Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1971/11/22 MINUTES OF A REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA November 22, 1971 The regular adjourned meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California was held on the above date beginning at 7:00 p.m. with the following members present: Stewart, Rice, Adams, Chandler, Macevicz and Rudolph. Also present: Director of Planning Warren, Senior Planner Williams, City Attorney Lindberg and Assistant Director of Public Works Robens. COUNCIL REFERRAL - Discussion with Environmental Control Commission - Proposed holding capability study and moratorium on development Environmental Control Commission members present: Chairman Glenn, Allen Miller, Robert Hastings, A. F. Hooper and Mrs. Taylor. Chairman Glenn introduced Mrs. Mignon Scherer of the "Lesser San Diego" organization, who discussed at some length a resolution presented to the Comprehensive Planning Organization and the Environmental Development Agency relative to a population study of San Diego County and placing a moratorium on future planning and construction until the study is completed and a satisfactory plan for population control formulated and adopted. A general discussion by the Commission, Mrs. Scherer, Planning Director Warren and City Attorney Lindberg ensued, with the Commission holding to their former opinion as reconmended to the City Council that a moratorium at this time would be a mistake and that a further study is needed by people with national reputations and expertise in the field. During the discussion the Environmental Control Commission members asked to be excused to convene their own meeting. Richard Marasso, 952 Ithaca Court, stated that he has been selected to be a representative of the Comprehensive Planning Organization's Committee on Goals and will be working on a regional study for the future development in San Diego County. MSUC (Adams-Rice) That the Commission's previous action to the Council be confirmed. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of interim zoning for 170.2 acres east of 1-805, north of Telegraph Canyon Road to P-C - Commission initiated Director of Planning Warren explained that these parcels of land lying within the proposed E1 Rancho del Rey development, called out-parcels, were excluded from the prezoning to P-C when they were annexed to the City along with t~le adjacent acreage owned by Otay Land Company, and remain unzoned. Sometime prior to July, 1972 the Planning Commission will be asked to schedule a new public hearing to completely reevaluate the El Rancho del Rey plan. In the mean- time, the staff recommends that these properties be placed in the P-C zone, or at least in the Agricultural Zone, as a form of interim zoning to protect the owners of these lands and adjacent lands. Senior Planner Williams pointed out the specific areas on the map, giving a general description of the topography and tile suggested densities. He remarked that these densities and the total population of the overall plan will need to be reassessed on the basis of the County Traffic Study which has indicated that many of the streets will be extremely overloaded. - 2 - 11/22/71 This being the time and place as advertised, tile public hearing was opened. George Shibata, an attorney representing Mrs. Gladys Koven, one of the property owners, asked that if this is a temporary zoning and the density factors can be shifted around within the developer's property, what assurance could be given on the type of zoning these out-parcels would get if it is to be reevaluated next July. City Attorney Lindberg noted that the P-C zone should be viewed as any other zone; it is simply a broader application of the zoning laws intended to give a greater degree of flexibility while planning a broad community. Instead of piecemeal zoning of certain parcels, imposing the P-C zone along with the general development plan, which is adopted by resolution, and the development schedule, makes for intelligigent planning of these areas in an orderly manner in the best interest of the community. Chairman Stewart declared that any presentation made before the Commission will have weight with the final decision. It was tile staff who asked the developer for the total plan, and it was done in the interest and welfare of the whole community. Mr. Warren stated that the reevaluation of the plan will involve consultation and review with all of the property owners and will be done with public hearings. The annexed out-parcels should not remain unzoned, but must have some type of interim zoning. Wally Nickel, 12801 Delaware Drive, Santa Ana, planning consultant representing owners Kohn and Michael, referred to the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan and asked that 40 of the 50 acres of the Kohn parcel be zoned R-l-5, the other l0 acres to be zoned R-2; and the Michael six-acre parcel be zoned R-3. He feels that if there is a reanalysis next year and the General Plan amended that fair doctrine will be applied so that all the properties in