Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1973/11/21 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA November 21, 1973 The regular 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: Macevicz, Whitten, Chandler, Rice, Rudolph and Swanson. Absent (with previous notification): Member Wilson. Also present: Director of Planning Peterson, Associate Planner Lee, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Assist- ant Director of Public Works Robens, Legal Intern Beam and Acting Secretary Scholl. Chairman Macevicz led in the pledge of allegiance to the flag followed by a moment of silent prayer. Chairman Macevicz called for oral communications and none were presented. 1. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-73-15~ request for commercial parking in R-3 zohe, 590 Flower street Ocean Fresh Seafoods Director of Planning Peterson recalled that the item had been before the Commission at their previous meeting and had met with opposition from apart- ment owners in the area to the parking lot having an exit onto Flower Street. He asked Mr. Robens to discuss the overall traffic circulation in the vicinity of Broadway, "E" and Flower Streets and safety problems which exist. Assistant Director of Public Works Robens compared the hazards of the exit onto Flower Street with those of midblock exit onto Broadway. Approximately 20,000 vehicles per day travel on Broadway, and an estimated 4,000 to 5,000 vehicles per day on Flower Street. Over the last five years there have been 34 accidents on Broadway between Flower and "E" Streets; there have been six on Flower Street between Broadway and Cedar. It was his opinion that most of the traffic exiting from the parking lot onto Flower Street would go west toward Broadway, where a safer turn onto Broadway could be made from the intersection than from a midblock exit on Broadway. Eliminating a left-hand movement onto Broadway from a midblock exit would cause southbound traffic to go north to Flower Street, east on Flower Street to Fifth Avenue and thence south, which would add to the traffic on Flower Street for the full length of the block. He pointed out that Flower Street is 40 feet wide, curb to curb, which is the City's standard for a residential collector street. Chairman Macevicz reopened the public hearing. Frank Kozak and Malcolm Ward, property owners on Flower Street, reiterated their objections to the expansion of commercial use into a residential zone, with the additional traffic, noise and air pollution which it would generate. Angel Barba, 585 Flower Street, whose children attend the school a block away, objected to them having to contend with additional commercial traffic in a City Planning Commis ~n -2- 11/21/73 residential area in their daily walks to and from school. Kathryn Moore, 1134 Tobias Drive, representative of the South Bay Citizens Planning Committee, commented on the EPA rulings which are to take effect in 1975, whereby a surcharge of approximately $2.00 per parking space per day will be assessed on private parking lots. Gilbert Furuya, co-owner of Ocean Fresh Seafoods, which has leased the property for the proposed parking lot, contended that traffic would not be greatly increased on Flower Street since the intended purpose of the parking lot was for employee parking. Commissioner Rice asked approximately how many apartment units might be built on the property if it were developed in R-3 use and how the traffic impact would compare with that of a commercial parking use? Mr. Peterson estimated the remaining R-3 district could accommodate about 42 additional units, and using the standard ten trips per day could expect about 420 trips per day. It was his opinion that the commercial parking would probably have more traffic spread over a wider range of time, whereas the multiple family would have peak hours in the morning and evening. Mr. Robens expected commercial uses and parking lot uses would add anywhere from 0-40% more trips. The Commissioners felt there must be a better way of circulating the traffic other than exiting it into Flower Street and asked the staff to explore alter- natives with the applicant. Mr. Peterson suggested several alternates and pointed out that the Safety Com- mission would also be interested in this matter. MSUC (Whitten-Chandler) The public hearing in consideration of PCC-73-15 be continued to the meeting of January 9, 1974 and the item referred to the Safety Commission for their opinion. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Environmental Impact Report ~IR-73-17- Bonita Ridge Director of Planning Peterson noted that the Environmental Impact Report for Bonita Ridge is re~ated to items 3 and 4 on the agenda, which is the prezoning and rezonin9 of the same property and its annexation. Since this item has aroused considerable interest on the part of residents of Acacia Avenue, written comments have been received, some too recently to have been fully evaluated; he suggested perhaps testimony might be taken at this public hear- ing, and if at the conclusion of the testimony, the Commission felt they would like a further staff report and recommendation which evaluates that testimony, the public hearing be continued for a final decision on December 12. Environmental Review Coordinator Reid summarized the most significant findings of the staff modified report: (1) the physical form of the property will be permanently altered; (2) lots 1 - 5, those closest to Otay Lakes Road, would be subject to an unacceptable noise level at the second-story level at times City Planning Commission -4- 11/21//3 yard with a house upon it, not 1/2 acre including a drainage ditch or a hill- - side too steep to be built upon. The present residents all have horses and other animals on their property and object to smaller lots and greater density in their immediate vicinity. ~illiam Ahrens of 4316 Acacia Avenue, which is directly adjacent to the pro- posed project, wishing to establish his credentials in engineering matters, stated he is a Commander in the Naval Civil Engineer Corps, commanding the amphibious construction battalion at Coronado, is a registered professional engineer holding a Masters Degree in Engineering with 14 years of experience in design, construction and maintenance engineering. He felt drainage was the most critical aspect to be considered and that Long Canyon, which parallels Acacia Avenue and empties under Bonita Road onto the Chula Vista Municipal Golf Course, is the most important and potentially dangerous watercourse which will be affected by the development. He said, according to the EIR, the present normal drainage flow in the three relevant Long Canyon sub-basins is 1231 cu. ft. per second, and projected construction of impervious roofs, streets and sidewalks, balanced against flattening of hilltops and planting of lawns estimated an increase in storm water runoff of 12 cu. ft. per second or a net of 1%. He could not accept these figures as a reasonable estimate, as his rough calculations, using the EIR figure of 9 acres of Streets or 8% of the total 107± acres, adding a conservative 6 acres of housing roofs (130 houses X 2,000 sq. ft. of roof area each)--6%, 3 acres of swimming pools, patios, driveways and sidewalks--another 3%--gives a total impervious surface of 18 acres or 17% of the total project. Considering that some unguttered roof line ground absorption would occur and that only 84% of the project drainage flows to Long Canyon, he believed that of all rains striking the 17% of impervious surface, 10% would be a conservative estimate for direct high velocity runoff to the Long Canyon drainage. 10% of 1231 cu. ft. per second is an increase of 123 cu. ft. per second as opposed to the EIR estimate of 12 cu. ft. per second. The EIR reflects an ultimate runoff for the three sub-basins of Long Canyon to 1340 cu. ft. per second for an allowable increase over the present of only 109 cu. ft. per second, so obviously the 123 cu. ft. calculated would seriously exceed the ultimate carrying capacity of the drainage. He referred to the heavy rains of November, 1972, which resulted in serious flooding and considerable property damage along Palm Drive, lower Acacia Avenue and the Chula Vista Municipal Golf Course across Bonita Road, as culverts under the access roads were inadequate to handle the excessive storm runoff in Long Canyon. Representatives of the San Diego County Depart- ment of Sanitation and Flood Control at that time were quoted as stating that any additional drainage or change in terrain of Long Canyon would likely result in even more severe flooding problems. Commander Ahrens, from an engineering standpoint, thought the drainage.prOposed for the project is unsound and the hillside siting and scope of earth moving is illogical. He recommended, if the project is permitted, running drainage and streets to the west to take advantage of Otay Lakes Road, which is best able to handle both, and only hilltop siting of houses. Commissioner Rice commented on the disparity in figures on the storm runoff estimates and asked if the figures in the EIR had come from the applicant - or from the City's Engineering staff. City Planning Commission -5- 11/21/7~ Mr. Reid replied the figures were received from the applicant and checked by the City Engineering Division. However, Mr. Ahrens' letter had arrived late in the afternoon of the previous day, and he did not know if Mr. Robens or his staff had had an opportunity to review them. Mr. Roberts advised there had been time only for a superficial review of Mr. Ahrens' figures, but thought perhaps one of the reasons for the wide difference was due to the fact that Mr. Ahrens had probably used all 130 homes in the project for his calculations, whereas only about 56 of them were situated to drain into Long Canyon. He said the Engineering staff had indicated that 1% was an approximation, but was very close, and not 10 times off. He expressed a desire to go over the figures and computations with Mr. Ahrens. Kichard Kau, 4203 Acacia Avenue, agreed with the EIR that Acacia Avenue would be unable to handle the traffic generated by the proposed project and agreed with Mr. Martin that there is no way of widening the street. J. E. Perkins, 205 Camino del Cerro Grande, representing the Bonita Bel Aire Homeowners' Association, concurred with statements already made regarding problems of drainage, traffic and density, and discussed the drainage problems in his tract which had to be resolved by the home owners at considerable expense. Gene Martin, 3751 Putter Place, reported that Mr. Mace who is Fire Board Director of the Bonita Sunnyside Fire District, had to leave the meeting but asked him (Mr. Martin) to point out that the area under discussion is not in the Bonita Sunnyside Fire District. If the property were annexed, it would be served by the City of Chula Vista, except