parcels.
Water Availability: Project development would require the construction of
water distribution facilities onsite, which would be the responsibility of the
developer. The Otay Water District has indicated an ability to supply water to
the site. However, the loss of imported water from the Colorado River as a
result of Arizona's withdrawal would have regional water supply implications.
The project as proposed would represent an incremental impact on limited
which could be significant on a cumulative basis. The
regional
w&ter
supplies
use of reclaimed water for irrigation of open space and recreation areas as
well as conservation measures would reduce the demand for imported water
from the community. However, the problem of adequate supply must be
solved on a regional scale.
Schools: Students generated by project development would create a need for
additional school facilities within the project area. The General Development
Plan indicates school sites for 5 elementary, 1 junior and i senior high. Based
on current generation rate and average school capacities, there may be a need
for 2 additional elementary and i each junior and senior high schools within
the community. The provision of adequate school facilities should be coordi-
nated with the Districts and provided by the developer in conjunction with
need to reduce potential impacts to insignificance.
Police Protection: Initial emergency response time to development within
EastLake would be below the preferred time. The addition of police staff and
equipment to meet the demands of new development would eliminate the
short-term impact which would occur during the initial phase of the project.
Fire Protection: Significant sl:lo~t-term impacts on the City's Fire Department
would occur during the first phase of development, until a new station is oper-
ational in the project area. A second station may be necessary during later
phases of project buildout. The developer would be responsible for providing a
station site, and construction of the station structure as well as provision of
the necessary apparatus and equipment may also be required to mitigate
potentially significant impacts.
Energy: Project development would result in an incremental increase in
demand for energy. No unique or unusual demands for energy are anticipated
to result from implementation of the project in this area due to the provision
of a mixture of land uses which would help to reduce future residents travel
distances. Conservation measures being considered for the development would
further reduce energy demand and consumption.
Parks and Recreation Facilities: The proposed General Development Plan for
EastLake includes the provision of open space and park areas to serve future
project residents. No adverse impacts related to parks would occur.
Library Services: Project development would result in an incremental increase
in demand for library services. Due to the size of the project and distance
from the central library, a significant impact could occur unless mitigation
measure~re implemented. Those recommended by the City librarian include
provision of temporary space for a branch library, purchase of books, funding
of staff for 1 year and dedication of a site for a permanent branch library.
Other Utilities and Services: Project development would incrementally
increase the use of and demand for other services including solid waste dis-
posal, telephone service, churches, hospital and paramedic services. No signif-
icant impact to these services and facilities are anticipated.
Biological Resources: The majority of the natural vegetation on the project
Site has been disturbed through agricultural cultivation. The proposed project
design includes retention of almost all the remaining native vegetation onsite
and associated sensitive species. No significant biological impacts are antici-
pated as a result of project development, although there will be an incremen-
tal reduction in the foraging area for raptors.
Visual Resources: The proposed development of the EastLake Planned Com-
munity would substantially alter the visual character of the site from its pas-
toral appearance to an urbanized community. Specific grading and design
features are not available at this time, but mitigation measures to minimize
visual impacts are included in the proposed PC regulations. These address
grading and architectural design, as well as visual considerations for projects
adjacent to designated Soenic Highways. Site-specific visual impacts should
be addressed during subsequent project review.
Geology: The designation of land uses on the project site has generally been
responsive to geologic conditions except in several possible minor landslide
areas. Potential impacts related to slope instability can be mitigated by
remedial grading or use of fill to buttress and stabilize the landslides° Poten-
tial seismic activity would be no'greater at the site than elsewhere in southern
California. Construction in accordance with the Uniform Building Code will
minimize the effects of earthquake shaking. Prior to final project design, a
detailed geologic investigation is required to be conducted to provide grading,
foundation and construction recommendations.
Soils: The project site contains areas with highly expansive soils. Unstable
soil~ conditions can be mitigated to insignificance by following the recommen-
dations of an engineering geologist.
Groundwater: Development of the project site would not affect local or
~egional groundwater conditions in the project vicinity.
