Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1983/12/14 Tape #242 Side 1 0 - 1593 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers Wednesday, December 14, 1983 Public Services Building ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Pro Tem Green, Commissioners Cannon, Guiles, Pressutti, and Shipe COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner O'Neill with prior notification, Commissioner Johnson without notification STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Gray, Director of Community Developer Desrochers, City Attorney Harron, Assistant City Attorney Gill, Principal Planner Lee, Environmental Coordinator Reid, Senior Civil Engineer Daoust, Traffic Engineer Glass, Community Development Specialist Kassman, Secretary Ruth Smith OTHERS PRESENT: Marshall B. Krupp, President, Community Systems Associates, Inc. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, SILENT PRAYER The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Vice Chairman Green, acting as Chairman Pro Tem for the meeting, and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Pressutti/Shipe) to approve the minutes of October 12, 1983; November 9; and November 30, 1983, as mailed. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None Planning Commission -2- December 14, 1983 1. CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-84-3 FOR THE PROPOSED OTAY VALLEY ROAD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Director of Community Development Desrochers stated that the Draft EIR was presented for public testimony at the meetings of November 9, 1983, and November 30, 1983. This testimony plus comments from the hearing before the State Clearinghouse have been incorporated in the Final EIR which is presented for consideration. Staff is recommending the Planning Commission certify that EIR-84-3 has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista and that the Planning Commission will be considering the information in the final EIR as it considers the project. Mr. Desrochers indicated that the Final EIR and the Report on the Redevelopment Plan will be presented to the Redevelopment Agency on December 15, 1983; there has been complete compliance with all State and local requirements; and the time schedule has been compressed from 9 months to 3-1/2. He reminded the Commission that the proposed Redevelopment Plan is a legal document setting forth the provisions for implementing the California Health and Safety Code as it applies to the redevelopment project. He then presented Marshall Krupp, the consultant for this project. Marshall B. Krupp, President, Community Systems Associates, Inc., consultant, summarized some of the pertinent replies incorporated in the Supplemental EIR from written and oral comments received during the public hearings. 1. Page 1-4; additional mitigation consideration: Because all detailed information is not presently available regarding projects to be developed in the area, new development projects and land development of the area should be subject to additional environmental review consistent with the new environmental quality amendments. This would require a subsequent EIR, a supplemental EIR, an EIR addendum, a focused EIR, an Allowance of adequacy prior to review, or a Negative Declaration. 2. Page 1-6; environmental impacts related to noise, odor, hazardous air quality and so forth. Strict enforcement of the Performance Standards of the Municipal Code will adequately provide means for minimizing future environmental impacts in the area. 3. Page 1-11; revised traffic counts. Because of the long-range planning activities of the City, County and State, there have been revised traffic counts developed. Although it is not known what the specific developments will be, the information is adequate to indicate approximate future traffic volumes in the project area. 4. Following page 1-27; Appendix D identifies the biological plants and species in the area. This was developed from other environmental documents previously prepared. The accompanying map indicates where the evaluation would take place. The landfill area is not included in the biological survey. However, a document which includes previous environmental analyses, and the regulations and requirements necessary for its operation is contained in the Supplemental EIR. Planning Commission -3- December 14, 1983 5. Appendix F is a verbatim photocopy of the Performance Standards of the Municipal Code and is defined as a mitigating measure for environmental impacts. 6. Also included are communications from various government agencies and individuals with replies to their stated concerns, and verbatim transcripts of the testimony given at the Planning Commission meetings of 11/9 and 11/30/83. Mr. Krupp summarized his presentation with the statement that the EIR adequately complies with State law and provides information obtainable at this time to indicate the impact on the environment. The Chairman stated that Mr. McKenna, representing the Citizens' Action Network, had requested permission to address the Commission for 30 minutes. On advice of the City Attorney, Mr. McKenna was informed that this was not a public hearing so there was no "right" to speak involved; however, upon agreement of the entire Commission, comments could be received. They would not, however, become part of the public hearing. MSUC (Shipe/Guiles) to hear Mr. McKenna's comments as long as they were not redundant and the time did not exceed 5 minutes. Lawrence F. McKenna, 1347 Mt. View Lane, Chula Vista 92011, representing Citizens' Action Network, declared he would like to raise a procedural objection regarding