Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1980/03/18 Item 05, 5aCOUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item '~ sa Meeting Date 3/18/80 Public hearing - Consideration of tentative subdivision map for C u a is a ITEM TITLE: Tract 80-11, Vista Arizona Resolution /0 0,33- Approving tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 80-11, Vista Arizona SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning r~~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No X ) BACKGROUND 1. The applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 80-11, Vista Arizona, for the purpose of the development of a one lot 12 unit condominium project at 582 Arizona Street in the R-3 zone. 2. An Initial Study, IS-78-83, was conducted by the Environmental Review Committee on July 13, 1979 for an identical 12 unit condominium development on the adjacent property to the east. Since this developer is using the same building design on an identical piece of property, with minor revisions, this project will result in substantially the same effects and the mitigation measures proposed in IS-78-83 will be applied to this develop- ment. The findings of insignificant impact, as listed in IS-78-83, also apply to this project. RECOMMENDATION: Concur with Planning Commission recommendation. In addition, the City Council is now required to consider the effect of their decision approving or denying the project on the housing needs of the region and balance those needs against the public service needs of the residents of Chula Vista and available fiscal and environmental resources. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: On February 27, 1980 the Planning Commission, by a vote of 5-2, recommended that Council: 1. Adopt the Negative Declaration on IS-78-83. 2. Approve the tentative subdivision map for Vista Arizona, Chula Vista Tract 80-11, in accordance with Resolution PCS-80-11. DISCUSSION 1. Existing site characteristics. The subject property is a 60' x 310' (18,600 sq.ft.) parcel located on the south side of Arizona Street approximately 260 feet east of Broadway. The site is relatively level, sloping gently toward the south and draining into a natural channel which traverses the rear portion of the property. The site is presently developed with two older dwelling units which will be removed for the development of this project. 2. Proposed development. On December 13, 1979 the Design Review Committee approved a two-story building con- taining 12 two bedroom units on the rear portion of the site, with the parking (12 carports, 10 open spaces--22 total) located in2 f~lront of the units. The proposed development 1002 / Continued Form A-113 (Rev. 11/79) Page 2, Item S, Sa hieeting date 3/18/80 represents a near dup1icatipn of the existing 12 unit condominium project (South Shore Condominiums) on the adjacent parcel to the east with some minor modifications. 3. Architecture. The proposed design of the structure is of contemporary Spanish architecture with a light stucco exterior, wood trim, patios and balconies, and mansard the roof on the front, rear and east elevations. The entrances to the units are located on the east side of the property. 4. Open Space. The project meets the open space requirements. Each of the interior lower units has a 60 sq. ft. patio adjacent to the entry and access to the open space in the side yard. The front and rear upper and lower units have a 120 sq. ft. patio or balcony. The upper interior units have 60 sq. ft. balconies. The private areas either meet or exceed the requirements of the code. 5. Parking. The 22 parking spaces provided on site meet the requirements of the code for the 12 two bedroom units. Twelve of the spaces will be in carports and assigned to each of the units. While not a requirement, the carports provide a covered area for each of the units and afford an opportunity to provide storage. 6. Storage. The code requires that 200 cu. ft. of private storage be provided for each unit. Of this total,a minimum of 40% or 80 cu. ft. must be adjacent to the unit. Each of the interior units (upper and lower) will provide 107 cu. ft. of adjacent storage located at one end of the respective patios or balconies. The front and rear units have two adjacent storage spaces, totalling 213 cu. ft., located at each end of their patios or balconies. In addition, 176 cu. ft. of storage space is proposed for each unit within the carport area; thus, the proposed storage exceeds the minimum requirements of the code. 7. The City Engineer requested that the Planning Commission place a condition on the map making the developer responsible for the construction of the north half of the drainage channel located along the south portion of the site. The applicant was given the option of constructing now or requesting a deferral based upon anticipated participa- tion by the Army Corps of Engineers in the construction of the channel. The applicant requested at the Planning Commission meeting that the dollar amount be established so that all of his costs would be known. The Planning Commission concurred and added a condition requiring that the dollar amount be established prior to City Council consider- ation of the final map. The City Engineer has determined that the cost of the applicant's share will be $8,000. The applicant would be required to bond for this amount with the condition that if construc- tion on the channel has not commenced by January 1, 1986 the money would be returned to the applicant so that he may proceed with the construction himself. Construction of the channel on a lot by lot basis would create design problems in providing the necessary transition between the proposed channel and the natural channel and would also increase the cost. KGL: hm ~'po~,3 Page 3, Item 5, sa Meeting date 3/18/80 8. The State Subdivision Map Act was recently revised to require that City Councils make an additional finding prior to the approval of any tentative map. The finding is setforth in Section 66412.2 of the Map Act as follows: "In carrying out the provisions of this division, each local agency shall consider the effect of ordinances and actions adopted pursuant to this division on the housing needs of the region in which the local jurisdiction is situated and balance these needs against the public service needs of it residents and available fiscal and environmental resources." KGL:hm by the City G^:!acil of Chula Vista, C:~fi;orr~ia Dated e~~ ~bb~ ~