Drainage: Development of the proposed project would increase runoff from
the site, which would represent an incremental increase in the existing flood
discharge of the Sweetwater and Otay Rivers. Several areas downstream are
currently subject to flooding problems, and the project contribution to peak
runoff could be significant on a cumulative basis.
The portion of EastLake which is drained by Telegraph Canyon represents
14 percent of the total watershed. Development of this site with urban uses,
rather than the assumed agricultural use, would result in an underestimation of
the projected peak discharge, and could impact drainage facilities. Develop-
ment~n the portion of the site drained by Long Canyon could also aggravate
the existing drainage problem southeast of Bonita Road. Measures to control
peak runoff discharge to pre-project levels and provide drainage improvements
could mitigate potential drainage impacts.
Mineral Resources: No mineral deposits are known or expected onsite.
Water Quality: Development of the site with urban uses would result in a
change in the type of contaminants contained in surface runoff and would
decrease sediment loads of runoff. No significant impact on water quality is
anticipated from project implementation. The wastewater reclamation plant
being considered for sewage treatment would involve the use of treated waste-
water for irrigation. Disposal of the treated effluent may be restricted along
the eastern margin of the property which drains into Otay Lakes by the
RWQCB. No significant water quality impact would occur onsite or in down-
stream areas.
Air Quality: The proposed EastLake development would represent a signifi-
cant increase in the planned growth levels within the Chula Vista Planning
Area, with a resultant increase in pollutant emissions from mobile and station-
ary sources. The impaet of project implementation would be significant on a
cumulative regionwide level due to the departure from planned growth within
the air basin. Mitigation measures are available to reduce project-related
emissions, but cannot mitigate the impact to insignifieanee~
Soeioeconomies: Development of the proposed project would result in a redis-
tribution of planned housing units and population within the Chula Vista Plan-
ning Area. This would affect the rate and density of development in other
portions of the Planning Area.. Secondary impacts associated with growth of
this property, and the potential induced growth on surrounding parcels are
discussed individually and in Section IV. The proposed development would pro-
vide additional employment opportunities in the Chula Vista area. The fiscal
analysis for the project indicated a net benefit to the City during all phases of
the project.
Archaeological/Historieal Resources: Field investigation of the EastLake
property identified three archaeolOgical/historical sites and 14 artifact iso-
lates. Future development of the project area would result in the loss or
impairment of the cultural resources present onsite unless appropriate mitiga-
tion measures are taken, including surface and subsurface testing.
Paleontological Resources: There is a potential for paleontological resources
to be present within the extreme southwestern portion of the project site. A
more precise determination of the resource presence can be made through
field examination of future soil and geotechnical borings or cut slopes during
grading operations. Mitigation measures are available to avoid significant
impacts to any paleontological resources onsite.
Noise: Ambient noise levels in the project vicinity would increase as a result
o-~ban development. Significant noise impacts would occur if residential
uses were constructed within the 65 dB(A) CNEL contours adjacent to road-
ways in the project area. Mitigation of noise impacts is possible through
construction techniques or noise barriers. Specific noise impacts would need
to be determined at the time of individual project review.
Growth Inducement: The project as proposed would introduce an urban devel-
opment into a currently rural setting, and would involve the extension of
roads, sewage facilities, and community services. Development of EastLake
could affect both the timing~ type and location of growth of adjacent parcels
and could encourage additional annexation requests. Although development of
the project site is planned to be phased over a 20-year period~ the project
proposal is considered to have significant secondary impacts associated with
growth inducement. If adjacent parcels were to develop at densities similar to
EastLake, an overload of facilities such as roads, sewers and drainage struc-
tures could result. Other secondary effects would be air quality and commu-
nity service availability.
E'/,'5:'-
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
1.1 PURPOS~
This environmental document addresses the proposed 1267.9-acre EastLake I
Sectional Planning Area (SPA). Located in an area zoned as Planned Community (PC)
by the City of Chula Vista on August 24, 1982, the project site is located approximatel.y
7.5 miles east of downtown Chula Vista and 8 miles north of the United States/Mexico
border.
