HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1974/05/22 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY PLANNING COMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
May 22, 1974
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, Chandler, Rice, Rudolph, Wilson, Floto and Starr. Also
present: Director of Planning Peterson, Current Planning Supervisor Lee,
Assistant Director of Public Works Robens, Deputy City Attorney Beam and
Secretary Mapes.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MSUC (Chandler-Rudolph) The minutes of the meeting of May 8, 1974 be approved
as mailed.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Request for deferral of public improvements in alley between Third Avenue
and Church, south of E Street - Terry Tanaka
This 20 ft. wide alley is presently paved with asphaltic concrete and/or oil
surfaced from E Street to Davidson. The surfacing is substandard since the
City Ordinance requires concrete cement paving for public alleys; however, it
is impractical to construct individual sections of the alley because of grade
and drainage problems. Approval of the request for deferral is recommended
subject to conditions to assure installation in the future at the City's request.
2. Request for extension of time on variance PCV-73-4 for reduction in front
and side yards at 223 Davidson Avenue
This variance was approved in May 1973; the applicant has requested an extension
of time in order to complete his plans, including complete soil tests and
engineering drawings. The staff recommends approval of the request.
MSUC (Wilson-Rice) Items on the consent calendar be approved in accordance with
staff recommendation.
REGULAR CALENDAR
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Rezoning PCZ-74-F, 16.3. acres north of Telegraph Canyon
Road, R-1 to R-1-PUD Windsor Park Enterprises
Director of Planning Peterson pointed out that a proposal for development of this
property was first presented over a year ago, at which time it was denied by the
Commission, appealed to the City Council, and the appeal denied by the Council,
based on the finding that development was premature at that time due to incomplete
studies concerning the alignment of Telegraph Canyon Road and the adjacent
drainage channel. The Council indicated that if the staff studies discussed at
that time were not completed within 90 days, development of the property should
again be considered.
-2- 5/22/74
Current Planning Supervisor Lee advised that under the proposed R-l-PUD zoning
the density range would be 4~ to 6~ units per acre; the applicant has submitted
a plan at 4 units to the acre. The General Plan places this area in a range of
4-12 units per acre. The average slope of the property is approximately 16%; if
the Hillside Ordinance were applied to this property it would allow 50 units,
whereas the applicant's plan contains 56 units.
Mr. Lee called attention to the findings for a recommendation of approval of the
requested zone change.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Gerry Simon, Toups Engineering, consultants on the project, indicated he had no
information to add to the staff report but would answer any questions of the
Commission.
As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Chandler commented that the near adherence to the Hillside Ordinance
makes this a desirable development for the area.
MSUC (Rudolph-Chandler) Recommend to the City Council the change of zone from
R-1 to R-l-PUD for PCZ-74-F based on the findings contained in the staff report.
5. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Planned Unit Development PUD-74-! -
Windsor Views
6. Consideration of Tentative Subdivision map PCS-74-1 - Windsor Views
Current Planning Supervisor Lee suggested that these items be discussed together
with separate action by the Commission on the two applications. He called
attention to the two maps on display; the tentative subdivision showing the
lot boundaries and circulation system, and the PUD map showing the location of
the dwellings and the offstreet parking. He noted there will be 56 units in
five clusters, as compared to the 1972 proposal for 72 units. Under this
proposal the total site coverage by structures amounts to 14%. Mr. Lee pointed
out the recreation area is not centrally located, but is located at the north
end of the property and has been dropped below the top of the knoll so that it
will not infringe upon the view of the adjoining property to the north when it
is developed. In addition to this recreational area there are barbecue areas
within each of the clusters of dwellings along with the required usable open
space.
Hr. Lee pointed out that this applicant is using many of the techniques described
in the Hillside Policy, such as clustering units, narrowing the streets,
orienting structures towards the view and using half-split floor plans. This
plan conforms to the Open Space Policy adopted by the City in that the units are
set back 240 to 300 feet from Telegraph Canyon Road with landscaping on the
slope bank.
Mr. Lee called attention to the 8 conditions recommended in approving the Planned
Unit Development and advised that condition 2 d. should be clarified to require
-3- 5/22/74
revisions to bring the PUD site plan and tentative map into conformance with
each other. Also that condition 3 e. relating to landscaping should indicate
a requirement for installation of permanent landscaping within the boundary of
the Planned Unit Development and temporary landscaping of the drainage channel
and Telegraph Canyon Road right of way for erosion control only, since it is
recognized construction will be taking place within a few years, which makes
the cost of permanent landscaping infeasible.
