Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1986/09/17 Tape No: 274, Side 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers Wednesday, September 17, 1986 Public Services Building ROLL CALL CO~qISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Shipe, Commissioners Cannon, Carson, Grasser, Green, Guiles and Tugenberg COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Krempl, Principal Planner Lee, Deputy City Attorney Moore, Senior Civil Engineer Oaoust, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Director of Community Development Desrochers, Senior Community Development Specialist Robin Putnam and Senior Community Development Specialist Pam Buchan PLEDG£ OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Shipe and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chairman Shipe reviewed the composition of the Planning Commission, its responsibilities and the format of the meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSC (Carson/Grasser), Guiles & Green abstained, to approve the minutes of the meeting of August 13, 1986, as mailed. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None 1. REPORT: ON PROPOSED OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 15 BONITA HACIENDAS Principal Planner Lee stated that the subdivision map was approved on May 10, 1978. The subdivision grading and improvements were installed but no homes constructed. The new owners, McMillin Development, Inc., have petitioned to have an Open Space Maintenance District established on Lots A, B, and D, which Planning Commission -2- September 17, 1986 abut the open space in the Bonita Long Canyon Area. The majority of the Open Space District will remain in the natural state except for 1/2-acre at the entrance which is planted and irrigated. The estimated maintenance cost will be approximately $10/month. Maintenance of the private park shown on Lot C will rest with the Homeowners' Association. In response to a question by Commissioner Shipe, Principal Planner Lee stated that this item would appear as a public hearing before the City Council. MSUC (Tugenberg/Guiles) (7-0) to recommend formation of the proposed Open Space Maintenance District No. 15 before the City Council. A public hearing must be held before the City Council for this consideration. CommiKsioner Cannon stated that he had a potential conflict of interest with the remaining items on the agenda and left the dais and the meeting. 2. FSEIR 83-1: CONSIDERATION OF FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL EIR-86-1 AMENDMENTS TO THE CHULA VISTA BAYFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN Robin Putnam, Senior Community Development Specialist, reviewed the section of the CEQA Guidelines pertaining to EIR's to clarify the confusion experienced at the meeting of September 10th during consideration of the Final EIR-86-2, San Diego Country Club, as to whether certification of the EIR should be supported if it is considered that the conclusions of the EIR are not substantiated by the facts in the report. She explained that according to Section 15089 of the CEQA Guidelines, review of the Final EIR should focus on responses to comments on the Draft EIR. The environmental issues are, however, the main focus of the public hearing on the Draft document. Certification by the lead agency or recommending body, like the Planning Commission, indicates that the EIR has been completed in compliance with the CEQA Guidelines; the Final EIR was presented to the decision-making body (lead agency) and that the decision-making body reviewed it and considered the information contained therein prior to approving the project. She explained the interpretation is that the members of the lead agency do not necessarily have to agree with the specific impacts or the mitigation measures proposed in the document. Specialist Putnam then asked if there were any questions on the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Midbayfront Local Coastal Bayfront Amendment, saying several changes had been made from the Draft docu;.~rnt to reflect the comments received, and that all comments received had been submitted at the public hearing before the Commission on August 27, 1986. MSUC (Tugenberg/Carson), Cannon out, (6-0), to certify that the Final Supplemental EIR-86-1 was prepared in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista and further that the Planning Commission would consider the information in the Final Supplemental EIR when it reviews the Local Coastal Program Amendments. Planning Commission -3- September 17, 1986 3. PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CERTIFIED LOCAL COASTAL PROGR~q AND THE BAYFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN Principal planner Lee stated that the Chula Vista Local Coastal Program occupied 790 acres and was certified by the Coastal Commission in March, 1984 and included a land use plan, zoning regulations, map and implementation action. In January, 1985, the Council made the Bayfront Specific Plan the official document of the City to be used in implementing the LCP; that