EastLake I is planned to be a functionally complete community within the City
of Chula Vista, and the SPA Plan prepared by the applicant is a refinement and imple-
mentation framework for the Planned Community Zoning (a copy of which is on file
with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department). EastLake I is a phased development
project and the SPA Plan projects development of 3683 homes over a period of 8 to
10 years.
This document is designed to serve as a Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report for the EastLake I Sectional Development Plan (EIR-84-1). A Master EIR was
completed for the project in February of 1982, and.the project received discretionary
approvals fr.om the City of Chula Vista for the requested, General Plan Amendment,
prezoning and General Development Plan, and annexation to 'the Cit~" of Chala Vista
from the County of San Diego.
EastLake I is the designation adopted for the current development area of
EastLake. On August 24, 1982, the City'of Chula Vista adopted the EastLake Policy
Plan for the entire 3073-acre community and the Planned Community Zoning for East-
Lake L Combined, these constitute the General Plan designation for the property. A
provision of the Planned Community Zoning was that, prior to development, a SPA Plan
would have to be approved for the planning area. This phase of project approvals,
including the preparation of Sectional Development Plans and Tentative Tract Maps is
now in process. The site-specific SPA and Tentative Maps are subject to environmental
rev.iew and comprise the primary focus of this EIR. Discretionary action by the City of
Chula Vista will include an amendment to the General Development Plan. Land use
designations for the_EastLake I SPA vary from the current General Development Plan in
terms of distribution, but are in compliance with the intent of the Planned Community
designations by type and density.
The objective of this report is to provide an updated base of information
regarding the resources and constraints of the project site, and to discuss the environ-
mental effects of the proposed actions. This EIR, together with the Master EIR (EIR
81-03), provides an assessment of the probable short- and long-term cumulative
impacts of the project and provides an evaluation of all feasible mitigation measures
necessary to reduce or eliminate adverse impacts. It also analyzes all feasible alterna-
tives to the project as proposed.
Future discretionary action for EastLake I includes the preparation and envi-
of a Supplemental SPA Plan for EastLake Greens and a Precise Plan
ronmental
review
for Village Center.
The following Planned Community District Regulations adopted by the City of
Chula Vista are applicable to the EastLake I project site and are used as guidelines for
development of this EIR. The regulations are intended to:
a. Provide for the orderly preplanning and long-term development of
EastLake so that the entire community and subsequent extensions of planning areas will
provide an environment of stable and desirable character;
b. Give reasonable assurance that Sectional Development Plans prepared
in accordance with an approved General Development Plan will be acceptable to the
city;
e. Enable the city to adopt measures providing for the development of
the surrounding area compatible with the planned community zone;
d. Enhance and implement the General Plan;
e. Secure for the citizens of the city the social and economic advantages
resulting from an orderly planned use of its land resources;
will allow land uses to exist in harmony
f.
F~tablish
conditions
which
within the community;
g. Facilitate adequate provisions for community facilities, such as trans-
portation, water, sewage, schools, parks and other public requirements;
h. Provide flexibility in development standards and permit planned diver--
sification in the location of land uses and structures;
i. To recognize the inherent influence that economic conditions and con-
sumer needs will have in the implementation of EastLake I and,
Allow a diversity of uses, relationships and heights of buildings and
open space in planned building groups while insuring substantial compliance with the
spirit, intent, and provisions of the Municipal Code. (City of Chula Vista, 1982c.)
1.2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Project Description
The 1267.9-acre EastLake I project site is located in the eastern portion of the
City of Chula Vista. Telegraph Canyon Road and Otay Lakes Road bisect the site,
which is comprised of a topography of gentle rolling hills dry-farmed for barley produc-
tion.
The existing City of Chula Vista General Plan designates the project site as
the Planned Community of EastLake I (Amendment 1982). Development under the
Planned Community (PC) designation requires the preparation of a Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) Plan to guide the sequential implementation of the PC's General Develop-
ment Plan.
The EastLake I SPA Plan as proposed would be developed to include a
mixture
of residential, employment park, office, commercial, circulation, recreational, educa-
tional and open space land uses as specified in the General Development Plan. Two
tentative maps, one for residential EastLake Hills and EastLake Shores, and one for
EastLake Village Center and EastLake Business Center, are also proposed. The mixture
of land uses provides for the development of a balanced community.
