HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1987/06/24 Tape No : 280
Side 2: 0-1382
MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
7:00 p.m. Council Chambers
Wednesday, June 24, 1987 Public Services Building
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Shipe, Commissioners Cannon, Carson,
Fuller, Green, Grasser and Tugenberg
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Krempl, Principal Planner
Lee, Deputy City Attorney Moore, Senior Civil
Engineer Daoust, City Traffic Engineer Glass,
Environmental Review Coordinator Reid
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 None. Minutes listed on Agenda had been approved at
Meeting of 6/10/87
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
Chairman Shipe announced that some of the participants in tonight's hearings
had been delayed because of the traffic on 1-15; therefore, the order of the
agenda would be revised as follows:
Item 1 - Final EIR-87-2, Otay Rio Business Park, would be taken third.
Item 2 - GPA, Rezoning and Tentative Subdivision Map, would be fourth.
Item 3 - Final EIR-87-4 - Plaza Bonita Apartments, would be taken first.
Item 4 - GPA and rezoning, would be taken second.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- June 24, 1987
1. CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-87-2 - OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK
Taken out of sequence. See page 4.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) GPA-87-1 - CONSIDERATION OF A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL,
AGRICULTURE AND RESERVE AND OPEN SPACE TO MEDIUM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND RESEARCH AND LIMITED
INDUSTRIAL LOCATED WEST OF OTAY VALLEY ROAD AND
NORTH OF THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO BOUNDARY IN THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY LIMITS
OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK
(b) PCZ-87-H - CONSIDERATION TO REZONE 210 ACRES
LOCATED WEST OF OTAY VALLEY ROAD AND NORTH OF THE
CITY OF SAN DIEGO BOUNDARY IN THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY LIMITS FROM A-8
AND F-1 TO R-1 AND 1-L-P - OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK
(c) PCS-87-6 CONSIDERATION OF A TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK, CHULA
VISTA TRACT 87-6, LOCATED WEST OF OTAY VALLEY
ROAD AND NORTH OF THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO BOUNDARY
IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY
LIMITS - OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK
Taken out of sequence. See page 9.
3. CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-87-4 - PLAZA BONITA APARTMENTS.
Environmental Coordinator Reid indicated that the draft EIR had been
considered on June 10th; testimony taken, and the comments, both written and
oral, had been incorporated into the Final EIR along with appropriate
responses and changes to the text. Many changes concentrated on the issues of
transportation access and land use. Since the EIR has now identified
significant impacts, the addressment of alternatives to the project as
proposed becomes more important. CEQA Findings have not been prepared because
of the recommendation on the project itself. If the Commission wishes to
approve the project, the Findings will be presented at a later date.
Certification of the EIR rather than tabling is recommended since it is
considered to be an adequate document. Mr. Reid then asked Senior Civil
Engineer Douast to discuss the memo of June 16 which was included in the staff
report.
Senior Civil Engineer Daoust stated he had information additional to that
contained in the referenced memo; namely, (1) the lane configuration at the
southbound on-ramp to 1-805 should indicate the more southerly lane is striped
for a combination through and right-turn lane; (2) the traffic signal at
Bonita Glen has been completed and is operational; (3) the additional lane on
Planning Commission Minutes -3- June 24, 1987
the southbound on-ramp discussed as a possible condition of approval has not
been imposed as yet; (4) the State has indicated uncertainty that an
additional lane can be provided at that southbound on-ramp; and there is some
concern that provision of a bicycle lane might result in the eastbound lane
configuration on Bonita Road remaining unchanged. As of this day, the County
was to have started procedures to implement the many interconnect systems and
to eliminate the U-turn capability at Bonita Road and Plaza Bonita for
eastbound (on Bonita Road) vehicles. Lastly, in the event the traffic lanes
at the southbound on-ramp are widened, it is not certain if the City will be
able to relocate the traffic signal standard further south as discussed with
Mr. Federhart at the June 10th meeting.
