Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1980/11/12 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA November 12, 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, R. Johnson, G. Johnson, O'Neill and Stevenson Commissioners absent: None Staff present: Director of Planning Peterson, Principal Planner Lee, City Engineer Lippitt, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Assistant City Attorney Harron 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 Commissioner Stevenson requested that the minutes be corrected on page 11, in the last paragraph covering his comment about the moratorium on the conversion of apartments to condominiums, in the fourth line change the word "listed" to "lifted" and add "by the City Council" without referral to the Planning Commission. MSUC (Stevenson-R. Johnson) The minutes of the meeting of October 22, 1980 be approved with the correction as requested. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Jerry Valk, 291 Camino Vista Real, asserted that the school districts are not making reports as they are supposed to with regard to the relief of overcrowding in the schools, and that the City Council is ignoring it because they feel it is the school districts' problem. He contended that the provisions of City Ordinance No. 1783 are not being complied with by the City with reference to overcrowding of schools and indicated he would make a more complete presentation on this subject at a future meeting. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 80-29, Vista Knolls, conversion of 74 unit apartment complex to condominiums, 1470 Second Avenue - Park Avenue Associates Principal Planner Lee noted the location of this development on a 2½ acre parcel on the west side of Second Avenue just south of Quintard. In accordance with the density allowed in the R-3 zone, the property is developed with 54 two bedroom units and 20 one bedroom units, which were constructed in 1973. -2- November 12, 1980 Mr. Lee reviewed the provision of storage and private open space which meet the requirements of condominium regulations. He displayed slides showing the buildings, carports, location of patios, and the landscaped yard areas in the interior of the project. In compliance with a condition assessed by the Design Review Committee, the existing wrought iron railing around the second story balconies will be replaced with wood railing to match the design of the fencing in the lower patio areas. It is recommended that the tentative map be approved subject to a list of five conditions. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Sid Xinos of Schwerin, Xinos and Associates, engineers for the project, expressed concurrence with the conditions and asked for approval of the map. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Smith asked what is the point of condition No. 5; he felt it is not necessary. Assistant City Attorney Harron advised that it is included because the tenant relocation assistance ordinance is just now being proposed, and after adoption it could not be applied retroactively to an approved subdivision map unless that requirement is a condition of the approval. MS (Stevenson-G. Johnson) Based on the findings stated in the report, the Commission recommends that the City Council approve the tentative map for Vista Knolls, Chula Vista Tract 80-29, subject to the 5 conditions listed in the report. MS (Smith-R. Johnson) The motion be amended by deleting condition No. 5. The motion for the amendment failed to carry by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Smith, R. Johnson and Williams NOES: Commissioners Pressutti, G. Johnson, O'Neill and Stevenson The original motion for approval of the tentative map carried by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Stevenson, G. Johnson, Pressutti, Smith, R. Johnson and Williams NAY: Commissioner O'Neill ABSENT: None 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Environmental ~mpact report EIR-80-7 on Brand~wine Industrial Park Environmental Review Coordinator Reid reported that this EIR covers the area both north and south of Otay Valley Road, east of 1-805. The area to the south of Otay Valley Road is not presently under consideration for development so the specific discretionary acts addressed in this EIR are the General Plan amendment and the zone change on the northern portion of the property covered by the EIR. The EIR includes comments submitted by the Environmental Control Commission, Montgomery Fire District and CPO. Word has just been received that the State -3- November 12, 1980 Clearinghouse will submit comments from some agencies of the state, but this material will not be mailed until November 17th, so it will be necessary to continue the public hearing on the report. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Debra Marsh, Director of Environmental Studies, PRC Toups, reviewed the analysis made by that firm based on their biological and archeological field trips, as well as traffic and noise studies. The greatest impact from industrial development would be at the northern boundary of the subject site which is adjacent to residen- tial development; if the steep slope in that area remains it would serve as a buffer between the two uses. The Nacion fault zone and expansive soil conditions on the site would require proper mitigation measures for development. Water is available but there would be a pressure problem for providing fire protection which may require pumping on the site. Additional review will be required upon presentation of precise development plans. MSUC (G. Johnson-R. Johnson) The public hearing for EIR-80-7 be continued to the meeting of December 10, 1980. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-81-1 - Request for amendment to the General Plan to change the designation of 19 acres at Ota~ Valley Road and Brandywine Avenue from medium density residential to research and limited industrial Director of Planning Peterson advised that this request cannot be acted upon until the EIR considered under the previous item has been adopted. It will be necessary to continue this hearing to December lOth. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Dick Kau, 3404 Bonita Road, Chula Vista, addressed the need for more industrial land in Chula Vista. He acts as an agent for developers and has found it is difficult to find a location in Chula Vista for the type of development proposed. Chairman Pressutti announced that the public hearing is continued to December 10, 1980. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-81-2 - Consideration of amendment to the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan to incorporate a development plan for East "H" Street City Engineer Lippitt reported that when the Specific Plan for E1 Rancho del Rey was approved in 1978 one of the conditions was that development would be from west to east in the "H" Street corridor. Since then there has not been much activity in development along "H" Street. When the Gersten Company subsequently requested development in the Long Canyon area, the City Council placed a condition on any development in the eastern a~ea that a plan be developed for the implementation of East "H" Street. The Gersten Company has since worked with other property owners within the planning area and basically all are in agreement with the proposed plan which determines the fair share of East "H" Street that each property owner -4- November 12, 1980 should construct. The plan also provides that the City will pay for construction of two travel lanes and half of the center median. The only item of contention at this point between the city staff and Gersten Company is the issue of street lights. Gersten has requested that the City pay for one-half of the street lights, but the City has not agreed. This proposal is before the Planning Commission so that it can be incorporated into the adopted Specific Plan for E1 Rancho del Rey, and it is recommended that the plan be approved. In response to questions from the Commission, Mr. Lippitt advised that property owners, aside from the Gersten Company, who will be involved in this program include the Huffman Construction Company, Lewsader and Lee, and the Catholic Church. He also explained that under this plan there would not be large amounts of cash transferred through an assessment and reimbursement procedure, but that each developer will put in a share of the road as his development occurs. Mr. Lippitt further explained that the plan has three phases. The first phase is for the construction of two lanes on a 40 ft. wide right of way; the second phase would complete the grading and install two more lanes, and the third phase would install the last two lanes. The plan specifies that there will be adequate roadway to handle the traffic as development occurs. Commissioner Stevenson commented that Southwestern College would be one of the biggest benefactors of East "H" Street and would contribute a large amount of the traffic to "H" Street when it is completed. He asked if that school could be required to contribute to the construction of "H" Street. Mr. Lippitt advised that the college has dedicated right of way for "H" Street through their property but have not contributed to the cost of construction and would not be required to do so under this plan. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Dick Brown, 1050 Pioneer Way, E1 Cajon, representing the Gersten Company, concurred with the report made by Mr. Lippitt. He advised that the Gersten Company will have the responsibility of constructing about 79% of "H" Street and they are in agreement with the City with the exception of street lights, wherein they feel the City should contribute toward that cost. Charles Lewsader, 6537 Wandermere Drive, San Diego, concurred with the plan as presented and requested its approval. Myron Dalseth, 114 Guava Avenue, representing the Pilgrim Lutheran Church, owner of a parcel at the west end of the developed portion of "H" Street extending from Otay Lakes Road, noted that four lanes of "H" Street has been constructed in front of their property. He asked if that would be taken into consideration when assess- ments are established. Mr. Lippitt advised that the cost to be assessed to each development will be based on trip generations of the project and will be assessed whether the property fronts on "H" Street or is located some distance away with access to "H" Street. No credit is given for existing improvements. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. -5- November 12, 1980 MSUC (Smith-Stevenson) The Commission adopts a resolution recommending that the City Council incorporate the East "H" Street Development Program into the Specific Plan for E1 Rancho del Rey. Commissioner Smith requested that the Engineering Department look upon this program as a framework on which some type of development program of general application could be developed for future expansion. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCA-81-2 - Consideration of amendments to the I-L and I zones to authorize the establishment of certain commercial land uses therein Director of Planning Peterson report6d that this amendment to the zoning ordinance would allow certain types of commercial use in industrial zones if both the Planning Commission and City Council approve a conditional use permit for a particular location. The type of use contemplated to be allowed would be a large scale discount store, such as the Price Club, or a manufacturer's outlet center, which would be a warehouse type of operation to sell production overruns, last years models, etc. of major manufacturers. Mr. Peterson expressed concern about the impact of such an operation on the Chula Vista Shopping Center and the Downtown Third Avenue area, but felt those considerations could be weighed by the Planning Commission and Council if a use permit application is filed. If it is determined it would have an adverse effect on other interests the application could be denied. Mr. Peterson felt this type of use would not be appropriate in the city's commercial areas, as it is more industrial oriented and could include wholesale distribution as well as retail sales. He recommended adoption of the amendment. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Gene York, 160 Brightwood, commented that he has had 30 years experience in retail shopping center site location, and management and store operation. He pointed out the retail picture is changing, which doesn't mean the department store is going out of business. He noted there is a trend toward home center shopping centers which are generally located in industrial areas. He described one such center in the Orange County area which started out with four stores and now has 20 or 25 stores, each catering some type of home furnishings with a large selection of a particular type of merchandise. He contended this is a good concept and should be permitted in Chula Vista. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (O'Neill-Stevenson) The Commission finds the proposed amendment would not significantly impact the environment and adopts the Negative Declaration on IS-81-17. MSUC (O'Neill-Stevenson) The Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the amendments to the "I-L" and "I" zones as proposed. -6- November 12, 1980 6. PUBLIC HEARING: PCA-81-3 - Consideration of amendment to the Municipal Code to require relocation assistance for tenants of residential properties bein9 converted to condominium ownership Director of Planning Peterson advised that the wording of the proposed amendment enclosed in the staff report is incorrect and does not reflect his recommendation. It is the intent of his recommendation to require the payment of relocation funds to a tenant who lived in the apartments at the time of filing the tentative map and continued to live in the development at the time of expiration of the tenants' 60 day right of refusal to purchase, but does not choose to purchase a condominium unit. The amendment would also require the owner of apartments proposed for conversion to condominiums to notify prospective tenants after filing a tentative map to put them on notice that a condominium may be approved. A person who moves into such a complex after the filing of the map would not be entitled to relocation expense but would be notified that the conversion is pending. Mr. Peterson distributed copies of the revised wording of the proposed amendment and suggested that if the Commission wishes more time to review it, the hearing could be continued to the next meeting. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Gene York, 160 Brightwood, spoke in favor of continuing the hearing for two weeks as he feels there are some potential problems in the ordinance. Sidney Xinos, I400 Sixth Avenue, San Dieqo, indicated he had not had an opportunit.v to review the proposed ordinance and would also favor a continuance. MSUC (O'Neill-Stevenson) The public hearing for consideration of the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code be continued to the meeting of November 26, 1980. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director of Planning Peterson noted that the second business meeting in December would fall on December 24th and the Commission may wish to cancel that meeting. He also reminded the Commissioners of the annual banquet for members of Boards and Commissions to be held tomorrow night, November 13th. If anyone wishing to attend has not made reservations, that should be done early tomorrow. Mr. Peterson asked whether the Commissioners wanted the study session of next week to begin at 5:00 p.m. or 7:00 p.m. It was the consensus of the Commission that the study session begin at 5:00 p.m. Chairman Pressutti also noted the consensus of the Commission to cancel the regular meeting of December 24th. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Pressutti noted the announcement of a short course for Planning Commissioners, sponsor6d by the University of California, to be held in Newport -7- November 12, 1980 Beach on December 9 and 10. He asked if Commissioners could attend this conference. Mr. Peterson advised that since none of the Commissioners attended the League of California Cities, which was included in the budget, there would be money available for two Commissioners to attend another conference. It could be the short course in Newport Beach or the Commissioners Institute to be held in February. He indicated that copies of the announcement of the conference in Newport Beach will be distributed to each Commissioner at the next study session. Commissioner Smith reported that he will be absent from the next meeting due to an out of town trip for the Thanksgiving holiday. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. to the study session at 5:00 p.m. on November 19th, and next regular business meeting on November 26. Respectfully submitted,