Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1987/08/12 Tape No : 382 Si de l: 0-1902 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF lHE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers Wednesday, August 12, 1987 Public Services Building ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Shipe, Commissioners Cannon, Carson, Fuller, Grasser, Green, Tugenberg COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Krempl, Principal Planner Lee, Assistant City Attorney Rudolf, Senior Civil Engineer Daoust, Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer Garibay, Assistant Planner Schilling PLEDGE 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 MSUC (Carson/Green) to approve the minutes of the meeting of May 27, 1987, as mailed. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None 1. PUBLIC HEARING: DRAFT EIR-87-2 - RANCHO DEL REY SPA I Consultant Tony Lettieri stated that the Commission had reviewed this item in a public workshop 3 weeks ago, and details of the project would not be restated. In 1985, an EIR had been prepared covering the area included in Exhibit A (2,377 acres, 6,620 units, employment park and public facilities). Planning Commission Minutes -2- August 12, 1987 That EIR was certified in August, 1985. The first phase (SPA I) of the specific plan is the project under consideration. Basically, SPA I is north of East "H" Street between 1-805 and Otay Lakes Road, west of Otay Lakes Road, and includes the major canyon running through the project, Rice Canyon. It also represents 2,201 units, the employment park and the majority of the public facilities. Mr. Lettieri then introduced David Claycomb from WESTEC Services, the firm that prepared the EIR. David Claycomb, Senior Project Manager, WESTEC Services, introduced Bob Ser9eant, Traffic Engineer with Willdan Associates, a sub-consultant of WESTEC. Mr. Claycomb said that following the close of the public review period, August 14, 1987, WESTEC, in consultation with the City, would respond to all comments received, issue a Final EIR with changes to the document as appropriate, and respond to all written comments. The E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan was first adopted in 1978, amended in 1985, and EIRs were prepared for those discretionary actions. The 1985 environmental document identified significant, unavoidable, unmitigable impacts in the area of biology and air quality. All other effects identified in the 1985 document were found to be mitigable. He stated that Section 2.B of the current EIR contained a detailed background of the planning history of the document. This EIR is a supplement to the 1985 EIR and the focus of such a document is to compare the currently proposed SPA Plan with the Specific Plan adopted for the site and to look at the project in more detail; for example, more specific grading plans and issues such as noise. Traffic issues with regard to traffic circulation and access, it was determined that the project would produce approximately 41,000 trips for the SPA I area. This would significantly impact traffic circulation in the project vicinity, particularly along East "H" Street and at the 1-805/"H" Street interchange. One assumption important to stress is that the mitigation measures assume that a maximum volume of 56,500 vehicles per day would utilize "H" Street east of the Hidden Vista Drive prior to construction of S.R. 125. The proposed mitigation measures consist of construction or improving the roads in the project vicinity. If the assumption stated holds true, no significant impacts related to traffic would be expected from the proposed project. Landform and aesthetics - the project substantially alters the land form and visual character of the site. This fact was addressed in the 1985 EIR. The current EIR finds that measures developed as part of the Specific Plan and incorporated into the current SPA Plan would reduce land form and visual quality impacts to a level of insignificance. Also, a design manual currently being developed as a mitigation measure for the adoption of the SPA Plan, contains measures to reduce the visual impacts to a level of insignificance. Planning Commission Minutes -3- August 12, 1987 Biological Resources - the conclusions of the current EIR are the same as in 1985, that is regardless of mitigation programs developed, this project will create significant unavoidable impacts in the area of biological resource. Geology/Soils - a specific geotechnical investigation has been prepared which indicates no major geological constraints on the site; a number of mitigation measures are proposed to ensure no adverse effects to the project. Noise - In 1985, no specific grading plans were available; however, for the current EIR, traffic volumes no internal streets have been modeled and grading information incorporated. Based on the review, noise levels will not be significant for any area except the multi-family area adjacent to East "H" Street. It is suggested that when the development plans are submitted for the multi-family area, they be investigated to ensure noise levels are reduced by such