restriction to the right of the Citizens' Action Network to present written material to the Commission. He requested the Commission call a recess so that 20 pages of proposed changes to the Plan and a two-page letter might be xeroxed by City staff and submitted to the Commission. Xeroxing of this material, he stressed, had been promised him by a member of the Community Development staff and the promise had been countermanded. Director of Community Development Desrochers responded that the material had been submitted exactly 12 minutes prior to the opening of the meeting; the IBM machine takes 10 minutes to warm up for operation; no authorized personnel was available to run the machine; and that material from the public was normally presented to the Commission in advance of the meeting so it could be reviewed by the members. Mr. McKenna then stated he had submitted a letter on December 12, 1983, to both the City Clerk and Community Development addressing the Report's failure to consider the geothermal energy within the project area plus other unresolved specific issues. This letter was not considered even though he had correspondence showing the final date for input to be December 12, 1983. Upon examination of the indicated correspondence, Director Desrochers noted the document was dated September 20, 1983, and contained preliminary data on an estimated time schedule. A final target date of December 7, 1983, was established after that time and publicly noted. MSUC (Pressutti/Shipe) to certify that EIR-84-3 has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista and that the Planning Commission considered the information in the final EIR as it considered the project. Planning Commission -4- December 14, 1983 Commissioners Pressutti and Guiles commended the staff for excellent work done in preparation of the EIR and the care taken to answer all expressed concerns and to provide environmental protection for future specific projects. 2. CONSIDERATION OF REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ON THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PROJECT AREA Director of Community Development Desrochers noted that on September 14, 1983, the City of Chula Vista requested the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Diego to designate and authorize the Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency to undertake the redevelopment of certain real property located within the territorial limits of the County, contiguous to the City of Chula Vista, and more particularly described as Parcel 2 of the Project Area. Mr. Desrochers stated also that on September 14, 1983, by Resolution No. PCM 84-3, the Chula Vista Planning Commission selected the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area at the direction of the City Council. In addition, a Preliminary Plan for the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area was approved, and the Draft Redevelopment Plan for the Otay Valley Road Project Area was prepared by Community Systems Associates, Inc. The Planning Commission held public hearings on the Draft EIR on November 9 and November 30, and considered the Redevelopment Plan at the meeting on November 30. Director of Con~nunity Development Desrochers reminded the Planning Commission that they were to certify the Redevelopment Plan's compliance to the General Plan and transmit the Draft EIR and the Plan to the Redevelopment Agency and City Council with their report. He then presented Marshall Krupp. Mr. Krupp outlined the responsibilities of the Commission regarding their findings on the conformance of the text of the Redevelopment Plan with the land use of the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. Chairman Green referred to Mr. McKenna's request to speak for 30 minutes and present major changes to the Plan. He stated that as there will be a public hearing at the meeting of the Redevelopment Agency and the Council on December 20, 1983, that Mr. McKenna's remarks could be more appropriately presented at that time. MSUC (Pressutti/Cannon) to recommend approval of the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan and Project Area; making certain findings with regard to General Plan conformity; receiving and commenting on the Draft Environmental Impact Report; and transmitting such documents and reports to the Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency and City Council for consideration, approval and adoption. 3. CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-84-2 ON EUCALYPTUS GROVE - MORGAN/GARDNER Environmental Review Coordinator Reid reminded the Commission that a public hearing on the draft of this EIR was held on November 30, 1983. Responses to the comments and questions of the Commission and to written comments received have been incorporated into the Final EIR which is ready for certification. Plannin9 Commission -5- December 14, 1983 MSUC (Cannon/Shipe) to certify that EIR-84-2 has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and the environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista and that the Planning Commission will consider the information in the document as it reaches a decision on the project. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF GPA-83-6: AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN DIAGRAM TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION OF ~7.6 ACRES AT THE INTERSECTION OF FLOWER AND "E" STREETS FROM MEDIUM TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-83-F - REZONING OF 17.6 ACRES ON BOTH SIDES OF O0 BLOCK FLOWER STREET FROM R-3-P-13 TO R-3-P-23 - MORGAN-GARDNER 6. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR EUCALYPTUS GROVE, CHULA VISTA TRACT 84-1 - MORGAN-GARDNER At the recommendation of Director of Planning Gray and the concurrence of the City Attorney, Items 4, 5, and 6 were considered at the same time. Principal Planner Lee presented slides and addressed the three items starting with Item 4, the General Plan Amendment. The request is to amend the present General Plan designation from medium to high density. The applicant is proposing 376 units; however, the actual unit count will be controlled by the zoning designation placed on the property. The project, as proposed, would provide approximately 25 percent of the housing for low and moderate income families. Staff believes this particular site is one of the few parcels west of 1-805 that is suitable for High Density Residential because of its locational setting next to the freeway and commercial facilities. He pointed out that the site is buffered from the single-family residences to the west by the Eucalyptus grove and by its lower elevation. Staff is recommending approval of the General Plan Amendment. The next issue discussed, Item 5, was the zoning action wherein the applicant requested a zone change from R-3-P-13 to R-3-P-23. The City, in 1976, approved a tentative subdivision map for the development of a 209-unit townhouse condo (Gateway Townhouses) on this site; a two-year extension of the tentative map will expire in September 1985, and on its expiration the new map will come in effect. The new plan developed by the applicant will be built in compliance with the City's Affordable Rental Housing Program. The increases reflected in the zone change coupled with a 25 percent bonus allowance in conjunction with the Affordable Housing Program would allow the applicant to develop the project as submitted. The design of the actual site plan and the architectural elements will be acted upon by the Design Review Committee after Council takes action on the GPA and the rezoning. Planning Commission -6- December 14, 1983 With regard to Item 6, Principal Planner Lee said that the subdivision map was filed to allow for the eventual resale of the units as condominiums. In answer to questions, Planner Lee stated that the high-density designation is most appropriate for this location as it is a natural area in which to increase density and still have a self-contained project; the primary access will be on "E" Street although Flower Street will be affected; and the zoning change in 1976 was a down-zoning from R-3-G to have the zoning consistent with the General Plan. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Allen Perry, 1900 Central Savings Tower, San Diego 92101, lawyer for the applicant, informed the Commission the applicant is preparing to enter into a long-range agreement with the City re low and moderate housing which indicates that the property will not be converted into condos for many years. He also stated that the applicant concurs with the material in the staff reports. George Felix, 3940 Gresham Street, San Diego 92101, Alvarado Design and Associates, the project designer, reported that he had been instructed to design a project of excellence in keeping with the gateway concept of the City; that meetings had been held with the community and staff and all concerns had been addressed and mitigation measures taken; that the project was envisioned as an apartment project, not a condo, however, the lending institution wanted both options in the same project because of the changing market and financial situation. In response to the Commission's concern regarding the traffic impact, he referred the Commission to the City Engineer and the Traffic Engineer who, after conferring with the applicant's traffic engineer, is of the opinion that there will be no significant traffic impact caused by the project location. Commissioner Cannon expressed great concern over the "miserable" traffic condition at Flower Street, Bonita Glen, and down through Plaza Bonita Road. Doubling the units, he said, would also double the traffic. Commissioner Green remarked on anticipated traffic changes with the "H" Street and Route 54 completions and the need to reassess the impact on the intersection with each change and additional project. He asked if we should pass up the opportunity to provide affordable housing to the citizens or to avoid an incremental increase in traffic at the intersection. Kenneth Habermeyer, 165 Rosemary Place, CV 92010, resident, stated he concurred with Mr. Cannon's remarks re the traffic congestion. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. The public hearing was reopened for Jack Gardner, the developer, to speak. Jack Gardner, 642 Third Avenue, Suite G, CV 92010, developer, stated that if the property is ever sold, it won't be for at least 10 years and he would be willing to enter into an agreement with the Council on that. The property was Planning Commission -7- December 14, 1983 intended to remain in the Morgan/Gardner family. Mr. Gardner maintained that the National City Shopping Center has caused the bulk of the traffic problem and that Chula Vista property owners should not be penalized by what National City has done or what the County intends to do further east in the way of another apartment project. He urgently requested that the Commission listen to the Traffic Engineer's opinion. City Traffic Engineer Glass noted that one consideration raised at the last Planning Commission meeting was the impact of the "H" Street opening on Bonita Road traffic volumes. The volume on "H" Street has increased from 6,000 to 8,000 trips per day since the opening in August, with a corresponding decrease in volume on Telegraph Canyon