that the houses with access to Acacia Avenue would probably be served by the Sunnyside Fire District, which would compound the problem of traffic and equipment on a narrow road. David Shine, 225 Camino del Cerro Grande, wondered about the number of houses and the proposed access for them on a projected street ending in a cul-de-sac in an area near Camino del Cerro Grande. Mr. Reid said there would be four split-level lots served by an access ease- ment off the end of the cul-de-sac, and a turn-around would be provided. James Ashbaugh of George Nolte & Associates, Planners and Engineers, consultants for Par Development, the applicant, commented that there is no doubt that one of the major concerns in the development of this property is that of drainage. He cited the statement in the letter of November 15 from the County Department of Sanitation and Flood Control to the Chula Vista Planning Department: "It has been determined that your calculated 1% increase to the present 50-year frequency 1231 c.f.s, will not have significant effect on the present and expected future conditions as regards drainage and flood control in the Long Canyon area." He referred to a statement in the staff report on the proposed annexation which says that the Engineering Division believes that any potential problems can be solved at the time development plans are submitted to the City for its review and/or approval. City Planning Commi[ on -6- 11/21/72 He said the tentative map has been modified, and the 90 foot fill slope referred to in the EIR has been reduced approximately 2/3 to a height of about 60 feet. He noted that the open space areas which comprise approximately 61% of the total property, of which 50% would be retained in its natural state, would be incorporated as part of a special assessment district for maintenance of the natural and designed landscaping and irrigation systems. If a hiking and riding trails system were developed in areas adjacent to this property, this special assessment district provides for dedication to the City of a part of this maintenance area for potential trails. He pointed out that the County Engineers had anticipated the existing Acacia Avenue would have a potential carrying capacity of 5000 trips per day, and the City's Draft EIR projects the maximum carrying capacity to be 1400 trips per day; but, the addition of a projected 423 trips per day generated by the proposed 43 dwellings which would require access to Acacia, to the estimated 960 trips per day of the present residents, would be less than the lower EIR figure. He reported that the City Fire Department had made recommendations for modifi- cations of some street widths, private drives and turn-arounds to provide access for fire protection. They also indicated they do have an agreement with a county fire district. Mr. Ashbaugh felt that the concerns of drainage, topography, open space and traffic had been expressed, and requested that the EIR be adopted. The meeting recessed at 8:42 and reconvened at 9:00 p.m. Noel Smith, 1008 Calle Mesita, President of the Bonita Bel Aire Homeowners' Association referred to the 1/2 acre lot sizes in use for the existing resi- dential development and called attention to two other proposed developments in the immediately adjacent area which have recently been accepted. He believed that the addition of between 300 and 400 homes in a short space of time would have a definite environmental impact and that in an area considered rural in character controlled growth would be a better way to go. Bill Van Meter, 4000 Acacia Avenue, felt that a serious traffic problem would be created on Acacia Avenue with the proposed residential addition increasing safety hazards to the people who walk on the street or who ride horses or bicycles on it. Billy C. Johnson, 3946 Acacia Avenue stated that the present drainage is unable to accommodate the existing residential development during heavy rains and that after the flooding of last year it had taken him six months to clear his property of the tons of debris--telephone Doles, chicken coops, rabbit hutches, trees--which had come down the creek. Shirley Wise, 3322 Bonita Mesa Road, President of Equestrian Trails, Inc., Corral 89, advised that their organization began in 1944 for the purpose of maintaining and preserving trails in the suburban areas in order that the areas not become locked in and people could use their horses. She read a City Planning Commission -7- 11/21/73 letter written to the Planning Commission from their Trail Coordinator, Mary Augustine, noting that there is an absence of dedicated trails indicated on the map of the proposed development, and requesting that as a condition of approval, this developer, and any other developer of property in this area, be required to make an offer of dedication of adequate trails north to south and east to west to tie into the trails presently being used. William Ahrens, 4316 Acacia Avenue, wished to point out for the record, that he believed the County Flood Control official (alluded to by Mr. Ashbaugh) who stated that their calculated runoff increase of 1% would cause no significant problem had apparently accepted Nolte Associates' figures and the statement was not based on independent County engineering calculations. Stewart Pritikin, 11460 Eridanus Court, San Diego, representing Par Construc- tion as their Marketing and Planning Counselor (not an attorney) briefly