Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1980/02/27 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA February 27, 1980 A regular business meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California was held on the above date beginning at 7:00 p.m. with the following members present: Smith, Pressutti, G. Johnson, R. Johnson, O'Neill, Stevenson and Williams. Also present: Director of Planning Peterson, Current Planning Supervisor Lee, Senior Civil Engineer Daoust, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Assistant City Attorney Harron, and Secretary Mapes. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Smith, followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner O'Neill requested that on page 6 in the fourth paragraph under agenda item 4, his comments include the additional statement that, "While mitigation of the cumulative impacts on water quality is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies, the Planning Commission would recommend specific mitigating measures at such times as the EIR~s are prepared on specific projects." Chairman Smith added that in discussion of the same item concerning EIR-80-1, he had commented that he thought the environmental impact report was deficient in that it did not consider the economic problems caused by limiting the develop- ment as proposed in the policies. He requested that such a statement be included in the minutes. Chairman Smith also pointed out that on page 8 the motion to adopt a resolution approving the phased growth policies did not show the vote, which was: AYES: Commissioners Pressutti, G. Johnson, R. Johnson, O'Neill and Williams NOES: Commissioners Smith and Stevenson ABSENT: None MSUC (G. Johnson-Stevenson) The minutes of the meeting of February 13, 1980 be approved with the corrections as requested by Commissioner O'Neill and Smith. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Smith called for oral communications and none were presented. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-80-11 - Consideration of tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 80-11, Vista Arizona, Chris Galichon Director of Planning Peterson reported this is a proposal for a 12 unit condominium on one lot which contains just over 18,000 square feet. The property is located on -2- -- February 27, 1980 the south side of Arizona Street approximately 250 feet east of Broadway, and is presently developed with two small, older single family homes. Last summer a similar condominium development was approved for the adjacent property to the east. As stated in the staff report the proposed development meets all provisions of the ordinance, including usable open space, storage space, offstreet parking and yard requirements. The design of the project was approved by the Design Review Committee and approval of the tentative map is recommended subject to eight conditions listed in the staff report. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Chris Galichon, 3617 Bonita Verde Drive, the applicant, advised that he felt all of the conditions listed in the report are quite reasonable with the exception of condition "e" which would make the developer responsible for the construction of the north half of the drainage channel adjacent to the property. He pointed out that channel cannot be constructed at the present time since it has not been designed. He further felt that the alternative of requesting a deferral and posting a bond to cover the cost of the construction at a later date is not equitable since the amount of the bond or the length of time it would be required has not been determined. He felt that his property should be treated the same as other adjacent properties which have not been made responsible for the cost of improving a portion of the channel. He suggested that it would be fairer to all involved to establish a 1911 Act to pay for the channel improvements over a long term. In response to a question from Chairman Smith, Director of Planning Peterson affirmed that the adjoining condominium development was not required to contribute to the cost of channel improvements since it was approved before the City had knowledge of the proposed improvement. He advised that it is a normal and fair obligation to require a developer to make such improvements, and the courts have upheld that requirement. Mr. Galichon pointed out it would be difficult to get a bonding company to provide a bond under the present conditions of uncertainty of the length of time or the ultimate cost of the improvement. He also expressed his understanding that the Corps of Engineers may install this channel improvement. He expressed a willing- ness to include in his sales contract a notice that the condominium owners may be assessed for a share of the improvement costs. Mr. Galichon further commented on the inequity of including an unknown figure to cover this expense in the cost of the units which he proposes to build and sell in the low $50,000 range. Under a 1911 Act this cost could be paid by the owners over a longer period of time. In response to questions from the Commission, Senior Civil Engineer Daoust advised that if the Corps of Engineers proceeds with the improvement of the channel it will be only partly funded by that agency and the remainder of the cost will have to be paid by the City. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner O'Neill expressed the opinion that this developer should be treated the same as other property owners along channel. Chairman Smith suggested that could be accomplished by deleting condition "e" as recommended in the staff report. -3- ~ February 27, 1980 Commissioner Williams pointed out that developers are normally required to contri- bute to the cost of offsite improvements and he believes the Commission should continue with what is a standard. He felt, however, this developer should be given a time when he would have specific information on what is required. Commissioner O'Neill pointed out that a similar project approved a few months ago adjacent to this site was not required to pay for the cost of such improvments. MSUC (O'Neill-Williams) The Commission finds that in accordance with the findings listed in the Negative Declaration of IS-78-83, this project will have no signifi- cant environmental impact. MS (O'Neill-Stevenson) Based on the findings stated in the staff report, the Commission recommends that the City Council approve the tentative subdivision map for Vista Arizona, Chula Vista Tract 80-11, subject to 7 conditions listed in the staff report and with the deletion of condition "e". Commissioner Pressutti expressed support of Commissioner Williams' point of view and asked if the maker and second of the motion would be willing to include condition "e" with an added statement that the dollar amount and conditions of the bonding be established prior to the final map being approved. Commissioner O'Neill indicated he wished the motion to stand. MS (Williams-G. Johnson) The motion for approval of the tentative subdivision map for Vista Arizona be amended to include the condition contained in paragraph "e" with the addition of a sentence that, "Specifics of the bond shall be determined prior to consideration of the final map." The motion for amendment carried by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Williams, G. Johnson, R. Johnson and Pressutti NOES: Commissioners O'Neill, Stevenson and Smith ABSENT: None The original motion as amended carried by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners O'Neill, Williams, G. Johnson, R. Johnson and Pressutti NOES: Commissioners Stevenson and Smith ABSENT: None 2. Consideration of supplement to EIR-79-8 on Rice Canson Sectional Planning Area Environmental Review Coordinator Reid advised that this is not actually a supplement to EIR-79-8, but is the consideration of candidate CEQA findings for the project relative to the environmental impact report on the project. It relates directly to the three items which follow on the agenda. Mr. Reid advised that the recommendation as contained in the staff report on the development plan for the Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area will be modified to recommend that action on the item be continued to the next Planning Commission to be concurrent with action on the proposed tentative subdivision map. For that reason it is also appropriate to delay adoption of the CEQA findings until the -4- ~ February 27, 1980 same meeting. He concurred it would be appropriate to discuss the candidate findings at this time and refer any information or questions raised back to the consultant who prepared the environmental impact report and CEQA findings. Chairman Smith pointed out that on page 7 under Section 4 on "Drainage" it indicates that the anticipated flow of water in a 50 year flood will be greater than the culverts beneath the 1-805/East H Street interchange are designed to handle. Mr. Smith suggested that a statement be added to that section to the effect that: "The drainage may be in excess of the capacity of the existing pair of 84" pipes. This may cause water to back up through the inlets until there is a sufficient head to force the 84" culverts to carry the water. This problem shall be addressed by the design engineer." Mr. Reid advised that the condition described by Mr. Smith would not be acceptable to the city and the project will have to be designed to mitigate that impact. Director of Planning Peterson advised he would not object to having the statement suggested by Commissioner Smith in the report if it is understood that it is an impact that would not be acceptable to the city and the design of the project must include some mitigating measure so that flood water would not back up as described. Commissioner Williams suggested that greater specificity in terms of the plan is required to show that the problems are being adequately met in the engineering and design of the project. Commissioner R. Johnson asked why the report contains the figures for a 50 year flood when some projects have been required to meet 100 year flood conditions. Mr. Reid advised it relates to the size of the drainage basin. In a major drainage basin, such as Sweetwater Valley or Telegraph Canyon, the difference would be significant, but in the smaller areas, like Rice Canyon, the difference in total runoff is not too great. Commissioner O'Neill suggested this area may be similar to Long Canyon where there have been considerable problems of flooding as a result of grading. He pointed out this project is proposed to be graded all at once, while the building will take place over five years so there is an erosion potential that is really significant during that time. The Commission discussed the problem of siltation which presently exists in the channel below the culverts underneath "H" Street. Mr. Reid advised that the thrust of the Planning Department from the ~nitial subdivision conference with the developer has been that the large manufactured slopes must be permanently landscaped, in accordance with current City Code requirements, and other areas would be hydro-seeded and temporarily irrigated or whatever is necessary to prevent erosion. Where appropriate, siltation basins will be placed so that silt would be collected before it is deposited downstream. Commissioner O'Neill raised a question as to the responsibility of the City with regard to water quality, air quality, schools and sewage, where another jurisdiction has the prime responsibility. -5- ~ February 27, 1980 Mr. Reid advised it is the City's responsibility to identify the possible impacts and point those out to the responsible agencies, send them an E.I.R., which implies a request from them for anything the City can do to lessen the impact. Commissioner O'Neill felt the recommended action does not do that, but merely states it is the problem of other public agencies. Mr. Reid