HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1980/08/27 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
August 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. in the City Council
Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue.
Commissioners present: Pressutti, Smith, Williams, G. Johnson, O'Neill and
Stevenson
Commissioner absent: R. Johnson (with previous notification)
Staff present: Director of Planning Peterson, Principal Planner Lee,
Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Senior Civil
Engineer Daoust, City Attorney Lindberg and Secretary
Mapes
The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Pressutti, followed by a
moment of silent prayer.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MSUC (Stevenson-O'Neill) The minutes of the meeting of August 13, 1980 be approved
as written. Commissioner G. Johnson abstained from voting due to her absence from
that meeting. Commissioner Stevenson noted that the agenda indicated that one of
the topics for discussion at the August 20 study session would be recreation vehicle
parking. Since that was not discussed in the study session he hoped it would be
included in a future study session.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None were presented.
1. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
OF VILLA SAN MIGUEL
Director of Planner Peterson reported this is a routine extension of a previously
approved map. There have been no changes in the area to justify denial of the request
so it is recommended the map be extended to September 27, 1981.
MSUC (Smith-Williams) The Commission approves a one year extension of time for the
tentative subdivision map of Villa San Miguel.
-2- August 27, 1980
2. CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-80-2A FOR DEVELOPMENT OF HILLTOP COURTS
Environmental Review Coordinator Reid advised that all testimony presented during
the hearing on August 13 has been included in the EIR along with response to the
specific issues raised. It is difficult to assess cumulative impacts that will
be affected by future development projects since the time frame of such development
has a strong bearing on the ability of various jurisdictions to offset the impact.
The cumulative aspects are discussed in Sec. 9.0 of the EIR. The basic analysis
in the final EIR remains the same as in the draft report.
In response to a question from Commissioner Stevenson, Mr. Reid affirmed that the
impact on schools, traffic and noise is based on the density of zoning requested by
the proponent, and if a lower density is adopted the impact would be less severe.
Jerry Valk, 291 Camino Vista Real, expressed the belief there is still not sufficient
coordination between the city and the school districts with regard to development
projects.
Director of Planning Peterson asserted that the school districts are advised of every
major development proposal and are requested to determine if additional school sites
are necessary. There is close working relationship between City staff and repre-
sentatives of the school districts, and the City must rely on the judgment of the
schools as to their capability of meeting the educational needs of all residents.
MSUC (Stevenson-G. Johnson) The Planning Commission certifies that EIR-80-2A has
been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the Environmental Review Procedures of the
City of Chula Vista and that the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the
information in the EIR as it relates to a decision on the project.
3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-80-E - Request to rezone 7.78 acres on the east side of
Nacion Avenue, north of Telegraph Canson Road, from R-1 to
R-3-P-23 - Dale Building Compans
Director of Planning Peterson reported this is a request to rezone a parcel just
under 7.8 acres, which backs up to 1-805 and has frontage along Nacion Avenue.
About 2½ acres of the property is devoted to the slope bank near 1-805 and to the
drainage easement at the southerly edge of the property, so that the actual usable
area is about 5½ acres. The density requested by the developer would amount to
about 31 units per acre of usable area.
When a General Plan amendment for redesignation of this property from Visitor
Commercial to residential was considered last fall, the Planning Commission
recommended low density residential, 4-12 units per acre. After considerable debate
in a hearing before the City Council, the Council amended the General Plan to change
the designation to "Residential, 13-26 units per acre."
Mr. Peterson called attention to the development plan the applicant submitted with
the rezoning request. He felt it is a good site plan and the elevations of the
buildings are very attractive, however, due to the close proximity of single family
development he could not support the density that is requested, which would result
in 171 dwelling units on the site. He affirmed that the site is well located for
medium density residential multiple family development, and that with height limitations
and setback requirements such development could be attractive and also compatible
with the single family neighborhood.