this area will be equally affected. He did, however, question Mr. Williams' description of the general topograpily of the area involving the Michael parcel and stated that the staff proposal would be in violation of the General Plan. Planning Director Warren reiterated that this zoning is considered an interim measure until the plan can be reevaluated. As previously said, the General Plan cannot delineate property lines, but must be general in nature. E1 Rancho del Rey area is a refinement to some extent of the General Plan, and the staff is suggesting it needs further refinement as they are aware of some of tile weak- nesses which Mr. Nickel has pointed out. Until the plan is refined, however, it is the one by which everyone must be governed, and it is felt that there is a need for some consistency in relation to that adopted plan for the adjacent out-parcels. It is not necessary to have written consent of the owners for the Commission to consider the application for P-C zone and this was verified by reading sections of the Zoning Ordinance. City Attorney Lindberg expressed complete accord in the legality of the proceeding. Some further discussion followed between Mr. Nickel and Chairman Stewart regard- ing the time of the development schedule. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. - 3 - 11/22/71 Member Macevicz requested Mr. Warren to clarify the P-C 4-12 range so there would be no misunderstanding by any of those present. Mr. Warren stated that it is set up as a density range from which a basic land use category in the density range may be approved. The goal is to promote flexibility, to utilize the land for which it is best suited. Each detailed development brought before the Commission for approval is limited to a maximum range, spelled out in the development schedule and initial reports. A maximum density of 12 in one specific area necessitates subtracting somewhere else, but not on adjacent property. City Attorney Lindberg commented that it should be appreciated that the P-C zone is a new tool which allows a degree of flexibility while at the same time giving to the owner a far greater degree of assurance as to the potential for his property than under the traditional type of development, and it is expected to be beneficial to all parties. MSUC (Macevicz-Adams) That the rezoning of 170.2 acres east of 1-805, north RESOLUTION PCV-71-J of Telegraph Canyon Road to P-C, being Commission initiated, be approved subject to the following conditions: To assure that all precise plans will be coordinated, all of the conditions imposed on the prezoning to P-C for the Otay Land Company's property (Ordinance No. 1342) will apply to the remaining 170.2 acres proposed for P-C zoning. PARKS AND OPEN SPACE a. Neighborhood Parks: The present land use plan projects a need for approxi- mately 10-t2 neighborhood parks. Neighborhood parks should be provided at approximately one-half mile intervals in the low and medium density areas. High density areas would require parks at one-quarter mile intervals. Sites should be planned as five-acre minimum sites in conjunction with elementary school grounds; up to ten acres is desirable for those parks not adjacent to schools. b. Community Parks: The City of Chula Vista has three community parks under development which are either in or adjacent to this planning area. These include the Southwestern College Community Cultural Center, Rohr Park, and the Greg Rogers Park. These facilities, together with the Wilderness Park and the Con~munity Center shown on the Land Use Plan, should meet the re- quirements of the City of Chula Vista for service distribution on community parks. Because of topographic barriers, the Rohr Park is, however, less accessible and it would be desirable to retain selected portions of the floor of the north leg of Rice Canyon ~s a supplement for community park development. c. Open Space (general): While not all open space need be level and available for active recreation, some areas within the canyons may require grading, landscaping and development for active use. Areas for retention of public or private open space are, but not limited to: Wilderness Park, Community Center, Equestrian Center, Community Club, San Diego Gas & Electric Company - 4 - 11/22/71 easements or rights-of-way, San Diego Pipeline, various canyons and other public or private easements. Grading (cut and fill) should not intrude into the open space areas indicated on the plan unless specifically approved by the Planning Commission. d. Ridin~ and Hikin~ Trails: Prior to the submission of the first development plans, a master plan of riding and hikin§ trails shall be submitted for Planning Commission approval. This requirement may be modified if plans properly consider adjacent areas. This plan should include any existing easements across the property. The overall grading and development plans for each phase of construction should include access and use of all open space, pedestrian and equestrian trails, and such development plans should provide pedestrian or equestrian access to designated open space areas. In relation to park land and open space, some of the standards delineated above may be met in the development of private recreation areas for planned unit developments, etc. This determination is possible only with the development of neighborhood studies. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SCHOOLS a. Elementary Schools: The projected population for this community will generate a need for twelve K-6 schools. Some of the proposed sites may require relocation as detailed plans are developed. b. Junior High Schools: Two thirty-acre junior high school sites will be needed. Preliminary studies would place one each north and south of Street. c. Senior High Schools: At least one forty-eight-acre high school site will be needed and should be located between "H" Street and Telegraph Canyon Road. District representatives indicate that, depending upon generating factors of the various types of dwelling units, this and adjacent develop- ment may cause the need for another site. d. Fire Stations: Two sites will be needed as shown on the plan revised by the Planning staff. e. Library: One branch library will be needed and should be provided within or adjacent to a shopping center. f. Police Facility: The Police Department projects no need for branch facilities to serve this community. Development of surrounding areas may create the need for one in the vicinity of Southwestern College. Further details at this time are not necessary and will be studied as precise plans are developed. The standards and conditions delineated above are acceptable to the public authorities whose jurisdictions are involved. - 5 - 11/22/71 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT a. Neighborhood Centers: Such centers may be needed and are sometimes de- sirable if well-designed and maintained. The specific locations as shown on the plan are not approved and will be considered only as detailed neighborhood plans are developed. b. Community Shopping Centers: The two centers proposed along Telegraph Can- yon Road and Otay Lakes Road are well-located and provide adequate facil- ities for the type needed at these locations. c. Regional Shopping Center: Ultimate population in this area along with other areas of develOpment in eastern Chula Vista will support a regional shopping center of this size. While the site should be acknowledged on the plan, precise zoning beyond fifty acres should not be made available until the growth trend is established in this area. Existing and proposed zoning along Interstate 805 is sufficient to serve the population of our planning area probably through 1990. If this Regional Center and that pro- posed at the Interchange of 54 and 805 are approved, a reevaluation of existing zoning elsewhere should be made. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION Based on studies conducted by the State Division of Highways, tile County Engineer, and our own Engineering Division, some of the thoroughfares as proposed will not be suitable and adequate to carry the anticipated traffic. Alternate routes (north-south, north of "H" Street) must be presented before approval of tile plan by the City Council. Thoroughfares must be located in areas of least disruption to existing and proposed neighborhoods. Special standards of development shall be utilized in the development of "H" Street, Telegraph Canyon Road and Otay Lakes Road. These standards shall relate to landscaping, design control of all signs and structures, grading, and retention of existing desirable natural features. Findings are as follows: 1) The public facilities (parks, schools, etc.) were planned by taking into consideration all of these individual ownerships. The land use plan approved by the City Council incorporates all facilities needed to serve these parcels when subdivided as well as the property owned by the Otay Land Company. 2) Adoption of the P-C zone with the densities as shown are in accord with the General Plan. 3) This will constitute a totally planned community concept, and upon submission of ally precise plans, the developer will be required to show its affect upon surrounding properties. 4) When development plans are submitted for each property, dedication of rights-of-way for trails (equestrian, bicycle, pedestrian) and streets shall be required, based on the circulation system approved by the City Council. PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING - 4 acres east of Albans between Tremont and Montgomery - I-L to R-3 - I~nacio Arella~ Planning Director Warren stated that he had received concurrence from Mr. Arellano's attorney ti~at the hearing be continued until January 17, 1972, since this site is being considered by the City for a park and a grant has been obtained. MSUC (Rice-Chandler) That the hearing be continued until the meeting of January 17, 1972. Recommendation on Miller's Horton Road Annexation Planning Director Warren referred to a plat of the area showing the 3.8 acres of vacant land along Horton Road, south of Bonita