Environmental Analysis
The environmental impacts of the proposed project are summarized below.
Mitigation measures as listed are required in order to ~reduce potential impacts to a
level of insignificance. If not applied, significant impacts could be expected to occur.
More detailed discussions of impacts and mitigation measures for each issue are con-
tained in Section III and the associated Appendices of this report.
Land Use: The land uses outlined in the proposed SPA Plan and Tentative
Maps vary slightly from land use designations of the Planned Community Regulations
and General Development Plan in terms of distribution. Types and density of land use
remain the same, however. The project v~ould allow a maximum of 3683 dwelling units
of 619.9 acr~ (49 of the total site area). The
within
a
total
residential
area
percent
remaining 51 percent of the site would be developed for a variety of non-residential
land uses on 648 acres. Although acreage within the non-residential land use categories
will vary somewhat from the General Development Plan designations, the SPA Plan
complies with the intent of the Planned Community Regulations. Even though the
employment park acreage is slightly higher than that designated on the General Devel-
opment Plan, limitations in the Planned Community Regulations will control the scale
of the structures. The SPA Plan's extensive design measures preserve the continuity
of
1-3
a well-balanced community with a variety of land uses. No significant land use !mpaets
are expected to occur with complete implementation of the SPA Plan.
Transportation and Circulation: The Transportation and Circulation analysis
indicates that a large number of streets in the East Chula Vista area will need to be
constructed or widened to accommodate cumulative growth from projected area devel-
opments. EastLake I, however, will not impact all of these streets. To evaluate which
roads will be impacted, a special SANDAG model was used which separates EastLake I
traffic from the rest of the study area. Results of this information indicated that
EastLake I, along with existing traffic, will create the majority of traffic on the streets
within the project and on SR125 between the project and San Miguel Road, and East 'H"
Street between the project and Otay Lakes Road. Caltrans has indicated that a four-
lane intermediate configuration on SR125 is acceptable, with an ultimate configuration
consisting of eight lanes, diamond interchanges and a truck lane upgrade from the
Sweetwater River Valley. Several existing streets will need to be expanded and the
proposed project traffic will atso necessitate a minimum of two lanes for SR125 north
of San Miguel Road, four lanes for SR125 between San Miguel Road and the southern
project boundary, and a minimum of four lanes on Telegraph Canyon Road west of the
project. Mitigation measures to reduce significant traffic impacts to a level of insig-
nificance are provided in Section 3.2.
Water Availability: In order to provide water to onsite development, the proj-
ect site will be annexed to Otay Water District's Improvement District 22. Project
development will require the eonstructi/)n of water distribution facilities both onsite
and offsite. Financing of the facilities will be accomplished through the combined use
of Improvement District annexation fees, OWD capacity charges, meter fees and use of
a form of bond funding. The use of reclaimed water for irrigation of open space and
recreation areas as well as conservation measures, are proposed as part of the project
to ultimately reduce onsite water requirements. As indicated in the Planned Commu-
nity Regulations, the developer will construct a dual water system in each phase of
development, such that reclaimed water, when available and where its use is deter-
mined to be feasible and practical, can be used for irrigation of open space, parks and
common areas. Even though the project would incrementally increase regional water
consumption, implementation of the SPA Plan would represent an insignificant impact
to water availability.
Sewer Services: Project development would require the construction of sew-
age facilities as outlined in the Wastewater Master Plan to provide adequate service to
the project site. Furthermore, negotiations between the developer and the City of
Chula Vista must be continued to ensure the timely provision of future sewer service.
The location and capacity of the Long Canyon sewer has not yet been determined.
Negotiations are currently underway between the applicant and the developer of Bonita
Long Canyon Estates to settle this issue. A Supplemental EIR will be prepared for
EastLake I which wiII address potential constraints associated with offsite improve-
ments such as the Long Canyon sewer line. Development of EastLake I would incre-
mentally reduce the capacity at the Point Loma Metro Sewer System. However, due to
the large area served by the system and the comparatively small increase generated by
EastLake I, the project will not represent a significant effect to sewer services.