In reply to Commissioner Cannon's question regarding Dr. Douglas Hill's letter
contained in the packets which asserted that a number of houses on Bonita Road
that are on septic tanks have had some downstream problems and that the
project site, being the lowest land in the area, had raw sewage on the
property, Mr. Reid replied that he had not seen the letter and that neither
Planning nor Engineering had investigated the problem. He added that
technically, the input period ended with the closure of the public hearing on
the 10th. However, this significant new information needs to be examined to
determine if it is an issue needing to be included and evaluated in the
environmental report. Coordinator Reid suggested that the consideration
report be continued until Engineering had an opportunity to review the status
in the area and, perhaps, do some additional subsurface testing. He estimated
that the continuation time needed would be 3 weeks.
MSUC (Cannon/Tugenberg) (7-0) to continue consideration of Final EIR-87-4 for
a period of 3 weeks.
AMENDED MOTION:
Commissioner Cannon amended the motion to continue consideration of the Final
EIR-87-4 to July 22, 1987. Commissioner Tugenberg agreed.
Allen Perry, representing the applicant, requested continuation indefinitely
of the next item on the agenda, GPA-87-3, which deals with the substance of
the application as distinguished from the EIR, in order that the project
parameters may be reconsidered in view of the density, the mass and building
locations. He suggested it might be appropriate to continue Item 3, the EIR
certification, in a similar manner. The applicant would have no objection to
that nor would there be any objection to the addition of further material in
the EIR.
Deputy City Attorney Moore, upon being asked for a ruling, stated that the
project itself cannot be considered until after EIR certification; and there
is no problem with continuing the consideration of the Final EIR to an
indefinite period of time if the applicant is so willing. Taking action on
GPA-87-3 would be unnecessary since the Commission was not acting on the Final
EIR.
MSUC (Cannon/Tugenberg) to file Final EIR-87-4 on the Plaza Bonita Apartments.
Planning Commission Minutes -4- June 24, 1987
1. CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-87-2 - OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK
Assistant Planner Schilling requested that the item be trailed until arrival
of the applicant. (See page 8.)
4. PUBLIC HEARING. (a) GPA-87-3 CONSIDERATION OF A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR 4.6 ACRES ADJOINING AND
TO THE WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF 'E' STREET AND
BONITA ROAD - STAFFORD GARDNER DEVELOPMENT
(b) PCZ-87-K CONSIDERATION TO REZONE 4.6 ACRES
ADJOINING AND TO THE WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF
'E' STREET AND BONITA ROAD FROM R-1 TO R-3 -
STAFFORD GARDNER DEVELOPMENT
Not considered because no action taken on Final EIR - see page 2.
5. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) GPA-87-2 CONSIDERATION OF A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FROM COMMERCIAL THOROUGHFARE TO HIGH
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR 2.6 ACRES LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF FLOWER STREET AND JEFFERSON
AVENUE - APPEL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
(b) PCZ-87-L CONSIDERATION TO REZONE 2.6 ACRES
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF FLOWER STREET
AND JEFFERSON AVENUE FROM C-T TO R-3 APPEL
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
Charles Gill, 600 B Street, Suite llO0, City of San Diego, representing Appel
Development, requested that the item be trailed for approximately 15 minutes
as it was not anticipated that the Commission would have reached this item
until after 7:30, and the owner and applicant are not present.
6. OTHER BUSINESS: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF CONCERN WITH
RESPECT TO DEVELOPMENT OF OTAY MESA (CONTINUED)
Director Krempl commented that the Commission had been provided with a revised
draft resolution regarding concerns as to development on Otay Mesa. This was
from an earlier Commission referral to staff and some discussion had taken
place at the last workshop. It is felt that the essential ingredients as far
as what has and is occurring on the Mesa and the "Now, therefore" expresses
the Commission concerns to the Council in terms of ongoing planning and
development in the Mesa, the amount and intensity of industrial land, the
adequacy of transportation planning, including transit, the lack of
development phasing limits and encouraging the Council to continue to pursue
available means to ensure responsible land-use planning of the area.
Commissioner Cannon commended the Director on the authorship of the resolution.