explained that when a draft EIR is sent out to other agencies, comments are requested from them. If there is no comment it is an indication that they are happy with the EIR and the mitigation and conditions proposed for the project. Chairman Smith call ed attention to page 16 of the candidate findings, where it states, "Several measures are recommended to reduce the brush fire hazards. Greenbelts should be maintained along the perimeter of developed areas and internal roadways." He pointed out that greenbelts require maintenance and irrigation which can be quite costly. He asked if a representative of the Fire Department could suggest a better word than greenbelts. Ted Monsell, Chula Vista Fire Marshall, advised that the greenbelt terminology is fairly common to describe the fire retardant type of growth planted in these areas and normally is associated with an automatic watering system to maintain the greenness. The water is then available from the system in the event of a fire. Mr. Smith commented he would like to see that changed to something like firebreak, made any way it can be made. Chairman Smith noted that if there is no further discussion, it is recommended that action to adopt the findings be delayed until the project is considered at the next meeting. MSUC (O'Neill-Stevenson) The Commission defers action on the candidate CEQA findings until the meeting of March 19, 1980. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-80-C - Consideration of zoning approximately 3 acres of unzoned freewas right-of-waS at the southeast corner of 1-805 and East "H" Street to P-C, Cits initiated Current Planning Supervisor Lee reported that the developers have been negotiating with the California Department of Transportation for the acquisition of this property. The site has been included in their development plans, which include filling the area to the level of "H" Street. It is proposed to use the southerly one acre of the site for a park and ride facility by Cal Trans and the remainder of the property would be incorporated into a proposed commercial development for an automobile sales facility. It is recommended that the property be zoned P-C to conform with the zoning of the adjacent property. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. As no one wished to speak on this item, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (R. Johnson-Stevenson) The Commission recommends that the City Council zone the three acre parcel P-C. -6- February 27, 1980 4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-80-13 - Consideration of development plan for the Rice Canson Sectional Plannin~ Area of E1 Rancho del ReS Specific Plan, Watt ~ndustries 5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-80-15 - Consideration of tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 80-13, Hidden Vista Village, Watt Industries Director of Planning Peterson noted this is one of the first Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plans for the implementation of the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan to be considered by the Planning Commission. All details of the plan are not complete at this time and will later be submitted for consideration and approval. He advised that a SPA plan is supposed to be an intermediate plan between the Specific Plan and a tentative map. In this case the applicant has submitted the tentative map for the residential development along with the SPA plan, so there is more detail on the development than would normally be available with a Sectional Planning Area plan. Missing from the SPA plan are the building elevations for the shopping center; and although a site plan was submitted for the commercial development, it is being revised, and will be submitted later for consideration. The submitted plans also did not include any detail for the Section 8 housing area and that will be presented later, as well as building elevations for the commercial recreation portion and site plans for the automobile dealership. Mr. Peterson pointed out that while portions of the development will encroach into areas designated as open space on the adopted Specific Plan, the overall open space shown on the SPA plan is about the same. The second major issue deals with the fact that this development is proposing more dwelling units than shown on the adopted plan. That is because the plan has less commercial footage than allowed on the Specific Plan, which allows for the substitution of multiple family develop- ment in place of commercial development, at up to 18 units per acre density. The third issue relates to the alteration of land form that will be required for the extension of "H" Street and to accommodate a shopping center of 150,000 square feet of building area. Fourth is the question of whether "H" Street should be extended easterly of the boundaries of this project to connect with Paseo del Rey. These issues are discussed in the written staff report, which includes a recommendation for action to be taken on this item. Mr. Peterson advised he has since decided it would be best to delay action on the SPA plan to the meeting when action will be taken on the tentative subdivision map. He therefore recom- mended that testimony on both the SPA plan and the tentative map be taken at this meeting and both items be continued to the meeting of March 19. Current Planning Supervisor Lee displayed a plat of the tentative map and pointed out that the north end of the site will be devoted to 329 single family dwellings with lots varying from 6,000 sq. ft. to 18,000 sq. ft. The area directly below and south of the single family area, lying adjacent to the north side of "H" Street, will be devoted to condominium development containing 498 units. On the south side of "H" Street there is a 140 unit condominium project. There are two major open space lots in the project containing 125 acres, located primarily along the south and east boundaries of the project. There is