Educational Facilities: Students generated by project development would cre-
ate a need for additional school facilities within the project area. Based on an
Elemen-
tary School Draft Master Plan prepared for EastLake I, two elementary school facilities
required. The site for one elementary school is proposed in the EastLake Hills
are
neighborhood; the second site will be addressed by the Supplemental SPA Plan for East-
Lake Greens neighborhood. Negotiations for a high school site at the south boundary of
EastLake I (offsite) are currently underway with Sweetwater Union High School Dis-
trict. The establishment of the high school would eliminate the potential incremental
effect of EastLake I and other developments on educational facilities. The provision of
the facilities outlined above would adequately serve students generated by EastLake I.
will be in the established time frames and in
Assuming
that
the
schools
developed
accordance with need, the potential impacts to existing facilities would be reduced to a
level of insignificance.
Police Protection: An adverse though non-significant impact could occur to
police protection services due to an increased demand in a service area currently oper-
ating above the optimum response time. However, additional police staff is anticipated
to be added with funds generated by EastLake and other similar developments, and no
significant impacts would then occur.
Fire Protection: Development of EastLake I would constitute an adverse
impact initially, as existing facilities and personnel would be required to provide fire
protection services to a larger geographical area and population. ~i~nis short-term
impact will ultimately be mitigated to a level of insignificance through the provision of
an equipped fire station, which is the responsibility of the developer.
Parks and Recreational Facilities: The proposed SPA Plan for EastLake I des-
ignates 284.4 acres of open space and 47.8 acres of parkland (32.9 acres of neighborhood
1-5
parkland and 14.9 acres of community parkland) to serve future project residents.
Three minor parks at approximately 0.5 acre each are proposed in the residential par-
eels of EastLake ~res. No adverse impacts related to parks would occur.
Library Services: The proposed project would increase the demand for library
facilities and represents an adverse impact. This impact would be eliminated through
the provision of a temporary community-oriented library or bookmobile; and ultimately
with the development of EastLake II, the construction of a separate library facility
financed by any combination of Mello-Roos, State library funds, grants and/or specially
earmarked City revenues, and acceptable to the Library Director of the Chula Vista
Public Library.
Supply and Conservation: Adequate facilities will be available to
Energy
transport gas and electricity to the project site. Since the continued availability of
energy supplies cannot be assured, the SPA Plan has incorporated measures to reduce
natural gas and electricity consumption and conserve fuel~ Thus, the development of
EastLake I would not adversely affect gas and electric facilities or the conservation of
energy resources.
Other Utilities and Services: Project development would incrementally
increase the use of and demand for other services including solid waste ~lisposal, tele-
.phone service, and hospital and ambulance services; No-significant impact to these
services and facilities are anticipated.
Visual Resources: The proposed EastLake I development w. ould change the
appearance of the project site as the pastoral'character of the existing landscape would
be replaced by urban development. The project site has been designated in the Chula
Vista General Plan for urban development, however, and the SPA Plan does not present
a significant alteration to this commitment. To avoid potential visual impacts the
project has incorporated extensive design measures including designation of open space
and parks, providing a landscape plan with vis~fal buffer zones, landscape zones, a plant
matrix, a street tree plan, trails plan, signage plan, fencing plan and a grading plan.
The plan also seeks to maintain the intent of the Scenic Highways Element. No signif-
icant visual impacts are expected to occur with complete implementation of the SPA
Plan.
Geology/Soils: Based on the preliminary geotechnical investigation of the
project site, it has been determined that development is feasible from a geotechnical
standpoint. There appear to be no significant geotechnical constraints onsite that
cannot be mitigated by proper planning, design and sound construction practices.
1-6
Mitigation measures as outlined in the investigation and provided in the SPA Plan will
reduce the potential impacts to a level of insignificance.