MSUC (Cannon/Fuller) (7-0) to approve the resolution as submitted.
Planning Commission Minutes -5- June 24, 1987
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Director Krempl informed the Commission that on the 24th, the Council would be
having another General Plan workshop at 4:00 p.m. It is an ongoing discussion
regarding Eastern territories. The Council had asked for some build-out
information as to what the three scenarios might look like if carried to their
ultimate conclusion In addition, some of the opportunities in Central Chula
Vista will be shared with them.
Two sign violation items have been resolved; at "H" and 1-805, there were
some subdivision sales signs removed and the monument sign for the Quik
Corner Deli has also been removed.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Tugenberg left the dais at this time.
Commissioner Fuller discussed SANDAG's Regional Growth Management Workshop
which she had attended; shared some material contributed by the Building
Industry Association which has in the last year had a Community Growth
Response Task Force and has done a survey in the region regarding growth and
development; some interesting facts that were highlighted in the workshop; and
noted a feeling that the City of San Diego and the County were working on the
regional growth problem. John Goss spoke about what was happening in Chula
Vista and he was an interesting contrast to the Planning Directors from
Oceanside and Carlsbad who discussed their programs initiated by the citizens
through ballot measures. People were impressed by the fact that here in Chula
Vista we have made an effort through a citizen's group, the builders and City
staff to work together to resolve some of the critical issues before they go
to the ballot.
Commissioner Tugenberg returned to the dais.
Commissioner Green remarked the fact that no "alliance" has yet been
demonstrated at the Commission meetings by Crossroads - only complaints.
Deputy City Attorney Moore interrupted and reminded the Commission that the
new Brown Act requires that no decisions be entered into by a majority of the
Commissione~without it being posted on the agenda.
Commissioner Tugenberg commented on the revised EIR on the Otay Lakes item -
the way it was done was excellent with the deleted part "x'd" out and the new
text italicized.
5. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) GPA-87-2 CONSIDERATION OF A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FROM COMMERCIAL THOROUGHFARE TO HIGH
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR 2.6 ACRES LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF FLOWER STREET AND JEFFERSON
AVENUE - APPEL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
Plannin§ Commission Minutes -6- June 24, 1987
(b) PCZ-87-L CONSIDERATION TO REZONE 2.6 ACRES
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF FLOWER STREET
AND JEFFERSON AVENUE FROM C-T TO R-3 - APPEL
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
Principal Planner Pass said staff recommendation is denial of GPA-8?-2 because
the retention of Thoroughfare-Commercial (C-T) on the entire site could
provide additional commercial territory needed in the revitalization of the
Broadway commercial strip. The Broadway Study of 1972 called for methodical
deepening of the strip for the use of new and remodeled commercial
developments, landscaping, off-street parking, visual and functional
amenities. The reduction in its depth could prove a hindrance to
revitalization. Mr. Pass quoted from the text of the Broadway Study in
support of staff's recommendation. He emphasized that the text calls for a
600-foot de~th of the C-T zone, the area of Flower to "E" Street. Staff's
conclusion is the reduction in depth of any of the commercial segments of the
Broadway strip would impede if not preclude its commercial revitalization and
progress; that there is no need to divert commercial territory to residential
use as large tracts of land have already been designated high- and
medium-density residential. The present fill-width and nodes, like the
600-foot node at Flower and Broadway, are essential for the maintenance and
development of the Broadway strip. In reply to Commission Tugenberg's query
about a later study of the Broadway strip, Principal Planner Pass indicated
two additional and more recent studies had been taken by the Community
Development, however, their findings substantiate that of the Broadway Study
of 1972, although they have not yet reached the completion stage.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Anthony Ambrose, HCH and Associates, 4877 Viewridge Avenue, San Diego, stated
disagreement with staff's recommendation to deny the requested GPA on the
basis that the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding area. He
maintained no revitalization would take place because of the overabundance of
strip commercial along Broadway; the City's population growth to the east; the
age and lack of drawing power of the area and the site plan is too small for
large users and too large for small users. He referenced a similar study and
demonstration project done along E1 Cajon, University and Adams. The area had
a great deal of strip commercial and was in decline; however, with the
addition of more nodes of commercial interspersed with high-density
residential, the area was revitalized. The basic theory was that more
residential was needed to support the commercial in the area. This is the
solution that is being proposed in the project.
