HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1986/05/14 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
7:00 p.m. Council Chambers
Wednesday, May 14, 1986 Public Services Buildin9
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Commissioners Carson, Grasser, Green, Guiles,
Shipe and Tugenberg
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: With notification: Commissioner Cannon
STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Krempl, Principal Planner
Lee, Assistant City Attorney Gill, Deputy City
Attorney Moore, Senior Civil Engineer Daoust
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PPJ~YER
The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Pro Tem Shipe and was
followed by a moment of silent prayer.
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
Chairman Pro Tem Shipe reviewed the composition of the Planning Commission,
its responsibilities and the format of the meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MSC (Guiles/Carson) Grasser abstained, to approve the minutes of the meeting
of April 9, 1986, as mailed.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR HUDSON VALLEY ESTATES NO. 2, CHULA
VISTA TRACT 83-3
Principal Planner Lee stated that the 2-1/2 acre parcel was originally
approved in 1981 and resubmitted in 1983; there have been no changes in the
immediate vicinity which affect the original conditions or findings of
approval; therefore, staff recommended approval of a 3-year extension of the
tentative map.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was
opened. No one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Planning Commission -2- May 14, 1986
MSUC (Tugenberg/Carson) (6-0) to approve a 3-year extension of the tentative
map for Hudson Valley Estates No. 2, Chula Vista Tract 83-3, the map to then
expire on May 17, 1989.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-86-5 - CONSIDERATION OF TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
FOR THE COTTAGES AT EASTLAKE SHORES, CHULA VISTA TRACT
86-5 - LANE/KUHN PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
Principal Planner Lee noted that the project site is for a lO0 single-family
lot subdivision with a density of l0 dwelling units per acre and the four
floor plans have been approved by the Design Review Committee. Mr. Lee
reviewed the conditions of approval and the Code requirements as outlined in
the staff report adding that this development will be highly controlled and
has many amenities.
In response to questions, the Commission was informed that "masonite lap" is
used to "dress-up" two-story units when the project backs up to the public
street; that item 2g(2), under Recommendations, stipulating "needed off-site
water improvements must be satisfied" is a standard condition in all EastLake
projects and refers to the tank system utilized during the construction of the
units (a regulation of the Fire Department); there is a temporary water line
which is part of the system, however, the complete system has not yet been
phased in; it is not known when Route 125 will be completed as a Freeway, but
a two to four lane roadway from Telegraph Canyon Road north to SR #54 will
have to be in place by the second or third phase of EastLake I or development
will cease; front-yard landscaping is installed by the developer, maintained
by the individual owner and there is no "common area"; the School District has
issued letters of assent re school facilities for the first part of Phase I.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
James W. Craig, 2611 Adams Ave., S.D. 92111, Engineer of the project,
indicated a willingness to respond to questions and stated agreement with
staff recommendations and conditions of approval.
John Davis, 14 Corporate Place, Newport Beach, CA 92660, Lane/Kuhn Pacific
Development Company,replying to questions regarding the marketability of the
2-bedroom homes said these homes were attractive to the first-time buyer who
does not wish an attached condominium, to the move-down buyer, the empty-
nester, who does not want to maintain a large home and yard, and the response
has been very good with all 87 models sold out.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Tugenberg /Carson) (6-0) to 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.
Planning Commission -3- May 14, 1986
MSUC (Tugenberg/Carson) (6-0) that based on the findings contained in Section
"E" of the staff report, to recommend that City Council approve the tentative
subdivision map for the Cottages at EastLake Shores, Chula Vista Tract 86-5,
subject to the conditions "a" through "y" contained in the staff report.
3. REPORT: PCM-86-24 - CONSIDERATION OF SECTION PLANNING AREA BOUNDARIES FOR
THE RANCHO DEL R£Y AREA OF THE EL RANCHO DEL REY SPECIFIC PLAN -
MCMILLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
Principal Planner Lee stated that Council adopted the revised E1 Rancho del
Rey (ERDR) Specific Plan on November 5, 1985 which established that the
property would be divided into sub-areas. The applicant proposes to divide
the property into four sub-areas. Area One will be accessed from "H" Street
and Otay Lakes Road to facilitate the extension of the sewer service from the
southwest; and the full improvement of "H" Street. The one issue of staff
concern is the estate housing located north of the loop road and the fact that
63 units are being proposed in the first phase with the bulk of the estate
housing (203) not accomplished until the third phase. Sub-area Two is an
in-fill project of the area which abuts existing development and which will
complete development along Telegraph Canyon Road and provide the extension to
"J" Street. The bulk of the estate housing will occur during Phase 3 and the
development on the south side of "H" Street will be finished in Phase 4; the
applicant proposes a variety of land uses on the project with a cut-and-fill
balanced grading operation within each given SPA prior to the preparation of
the SPA Plan for the area with all the details of the project outlined.
In reply to questions from the Commission, Mr. Lee noted that construction
might involve two or more SPAs simultaneously, but safeguards placed in the
SPA Plan would guide the mixture of units and order of development; that some
grading would occur in the open space area in connection with the installation
of the sewer line, however, aside from this, the open space area would be free
of grading.
Commissioner Tugenberg expressed concern that the estate-sized lots would not
be developed early in the program with the possibility that the developer
might return and request a higher density for the land because of a lack of
market demand for estate housing. He was reminded that Council had been quite
adamant about the number of estate lots incorporated into the Final Plan.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Ken Baumgartner, McMillin Development, 2727 Hoover Ave., National City, spoke
in support of the application stating they had endeavored to comply with the
approved SPA Plan by provision of infrastructures, 55 acres of open space,
addition of the fire station, library and elementary school in the first
phase; the Junior High in the second phase; the public facilities are provided
well in advance of need; all density categories have been included plus the
employment park which will allow them to meet a valid market all within one
phase. He noted that the grading operation would be in a west-to-east
direction across the northern ridge which necessitates early development of
Planning Commission -4- May 14, 1986
the estate areas; they would, therefore, make a commitment for the 63 lots and
are very positive about the demand for estate-sized housing.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Guiles/Carson) (6-0) to recommend that Council approve PCM-86-24 to
establish SPA boundaries for Rancho del Rey.
4. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT PCA-86-9 - REQUEST TO AMEND
CHAPTER 19.70 OF TITLE 19 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL
ORDINANCE TO INCLUDE REGULATION OF SATELLITE DISHES
WITHIN MONTGOMERY
Director of Planning Krempl stated that had the Council had adopted an
ordinance in 1985, which regulated satellite antenna dishes within Chula
Vista. In early 1986, Council amended the ordinance to revise the abatement
program outlined for nonconforming dishes within the City within a 3-year time
period. Since the Montgomery annexation area is not under the jurisdiction of
the Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance, the Montgomery Planning Committee, at its
May 7th meeting, voted to recommend adoption of an ordinance similar in all
respect to that of the City of Chula Vista with two exceptions (1) a lO-year
rather than a 3-year amortization period and (2) a 60-day (rather than 30-day)
period of time in which a non-conforming dish may be removed and re-erected
without losing its nonconformative status and being considered abandoned.
This time frame was recommend to coincide with agreements made by the Council
to not form assessment districts for street improvements for a period of l0
years after annexation unless there is a 2/3 vote of the people in the
Montgomery District. The City Attorney is concerned that such an
inconsistency between the regulations governing the Montgomery area and the
balance of Chula Vista could cause problems in the future.
Discussion ensued about the grounds for granting a variance, the FCC
regulations regarding location of the dish antenna to permit clear reception
and it was suggested by the Attorney that for cases wherein the whole issue is
the ability to receive from the satellite, an administrative permit be
established which would be less costly than the present variance procedure.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was
opened. No one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Green/Carson) (6-0) to recommend approval of the proposed amendment to
Chapter 19.70 of Title 19 of the Municipal Code included in Exhibit A of the
report.
Planning Commission -5- May 14, 1986
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
Director of Planning Krempl
reminded the Commission of the upcoming workshop scheduled for May 21,
1986,
requested a response from the Commissioners to the list of topics
suggested for future workshop meetings and an indication of their order
of priority,
noted that there would not be a Planning Commission meeting on June 25th
because of insufficient agenda items.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
- Commissioner Grasser will not be able to attend the workshop.
ADJOURNMENT AT 8:09 p.m. to the Study Session Meeting of May 21, 1986 at
5:00 p.m. in Conference Rooms 2 & 3
WPC 2889P