-3- August 27, 1980
Mr. Peterson recommended that the zoning be established at R-3-P-15, subject to
adoption of three guidelines relating to building heights, setbacks and driveway
alignments. He pointed out the guideline requires 15 foot setback from Nacion
for single story or 15 foot high portions of buildings, 30 foot setback for two
story portions and 60 feet for three story portions. The recommended density of
15 units per acre is based on the type and size of units proposed by the developer.
If larger units and a different parking arrangement are introduced into the plan
at the design review stage, it may be necessary to further limit the density to
avoid overcrowding the site.
Mr. Peterson acknowledged the receipt of two petitions expressing opposition to
the rezoning; one bearing 261 signatures representing 175 households, opposing
any development in excess of 8 units per acre, the second petition containing
13 signatures, representing 6 households, bases opposition on the increase in
traffic and noise.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
D. D. Boerner, 163 Camino Entrada, expressed the opinion that the density requested
is too high based on the developer's request for 171 units and the Planning Director's
recommendation of 116 units on slightly less than 8 acres, when this is compared
with a total of 162 single family homes on slightly less than 40 acres in the
development just west of Nacion. He contended that the 48% increase in peak morning
traffic, at the time children are walking to school, would result in unsafe conditions.
He recommended that development be limited to 6 to 8 units to the acre. He concurred
that the "P" zone is prerequisite in the development of the property.
Richard Haenel, 736 Nacion Avenue, contended that the anticipated increase in traffic
on Nacion would result in increased back-up of vehicles at the intersections, which
he considers undesirable even at the present time.
Dick Brown, representing the applicant, advised of their intent to use retaining
walls along the slope area to increase the net usable area of the site. He pointed
out the EIR indicates a traffic level of B even after 171 units are built on the
site and that is a good service level. With reference to schools, he reported
that the districts are experiencing declining enrollment and are more concerned
over financial matters for operation of the schools than over the need to construct
new school facilities.
Mr. Brown asserted that with their requested density they could meet the criteria
for development as recommended by the staff. He asked that consideration be given
to the critical housing shortage in the area in determining the appropriate density
of the zoning.
Richard Sterba, 770 Nolan Avenue, commented on the increase in traffic through that
residential neighborhood as a result of extending Nacion Avenue through; the noise
of traffic coming up Nacion is audible at his home two blocks away.
Betty Campbell, 737 Nacion, spoke of the difficulty she has exiting from her
driveway; the grade of the street and a curve make visibility very limited.
Clete Wise, 800 Nacion Avenue, noted that residential lots in this city are so
small, children play on cul-de-sacs or other residential streets and increased
traffic makes it unsafe for those children, as well as children going to and from
school.
-4- August 27, 1980
Molly Rose, resident on Millan, expressed opposition to high density development,
and felt there should not be more units on that small area than in the 40 acres
of new houses adjacent to that site.
Jerry Valk, 291 Camino Vista Real, objected to the increase in traffic and to any
development before assurance is received of adequate school capacities.
D. Boerner noted that the report indicates this development will have 30 onstreet
parking spaces on Nacion. He estimated that number of spaces would take up 75% of
the length of the street with the driveways taken out.
Judy Barnes, 282 Camino Vista Real, asked if the construction of a larger number
of apartments would require that a certain number be opened up to low income
families.
Mr. Peterson briefly described provisions of inclusionary zoning with regard to the
provision of housing for low and moderate income families. He advised that the
City Council has neither adopted that policy nor indicated support for it but is
still under consideration.
Vonne Smith, resident at the corner of East Millan and Nacion, described the
extremely hazardous traffic conditions at that location which she feels makes it
unsafe for her small children to pay in the front yard.
As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed.
In response to a question from Commissioner G. Johnson, Mr. Peterson affirmed that
he felt development at a density of 15 units to the acre can be compatible with
single family homes if good site planning is used.
Commissioner Stevenson expressed the opinion the zone density should be no higher
than the 4-12 recommended by the Planning Commission when the General Plan amendment
was under consideration.