Mr. Lee briefly discussed the tentative subdivision map, pointing out that the
only public road is the frontage road parallel to Telegraph Canyon Road, while
the remainder of the circulation system consists of private roads to serve the
clusters of dwellings. He called attention to the noise impact as discussed
in the Environmental Review Report which indicated an undesirable noise level
extending from Telegraph Canyon Road to approximately 380 feet into the project;
for this reason it is recommended that mounding and solid walls be required in
front of the units nearest to Telegraph Canyon Road to reduce noise levels to
an acceptable standard.
Mr. Lee called attention to the list of 34 conditions contained in the staff
report and recommended that the following modifications or additions be con-
sidered: Deletion of parking spaces from the center of "B" Court, as well as
"C" Court; requirement that the curve radii for all private streets be shown;
cul-de-sacs shall utilize a 30 ft. diameter and decorative pavement, or as an
alternative, smaller diameter and a tree well, and shall be subject to the
approval of the Directors of Planning and Public Works; and the requirement
that public right of way be secured for offsite areas prior to the recordation
of the final map.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing for consideration
of the Planned Unit Development was opened.
Jerry Simon expressed appreciation to the Planning Department staff for the
assistance rendered in developing this plan. He reported the applicant has
no objection to the conditions relating to the PUD; however, they do have
disagreement with the conditions of approval of the tentative map relating to
offsite improvements. He pointed out that their development has been delayed
for approximately two years awaiting the alignment of Telegraph Canyon Road.
This has now been accomplished, but a problem still exists on the vertical align-
ment of the drainage channel. For this reason, when they started on plans for
this development they opted to use a temporary access road, as shown on the
PUD site plan. It is now indicated that these elevations will be available in
the near future and the permanent access road could be designed. }t is their
contention, however, that they have complied with the Subdivision Ordinance
which requires an access to the development, to be developed to the standards
of the City Engineer. They find that now the Engineering Division is recom-
mending approval subject to: (1) improvement of the temporary access road to
the City Engineer's standards, and (2) bonding for the improvements of the future
collector road, which consists of a 61 ft. wide box culvert and half of the
improvement of the frontage road running in an east-west direction, connecting
the subject property to the collector road. He felt there is a difference of
opinion in interpretation of the ordinance as to whether they have complied with
the requirement for furnishing access to the site.
-4- 5/22/74
In response to a question from Deputy City Attorney Beam, Mr. Simon reported
that he has now been advised that the engineering design for the drainage
channel should be available within six months; they were not aware of this at
the time they designed the present plan which includes the temporary access
over the channel.
Mr. Simon also pointed out their concern over the equity of requiring them to pay
for installation of the culvert as well as half the improvement of the frontage
road, since their property represents only about 18% of the frontage that will be
served by this frontage road. He reported he has been advised by the City
Engineer that they would have to acquire half the right of way for the frontage
road and collector road and bond improvements of the same.
Assistant Director of Public Works Robens confirmed that if the applicant chooses
to construct the temporary access route, then they will be required to bond for
acquisition of right of way of the permanent route and half of the offsite
improvements.
Mr. Simon contended that they should not be forced to develop the permanent
collector road at this time and pay a disproportionate share of the cost. He
expressed a willingness to construct the temporary access road and bond for its
removal at such time as the permanent collector road and frontage road have been
installed to serve other development, and would pay a fair share of the permanent
improvements.
Mr. Robens reported that the Director of Public Works has indicated that the
City should be very cautious about approving the subdivision with only temporary
access. He also advised that the cost of street improvements are not recoverable
by the developer who is required to install improvements.
Deputy City Attorney Beam reported that he has discussed this matter of improve-
ments with the City Attorney and there is precedent supporting the position that
when an improvement is of measurable benefit to the City, the City may enter into
an agreement for its installation.
As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Wilson-Rice) Recommend to the City Council the approval of PUD-74-1 sub-
ject to the eight conditions in the staff report and the modifications submitted
by Mr. Lee.
In discussion of the tentative map, Commissioner Wilson expressed the opinion that
the requirement for offsite improvements places an unfair financial burden on this
developer and allows future developers to derive benefit from those improvements.
Mr. Peterson pointed out that the question of timing enters into the equation of
offsite improvements; the initial developer is frequently required to pay a larger
share of the cost in order to assure that the improvements will be adequate to
serve his development prior to the development of the surrounding properties. If
this developer were content to wait until the adjacent property develops he would
not suffer this burden, but it's a price he pays in order to go first.
-5- 5/22/74
Commissioner Starr asked if the cost of the offsite improvements are a known
factor at this time, or if it might work a hardship on the applicant to proceed
without this information.
Assistant Director of Public Works Robens advised that two items not known at
this time include the exact alignment of the north-south collector road, although
a general alignment has been determined, and he felt the engineer's exact align-
ment would not vary enough to create any problem. The other factor is the
elevation of the drainage channel, and the City Council has authorized the
Director of Public Works to proceed with drawing an agreement with Wilsey and Ham
to design the drainage channel for the entire region of Telegraph Canyon from
Rutgers Avenue to Crest Drive. There will be a stipulation in the agreement as
to when the design will be completed but the private engineer has indicated it can
be accomplished within three to four months.
MSC (Rudolph-Chandler) Recommend to the City Council the approval of the tenta-
tive map for Windsor Views PCS-74-1, subject to the conditions enumerated in the
staff report and the modifications presented by Mr. Lee.
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Members Rudolph, Chandler, Floto, Macevicz and Rice
NOES: Members Starr and Wilson
ABSENT: None
7. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of amendment to Zonin9 Ordinance relating to Family Da,y Care Homes
Director of Planning Peterson requested that the Commissioners revise the pro-
posed amendment at the bottom of page 20 by deleting the stipulation of "16 years
of age or younger" and by changing "including" to "excluding." The proposed
amendment would then read "Family Day Care Homes serving from four to six children,
excluding the day-care family's natural or adopted children."
Mr. Peterson pointed out that approximately a year ago the Commission and Council
adopted an amendment to the ordinance relating to foster homes, and at that time
the County requested an additional zoning text amendment dealing with day care
homes. He noted that at the present time the Zoning Ordinance allows day care
homes for not more than 3 children, in addition to the natural children in the
home, as a principal use in all residential zones. The County has requested that
this be increased to 6 children as a matter of right with no conditional use per-
mit procedure. It is the opinion of the Planning Department staff that no more
than 3 should be allowed as a matter of right, and that a home desiring more than
3 children should apply for a conditional use permit in order that the neighbors
may be informed of the use and given an opportunity to respond.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Bim Plumb with the Licensing Section of the San Diego County Welfare Department,
spoke of the value to the community of a sufficient number of day care homes to
provide care for the children of those mothers faced with the necessity of
obtaining employment. He felt the more flexible the ordinance can be, the
easier it is to obtain an adequate number of day care homes. He also pointed
-6- 5/22/74
out there is some confusion in the proposed amendment which would allow as a
permissible use not more than three children, excluding natural or adopted
children of the day-care family, and the requirement for a conditional use
permit for day care homes serving from 4 to 6 children including the day-care
family's natural children. He felt in some instances this would limit the
number to even less than three if there were a larger number of natural children.
In response to a question from Commissioner Rudolph, Mr. Peterson concurred to
that the amendment relating to conditional use permit allowance should be 4
6 children, excluding the day-care family's natural children, or as better
language should read, "4 to 6 children, in addition to the day-care family~s
natural or adopted children."
Commissioner Wilson suggested it would simplify matters if the City would use
the County formula of permitting up to 6 children, including the family's
natural children, as a matter of right, eliminating the requirement for a
conditional use permit.
The Commission discussed the possibility of waiving the fee for a conditional
use permit but it was felt the Commission does not have that right.
Commissioner Wilson expressed the opinion that up to 6 children cared for within
a home would not have a disruptive impact on a neighborhood.
Judy Evans, 1431 Camellia Court, licensed day care mother and member of the San
Diego County Day Care Association, expressed concern over the possible $35.00
or $85.00 fee for a conditional use permit which she felt would deter many
families from applying for a day care home. She pointed out the need for low
cost day care in Chula Vista. She also pointed out that State Assembly Bill
457 waived the licensing fee for family day care homes for six or fewer children
on the grounds that such a fee would create a financial hardship. She asked
that the Commission give favorable consideration to allowing up to 6 children
without a conditional use permit.
As no one else wished to speak the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rudolph suggested adopting the State definition of Family Day Care
Home and allowing this use as a right in all residential zones.
Commissioner Starr pointed out that since the State definition provides for a
different number of children at different age levels, it might be confusing if
there were a mixture of ages in one family. Mr. Plumb explained how the County
administers this type of situation.
MSUC (Wilson-Rudolph) Recommend to the City Council an amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance to permit 6 children in a Family Day Care Home as a matter of right in
all residential zones.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Mr. Peterson reminded the Commission there will be no meeting next week or the
following week, since those are the fifth and first Wednesdays. The next meeting
will be held on June 12th, with a special meeting for the continued public hear-
ing to consider the sign ordinance provisions on June 19th.
-- -7- 5/22/74
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Wilson reported that he will not be able to attend the meetings on
June 12th or June 19th.
Chairman Macevicz announced this is his last meeting with the Commission, since
his resignation was submitted to the City Council on the previous night to be
effective June 1, 1974. The Commission expressed regret that he is leaving and
gratitude for the service he has rendered as chairman for the past year.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Macevicz adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Helen Mapes
Secretary