items as a noise attenuation wall, a wall combined with a berm, or the utilization of large setbacks. Schools - this project would have a requirement for approximately 660 elementary and 660 secondary students, which is an incremental impact to the City's school facilities. The current regional development plans call for the construction of three elementary schools, one junior high., and one high school in the vicinity of the project site. This would reduce impacts to a level of insignificance upon implementation. There is also a school site designated within the SPA area. Parks/Recreation - the proposed acreage for open space exceeds all parkland dedication requirements the City has in place; therefore, the project incorporates mitigation measures to handle the parks and recreation needs of the project. Water the project has incorporated all mitigation measures necessary for water distribution a nd allocation. The potential shortage of water in Southern California is a regional problem. This particular project does not adversely affect the regional water supply. Commissioner Tugenberg remarked that it is difficult to assess how realistic is the assumption of 125. Mr. Claycomb said that factor was built into the analysis and that Bob Sergeant might be able to address the question of "realism" if wanted. Mr. Sergeant, Willdan Associates, stated that 125, or a six-lane facility along that corridor, is unsettled at present; however, efforts are being made and further planned at staff level to finance construction of a roadway along that alignment. The EIR indicates a phasing of improvements in the project and there is a cap on the amount of development permitted prior to construction of a facility in the 125 corridor. In developing that cap, a substantial amount of regional growth was assumed coincident with the development of SPA I; therefore, SPA I would not take all the available capacity in the eastern area but would be built out along with the other planned developments. Planning Commission Minutes -4- August 12, 1987 Commissioner Tugenber§ asked for clarification regarding the northbound exit ramp from 805 to East "H" Street at Terra Nova, if an extra lane were to be constructed on the south side of East "H" at that intersection. Mr. Sergeant replied that supposition was correct and there would be, in essence, four eastbound lanes in the area adjacent to the Shopping Center. A conceptual alignment has been prepared and can be accommodated within the existing right-of-way with the median curbs narrowed. In reply to whether there would be a free right-hand turn from the northbound exit, Mr. Sergeant replied that was the point at which the additional lane would be picked up. Regarding the proposed location of a stoplight at Buena Vista and East "H" Street, the answer was affirmative. Commission Cannon then asked what would be the level of service (LOS) at 805/"H" Street, assuming a 50,000 ADT, if Route 125 were not built and the consequent building permit cap were enforced. He was answered that with completion of the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR, and using a limitation of 50,000 ADT (instead of the 56,500 ADT in the EIR which is generally considered the lower limit of LOS C), "H" Street would operate at a LOS C to LOS D range during peak periods. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Ken Baumgartner, 2727 Hoover Avenue, National City, McMillin Development Company, volunteered that the authors of most of the technical documents presented to the City were available for questioning. Maria Tollefson, 1439 Summit Drive, Chula Vista, speaking as a member of the Board of Directors of the Eucalyptus Ridge Homeowners Association, officially presented the Planning Commission with a resolution passed by the Board of Directors stating their objection to the planned placing of any ballfields on the easternmost edge of Rice Canyon bordering the Eucalyptus Ridge Condominium community as negatively impacting the quality and character of the community and posing unnecessary hardships on the property and residents, and that the planned provision of public recreational facilities would force an unreasonable impact upon their existing community. Ms. Tollefson indicated their exhibit displayed the relationship of the proposed ballfields to the present location of Eucalyptus Ridge, that the fields would be approximately 35 feet lower in elevation necessitating a great in-fill of Rice Canyon. In response to Commissioner Carson's request for a definition of the phrase "unnecessary hardships," Ms. Tollefson replied that the lights, noise level created by baseball, soccer and other recreational activities - with no barrier between the condominium complex and the ballfields - and the traffic problems would simply add to the general impact. Approximately 60 adults reside in the condominiums with only 10 to 15 children. Other persons offering testimony opposing the project were: (1) George Ruth, 1438 Summit Drive; (2) Keath Harmon, 1457 Summit Drive; (3) Daniel Kincade, 1417 Summit Drive; (4) George Rodway, 1459 Summit Drive and (5) Greg Rowe, 