re- capped the testimony of the home owners on Acacia and the local area. Mr. Pritikin referred to the plan as a cluster type concept, allowing 61% of the total acreage to be left in open space and set aside into a City assess- ment district. He believed that the proposal conformed with the Hillside Development Policy to a great degree, and the density of 1.2 units per acre was, on a gross basis, less than the density of the surrounding homes. He noted that they planned to use a modified version of homes which are being built in La Jolla Summit and selling for $75,000 to $95,000, utilizing split lots--4 foot, 8 foot splits, tri-levels, flat pads with various changes of elevation to the house--and that their very best effort had been given to designing the subdivision to respect existing topography and the surrounding environment. He said that reports received that afternoon from the County Traffic Depart- ment substantiated the report of the Nolte Associates' engineer that the projected capacity of Acacia Avenue, as it exists, is 5,000 trips and the impact of the proposed development would reach less than 50% of that capacity. He felt that the problems involved in runoff and flooding could be resolved, that any problems with the Fire District service had been alleviated by con- forming with their recommendations, and that the area being dedicated to open space would maintain the rural environment. He expressed willingness to work out the most feasible hiking and riding trails, and hoped to work in harmony not only with the staff, but with those people at the meeting, in developing the project. Gerald Papke, 4248 Acacia Avenue, said that since he moved to Bonita in 1955 he has seen the number of houses and the traffic on Acacia double, and the flood water in the creek rise from about 18 inches to around three feet. He requested that the existing drainage problems be taken care of before ad- ditional homes are added, and that the zoning be left as it is. Attorney Beam wished to note, that confusing as the procedure probably is to citizens attending the meeting, the Environmental Impact Report is the item being considered, and it would be useful to all concerned if the testimony were confined to providing public input for that report. City Planning Commission -8- 11/21/73 Sharon Johnson, 3946 Acacia Avenue, reported that the creek runs diagonally through their property and it was really frightening when the water came rumbling through with such force within 12 feet of their house. She would not like to see a cement drain come through the middle of their horse corral, but hoped the problem would receive consideration. The Commissioners agreed they wished to continue the hearing in order to review the EIR from the standpoint of strengthening it with regard to traffic and drainage. MSUC (Whitten-Rudolph) The public hearing on EIR-73-17 be continued to the meeting of December 12, 1973 to review a written report from the Environmental Review Coordinator, such public report to be made available for public perusal at the City Library on Friday, December 7. Chairman Macevicz inquired if it would be necessary to also continue items 3 and 4 of the Agenda, since both were concerned with the Bonita Ridge Estates Subdivision? Director of Planning Peterson replied that it would be necessary to continue the prezoning and rezoning, but item 4, which is the annexation, could be acted on since that would require no EIR or public hearing. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: PREZONING & REZONING PCZ-73-P - Approximatels IlO acres between ota~ Lakes Road and Acaciai south Of B6nita ROad, R-E to R-E-P - Par Construction MSUC (Rice-Whitten) The public hearing for consideration of PCZ-73-P be con- tinued to the meeting of December 12, 1973. 4. Consideration of annexation of Bonita Ridge Estates MSUC (Whitten-Chandler) Consideration of annexation of Bonita Ridge Estates be continued to the meeting of December 12, 1973. Director of Planning Peterson reported that th~ applicants asked him if they might address the Commission on the annexation, as they would like that item to move ahead. Attorney Beam said that from a legal standpoint there is no requirement that the annexation be considered with the other items, and as it does not require a public hearing or that public testimony be heard, it could be properly con- sidered at this time. Stewart Pritikin and Conrad Walton of Par Construction, protested that they had been in conference, and before having an opportunity to speak the vote for continuance had occurred. They had hoped that even if the EIR and the zoning items were continued, the annexation might be discussed as they would like it moved along to LAFCO as quickly as possible. City Planning Commission -9- 11/21/73 The Commissioners agreed that they might legally act on the annexation, but felt it would be unethical since nearly a hundred people who were vitally interested in the matter had been informed of the continuance and had already left the Chamber. MSUC (Rice-Whitten) Consideration of annexation of Bonita Ridge Estates be continued to the meeting of November 28, 1973, and notification made to inter- ested people involved. 5. SUBDIVISION PCS-73-5, Tentative Map of Deerpark Chula Vista Associate Planner Lee pointed out the 14 lot subdivision on approximately 3-1/2 acres presently located in the County at the end of Loma Lane, south of Orange Avenue. He advised that the property was originally part of the Larkhaven subdivision but was deleted from that development when LAFCO failed to approve the annexation to the City because of objections from County residents who were attempting to establish a park district. Development was then attempted in the County, but the County denied the tentative map on the basis that the property receives its access through the City and is dependent on City main- tained facilities. The applicant is currently before LAFCO, again pursuing annexation to the City. The subdivision basically conforms with the City's regulations. Commissioner Rudolph inquired if this property had been included as a part of the proposed park district. Mr. Lee replied that the County residents had argued that the assessed valu- ation gained by development of this property should go into the development of a park in the area. The City has done everything it can to aid the park situation there, including the development of a 5-acre park which abuts this area, at no cost to the County residents, as the developer essentially gave the City $35,000 for its development. MSUC (Whitten-Chandler) Recommend to the City Council the approval of the tentative subdivision map PCS-73-5, subject to the conditions in the staff report. 6. COnsideration of amendment to ResOlutign PCM-72-8 relatin~g to Dolic~ for patio covers and room addl.tl~9~s l~n PUBs Associate Planner Lee reported that on June 5, 1972 the Commission adopted a resolution relating to developments within certain specific Planned Unit areas where criteria for additions of patio covers and room additions had not been included. In its application over the past year a problem has become apparent in the 3-foot setback requirement for supporting structures and screening roof material for patio covers, where the property line of a lot adjoins an open space and not another owner's property. Also, an amendment is recom- mended which would provide for written approval from the appropriate Home~ owners~ Association prior to Planning Department action on requests for such additions. City Planning Commission -10- 11/21/73 MSUC (Rudolph-Whitten) The following amendments to Resolution PCM-72-8 be approved: 1. Amend paragraphs 1 c and 2 c to read: All supporting structures shall observe a three foot (3') setback from property lines separating individually owned lots; the screening roof material may project into forty percent (40%) of that setback. No setback from the property line shall be required where the property line separates an individual lot from a common open area. 2. Add new paragraph 4: Prior to City approval of a request to build a patio cover or room addition, the request shall be approved in writing by the appropriate Homeowners~ Association, as provided in the covenants, conditions and restrictions and by-laws of such association. 7. Report by Attorney Beam on Moscone Bill (financial disclosure) and its effect on Planning commissios~rs Attorney Beam reported that the law required information on the Moscone Bill (SB 716) be given to the Planning Commission (and to the Planning Director) as it is applicable to them in its two main provisions. He referred to the written report with which he had provided them and reviewed the points which it covered. He offered the assistance of the City Attorney's Office to each individual Commissioner in determining specific application of the Bill. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Whitten commented on the development activity in the Sweetwater Valley, east of Otay Lakes Road, and suggested that some sort of long range planning covering drainage, schools, street plans, shopping centers, etc. be done to provide guidelines for consideration of any future proposed develop- ments that may come before the Commission, rather than attempting to solve the problems of each single subdivision without reference to (perhaps) the City's entire Sphere of Influence to the east. Commissioner Rice reminded the Commissioners of an Ad Hoc committee, including County residents, which had been set up for this purpose some years back and the project had eventually been dropped because of several individuals living in the Sunnyside area who were very vehement in their opposition to the City of Chula Vista. Mr. Whitten explained that what he had in mind was for the Commission to in- struct the staff to create a "General Plan" which will show how the Ci_~_ wishes the property developed if it should become annexed to Chula Vista. Commissioner Rudolph called attention to a concept called "impact zoning" which evaluates the infra-structure and all the environmental concerns and bases the zoning on these factors. She felt this approach may have validity in this area. City Planning Commission -11- 11/21/73 Mr. Peterson noted that the main problem would be in providing the staff to devote the necessary time to such work. MSUC (Whitten-Macevicz) Recommend to the City Council that funds be made available to the Planning Department for a staff General Plan Study of the area east of Otay Lakes Road and south of Telegraph Canyon Road to the southern City Limits. The purpose of the study would be to determine a system of land uses deemed most desirable by staff without considering desires of the property owners, etc. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by Chairman Macevicz at 10:25 p.m. Respectful ly ~su bmi tted, '~]/[eoda Scholl Acting Secretary