· H~,drolog?f~./Drainage: The project site is located within five drainage basins
that are tributary to the Sweetwater and Otay Rivers. Runoff volumes from the site
will increase slightly for each of these basins while total sediment loads would be
decreased after site development. In the Long Canyon basin, there are existing down-
stream flooding conditions for which improvements are planned. The proposed project
would avoid significant impacts to this basin by providing drainage improvements that
reduce the peak flows from the property. In the Telegraph Canyon basin, the minor
increase in surface runoff during a 50-year storm event would not have significant
impacts once the planned downstream improvements are in place. In meetings con-
ducted with the City of Chula Vista and the applicant, downstream improvements have
been addressed. It was resolved that interim drainage facilities improvement on East-
Lake I would include a retention basin in the Commercial Center area, in order that
downstream flows would not increase beyond existing levels. Long-term drainage facil-
ities improvements would be financed under a fee district to be instituted by the City
of Chula Vista. The peak 50-year flows from the project site in. the Proctor Valley
basin would decrease after site development and no significant impacts would result.
No adverse impacts would be associated with project development in the Salt Creek or
Poggi Canyon basins, tributary tothe Otay River.
Air Quality: Air quality emissions resulting from project implementation
would conform to the regional air qual~t.y management plan and the project would not
impede the attainment of air quality standards within the ~an Diego air basin. East-
Lake I includes several measures to reduce vehicle travel and the consumption of nat-
ural gas and electricity. The corresponding decrease in air quality emissions is consid-
ered a beneficial effect associated with project development. No adverse impacts are
anticipated concerning air quality.
Socioeconomic Factors: The proposed population for EastLake I SPA conforms
to population statistics projected for the EastLake Planned Community and would not
adversely affect socioeconomic factors. Proposed housing for the development meets
and exceeds the requirements of the Planned Community Regulations and General
Development Plan in providing Iow-and moderate-income housing and manufactured
housing. No adverse impacts to housing are anticipated. The slight increase in employ-
ment opportunity under the SPA Plan is considered a beneficial socioeconomic impact
and no mitigation measures are necessary.
1-7
Fiscal Analysis: Based on the fiscal analysis prepared by Public Affairs Con-
sultants, the EastLake I SPA Plan is estimated to provide net revenues which would
result in a beneficial fiscal impact to the City of Chula Vista. No significant adverse
impacts are anticipated concerning the fiscal issue.
Noise: The noise analysis for EastLake I shows that nearly one-quarter to one-
third of the site development could be potentially impacted by roadway noise levels
above the City of Chula Vista's maximum residential limit of 65 dB CNEL. An even
greater area would potentially be impacted by roadway noise levels of 57 dB CNEL.
The area of potential noise impacts may be reduced considerably by the use of barriers
(berms and walls) and sensitive land use setbacks from major roadways. However, both
topography and the first "row" of development structures adjacent to a roadway will
have the potential to reduce noise impacts without specific barrier construction or
noise related property development setbacks. At the time of development in poten-
tially noise, impacted areas, site (and plan) specific noise studies must be performed to
assess the actual noise environment and provide any engineering designs to mitigate or
reduce potential adverse impacts. In addition to the use of barriers and setbacks for
reducing outdoor noise impacts, sensitive indoor uses may be protected by the acous-
tical
engineering
design of building exterior wails, windows, doors, roofs and ventilation
systems.
The noise impacts from the initial construction phases of the proposed project
are expected to be minimal since the project is in a relatively unpopulated area with
the exception of the residential area to the-southwest of the project area. Construction
of the major roadways and utilities services which will occur either with or without the
development of EastLake Phase I may be expected to cause some impacts to existing
residents. Since the proposed project area would not be 'quuilt out" for a number of
years, it can be expected that after initial stages of development, increasing numbers
of "new" residents could be exposed to noise impacts from interim and final stages of
construction. Therefore, the use of quiet equipment and good neighbor work schedules
which would initially be important only in the area of existing residents, ~would in later
stages be necessary throughout the project region.
Biological Resources: The biological resources concentrated in the northern
and northwestern portions of the project site have been placed in designated open
space, retaining the majority of existing native vegetation and the inclusive sensitive
species. As this habitat would be retained as natural, undisturbed open space, no signif-
icant biological resource impacts would occur.