Commissioner Williams pointed out that consideration must be given to existing
conditions, such as the topography and the fact that there have already been
traffic problems on Nacion Avenue both north and south of this site.
Commissioner O'Neill pointed out the need for more housing in the community and
the desirability of filling in areas such as this which are already surrounded by
development, but he felt the density requested by the developer is out of line and
it should be 15 units to the acre or a lower figure.
MS (G. Johnson-O'Neill) The Commission recommends that the Council change the zone
for the 7.78 acres to R-3-P-12, subject to the precise guidelines listed in the
staff report.
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners G. Johnson, O'Neill, Williams, Pressutti and Stevenson
NAY: Commissioner Smith
ABSENT: Commissioner R. Johnson
-5- August 27, 1980
4. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF PRECISE PLAN RELATING TO FENCE
DESIGN AND LOCATION IN VISTA DE OTAY SUBDIVISION
Principal Planner Lee displayed a plat of the area at the southwest corner of Otay
Valley Road and Melrose Avenue and reviewed the development which occurred between
1970 and 1974 of the Rancho Rios subdivision, now known as Playmor, containing just
over 500 units on 54 acres. One of the key elements of the development was the
retention of a natural drainage swale extending from Otay Valley Road to the south
boundary of the development. This grass covered swale, 150 to 200 feet wide,
separates the two sections of the development and provides visual relief in the
form of open space throu9h fairly dense development.
The area immediately adjacent to the intersection of Otay Valley Road and Melrose
Avenue was designated for neighborhood commercial use. It was later decided that
the commercial was larger than necessary and a precise plan was approved for the
construction of 50 dwelling units on a 3 acre portion of that site. After the
development was completed and inhabited, it was noted that a chainlink fence had
been constructed at the west boundary of the property which encroached into the
grass slope and had not been shown on the approved plans. Upon contacting the
residents it was learned they felt the fence was necessary to protect their property
from vandalism and to prevent foot traffic from the development to the west to the
commercial site. Since the fence was in violation of the approved plan for the
site, the home owners were asked to remove it.
A meeting was arranged between members of the homeowners association and the staff
to discuss alternatives to removing the fence. These included: leaving the fence
in the present location and painting it to reduce the glare; move the chainlink
fence to the top of the slope; remove the chainlink fence and locate a new decorative
wrought iron fence near the top of the slope.
In staff's opinion the open space area is a critical element in the total area
plan of these projects. It is therefore recommended that the fence be removed and
relocated at the top of the slope to allow both visual and physical continuity of
the open space area.
Mr. Lee displayed slides showing the fence from different locations and angles,
as well as the total open space as viewed from Otay Valley Road. In response to
a question from the Commission he affirmed the open space has not been dedicated
for public use but is maintained by homeowners associations and is for the use
of those residents.
Chairman Pressutti opened the hearing for testimony from the residents.
Michael Weiner, 1720 Melrose Avenue, Unit 9, stressed the importance to the residents
of retaining the fence in its existing location which provides the residents of
their complex with 25 feet of usable open area. He showed additional slides to
show that the top of the fence is about even with the top of the slope and does not
obstruct the view of the buildings from the road or of the open area viewed from
the pad elevation of the structures. He contended that to move the fence would
deprive those residents of any use of the open space. He showed slides of the inside
of the complex noting the total lack of any recreational area aside from the swimming
pool which is surrounded by a wrought iron fence. Since the fence is just inside
-6- August 27, 1980
their property line, he felt they should be afforded the use of that 25 feet
of space, noting that it represents a small portion of the total width of the
swale. He also affirmed the fence is needed for security purposes and to stop
foot traffic through their complex.