Mr. Ambrose cited a marketing study performed in January~ 1987 on the
high-density residential component and the convenience commercial center. The
study results were supportive of a small commercial center at the proposed
location Ithe front portion). The study indicated a 21 percent vacancy factor
in the ten centers analyzed indicating too much commercial activity.
Referring to the large tract of high-density residential land, Mr. Ambrose
commented that this area is cut up into small lots and any redevelopment of
Planning Commission Minutes -7- June 24, 1987
the area would have to be done piecemeal and would take a long time.
Regarding residential, the marketing study showed City rental vacancy rates
were 4 percent, and as the normal vacancy rate is 5 percent, an undersupply
was indicated. The study analyzed 19 existing apartment projects ranging from
20 to 300 units for a total of 1,947 rental units. The tenant profile
consisted of single and childless couples with a total of only 300 children,
or one child per six units.
Charles Gill, 600 "B" Street, Ste. llO0, San Diego, representing Appel
Development, reminded the Commission of their concerns expressed 2 years ago
regarding a multiple-residential project proposed at this location; namely,
that the use of Jefferson and Flower for commercial traffic was
inappropriate. He pointed out that the area was appropriate for high-density
residential based on the established constraints in the locality; a school
across the street, predominantly single-family dwellings and duplexes to the
north which conversely made the location inappropriate for commercial use.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Fuller said that in her opinion a General Plan ~mendment and
rezoning at this time would be impacting an area already impacted with high
density.
MSUC (Tugenberg/Green) to approve the Draft Negative Declaration issued under
IS-85-41.
MS (Fuller/Shipe) to deny the requested General Plan Amendment, GPA-87-2.
Commissioner Tugenberg opposed the motion saying he could not visualize the
property being used for anything but strip commercial; he agreed though with
the applicant that commercial extended back to Jefferson Street would impact
neighborhood schools; but designating it residential would impact the
neighborhood less than having the entire parcel zoned commercial.
Commissioner Cannon agreed and added that, in his opinion, the area is ideal
for residential purposes. The strip zoning along Broadway appears to be of
much less depth than this property already has and that will be remaining in
the commercial zone. The parcel in question would not affect the entire
community or the integrity of the commercial zone and he opposed commercial
traffic utilizing Flower Street of Jefferson Avenue.
Commissioner Green said he considered favorably the location of an apartment
house across the street from a park and school (which is why he supported the
idea some years ago).
The Motion failed by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Fuller and Carson
NOES: Commissioners Tugenberg, Grasser, Shipe, Cannon and Green
ABSTAIN: None
Planning Commission Minutes -8- June 24, 1987
MS (Tugenberg/Cannon) to approve GPA-87-2 and redesignate this piece of
property as Thoroughfare Commercial and High Density Residential.
Commissioner Cannon questioned the wording of the motion in that it was
changing from Commercial Thoroughfare to High Density Residential.
Commissioner Tugenberg said he was under the impression that the zoning change
involved the whole parcel, both sections A and B. In being informed that only
"A" was being considered he asked for a rephrasing.
RESTATED MOTION
MSC (Cannon/Tugenberg) {5-2), Fuller and Carson, no, to approve GPA-87-2 and
redesignate 2.6 acres located at the southeast corner of Flower Street and
jefferson Avenue from Commercial Thoroughfare to High Density Residential.
MS (Cannon/Tugenberg) to rezone Parcel A from C-T to R-3
Principal Planner Lee interjected that staff had not yet made a presentation
but had been awaiting the Commission action on the GPA; that staff had
recommended rezoning to Commercial (C-C) which is a less intense commercial
zone, not Commercial Thoroughfare (C-T). Based on the Commission's
recommendation to amend the General Plan to a high-density residential, staff
would like to return with a recommendation reviewing whether or not the
P-modifying district should be attached and what density might be
appropriate. Such a recommendation had not been prepared because of staff's
recommendation on the zoning.
