Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1984/11/14 Tape 253: Side 2 0-1005 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers Wednesday, November 14, 1984 Public Services BuildinU ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Green, Commissioners Cannon, Carson, Guiles, O'Neill, Shipe and Tugenberg · COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None STAFF 'PRESENT: Director of Planning Krempl, Principal Planner Lee, Assistant City Attorney Gill, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Green and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chairman Green reviewed the composition of the Planning Commission, its responsi- bilities and the format of the meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSC (O'Neill/Shipe) to approve the minutes of September 26, 1984 as mailed - Cannon abstained. MSC (Guiles/Shipe) to approve the minutes of October 10, 1984 as mailed - Cannon, Carson and O'Neill abstained. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-84-8 - BAYFRONT/"E" STREET TROLLEY STATION Environmental Review Coordinator Reid stated that the Commission had held a hearing on the draft EIR on October 24, 1984. No public testimony requiring a response was provided during that hearing. Comments were received from CalTrans regarding concern about the westerly entrance from "E" Street to the facility. As a result, the opera- tion of the facility has been changed so bus access to the station will be from Wood- lawn Avenue only, also control devices have been added on "E" Street. Additionally, MTDB had some concerns which were not environmental but which~ nevertheless, are addressed in the Final EIR. Staff recommends certification of the EIR. MSUC (O'Neill/Green) to certify that EIR-84-8 has been prepared in compliance with CEQA, the State EIR Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedure of the City of Chula Vista, and that when the conditional use permit for the project is before the Planning Con~nission for consideration, they will have reviewed and considered the information in the EIR. Planning Commission -2- November 14, 198q 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ON THE EASTLAKE I SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA, EIR-84-1 Environmental Review Coordinator Reid stated that this EIR is designed to be a supplemental environmental impact report, a subsequent document to the master EIR which was adopted in February 1982. EastLake I is the initial development phase of the overall EastLake project. A provision of the planned core, unity zoning is that prior to development of the property, a SPA Plan would have to be approved for the planning area. The site's specific SPA and tentative maps are the primary focus of this EIR. The discretionary action by the City includes an amendment to the General Development Plan. This EIR together with the master EIR (EIR-81-03) provide an assessment of the probable short- and long-term cumulative impacts of the project. Future discretionary action of EastLake I area includes the consid- eration of a precise plan for the Village Center and a supplemental SPA plan for the EastLakes Greens area. The draft was ~ssued for public and agency review on September 27, 1984. Written comments from SDG&E~ MTDB and the Regional Water Quality Board have been attached to the staff report. A letter received by staff from EastLake has not yet been evaluated. The State Clearinghouse reports one letter from Caltrans not yet seen by staff. Mr. Reid then introduced Ann Nussbaum of Westec who prepared the EIR for a brief analysis of the report. Ann Nussbaum, Westec Services, 3211 Fifth Ave., San Diego, stated the EastLake I SPA plan as proposed would include 3,683 dwelling units within a residential area of approximately 620 acres with the remaining acreage to be developed for non- residential uses. The acreage varies somewhat from the General Development plan .designations but is in compliance with the intent of the Planned Community Regu- lations. To evaluate which roads will be impacted, a special SANDAG model was used which separates EastLake I traffic from the study area results. Expansion of several existing streets will be required plus a minimum of two lanes for SR 125 north of San Miguel Road and four lanes on Telegraph Canyon Road west of the project. The property will need to be annexed to the Otay Water District's Improvement District 22. A dual water system in each phase of the development will enable the use of reclaimed water for irrigation of open space and similar areas. The increase in the regional water consumption by the project will have an insignifi- cant impact on water availability. The sewer service requires some improvements. Monitoring of the Telegraph Canyon line to determine capacity will be needed and extension of the pipe line will be necessary. Two elementary school facilities will be required. A site is reserved in the north- west section and when enrollment reaches 900, a second school in the southeast section will be needed. No site is reserved for the second school as of now. The District has indicated there are sufficient secondary school facilities. Improvements are planned for some of the existing flooding problems in the Tele- graph Canyon basin and the Long Canyon area to prevent exacerbation of the impacts of the minor increase in run-offs. Mitigation measures in Long Canyon Basin may require drainage under Coral Canyon Road. Plannin~ Con~nission -3- November 14, 1984 Ms. Nussbaum concluded her analysis stating that the traffic noise impact needs mitigation efforts; however, subsequent noise studies will be made at the time of each development to determine necessary mitigation measures. Commissioner Shipe questioned the (1) impact of traffic on 1-805; (2) estimated number of additional police and fire personnel required; and (3) impact of los- ing the Colorado River water on EastLake. Bob Sergeant, responsible for the traffic section of the report, replied that the impact on 1-805 would be minimal with EastLake adding lO,O00 cars per day to 1-805; the ramp at Telegraph Canyon Road would be most impacted and construction of the 125 corridor would reduce the impacts on the ramp but not those on 1-805. The volume on 1-805 would be comparable to that through the Del Mar area not to SR 8 or 94. Ms. Nussbaum noted that (2) an increase of 9.3 police and 10.5 fire personnel is anticipated at a cost of $976,000. EastLake is responsible for construction of the fire station but is not included in the personnel estimate. (3) In terms of water consumption, the loss of the Colorado River w~ter will not present an unusual increase in demand because of EastLake. Replies by Mr. Sergeant to further questions by the Commission included: (1) the EastLake project will add less than 1,000 cars per day to Bonita Road whose current volume is 18,000 with an anticipated increase to 22,000 per day in 1995 because of the development occuring east of 1-805 and Bonita; (2) the payment for bridge construction across the canyon is beyond the scope of the EIR; (3)~ the effect of the non-completion of SR 125 is not addressed in the EIR although East "H" Street and Telegraph Canyon Road are approaching their capacity. In reply to questions from Commissioner O'Neill regarding hydrology and drainage, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid replied that one of the conditions of the · PC zoning was that there would be no increased run-off discharge from the properties and a retention basin at the junction of Telegraph Canyon Road is shown on the tentative map for the Village area; the developer will be responsible for building the drainage culvert under Coral Canyon Road. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Michael C. Spata, 1007 Fifth Ave., San Diego, 92101, Attorney f6r United Enter- prises, stated that they have met with Mr. Santos' attorney and discussed items of copn~rn Ca copy of which was submitted for the record) and a copy was given to the developer. wendy Longley-Cook, lO07 Fifth Avenue, Ste. 1110, San Diego, Longley-Cook Engineer- ing, representing United Enterprises, noted that if all conditions outlined in the letter are met, there should be no problem. The major concerns of United Enterprises address the issues of circulation as related to SR 125, and the devel- opment of facilities relating to the drainage problems. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Environmental Coordinator Reid noted that the schedule of discretionary actions was still uncertain, however, it was anticipated that they would return with the Final EIR in January, 1985.