Tom Eldredge, president of the homeowners association, reported they water and
maintain the entire width of the slope bank, both inside and outside the fence,
where it abuts their property. The sprinkler heads are located just inside the fence
and removal of the fence would permit vandalism of that irrigation system. He
reported they have talked with the home owners of Rancho Rios and those residents
have no objection to the fence in its present location. He also asserted they were
not aware of the need to obtain permission before the fence was constructed.
Mr. Lee advised that the reason such permission was necessary was the fact that
the fence was not shown on the approved plan for the development, which was a
precise plan in conformance with the zoning of the property.
In discussion the Commission concurred that the fence has a functional use and,
if painted to blend with the landscaping, it would not detract from the esthetics
of the open area.
MSUC (O'Neill-Stevenson) The precise plan for Vista De Otay be amended to include
the location of a chainlink fence, painted green, at the west property line and
extending back to the east at the north and south property lines.
5. PUBLIC HEARING: Tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 80-31,
Gateway Townhouses, between Bonita Road and 1-805, construction
of 205 unit condominium project
Principal Planner Lee reported that this 17½ acre site received precise plan approval
in 1978 for 217 apartment units. The plan has been revised and now contains a
total of 205 units to be constructed as condominiums. Access to the development
is from "£" Street via Flower Street which extends up the slope to single family
development.
Mr. Lee displayed a plot plan noting that parking for most of the units will be
accommodated in two car garages located beneath the two story dwelling units, with
a limited number of single car garages. The plan also includes 80 open parking
spaces dispersed throughout the development. The entry driveways from Flower Street
will be marked by low walls identifying them as a private street system; decorative
tile paving will also be used to identify the driveways as private streets.
Slides were shown depicting the architecture of the front elevation as well as
the interior side and ends of the units. The design of the project has been approved
by the Design Review Committee subject to a number of conditions which were included
in the staff report for inclusion in the Commission's resolution approving the
tentative map. Mr. Lee called attention to the list of conditions and asked that
the second condition be revised to delete the dollar figure for low income and
substitute instead "families earning no more than the median income in San Diego
County as defined by the federal government."
-7- August 27, 1980
Commissioner G. Johnson noted that some of the units were listed as having two
bedrooms plus a den. She asked whether there are restrictions to prevent conversion
of the den to bedroom use and, if not, whether this would affect the requirement
for storage and parking spaces.
Mr. Lee indicated this would be pursued with the developer to determine if those
units would require additional storage space. However, since the storage is located
within the garages he felt the requirement of an additional amount would not be a
problem.
In response to a question from Commissioner Williams, Mr. Lee confirmed that the
elevation of the site is below the 100 year flood level. It is, however, basically
blocked off from the Sweetwater channel by the freeway and the pads will be elevated
above the 100 year flood level.
Senior Civil Engineer Daoust advised that drainage from this property would go via
culverts under the freeway into the Sweetwater River.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
John Morgan, 6153 Fairmont Extension, San Diego, responded to a question from
Commissioner Stevenson that he had no objections to the conditions recommended in
the staff report. He reported they have had numerous meetings with the Planning
Department and Engineering Department and have received approval from the Design
Review Committee and he feels the project is moving along okay.
MSUC (Stevenson-G. Johnson) The staff certifies environmental impact report
EIR-76-11 on this development.
MSUC (Stevenson-O'Neill) Based on the findings stated in the staff report, the
Commission recommends that the City Council approve the tentative subdivision map
for Gateway Townhouses, Chula Vista Tract 80-31, subject to the conditions enumerated
in the report with the modification to the second condition relating to the limit
of earnings to read "families earning no more than the median income for San Diego
County, as defined by the federal government."
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Chairman Pressutti advised that he had been requested to find out whether the
Planning Commission members would prefer a sitdown dinner banquet or cheese, wine
and hors d'oeuvres. The Commissioners expressed their preference for a sitdown
dinner.
ADJOURMENT
Chairman Pressutti adjourned the meeting at 9:31 p.m. to the meeting of September 10,
1980 at 7:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Helen Mapes, Secretly