1-8
Archaeological Resources: Archaeological site CA-SDi-7179, composed of
5 loci, is located within the EastLake Business Center. A data recovery program has
been conducted for Locus B of the site to mitigate adverse effects of the SDG&E
Interconnection Project. The four remaining loci of the site would be impacted by
EastLake I development. Mitigation measures involve a two-stage investigative data
recovery program to avoid potential significant impacts of project development,
Paleontological Resources: There is minimal potential for adverse impacts to
significant paleontological resources on the project site. To ensure that significant and
potentially unique fossils and paleontological resources are not destroyed without exam-
ination and analysis, it is recommended that a qualified paleontologist monitor the
initial grading activities in the Sweetwater Formation as it appears in the drainage
walls. The mitigation measures presented would avoid potential adverse impacts to
subsurface resources.
Growth Inducement: The majority of the EastLake I project site is surrounded
by land zoned for urban growth. The western and northwestern portions of the project
site would be contiguous with existing or approved development zoned for low- to
medium-density residential use. The southern and eastern portions of the project site
would be contiguous with land zoned as "future urban." Approval o~ the EastLake I SPA
would have some growths.inducing effects on'the existing undeveloped land southwest
and northeast of the project boundaries; and may encourage Surrounding plmmed devel-
opments to take'place sooner than would'otherwise oeeur without the project. Develop-
ment of EastLake I as an urban community in an area projected for future urban growth
does not present a significant adverse growth inducing impact and complies with the
intent of the City of Chula Vista growth management plan.
1-9
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
FOR
VISTA CORTINA
A 162 UNIT SINGLE FAMILY
DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
IN
EASTLAKE PLANNED COM/~3NITY
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CA
May 1, 1987
Job No. 37170.31
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TEXT
I. Introduction 1
II. Project Location 1
III. Development. 1
IV. Land Use 1
V. Landscaping. 2
VI. Set Backs. 2
VII. Patio/Additions. 3
VIII. Fencing. 3
IX. Additions 4
X. Garages 4
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 'Al' 42" Height Solid Wood Fence 5
Exhibit 'A2' 42" Height Wrought Iron Fence 6
Exhibit 'Bi' Block & Stucco Retaining Wall 7
Exhibit 'B2' Wrought Iron Fence on Retaining Wall 8
Exhibit 'B3' Wood Fence on Retaining Wall . 9
Exhibit 'C' Open Fencing - 42" Height With Pilaster 10
Exhibit 'D' Community Pilaster With Open Fence
5' Height - Optional 11
Exhibit 'E' Solid Wood Fence - Typical 12
Exhibit 'F' Typical Slope Irrigation on Interior Lots 13
Exhibit 'G' Typical Section Through Lot 7, Plan 3 14
Exhibit 'H' Typical Fence & Planting 15
Exhibit 'I' Covered Patio Standards 16
Exhibit :I' Sketch II 17
I. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report is to describe and
support the tentative subdivision map and plot
plan, which together comprise the precise plan, as
required for development in the "Eastlake I
Sectional Planned Area."
II. PROJECT LOCATION
The project is approximately 22.4 acres, of which
approximately 19.5 acres is graded pad. The site
is located in the Eastlake development at the
southeast corner of Lakeshore Drive and Eastlake
Drive; or more particularly described as Parcel 2
of Parcel Map 14572.
III. DEVELOPMENT
The developer, Brehm Communities, proposes to build
162 single family detached residential homes. The
price range of these homes will be between $110,000
and 135,000.
IV. LAND USE
The proposed development will require re-grading
the property for pads and streets. However, 2.3
acres of the project will be open space, graded at
2:1 and planted with indigenous plants. The lots
have been placed within the project limits in such
- 1-
a manner to maximize the various available views of
the mountains to the south and east, and the lake
to the west. The majority of the lots have pads 40
feet wide by 85 feet deep or larger.
V. LANDSCAPING
See landscape concept plan for location of major
slopes that are to be planted with indigenous
[ species.