Road, adjacent to the City limits, which Mr. James E. Miller has requested be annexed with prezoning to R-E. Property is already prezoned R-E-40. The staff is somewhat concerned about annexing small parcels in this area, because very limited city services will be available. Mr. Miller has indicated he is aware of this, but he was one of the proponents of the Sweetwater Valley Annexation, and feels that this land belongs in the City. The City Council has adopted no formal policy on annexing bits and pieces in Sweetwater Valley, but unofficially they seem dis- posed to accommodate annexations when requested. Whatever action is taken by the Planning Commission will be a recommendation to the Council in any event. Assistant Director of Public Works Robens pointed out that the sole access to this property is through private easements across parcels in an unincorporated area. The City could provide only emergency service, that is fire and police service, under these conditions and would not be able to provide sewer, drainage, street cleaning or any street services. The City would be unable to accept dedicated streets, as it is over one-quarter mile to the nearest City dedicated street, and Public Works feels annexation is premature and should be postponed. Mr. Warren expressed agreement that the City clearly should not accept any dedi- cated streets but believes this need not be a reason for postponement. All of this area has been developed in this manner. It is contemplated that three dwellings will be constructed on a private road. Basically what Mr. Miller, not present at this meeting, has in mind could be done through a variance or a Planned Unit Development, which seems the logical way to develop this property. The County has expressed disinterest in that type of development, so the question is how can Mr. Miller best be served. He agreed also that there is no way to provide seuer or other services. Member Rice observed that the amount of services offered are limited; however, the present services are certainly just as limited, if not more so. Chairman Stewart stated that it is his belief that the City Council should establish a policy either for or against this type of annexation. He is in favor of recommending annexation of this area to the Council but making note of the lack of services which the City could provide. Member Rice commented he believes the more of this area that eventually annexes to the City the more guarantee the community will have of being able to main- tain a reasonable development within tile Valley, and because we lost the chance to plan for the Valley as a whole does not preclude us from planning for that portion which lies within the City limits. - 7 - 11/22/71 MSUC (Chandler-Rudolph) That recommendation for annexation of 3.8 acres of vacant land along Horton Road adjacent to our city limits, south of Bonita Road, be approved and note taken that the property owner should be aware that city services are available on a limited basis only. Appointment to City Beautification Awards Committee Chairman Stewart referred to the letter received from the City Council requesting that a member of the Planning Commission serve on the City Beautification Awards Committee and asked for volunteers or nominations. MSC (Rice-Macevicz) Member Chandler serve as Planning Commission representative on the Beautification Awards Committee. AYES: Members Stewart, Adams, Rudolph, Rice and Macevicz ABSTAIN: Member Chandler MSUC (Macevicz-Rice) Member Rudolph serve as an alternate representative. Director's Report Planning Director Warren reported that a Workshop has been scheduled for Monday, November 29, beginning at 5:00 p.m. in the Conference Room, with dinner at 7:00. Member Rudolph suggested adding to the agenda discussion on ACA-49, Taxation and Assessment Policy, as Assemblyman Deddeh plans to hold hearings in Chula Vista on December 16. All Commission members indicated a wish to go on the field trip tentatively scheduled for December II. Commission Comments Chairman Stewart commented the Shoreline Control Bill [(Sieroty) AB-1471] had recently been defeated in the legislature, but a new bill will doubtless be presented in the next session. Member Adams requested an opinion from the City Attorney on a bill presently before the legislature which would take away some of the Commission's authority. City Attorney Lindberg replied that he has no opinion on the right of the Real Estate Commissioner to get involved in the adequacy of proposed improvements in a project as required by AB-1300, but believes he would oppose AB-1301 which prohibits the City and County from approving a final subdivision map incon- sistent with their General Plan and AB-1303 requiring Council on Intergovern- mental Relations to adopt criteria to determine whether City and County General Plans contain all required elements. Member Adams stated that as he understands the proposed legislation it would allow the State to prohibit the City from approving any zoning which did not conform to the General Plan, and he is opposed to it.