MS (Cannon/Tugenberg) to continue this matter to July 8, 1987 with regard to
subdivision B of Item 5.
Mr. Gill interjected that the Commission was taking an action which the
applicant had not had a chance to address, and suggested the applicant have
the opportunity to address the item for purposes of due process.
Commissioner Cannon replied that the item would be opened to a public hearing
at the July 8 meeting. Consultation with Deputy City Attorney Moore indicated
that the public hearing could be continued to a later date.
RESTATED MOTION
MSUC (Cannon/Tugenberg) to continue the public hearing to July 8, 1987
1. CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-87-2 - OTAY BUSINESS PARK
Assistant Planner Schilling stated that the draft EIR was heard on June 10th,
and the project is a 211-acre development located on the west side of Otay
Valley Road, south of the Otay River. The proposal is to develop the property
for approximately 131 acres of limited industrial uses, 14 acres of single-
family residential uses with the balance {approximately 72 acres) preserved as
open space. At the close of the public review period comments had been
Plannin9 Commission Minutes -9- June 24, 1987
received from seven State and local agencies as well as by the Commission
during the public hearing. Ms. Schilling presented Christine Keller, the
principal for Keller Environmental, to discuss the responses to the comments
and the changes made to the text of the EIR.
Ms. Keller, Keller Environmental Associates, Inc., 964 Fifth Ave., Ste 535,
San Diego, stated that letters were received from the Department of Water
Resources, the City of San Diego, the State of California Division of
Aeronautics, State Fish and Game, State Department of Conservation, and the
Department of Transportation. The comments of the Department of Water
Resources primarily dealt with the use of reclaimed water and they were
informed such use, in terms of irrigation, would be considered during
implementation of the plan. The City of San Diego commented on air quality,
conformity with their General Plan, aesthetics, and the correction of the
status of Robinhood Ridge which was noted in the text and corrections made
relative to the change in that development. The Division of Aeronautics was
informed that their concern about the noise levels at Brown Field could not be
adequately addressed until the master plan for that facility is completed.
Fish & Game's concern about the .92 acre riparian area prompted their
recommendation that it be omitted from the development plan. They had not
been on the site to look at the quality or condition of that area and after
discussion with the consultant indicated they no longer had such a concern.
The Department of Conservation's comments dealt with the mineral zone because
resources of commercial value had been found upstream and downstream. Their
location of the project was a little incorrect within the MRC zone and they
were informed that sub-surface testing had determined there was no commercial
value of the resource involved.
MSUC (Cannon/Fuller) to certify the Final EIR-87-2 has been prepared in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the State California
Environmental Ouality Act Guidelines and the environmental review procedures
of the City of Chula Vista, and that the Planning Commission will consider the
EIR as they reach a decision on the proposed project.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) GPA-87-1 CONSIDERATION OF A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL,
AGRICULTURE AND RESERVE AND OPEN SPACE TO MEDIUM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND RESEARCH AND LIMITED
INDUSTRIAL LOCATED WEST OF OTAY VALLEY ROAD AND
NORTH OF THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO BOUNDARY IN THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY LIMITS -
OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK
Principal Planner Pass noted that the project involved 150 acres of land
located on the south side of the Otay Valley, south of the Otay River and west
of the Heritage Road component of Otay Valley Road. The proposed General Plan
Amendment would improve the economic, fiscal and employment conditions of
Chula Vista without compromising the quality of its environment or the order
and amenity of its urban form, increase Chula Vista's potential industrial
Planning Commission Minutes -10- June 24, 1987
territory, foster the expansion of the industrial complex currently developing
within the Otay Valley Road Project area, provide employment opportunities,
and increase tax revenue. Industrialization of the area would require no more
improvements and widening of Otay Valley and Heritage Roads than would
residential development. The project would produce about 20,000 traffic
movements per day and off-street road improvements could be provided through a
development agreement between the City and the developer. Application of
development controls, urban design guidelines, buffering and performance
standards could ensure the compatibility of the industrial land uses with the