The major interior slope, as seen on the landscape
concept plan and as shown on Exhibit 'F', will be
maintained by the individual home owners. The
developer will install the irrigation system
necessary to properly maintain this slope. The
exterior slopes within the open space lots will be
maintained by the Eastlake Maintenance District.
VI. SET BACKS
A. See the plot plan for the various set backs as
they apply to each particular building type.
B. Areas in the front and exterior side yards
(building to sidewalk) shall be limited to
landscaping and approved master fencing program
on file with the city of Chula Vista, with an
exception therefrom, the driveway area shown on
the approved precise plan filed with the City.
VII. PATIO
Any patio on any lot shall be constructed in
accordance with Sections 2 thru 5, and Sketches 1 &
2, of "Covered Patio Stand" set forth in Exhibit
'I'. The height of said patio will not exceed
1-story or 10'. The maximum average lot coverage
ratio allowed (including patios) will be 40%.
Patio structures shall be limited to the approved
Exhibit 'E' included within this document.
VIII. FENCING
Ail fencing must conform to the Eastlake
standards. Replacement of existing fencing shall
be subject to the approvals of the Chula Vista
Planning Commission. For fencing limits, see
"setbacks" in Section VI.
See landscape concept plan for location and limits
of each type of fencing.
Back yard fencing for lots adjacent to Lakeshore
Drive and Eastlake Drive will be as shown on
Exhibit 'D'.
- 3 -
Back yard fencing for the remainder of lots located
at the top of 2:1 slopes with a vertical height of
5 feet or more will be fenced in accordance with
VA/FHA requirements, as depicted on Exhibit 'C'.
Side yard fencing will consist of a solid wood
fence 5 feet 6 inches in height as shown on Exhibit
'E', and on landscape concept plans.
IX. ADDITIONS
( No building additions other than patio structures
described in section VII shall be allowed.
X. GARAGES
A. No garage shall be converted for living
purposes nor shall any modifications occur
( which would preclude the parking of two
standard size motor vehicles within the garage.
B. For all unit #l's a garage door opener with two
automatic openers shall be supplied to the
buyer.
(
COVERED PATIO STANDARDS
1. GENERAL NOTES
The following criteria and sketches show the type of construction
that is permitted in this development. Refer to the Patio Standards
developed by Chula Vista for all rafter, beam, footings, house
attachments and structural connections, unless noted otherwise on
the sketches attached.
2. COVERED PATIO RESTRICTIONS
The maximum covered patio area allowed is 300 square feet. Structures
are prohibited within the side yard setback and a minimum of three
feet must be maintained at the zero lot line condition. A minimum
of five feet must be maintained from the rear property line for
structures built within the rear yard.
3. MATERIALS/FINISHES
Approved Construction Materials: Resawn Douglas Fir or Redwood.
Approved Finishes: Colors are to match house colors.
4. SLAB
Concrete per City of Chula Vista's Standards and Specifications.
5. ROOF
Roof Slope: Minimum slope 1/4" per foot/Maximum slope not to exceed roof slope of house.
Roof Construction: 2" x 4" Resawn Douglas Fir or Redwood structural
members as indicated in attached sketches.
Lattice Panels: 1/4" x 1" Redwood Boards, see sketches for
spacing and connections, or 4' x 8' pre manufac-
tured Lattice Panels.
6. WALLS
Masonry: 4x4x8 masonry veneer with top soldier course. Match veneer
color of house or paint veneer to match house stucco.
Stucco: Finish and Dolor to match stucco of house.
Wood: Wood siding, cap, and trim to match house in material and
painted finishes.
EXHIBIT I
8' panels of pre manufactured
lattice or 1/4" X 1~ r~dwc~d ~oards
4' o.c. each ~y, ~ ~az~, ~i~ 2491 w.
~ ci~ s~s for s~s for s~al
size of ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
raf~rs
'W~ll 'pr ho~se
6x6 . .
city
SKET(~ II
EXHIBIT I
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of May 13, 1987 Page 1
6. PUBLIC HEARING PCM-8?-l?; Appeal from conditional revocation of home
occupation permit for handyman service at 467 Second Avenue
- Carl R. Davidson
A. BACKGROUND
This item 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 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