is, the land use intensity, the building mass/height, and the off-street parking standards. The major landowner within the Midbayfront, Santa Fe Land Improvement Companies, combined with Watt Industries and formed the Chula Vista Investment Corporation to handle the proposed development of the Bayfront. Their engineer reviewed the adopted LCP/Specific Plan and concluded that the soil conditions along the Bayfront would constrain development as planned in the Midbayfront. As a result, an alternate plan was developed which called for (1) road realignments and changes, (2) relocation and/or reconfiguration of land uses, (3) modification of grading. Principal Planner Lee then outlined and reviewed with the use of the overhead projector the three areas. Circulation Element - "E" Street/southbound 1-5 interchange was aligned ~ith Bay Boulevard and a much tighter loop proposed. The restriping of "E" Street to accommodate six lanes will provide two lanes in each direction plus a double left. Widening of the "E" Street bridge would be required when traffic circulation declines to LOS D condition. In conjunction with that, a widening program along the section of "E" Street from I-5 east to Woodlawn m~y be necessary. The new "E" Street trolley station has the potential of adding traffic congestion; however, MTDB has indicated that the trolley movement headway time will remain at 15 minutes as they will add additional cars to handle the volume rather than more trains; also, a fail-safe system to allow the trains to load and unload without the cross-arms being lowered thus permitting traffic to move across the intersection (cutting the downtime by 50 percent) is under review. - Marina Parkway Design - The new alignment links the Marina Parkway directly to "E" Street with Tidelands becoming secondary by "T-ing" into Marina Parkway. This design provides visual access to the Bayfront and park; allows for a continuous flow of the park with consolidation of the residential area at the east side to Tidelands (Marina Parkway). Lanes will be reduced to two for that portion of Tidelands proceeding north. Lagoon Drive ("F" Street) from 1-5 to Tidelands (Marina Parkway) originally with a lO0-foot ROW will be a 95-foot ROW with a median to provide a better visual tie with Marina Parkway. Planning Commission -4- September 17, 1986 Bay Boulevard - The revised traffic analysis recognizes that abandonment of the railroad east of Bay Boulevard which would allow for the ROW expansion will not take place in the near future. The lack of additional ROW is not seen as a significant traffic impact because the Bay Boulevard (between "E" and "F") which is calculated to operate at overcapacity, is only 1/4 mile in length and the capacity is estimated at 5,000 ADT (5,600 at full development). In addition, the lack of land uses to the west eliminates problems for those accessing the area plus Bay Boulevard's new alignment with the off-ramp coming from the north make this an acceptable solution. Land Use Based on the whole rendition, the development parcels were reconfigured; however, the land use acreage has remained almost the same. The parkland was reconfigured along the Bay and marshland area to open the waterfront views and increase access to coastal areas; the residential area was retained to the east and south of Marina Parkway; and a +3-acre saltmarsh reconfigured adjacent to the "E" Street marsh thereby -increasing public access and enjoyment of the coastline. The amendment would allow for a transfer of the development rights from the office park area to the north of Marina Parkway; the existing overall floor area ratio (FAR) would remain at .5 FAR. A provision was included in the amended text to ensure substantial setbacks and stepping of the building heights. Grading and Drainage The grading plan for the Midbayfront has been revised to decrease the amount of imported fill (400,000 cubic yards) required for building pad elevations. The 1-1.5 acre desiltation basin is retained and will connect to the new freshwater marsh south of Lagoon drive to provide +3.2 acres of freshwater habitat. The area north of Marina Parkway is planted to drain west via a swale into the bay. The grading and drainage amendment, as proposed, would create several problems involving the location of the swale/within the areas designated for office park and public parkland and would result in less usable public space adjacent to the coastal area. An alternative drainage system, such as underground facility, should be utilized within the park area. Retention of the swale through the office park area is acceptable; however, necessary maintenance would be the responsibility of the applicant and not involve the public area. Principal Planner Lee pointed out that the new proposal provides a more dynamic entry to the Midbayfront based on configuration of Marina Parkway, relocation of the residential and parkland areas, the architectural edges of the building heights and the potential of an architectural focal point such as a tower or dome (70 feet maximum) in the office park north of Marina Parkway to identify the core area of the Midbayfront. Planning Commission -5- September 17, 1986 He outlined the amendments to the LCP and Specific Plan needed to ensure consistency within the LCP documents including (1) Change of the Specialty Retail (SR) designation to Office Park; (2) change of Midbayfront Office Park designation to Industrial Business Park; (3) reinstatement of the 44-foot height limitation at the northeast quadrant of Bay Boulevard/"E" Street; and (d) addition of a new section on specific procedures and format for issuance of emergency coastal permits. He stated that certification of the FEIR and SEIR and approval of the LCP and SPA per the addendum and the attachments was recommended by staff. Questions asked by the Commission and answered by staff were as follows: (1) the distance from 1-5 to the western tip of Gunpowder Point is 3/4 miles; (2) CVIC discovered the extent of the soil problem about 6 months ago, although it had been known for 10 years that poor soil conditions existed; (3) the on-going obligation to maintain the swale through the commerical area and the possibility that the developer would have to widen the "E" Street bridge would be ensured by the fact that the applicant has accepted this as a condition of approval and there will be a development agreement between the Agency and the developer; (4) if the problem of bridge widening occurs after build-out, control is ensured by the required feasibility study and the filing of a financial document which includes the bridge and other major improvements, plus the traffic conditions being monitored on a yearly or quarterly basis to anticipate a LOS D situation; (5) the present level of traffic during the rush hour is close to LOS D even with the police-controlled Rohr traffic which allows less turn movement; (6) it is anticipated that a 2-year period may elapse between a LOS D situation and the bridge widening; (7) control of the 430 parking spaces allotted for the hotel on Gunpowder Point is established because the hotel is limited to 400 rooms regardless of the number of stories in the building; (8) the soil condition at the proposed hotel site is considered stable soil and has been in a high-ground location for many years. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. George Merziotis, ?O1 Broadway, CV, representing Merziotis Properties, stated that qe had received notification of this meeting; his concern is the change of height limitations and the switching of parklands; that decisions are being made that might not be necessary and these problems should be resolved beforehand. Director of Community Development Desrochers explained that the Agency is in litigation with Mr. Merziotis and the City has obtained immediate possession of his property. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tugenberg stated he would like to see something firm regarding the "E" Street bridge and a decision made prior to arrival at LOS D service. Plam}ing Commission -6- September 17, 1986 Principal Planner Lee replied that the matter will not proceed further until a commitment and solution are agreed to in the development agreement. Director Desrochers added that the modification with the new configuration will alleviate some of the problems as southbound traffic will have one continuous loop in the future. Commissioner Guiles referring to condition #4, asked if nine lanes are needed on "F" Street and when the modification will be required. Staff replied that an acceptable format would be developed by the time the first tentative map was considered by the Commission; the Engineering Department is endeavoring to resolve the problem of traffic increases on "F" Street and the necessity of widening "F" back to Third Avenue; however, the new loop design will curtail congestion. MSUC (Tugenberg/Green), Cannon out, to recommend that City Council adopt a resolution: A. Certifying that FEIR-85-1 and Supplemental FEIR-86-1 have been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the Environmental Procedures of the City of Chula Vista and that the Planning Commission has reviewed these documents; and B. Amending the Chula Vista Local Coastal Program and Specific Plan as set forth in Attachments A, B, and C of the attached resolution subject to conditions listed in Attachment D of the attached resolution. MSUC (Tugenberg/Green), Cannon out, to recommend that City Council enact an ordinance amending the Chula Vista Bayfront Specific Plan as set forth in Attachments A, B, and C subject to conditions listed in Attachment D. DIRECTOR'S REPORT None COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Green observed that it was difficult to see the Director and asked if he would sit elsewhere for easier visibility. Commissioner Carson asked if there would still be a joint meeting with Council on October 8, 1986, and was informed there would not be a meeting. ADJOURNED AT 8:00 p.m. to the Regular Business ~eeting of October 8, 1986, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Ruth M. Smith, Secretary P1 anning Commi ssi on WPC 2251 P