adjacent City of San Diego's proposed residential development and also protect
Chula Vista's interest in a regional open space preserve along the Otay
River. Mr. Pass said the proposed General Plan redesignation is in harmony
with the Otay Mesa Community Plan of the City of San Diego for the surrounding
areas with the only change proposed being the low-density residential becoming
industrial.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Charles Gill, 600 B Street, Suite llO0, San Diego, representing the
Chillingworth Corporation, noted concurrence with staff's recommendation on
the General Plan Amendment and that representatives of the Chillingworth
Corporation were available to answer any questions.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Cannon/Carson) to approve GPA-8?-l, designating subject property
"Research and Limited Industrial" and that in making that motion the
Commission had previously certified the Environmental Impact Report, EIR-87-2,
and had considered that EIR in reaching the decision on the project.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: (b) PCZ-87-H - CONSIDERATION TO REZONE 210 ACRES
LOCATED WEST OF OTAY VALLEY ROAD AND NORTH OF THE
CITY OF SAN DIEGO BOUNDARY IN THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY LIMITS FROM A-8
AND F-1 TO R-1 AND I-L-P - OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK
Assistant Planner Schilling stated that the proposed rezone action offered by
the developer was generally in conformance with the proposed General Plan
designations; namely, approximately 131 acres zoned I-L-P, 14 acres zoned R-1
and the balance of the developable property, approximately 72 acres, be placed
within open space and zoned A-8. Staff recommendation on the rezone concurs
with the proposal for the I-L-P zone over that portion of the property, but
recommends the request for residential zoning along the southern boundary in
the southwest corner be denied at this time because much of the infrastructure
needed to support that development is not available to sustain residential
development. Access to the proposed residential development would need to
come from properties which have residential proposals before the City of San
Diego and the eventual outcome of these proposals is very uncertain at this
time. Until there is formal approval of a residential proposal in those areas
and some evaluation is made based on the design of any subsequent tentative
maps or rezonin§, staff requests that only the General Plan designation for
the residential be in place and the balance of that property be zoned A-8
along with the open space.
Planning Commission Minutes -ll- June 24, 1987
Ms. Schilling continued that in the original proposal, the developer had
designated an F-1 (Floodway) zone in the upper northwest corner of the
~roperty with the balance of the property being given over to an I-L-P
Limited Industrial) zone designation. Staff is recommending that since there
are substantial areas that would be retained in open space as riparian
habitat, lot 1 in its entirety be zoned A-8 to effect conformity with the open
space.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Charles Gill, 600 B Street, Suite llO0, San Diego, representing Chillingworth
Corporation, noted concurrence with the rezone and the concerns expressed by
staff but requested (prior to discussion with staff) the possibility of
exploring with staff rezoning the residential portions concurrently with the
designation of the General Plan while recognizing that there are significant
problems with providing infrastructure and the necessity to return to the
Commission for purposes of subdividing the property. The applicant would like
to have the zoning designation placed on the property to forestall future
concerns and implications over why the Commission, with the General Plan
before it, elected to leave the zoning at Agriculture. He stated there were
adequate opportunities for staff to be assured that there will be no
residential development placed because the applicant is in full concurrence
with the conditions of the tentative map which limits the lots without actual
subdivisions taking place within the R-1 area.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Cannon asked for staff's opinion of the comments just presented.
Director Krempl replied it was still staff's opinion that the zoning would be
a premature action at this point, the recommendation of leaving it at A-8 is
done without prejudice because staff would like to see the pattern of
development (as far as zoning is established by the City of San Diego) and
also the mapping before recommending the zoning.
In reply to Commissioner Green's inquiry, he added that residential zoning in
that area is dependent upon the City of San Diego's decision regarding Brown
Field's expansion. Commissioner Green then commented that if the area were
not zoned comparably, it might be more difficult to change the designation
from R-1 to something else than it would be to change it from A-8 to R-1.
MSUC (Cannon/Grasser) to recommend Council that an ordinance be enacted to
change the zones in effect for the 210 acre parcel located south of Otay River
on the west side of Otay Valley Road in the extreme southeast corner of the
City of Chula Vista from A-8 (Agricultural) and F-1 (Floodway) to A-8
(Agricultural), I-L-P (Limited Industrial) and F-1 (Floodway) as is indicated
in Exhibit B which is part of the staff report. It is further moved that
Council deny the applicant's request with regard to the residential zoning R-1
designation for portions of the property located at the southeastern boundary
-- in the southwest corner of the parcel as shown in Exhibit A of the staff
report.
Planning Commission Minutes -12- June 24, 1987
PUBLIC HEARING: (c) PCS-87-6 - CONSIDERATION OF A TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP FOR OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK, CHULA
VISTA TRACT 87-6, LOCATED WEST OF OTAY VALLEY
ROAD AND NORTH OF THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO BOUNDARY
IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE CHULA VISTA CITY
LIMITS - OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK
Assistant Planner Schilling indicated the proposed tentative subdivision map
contains 78 lots designated for limited industrial uses, 49 lots for
single-family residential, 1 lot for commercial uses servicing the proposed
industrial park and 2 lots (located in the northwest property boundary and
along the southern boundary where steep slopes occur) which would total 72
acres of open space. Staff has recommended completion of several conditions
of approval prior to filing of the final map. Revisions being offered to the
conditions listed in the staff report include:
1. Condition 12 - states the developer shall be responsible for the
construction of Otay Valley Road along the entire frontage of the eastern
subdivision boundary to current Chula Vista standards. That should be
revised to "along the entire frontage of the western portion of the
eastern subdivision boundary"; in essence, they are responsible for half-
street improvements, not for the entire road.
2. Condition 15 - should be revised to state that the developer shall enter
into a development agreement in which they and all subsequent owners of
the property in the development are responsible for widening Otay Valley
Road crossing over the Otay River. The condition goes on to state, "If
the traffic volumes exceed 7,500 ADT for the bridge crossing the Otay
River, no further building permits would be issued."
3. Condition 17 - should be deleted as not necessary since there is a prior
agreement with the City of San Diego for sewer purposes.
4. Condition 24 - which deals with revisions to be made to lots along the
eastern boundary of the property with respect to noise; namely, "grading
in slopes not to exceed 3-1/2:1 in conjunction with placement of the
6-foot high wall, berm or building construction..." should continue as
"...to reduce ambient noise levels to 70 dBA or less for areas inside the
building."
The primary issues of concern to staff center around two general areas: one
is the physical constraints of the property because of its location adjacent
to the Otay River Valley and to the steep slopes which separate the Otay Mesa
from the Valley, and also to the lack of infrastructure present at this time
for services needed by the development at build-out.
Conditions 20, 21, 22 and 25 deal primarily with the riparian habitat which
now exists in the northwest corner of the property. Staff is recommending
that Lot 2 be dedicated as open space and maintained as part of an open space
district. Additionally, staff recommends that the smaller riparian habitat
Planning Commission Minutes -13- June 24, 1987
portion existing on lot 2 also be retained as part of an open space easement
with the addition of a lO0-foot landscape buffer surrounding the riparian
area. These recommendations derive from a Fish and Game suggestion that the
riparian area be retained in its entirety. Staff also suggests that the 2:1
grading present on the tentative subdivision map separating lots 1 and 2 be
eliminated and a gradual slope be maintained into the floodplain area to
maintain the lO0-foot buffer and the riparian habitat.
The steep slopes present on the property are primarily contained in lot 81
which staff recommends be dedicated as open space and a revegetation plan be
submitted to the satisfaction of the City Landscape Architect. Staff has no
objection to dedication and revegetation occurring in phases since the balance
of the map occurs in phases.
With respect to the lack of infrastructure on site at this time, conditions 15
and 19 deal with traffic impacts to the existing traffic circulation system.