Road, Otay Lakes Road, and Bonita Road east of 1-805. He stated that traffic problems on Bonita Road are aggravated by the high demand for northbound 1-805 right turns and subsequent left turns onto Plaza Bonita Road to reach the Plaza Bonita Shopping Center, the reverse movement leaving the Center, and the short distance between signalized freeway ramps. Mr. Glass discussed several traffic improvement projects resulting from meetings with the County and State as follow: - A recent change by the County's Plaza Bonita Road signal operation to split-phasing to give both Plaza Bonita Road and Lynwood Drive separate phases, thus allowing double right-turn lanes southbound to westbound on Bonita Road. - A proposed traffic signal interconnect system with the County's Plaza Bonita Road signal, the State's ramp signals, and the City's proposed signals at Bonita Glen Drive and at Flower Street. Proposed modification by CalTrans of the freeway ramps and signals to eliminate trouble-causing free right turns and to provide side-by-side double left-turn lanes under the freeway for the ramps. This will more than double the storage capacity for left-turn vehicles, thereby freeing the intersection of vehicle backup, and, consequently, enable shortening the signal cycle phase. Work on the northbound ramps will be completed in the near future and improvement of the southbound ramps is scheduled for next spring. - The City's plans to install a traffic signal at Bonita Glen Drive next spring to provide controlled access to commercial developments on both sides of Bonita Road. Commissioner Shipe queried if another 125-150 trips during the peak hour would not offset these referenced changes. City Traffic Engineer Glass replied that the planned additions and modifications would more than compensate for the traffic added by this project. Planning Commission -8- December 14, 1983 Commissioner Cannon asked if the Traffic Engineer concurred with the Environmental Impact Report that the service level would remain at "E" or "F" even after the left-turn lanes were expanded to two lanes at 1-805 and Bonita Road. Mr. Glass answered affirmatively but added that the casual observer would not notice any significant difference in a service level change. In this particular instance, a difference in the traffic volume would be noted on Flower Street but would not be apparent on Bonita Road. There being no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed, Commissioner Green stated that he represented a number of management companies and rents in this area are up and housing tight; the Commission has a responsibility to provide affordable housing when available; rents in a high density area will be correspondingly lower; the project is appropriately located near the freeway while separated from the adjoining single-family residences; he approves of the project and intends to vote for its approval. Commissioner Shipe supported Commissioner Green's statement adding that traffic problems can be mitigated; and he will also vote for approval. Commissioner Pressutti commended Messrs. Morgan and Gardner stating the concerns of many people must have been met as there had been only one objection voiced by the public during the meeting. Commissioner Cannon agreed with Commissioner Pressutti but added that he would continue to be concerned about the traffic impact; had spent eight years trying to prevent Plaza Bonita; does not share Mr. Shipe's optimism about the mitigating measures at the interchange; and believes the Commission needs to take a good solid look at the traffic in the area and divert it through National City. MSUC (Shipe/Pressutti) to approve GPA-83-6. MSUC (Shipe/Pressutti) that based on findings contained in Section "E" of the staff report, to recommend that the City Council enact an ordinance to rezone Lot 57 of the Morgan/Gardner subdivision from R-3-P-13 to R-3-P-16 and Lot 58 from R-3-P-13 to R-3-P-19 subject to precise plan development standards 1 through 6. MSUC (Shipe/Pressutti) that based on findings contained in Section "D" of the staff report, to recommend that the City Council approve the tentative subdivision map for Eucalyptus Grove, Chula Vista Tract 84-1, subject to conditions 1 through 12 as included in the staff report. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Director of Planning Gray recommended that the workshop meeting of December 21, 1983, be canceled because of the joint Council/Redevelopment Agency meeting on the previous night. The Commission agreed. Planning Commission -9- December 14, 1983 recommended canceling the regular business meeting of December 28, 1983, for lack of agenda material. The Commission agreed. Principal Planner Lee notified the Commission that there is sufficient money left in the budget to permit more than three members to attend the League of California Cities meeting in the spring. The Commission asked that more information be given to them about the meeting. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commissioner Pressutti requested that a red curb be painted in front of Denny's on Bonita Road to eliminate a safety hazard. City Traffic Engineer Glass replied that the work order was already in. - Chairman Pro Tem Green reminded the Commissioners to attend the joint Council/Redevelopment Agency meeting on the 20th. ADJOURNMENT AT 8:58 p.m. to the joint City Council/Redevelopment Agency/Planning Commission meeting of December 20, 1983, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers and to the Regular Business Meeting of January ll, 1984, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Ruth M. Smith, Secretary Planning Commission WPC 0651P