1461 Summit Drive. lheir objections were as follows: Planning Commission Minutes -5- August 12, 1987 (1) The noise impact from six baseball fields; and the widening of "H" Street would.bring traffic and its noise to within 30 feet of the front door of the homes, (2) condos were purchased because of the open canyon area, it is now proposed to not only fill in the canyon but to construct multi-unit complexes up to the fence level, to install lighted playing fields, and a shopping center; (3) I am deeply concerned and upset by the proposed placement of the recreational fields and the effect it will have on my neighborhood and my property; my fellow residents and I are in a lose-lose situation in that objections equate with being selfish, shortsighted and anti-community, while silence equates with enduring hardships and handicaps that did not exist at the time of property purchase; the ADMA Group and the City of Chula Vista specifically indicated that the area would be surrounded by open space; resale value of the property will drop; concerned about baseball fields in the backyard; the expansion of East "H" Street to six lanes; development of a major shopping center on the eastern boundary; loss of the canyon on the western boundary; addition of more condominiums nearly on the property line; loss of views of the canyon spaces; addition of noise and light pollution; increase in trespassing, parking, theft and vandalism problems; lack of on-street parking on East "H" Street after expansion to six lanes will bring more visitors to utilize their parking; additional safety problems through blockage of fire lanes; the consensus of the Board and the members of the Association is that it is not fair to the existing residents. Solutions proposed include moving the ballfields so they border the undeveloped area in the Rancho del Rey SPA, perhaps behind industrial property where no prospective residents will be impacted; eliminate the two easternmost fields and use that area for low-impact activity such as open space, jogging, hiking and bike trails; omit the proposed lighting and require a dusk-to-dawn curfew; provide architectural barriers around Eucalyptus Ridge to minimize noise and limit trespassing and litter problems, with the cost of such barriers to be borne by Rancho del Rey Partnership or the City or both; (4) Mr. Rodway read from the literature provided by both ADMA Group and McMillin Development in which it was promised that the area would remain private and uncrowded, that the canyon was dedicated open space and that no development of major uses was planned in the north and middle legs of Rice Canyon and that development would occur only on the plateaus; that presently his sleep is prohibited by the amplification of the ballgames at Southwestern College. (5) Mr. Rowe emphasized that he was speaking on behalf of himself not as a member of the Resource Conservation Commission. He passed out a diagram of the area plus a photograph of the present view from his bedroom windows and asked that the Commission imagine what he would be seeing after the City installed baseball diamonds and soccer fields. He referred to an exhibit prepared by McMillin that depicts the canyon in profile, how much would be filled in and the proximity of the field with the building pad upon which his development is constructed; that the noise from the ballfields from 7:00 a.m. to lO:O0 p.m. daily would be approximately 50 feet from his windows; presently, the noise from the soccer fields at Bonita Vista High School, a good quarter of a mile away, dominates their homes even with the windows closedl directing attention to Section 4, page 136 of the EIR, he quoted that "...this site has also tentatively been identified as a suitable location for night-lighted recreational facilities. The establishment of such facilities could pose Planning Commission Minutes -6- August 12, 1987 potential impacts with the adjacent residential development." Mr. Rowe asked why the word "could" was used, when it was obvious that it would. There is an indisputable need for parks and active recreation in the City; however, there are approximately 16 acres of City property designated for passive recreation which could be exchanged with the baseball fields, and there would be no effect except for purchasers in the development who would be informed of the situation at time of purchase. To have this kind of active recreation foisted on them is really the last straw. He said there were many other viable options and he would encourage the City to rethink their priorities and find other locations for these facilities. He noted that the number of ballfields could be decreased if a sharing situation among the schools, YMCA, developers, and City were emphasized and implemented. In response to Commissioner Green's question if Mr. Rowe had made his feelings known to the developer, he replied that the developer had informed him and the Board Members of the Homeowners Association that they were complying with the demands of the City in the location of the fields; for that reason, he believed the problem lay with the City and not with the developer. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. The Chairman stated that the Final EIR would be scheduled for consideration by the Planning Commission at the time the project is considered. Any comments received from the State Clearinghouse would be accepted and responded to in the Final EIR. Commissioner Cannon stated that he had four comments and that he was requesting some further input. He would like to see: 1. in the EIR, a realistic analysis of the alternatives available in the event that Route 125 is not put into place and lowering ADTs to a point of insignificance, in other words, a cut-off point which will guarantee if 125 is not built, that no more construction will take place until such times as the roads are in place. 2. an analysis of what happens with major developments on a cumulative basis should Arizona, 5 years from now, take the entire amount of water allotted to it; and what is the estimated cost to the Otay Water District to import all their water and the consequent cost to the homeowner. 3 an analysis with regard to the lack of a junior high school being within the planning stages of Sweetwater Union High School District; and what happens if these schools are not built -- what provisions are made for the children generated by this project. 4. rather than just a "no project" alternative, a project alternative involving (a) lower density and (b) lack of an employment park, specifically in relationship to how those proposals would affect the traffic basis that we have seen in the EIR. Planning Commission Minutes -7- August 12, 1987 2. PUBLIC HEARING: (CONTINUED) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-87-39M - REQUEST TO ALLOW CONTINUANCE OF AN RV STORAGE LOT AT 1383 BROADWAY - BROADWAY EOUITIES, LTD. Assistant Planner Schilling indicated that the applicant had requested continuance of the item until the September 16 meeting. MUSC (Cannon/Green) to continue PCC-87-39M to the meeting of September 16, 1987. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-88-4M - FAMILY DENSITY BONUS, 251 OXFORD STREET - HECTOR ZUNIGA Principal Planner Lee stated that a density bonus of one unit had been requested for a proposed apartment project at 251 Oxford under State Government Code Section 65915. The Design Review Committee had approved the project design with the additional density bonus at their March 19 meeting, subject to City Council approval. The Montgomery Planning Committee, at their meeting of August 5, had reviewed the request for the one-unit density bonus as an information item. Being developed is a 7-unit apartment complex with the single-family house being moved from the front of the lot to the rear as a utilization of the density bonus. Under City Ordinance 12135, a developer must provide 20 percent of the total project units as affordable-to-low-income housing, and 5 percent of the pre-density project units as affordable-to-moderate-income units to qualify. Rents on the affordable units are restricted for 25 years. If City Council approves the requested density bonus, the developer has agreed to rent one two-bedroom apartment for no more than $523/month to a low-income household, and one two-bedroom apartment for a maximum of $784/month to a moderate-income household. The issue that will come before the City Council is to decide whether or not to grant the density bonus or to agree to offer equivalent financial incentives. According to State Law, a local jurisdiction does not have the option to deny a density bonus without offering the financial incentives. Staff is recommending approval of the request for one density bonus. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Hector Zuniga, 251 Oxford Street, CV, the applicant, stated his availability for answering questions. Paul Castillo, 249 Oxford Street, Chula Vista,an adjacent neighbor, said there was an existing problem with water runoff from the project site after rains. He had no objection to the project provided the problem was alleviate~ not exacerbated by the construction. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Cannon inquired if any plans had been made to reroute water from the project. Senior Civil Engineer Daoust replied that no grading plans had been received as yet, however, Mr. Castillo's concerns would be taken into account at the time of the building plan and appropriate drainage would be required. Planning Commission Minutes -8- August 12, 1987 MSUC (Green/Cannon) to find that this project will have no significant environmental impact and adopt Negative Declaration issued on IS-87-9M. MSUC (Green/Cannon) to recommend that Council approve the request for one density bonus unit for the project at 251 Oxford Street in compliance with State Government Code Section 65915. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE AZV-87-36 REOUEST TO REDUCE EXTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK AT 844 WOODLAWN AVENUE - LEANDRO ALEX ESQUEDA Principal Planner Lee commented that the item was a request to reduce the exterior sideyard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet in order to construct an addition to 844 Woodlawn Avenue in the R-1 zone. The proposal is to add 105 square feet (5'x 21') to the southerly portion of the residence to include a bathroom and two walk-in closets. This would reduce the exterior sideyard setback along Sierra Way from l0 feet to 5 feet. Both the underlying zone and the building line map call for setbacks on Sierra Way of 10 feet. Staff recommends denial of the request on the basis there is nothing unique about the characteristics of the property or its relationship to adjacent areas which prevents reasonable use under existing exterior sideyard restrictions. The improvements could easily be accomplished in an alternative manner without encroaching into the ten foot sideyard. Mr. Lee also noted that a site inspection of the property had revealed that six foot fencing had been established in the front and exterior sideyard setback areas where the maximum height is 3.5 feet. That matter has been turned over to Zoning Enforcement for correction. Commissioner Tugenberg suggested that the Zoning Enforcement Officer also look into an encroachment on the north side of the house, a new bay; and that on the adjoining property to the north, there is a covered shed or structure extending up to the property line. Commissioner Green interjected that the adjoining two properties to the north have such a structure. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing to speak, the hearing was closed. MSUC (Green/Fuller) to deny the request to reduce the exterior side yard setback. The Commission requested that the Zoning Enforcement Officer investigate the other referenced properties. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-88-1 - REQUEST TO ESTABLISH OFFICES FOR SAN DIEGO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES AT 1261 THIRD AVENUE - JOHN M. URQUHART Principal Planner Lee stated that the item involved a 4.5+ acre site located at the southeast corner of Third Avenue and Kennedy occupied by the 55,000 square foot former Handyman facility. 372 parking spaces are in the facility Planning Commission Minutes -9- August 12, 1987 which is shared with a drive-through restaurant and a 8,000 square foot multi-use commercial building. The applicant has submitted a two-phase plan with the San Diego Department of Social Services to occupy the north half of the former Handyman building (24,000 square feet) as the first phase operation. The second phase would be the remodeling and reconstruction on the south side to accommodate three movie theatres and approximately 4,500 square feet of office retail. A 3,000 square foot restaurant is proposed for location on a separate pad near Third Avenue. The Commission is asked to approve the use permit required for the various services being proposed by the County as outlined in the report. The 170 parking spaces required to accommodate both employees and clientele plus the llO required by ordinance for uses now on site would total 280 spaces. Through the proposed revision of the existing plan, the applicant can apply well over 400 spaces in the first phase. Phase 2, which involves the theatre addition and pad building, does result in a possible conflict with shared parking unless operation hours and uses are monitored. That issue would be addressed by the Design Review Committee when reviewing the precise plan of that phase. The issue of land use and the shared parking will then be forwarded to the Council for a final decision. It will not return to the Commission. Staff recommends approval subject to designation of employee-parking on a specific area and the findings contained in the report. One letter of protest was received from an apartment structure located at 244 Palomar Street objecting to the basic land use and posing questions about sewer and parking. The sewer problems will be discussed more fully by Senior Civil Engineer Daoust. Planner Lee pointed out that if the 24,000 square feet proposed for the north half of the building were used as an office or retail establishment, 80 to 120 spaces would be required while the applicant is actually providing 170 spaces. The Initial Study for the Negative Declaration addressed a mitigation measure on the sewer problem but the City Engineer and the applicant have agreed to a substitute mitigation measure of cleaning the sewer main downstream from the identified problem area with the applicant paying $2,000 to offset the cost. Before taking action on the environmental document, verification of this agreement is needed from the applicant. In response to Commissioner Fuller's request for further clarification, Senior Civil Engineer Daoust explained that the sewer overflows and waste backflows up into the manhole structure to within 2 feet of overflowing. Three efforts at cleaning the lines to enable measurement of the flow have been made. An appreciable amount of debris and extraneous material has been removed, but the sewer is still not functioning satisfactorily and further cleaning efforts are considered more practical than the study proposed originally. Commissioner Tugenberg verified that the parking matter in Phase 2 would not return to the Commission but any recommendations and concerns could be forwarded to Council. Mr. Tugenberg then said that he had a concern about the negative parking situation and resulting impaction if all the suggested items in Phase 2 were to be implemented. Planner Lee reassured him that several mitigating measures were under consideration to control the traffic situation. Planning Commission Minutes -10- August 12, 1987 Commissioner Cannon asked if the sewer line cleaning did not cause the level at the manhole to drop sufficiently, would such action be of sufficient significance to require an environmental impact report. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf said that to adopt the mitigated Negative Declaration, the Commission would need to be satisfied that the measures set forth would mitigate a substantial negative impact stated in the report. If not satisfied, the Commission should not approve it. He pointed out that the sewer problem was addressed in the Negative Declaration in Item 3 and the mitigation measure was amended to delete the study and substitute the payment of $2,000 by the applicant for cleaning the line. Commissioner Carson said she could not vote for a Negative Declaration under the present circumstances and would like to see the item tabled until the sewer problem is solved. Commissioner Green summarized the discussion by saying that if the problem continued, there would be an overwhelming health problem which would have to be remedied immediately; therefore, the Commission does not have to concern itself with that situation. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Marc A. Weiss, 2391 Marca Place, Carlsbad, 92009, representing a property owner on Kennedy and Palomar, spoke in behalf of the project based on the need for occupancy of the building to inhibit the undesirable activity in the area since the building was vacated. Lu Quinney, 363 Fifth Avenue, representing John Urquhart, the owner, said the staff has presented the background well, and the concerns voiced by the Commission echo those of the applicant. The client wants to share in the cost of repair instead of the replacement of an entire line to serve a larger area. The $2,000 clean-out fee in addition to the sewer capacity charges of $600/unit were agreed upon since a sewer problem would affect them as well as others in the neighborhood. He is in agreement with Commissioner Green's analysis that if there is a health and safety problem in the area, it will have to be corrected. The parking situation will be pursued with the Design Review Committee and the applicant recognizes the level of development on the project will depend on parking adequacy. Their analysis and staff's do not agree but they will continue working together to reach a conclusion and agreement prior to the DRC review. A more detailed parking study is being prepared. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MS (Green/Fuller) that the project will have no significant environmental impacts and to adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-88-3. Commissioner Carson asked if the motion included the correction that staff presented or as it is printed in the report. The reply was "with the correction". Principal Planner Lee suggested that before voting~ acknowledgment was needed from the applicant regarding agreement with the mitigation measures proposed and corrected. John Urquhart stated his agreement. The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission Minutes -11- August 12, 1987 MSUC (Green/Fuller) that based on the findings contained in Section "E" of the report, to recommend that City Council approve request, PCC-88-1, to establish offices for the San Diego County Department of Social Services at 1251 Third Avenue subject to the condition that the parking spaces to the east of the County offices shall be designated for employee parking only. 7. OTHER BUSINESS: LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 1987 ANNUAL CONFERENCE Director of Planning Krempl pointed out that monies had been budgeted for the attendance of one Commissioner at the Conference with all expenses paid. He would like to know if the Commission wishes to have someone attend, or if there are multiple interests, for the Commission to decide whether they will send one individual or split the cost in some fashion. The final answer will be needed in the near future as the deadline for registration is the middle of September. ELECTION OF OFFICERS MSUC (Shipe/Grasser) to propose Joanne Carson as Chairperson for the forthcoming year. MSUC (Cannon/Fuller) to propose Bob Tugenberg as Vice Chairperson. DIRECTOR'S REPORT None COMMISSION COMMENTS Commisioner Shipe said he would not be present at the August 26 meeting as he would be on vacation. Note: Commissioner Cannon notified the Secretary earlier that he would not be present at the August 26 meeting because of vacation. ADJOURNMENT AT 10:50 p.m. to the Regular Business Meeting of August 26, 1987 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers Ruth M. Smith, Secretary Planning Commission WPC 4259P