additional open space with the extension of the lot lines for the elementary school, junior high school and park site at the northerly end of the project. There is a total of 180 to -7- ' February 27, 1980 185 acres of natural open space within the development. In addition, there is a 30,000 sq. ft. site set aside for a fire station, a one acre park-and-ride facility adjacent to 1-805 and an automobile sales lot in the same vicinity. The plan includes a 3 acre commercial recreation area, and a 20 acre commercial site which will be devoted to retail store, offices, a theater, and the required parking area. An 11 acre site adjacent to the retail commercial area is proposed for residential development to serve senior citizens and low income families. Mr. Lee explained the circulation system within the development, which includes "H" Street developed with six lanes and with the ability to widen it to eight lanes within the critical area along the commercial development. Sidewalks are proposed only on the south side of "H" Street, to encourage pedestrians to cross at the signalized intersections. Ridgeback Road will connect to "H" Street and lead to the north and east to serve future development along the ridge. This will be a four lane road with a bike lane on each side. The condominium units will be served by a private street system consisting of a series of loop streets and short cul-de-sacs. The project also provides for two streets to connect with existing streets to the north; one will be just east of the present water tank and provide access to a future area of development in the county. There is also a connection proposed to Lynwood Drive directly south of the existing residential development. Both the Fire Department and Police Department have indicated a desire to have this connection. A communication has been received from the County Planning Department indicating substantial improvements would be required on Lynwood Drive based on this connection. The City staff does not concur with those requirements since information in the environmental impact report indicates a limited number of trips would utilize Lynwood Drive from this development. It is felt, however, this is an essential link in the circulation pattern for future use when the fire station is relocated to this area. An equestrian trail is shown on the plan for a north/south route following the water pipeline owned by the City of San Diego. In addition, the Sweetwater equestrian group has asked for an east/west trail. Mr. Lee noted the project will include massive grading, with the movement of 3~ to 4½ million cubic yards. The shopping area will be raised some fifty feet in certain areas above the present floor level of Rice Canyon. However, nearly half of the entire area will remain in its natural state. This is in compliance with the Sectional Area Plan. Both school districts have been contacted in an attempt to resolve the issue of school sites. Both are continuing to negotiate with the developer, who has offered two ungraded school sites to the districts. Mr. Lee showed numerous slides depicting the site plans, landscaping and proposed elevations of the multiple family development. The Commission raised questions concerning some of the information shown, which were answered by Mr. Lee. Chairman Smith asked about the bike lanes on each side of "H" Street. Mr. Lee advised that the outside lane will be 16 feet wide which will be shared by bikes and autos. -8- ~ February 27, 1980 A short recess was taken at 9:00 p.m. and the meeting reconvened at 9:12 p.m. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mary Augustine, 3608 Valley Vista Road, trail coordinator for Bonita Valley Horsemen and also for San Diego County Trails Council, reported that she has been working with the engineers on this project and they have come up with a suitable trails plan for the open space area. She expressed the thought that there will probably be 20 walkers and joggers for each horse on the trails. They are attempting to set up a suitable trail system to serve the residents of the area in that regard. Gilbert Dreyfuss, 333 South Hope Street, Los Angeles, reported that he is one of the owners of a 16 acre parcel immediately southeast of the proposed condo- minimum development. This property is the remnant from former development in the Halescrest area. He expressed the hope that with the extention of "H" Street that his property would be afforded access, so that it might be put to some use. He suggested that such access could either be provided through the Watt property presently under consideration, or through property under the ownership of the Gersten Companies. Mr. Lee advised it would create less of a problem for access to be taken through the Gersten property which is designated as open space, than through the condominium development proposed on the Watt property. Raymond Spencer, 3314 Lynwood Drive, reported that the residents of Lynwood Hills understand that the area adjacent to their homes will be developed, but they ask that the development be compatible with the topography. He suggested the use of split level designs to lessen the amount of grading required. He felt that cut banks could be affected by the existing septic tanks and leach lines. He also expressed concern about the street to connect with Lynwood Drive and asked that no more than 100 units be approved to use Lynwood Drive until East "H" Street is extended. He also suggested that the open space in the project be broken into smaller areas scattered throughout the area. Niek Slijk, 4450 Vista Nacion, advised that he owns one of the six properties adjacent to the cut slope. He supports the proposal to cut the slope so the houses will be at a lower elevation and will not obstruct his view. He also welcomed the provision of sewer lines to the edge of the Lynwood Hills as he felt septic tanks can only serve an area for a limited length of time. Eugene Coleman 1670 Gotham