Condition 15 states the requirement for a development agreement and traffic
level monitoring along Otay Valley Road with special emphasis on the bridge
which crosses the Otay River. When traffic levels from any source reach 7,500
ADT, no further building permits would be issued for phase 1 of the project
until widening of the road would occur. The developer is a participant in a
FBA with the City of San Diego which includes widening the bridge and Otay
Valley Road south of the bridge; however, it is estimated that the design
would occur somewhere around 1998, with final construction estimated at the
year 2001. Condition 19 restricts development to the first phase and
subsequent phases would not be finaled until widening of Otay Valley Road
takes place.
Staff recommends that the residential lots on the southern boundary be
eliminated from the tentative map because of the uncertainty of the proposed
residential projects within the jurisdiction of the City of San Diego. Until
approval for residential uses in those areas south of the project site and a
subdivision design is reviewed, staff is recommending those lots be eliminated
and incorporated into general lots.
The final issue is centered around condition 22 which requires that lot 2
(adjacent to the riparian area) be maintained in an open space easement and
developed as an active-use park privately maintained for use of the business
park owners and employees. Staff is of the opinion that at the build-out of
approximately lO0 acres of industrial development in such an isolated area
some sort of recreational facilities on-site for the 4,000 or more employees
would be required.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Charles Gill, representing Chillingworth Corporation, 600 B Street, Suite
llO0, San Diego, thanked staff. An invitation had been extended to
Chillingworth to bring Otay Rio Business Park into the City for the purpose of
bringing in industrial land and to provide a mechanism whereby the entire
river valley can be protected within one jurisdiction. They are in
Planning Commission Minutes -14- June 24, 1987
concurrence with staff's recommendation as to the residential aspects, but
have some specific concerns as to the conditions. They requested
clarification of condition 23 relating to grading permit and the transplanting
of the barrel cactus, which it is understood occurs only in the residential
lot area.
On condition 28, which relates to natural gas, the applicant would like to
have that as an option rather than a requirement.
The two issues that staff highlighted relate to lot 81 (conditions 19, 20 and
25) which is a very large portion of open space separating the industrial area
from the proposed residential areas. The way the conditions are currently
worded, that will be dedicated to the City of Chula Vista within phase 1 plus
requirement for a revegetation program and construction of a fence. The area
is used for off-road vehicle activities and as a transit corridor for
individuals coming north from the Border and is currently in a disturbed state
from the off-road vehicle activity of both off-roaders and Border Patrol.
Putting up a fence or putting in new vegetation in this area would be costly
and futile. For financial reasons, it is easier and better if this can be
shown as a portion of the project since if it is dedicated, a 69KV line that
goes through this site would have to be undergrounded and also there is also a
water main located there which would place a significant financial burden on
the first phase (already restricted because of concerns with access to the
site). Mr. Gill requested that lot 81 be dedicated with phase 3 because of
these additional costs.
The other concern expressed by Mr. Gill was with lot 2, condition 22,
requiring dedication of this lot for a park since to turn over an approximate
2 acre site for park purposes would be significant economically because of the
property values. This is considered an economic burden that is unjustified
when there is so much open space already associated with the industrial park.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Cannon/Grasser) based on the findings contained in Section "E" of the
report, to recommend the City Council approve tentative subdivision map for
Otay Rio Business Park, Chula Vista Tract 87-6, subject to the conditions as
they were modified in Assistant Planner Schilling's report and further subject
to the following changes:
1. that subject to confirmation from staff that the barrel cactus only exists
in the residential zone, the removal and replanting of the barrel cactus
not take place until the residential zone is developed;
2. that the requirements of the conditions of lot 81 not need to be met until
the end of the third phase.
Commissioner Tugenberg stated that the EIR on this project was very well done.
Plannin9 Commission Minutes -15- June 24, 1987
ADJOURNMENT AT 8:45 p.m. to the Regular Business Meeting of July 8, 1987 at
7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers
Ruth M. Smith, Secretary
P1 anning Commi ssi on
WPC 4208P