Street, spoke of flooding problems which have long existed on Bonita Road due to runoff from the Rice Canyon area, and on the extreme problem of siltation in the channel adjacent to the freeway. He questioned the effectiveness of sedimentation basins and who will maintain them. He also expressed strong reservations concerning the availability of an increased supply of water to serve future development. Randall Case, 4324 Lynwood Drive, read a letter from Thomas A. Demere, paleontol- ogist at the Natural History Museum, which expressed concern over the existence of fossilized remains of marine life throughout the San Diego Formation which underlies this area, and suggested that a paleontological monitor be assigned to periodically check cuts for exposed fossils. He also read a letter from William Link, retired principal of Allen School in Bonita, which endorsed the opinions expressed in Mr. Demere's letter. J. L. White, 4368 Lynwood Drive, advised that his two points of concern are: No. I, the type of dwelling units that will be contiguous to his property in Lynwood Hills. He had been assured the new homes would be compatible with the Lynwood Hills residences. He felt this would not be the case since the lots will be much smaller than the one acre and 3/4 acre home sites in Lynwood Hills. The second point of concern is with the County Department of Transportation's recommendation for connection of "C" Street to Lynwood Drive, which would be adjacent to his residence. While he felt the County's recommendation for improvements to Lynwood Drive would be necessary to handle the increase in traffic, the installation of those improvements would have a drastic effect on the existing home sites, which in some cases would be cut in half to provide additional street width. He suggested that other alternatives for traffic circulation be considered in place of an egress on to Lynwood Drive. Harlan Skinner, 4234 Lynwood Drive, concurred with Mr. White's objection to the connection with Lynwood Drive. He contended that if the connection is made the traffic will be very heavy as the residents wish to go down to the Bonita area. He also questioned the availability of sufficient water in the future and of school facilities. Gary McCabe, 1231 Alpine Estates Place, Alpine, representing Watt Industries, advised that they have been working with the staff on this project for two years and their proposal implements the Specific Plan for Rice Canyon, approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. He pointed out the conformance of their plan in the areas of open space, circulation pattern, density, and type of develop- ment. He assured that through proper engineering design the drainage can be taken care of in underground pipes. He further noted this development will implement the west to east policy for development. He expressed the opinion that their responsibility for public improvements should terminate at their easterly boundary, and if further development takes place to the east, "H" Street should be extended at that time. He also addressed the various concerns voiced by the residents of the area concerning grading, erosion and traffic. He spoke of their efforts and desire to work with the school districts to provide the sites they will need. Chairman Smith noted the recommendation by the Director of Planning that both agenda items 4 and 5 be continued to the meeting of March 19 and asked if the public hearing should remain open. Mr. Peterson felt that additional testimony and comments should be permitted at the March 19th meeting. He noted that copies of the staff report will be available on Friday, March 14th for anyone who might be interested. MSUC (Pressutti-R. Johnson) The public hearings to consider the development plan for the Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area and the tentative subdivision map for Hidden Vista Village be continued to the meeting of March 19, 1980. 6. Consideration of amendment to the Municipal Code makin~ stock cooperatives and community apartment projects subject to the same provisions as condominiums Director of Planning Peterson advised that the State Subdivision Map Act was recently amended to require stock cooperatives to go through the subdivision map procedure the same as condominium projects. In line with that the City Council adopted an urgency ordinance on January 15, 1980, which became effective immediately -10- ~ February 27, 1980 and required stock cooperatives to be treated as condominiums. The Council then referred the ordinance to the Planning Commission for consideration of adopting a permanent amendment to the Municipal Code. As these regulations do not fall within the zoning ordinance section of the code, a publ$c hearing is not required. MSUC (R. Johnson-Stevenson) The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council enact the provisions of the urgency ordinance, No. 1890, as an amendment to the Municipal Code. DIRECTOR'S CODE Director of Planning Peterson reminded the Commission that the meeting normally scheduled for March 12th was cancelled, so the next regular business meeting will be on March 19. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner O'Neill commented that he read recently in the City Council minutes an item in reference to the Tiburon case in which the California Supreme Court held that the city is not liable on inverse condemnation suit resulting from the downzoning of property. He suggested that such items would be of interest to the Planning Commission at either a regular meeting or study session. Chairman Smith called attention to a notice of a hearing before the Unified Port District to consider their revised master plan, to be held at 2:00 p.m. on March 11. He suggested that copies of the hearing notice be given to each of the Commissioners. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Smith adjourned the meeting at 10:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted,