Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1981/12/02 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA December 2, 1981 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: R. Johnson, Williams, Green, G. Johnson, O'Neill and Stevenson Commissioners Absent: Pressutti (with previous notification) Staff Present: Director of Planning Peterson, Principal Planner Pass, Principal Planner Lee, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Senior Civil Engineer Daoust, Housing Coordinator Gustafson, Assistant City Attorney Harron and Secretary Mapes. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Pro Tem R. Johnson, and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (O'Neill-Stevenson) The minutes of the meeting of November 18, 1981 be approved as written. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Director of Planning Peterson suggested that the Commission move agenda item 8, consideration of the revised Housing Element, up to be the second term considered. The Commission concurred with the change of order. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 82-6, Hilltop Terrace, northeast corner of Telegraph Canyon Road and Nacion Avenue - Dale Buildin§ Compans Principal Planner Lee advised that the applicant has requested a continuance of this hearing to the Commission meeting of December 16. MSUC (G. Johnson-O'Neill) The public hearing to consider the tentative subdivision map for Hilltop Terrace be continued to the meeting of December 16, 1981. 8. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Revised Housing Element of the General Plan Principal Planner Pass advised that the Housing Element of 1981 is submitted for the Commission's consideration and if adopted would replace the Housing Element of the General Plan of 1975 which was adopted by City Council Resolution No. 7897. -2- December 2, 1981 This Housing Element is predicated upon the Housing and Community Development's revised guidelines of 1977. It is more stringent than the 1975 plan and follows much of the HCD guidelines and a great deal of its manual. Mr. Pass made a brief comparative analysis of the 1975 Housing Element and the 1981 Element as proposed, pointing out that the 1981 version calls for substantially greater commitment to affordable housing and assigns departmental responsibility for the administration of housing programs. The 1981 plan commits the City of Chula Vista to SANDAG's allocation program for lower income households; under this plan Chula Vista will be required to provide an additional 482 assisted household units within the next three years. Mr. Pass advised that the 1981 plan is based on data from the 1975 special state census because full data has not been received based on the 1980 Federal census. It is uncertain when that data will be available and it is important for the City to adopt a revised Housing Element to comply with HCD guidelines as soon as possible. HCD has not objected to the use of the 1975 data. He pointed out that the 1981 plan continues emphasis on new planning concepts, including cluster garden, patio home, townhouse, garden apartment concepts and provides considerable advocacy for mobile homes, mobile home parks and factory built and modular housing. It fosters the establishment of a private sector/public sector housing partnership for affordable housing programs, and commits the City to deep density bonuses, expeditious processing, and the consideration of financial partici- pation with respect to improvements where affordable housing projects are proposed. Mr. Pass advised that the plan encourages demonstration projects under which developers are encouraged to pioneer and use new design and developmental techniques in an effort to cut the cost of housing without cutting the environmental quality of the project. Mr. Pass enumerated the various housing programs listed in the new housing element to implement affordable housing efforts; thirteen programs are included in this effort. He pointed out that the Housing Element has its own implementation program, and that the action program of the 1981 plan is greater in length and depth than the 1975 plan, and would better enable Chula Vista to foster affordable housing. It is recommended that the Commission find that the new Housing Element will not significantly affect the environment and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-81-44 and recommend that the City Council adopt the new Housing Element. Commissioner O'Neill commented that this document is greatly superior to the city's existing Housing Element and it has been needed for a long time. He recalled that the 1977 guidelines were published and commented on, then sent back to the State Office of Planning and Research. He asked if they have come out with new guidelines. Mr. Pass advised that the State has adopted the 1980 Housing Element Law which was enacted to ameliorate the stringency of the 1977 guidelines. He noted that if this proposed 1981 Housing Element is adopted it will be effective until 1985 when the City will have to consider adopting a revised one. Commissioner O'Neill noted that Table 15 tabulates the number of lower income house- holds to be assisted with housing as a three year goal. He asked if any of these programs are presently at work. -3- December 2, 1981 Housing Coordinator Gustafson affirmed that all of the programs for housing assistance have been implemented to a greater or lesser degree. Commissioner O'Neill felt the Housing Element should contain a statement that all of these programs are at work at the present time. Commissioner Williams noted that the Housing Element calls for an annual review of the element and program. He suggested that it be a requirement of the first annual review to update the figures with the 1980 census. Mr. Pass advised that once this plan is approved, the City will go on a tracking program with SANDAG and HCD, and they will track the program to see if the City is implementing the plan and if different census figures are inserted it may be difficult to determine the progress, however some language change may be appropriate and staff would review that. Commissioner Green asked what would happen if Chula Vista did not adopt this Housing Element. Mr. Pass affirmed that if Chula Vista does not adopt a new Housing Element but keeps the old one, the greatest likelihood is that nothing would happen, however, if someone should challenge the adequacy of our Housing Element, it is possible that the court would find it inadequate. If that happens, the court could stipulate that no subdivision maps can be approved and no new development can be sanctioned. Commissioner Stevenson questioned the statement on page 22, paragraph 11, that indicates Chula Vista is fostering affordable housing within the Bayfront Redevelopment Project Area. Mr. Pass affirmed that the Bayfront Redevelopment plan has some residential areas, and if these are built, it is the plans purpose to provide that 10 per cent of the units will be for low and moderate income residents. Commissioner G. Johnson pointed out that on page 24 in a discussion of the problem of housing for low and moderate income families, the statement is made that households headed by widowed or divorced women often cannot compete in the housing market. She suggested that the word "women" be changed to "people" since widowed or divorced men may be faced with the same problem. Mr. Pass agreed that change is commendable. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. As no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (O'Neill-Stevenson) The Commission finds that the adoption of the new Housing Element will have no significant environmental impact and adopts the Negative Declara- tion issued on IS-81-44. MS (O'Neill-Stevenson) The Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the new Parts i and 2 of the Housing Element with a change on page 24, paragraph H.1 to substitute "people" for "women" and an addition on page 19 to require an update with 1980 census figures by the second annual review. Commissioner Green advised that he believes in the goals of the housing policy but is opposed to the means of reaching those goals through government projects and subsidies which include 14 different State and Federal programs. -4- December 2, 1981 The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners O'Neill, Stevenson, G. Johnson, R. Johnson and Williams NAY: Commissioner Green ABSENT: Commissioner Pressutti 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of draft EIR-81-3 on EastLake Planned Community Environmental Review Coordinator Reid noted that this hearing was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of November 18 and since that date written comments have been received from the Resource Conservation Commission and a letter from the Local Agency Formation Commission which indicates the document is adequate for their purpose. The EastLake Task Force has had two meetings since its origin following the last Commission meeting and they expect to make a presentation on December 16. It is also anticipated there will be input from the State agencies prior to December 16. Chairman Pro Tem T. Johnson reopened the public hearing. As no one wished to speak on this matter, Mr. Johnson announced that the public hearing is continued to the Commission meeting of December 16 in compliance with action taken on November 18. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of EIR-80-6 A (Supplemental) on Tele§raph Point Environmental Review Coordinator Reid reported that after EIR-80-6 was certified by the Planning Commission, a revised development plan for the East College Sectional Planning Area was submitted and was reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee. That Committee found the project as revised could result in adverse impacts in the area of land form alteration and aesthetic effects and a supplemental EIR covering those aspects would be required. On October 9, 1981 the Environmental Review Committee issued the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. Mr. Reid reported that the revised project consists of 252 housing units and will entail 300,000 cubic yards of grading with resulting slope banks up to 52 feet in height. Since the issuance of the Supplemental EIR the project proponent has submitted a revised plan in an effort to mitigate the extensive grading. That plan is being reviewed. Mr. Reid recommended that the public hearing be opened on the adequacy of the EIR. If there is testimony that requires a response, consideration of the final EIR could be scheduled on December 16; if no response is required the Commission could determine at this time if the EIR is adequate. In response to a question from Commissioner Stevenson regarding a comparison of the revised plans with those previously approved, Mr. Reid advised that this plan proposes the development of condominium units but would be a different type of structure than the previous proposal. As the present plan proposes a more traditional type of structure, two stories in height, rather than three, increased grading is required to develop larger pad areas. Mr. Reid also affirmed that the development plans will be presented for the Planning Commission for consideration and approval, and this hearing deals only with the adequacy of the EIR in pointing out the possible adverse impacts that could result from the proposed development. -5- December 2, 1981 This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. As no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MS (Stevenson-Green) The Commission certifies that EIR-80-6 A adequately covers the proposed project. The motion carried with Commissioner O'Neill voting no. Commissioner O'Neill advised that he felt there are some questions which have not been adequately covered in the document. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Rezonin§ application PCZ-82-C to change the zoning for 288 and 290 Del Mar from R-3 to C-O Joseph A. Casey, D.D.S. Principal Planner lee displayed a plat showing the location of the property which is 45 feet wide and has been divided into two parcels, each measuring 67' x 45'. Each parcel contains a dwelling unit and a two car detached garage straddles the property line between the two parcels. The property in the rear was granted a conditional use permit in 1965 and was used as an antique store. Mr. Lee noted that this property is adjacent to the Third Avenue Parking District and it has been recommended by the Parking Place Commission that the City Council include it within the boundaries of the district. If that action is taken the owner would have the option of providing parking onsite, or paying a fee for parking in a parking district lot; a public parking lot is adjacent to this property on the north. The applicant has advised that he intends to remodel the front dwelling and use it for a dental office. It is recommended that the zoning be changed to accommodate that type of use since the narrow width of the property makes it difficult to develop a multiple residential use. The Commission discussed the use of the public parking lots and pointed out that the landscaping on the adjacent parking lot does not look very good. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Joseph A. Casey, D.D.S., expressed the opinion that the use he intends to make of this property fits in with the General Plan of the City and the operation will not encroach on the people in the residential area to the north since it is separated from that use by a parking lot. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Green-O'Neill) The Commission recommends that the City Council approve the change of zone for the 45' x 135' site at 288 and 290 Del Mar Avenue from R-3 to C-O. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-82-7 request for mini-market with gasoline sales at 720 "H" Street - Atlantic Richfield Co. Director of Planning Peterson advised that Atlantic Richfield proposes to convert the lubrication bay and office of an existing service station, located on the south side of "H" Street across from the M.T.D.B. station, into a mini-market. There are two other service stations in the area which maintain service bays and numerous auto repair facilities along Broadway. In evaluating the application it was noted that the proposed mini-market would duplicate the service offered at a nearby 7-Eleven store, but in the absence of a strong reason for denial of the application, it is T -6- December 2, 1981 recommended that the request be approved, subject to a list of eight conditions relating to site plan improvements and signs. The conditions include the removal of two freestanding signs, one of which would be replaced with a monument sign. The freeway oriented sign is nonconforming under the code regulations and is scheduled for removal within 7-1/2 years under the amortization schedule. Mr. ?eterson recommended the inclusion of two additional conditions not contained in the written report, which would limit the size of the cooler box area for the storage and display of beer and wine to 5' x 7', and specify that no signs visible from outside of the building could advertise beer or wine. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Sam Blick, attorney with Higgs, Fletcher and Mack in San Diego, representing the Atlantic Richfield Company, advised that this concept is introduced for sites which need maintenance, facelifting and beautification. This particular proposal would require $150,000 worth of site improvements, including significant landscaping and the removal of the pole signs, although it would be their preference to retain the freeway oriented sign for the full amortization period. Bill Ott, resident of Costa Mesa and employed in Atlantic Richfield's Research and Marketing Division, advised that it had been their experience some years ago that in metropolitan areas the stations located adjacent to freeways did not procure enough service work to keep the dealers in business. In their efforts to find a means of supplementing the dealer's income from the sale of gasoline they had found the convenience market to be the most successful. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. In discussing the signs, and particularly the freeway oriented sign, Commissioner Stevenson expressed the opinion that requiring removal of the Arco sign while a Texaco freeway sign remains in this vicinity would not be equitable. Commissioners R. Johnson and Green pointed out that credit card users are frequently looking for a particular company when motoring on the freeway and until such time as the freeway service signs include the logo of the companies located at a particular offramp, the freeway oriented sign serves a real need to the company and to the customer. MSUC (Stevenson-G. Johnson) The Commission finds that approval of this conditional use permit will have no significant environmental impact and adopts the Negative Declaration issued on IS-82-14. MSUC (Stevenson-G. Johnson) The Commission approves a conditional use permit for the Atlantic Richfield to modify an existing gasoline service station at 720 "H" Street to include a convenience food store, subject to the conditions recommended including a condition to limit the size of the cooler box for display of beer and wine products to 5' x 7' and prohibiting exterior signs from advertising beer or wine, and with a modification to the third condition to require removal of the freestanding sign adjacent to "H" Street and its replacement with a monument sign, and that the applicant agrees to remove the freeway oriented sign at the direction of the Planning Commission. -7- December 2, 1981 6. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of tentative subdivision map for Chula Vista Tract 82-5, Centre Villas, 344-354 "G" Street - Hoffman and Salganick Principal Planner Lee indicated on a plat the location of three lots on the south side of "G" Street on which it is proposed to develop a one lot condominium project, consisting of 26 units located in five two-story structures with a sixth single story building devoted to garages. The architecture and site plan for the project have been approved by the Design Review Committee. The project meets all code requirements for parking, open space and storage. It is recommended that the tentative map be approved subject to the list of 10 conditions contained in the written report. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Tony Janus, 610 Mariposa Circle, co-owner of the 16 units on the property to the southwest of this site, spoke about the drainage in the area, pointing out that most properties fronting on "G" Street drain to "G" Street whereas this property is proposed to drain to the south across their development. Jerry Hoffman, in partnership with Dr. Salganick on the subject property, advised that they had proposed several solutions to the drainage problem. He noted that one of the recommended conditions requires that they obtain a drainage easement or signature of the adjacent property owner indicating acceptance of the runoff water from this site. His previous attempts to obtain such an agreement have been unsuccessful. James Sterritt, partner of Mr. Janus, confirmed that they had been approached by the engineer for the Hoffman project, and they do not want any change from the existing condition of the property. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Senior Civil Engineer Daoust advised that the property being proposed for develop- ment drains in a southwesterly direction, in a sheet flow condition onto the adjacent property. Under the proposed development plans the runoff water would be carried to the southern end of the property and be directed west, concentrating all of the drainage into a narrow swale. In times of heavy rainfall this could have an impact on the adjacent property. Also, the continuing flow of that water down Vance Street might create a situation of too much water for the street to carry. Condition 3 in the report addresses that problem. The Commission discussed this problem and concluded that if the developer cannot reach an agreement with the adjacent property owner, he can propose other engineering methods to overcome the problem. MSUC (Green-O'Neill) The Commission finds that the proposed development of Centre Villas will have no significant environmental impacts and adopts the Negative Declaration issued on IS-81-33 with the mitigation measures contained in the Declaration. MSUC (Green-O'Neill) Based on the findings stated in the report, the Commission recommends that the City Council approve the tentative subdivision map for Centre Villas, Chula Vista Tract 82-5, subject to the conditions as stated in the report. -8- December 2, 1981 7. PUBLIC HEARING: Amendment to E1 Rancho del ReS Specific Plan to redesignate the high school site in Ranchero Sectional Planning Area to Low Density Residential Director of Planning Peterson reported that the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan, adopted in 1978 designated a 50 acre parcel on the south side of the extension of East "J" Street as a high school site. When development plans for E1 Rancho del Rey Unit 6 were under consideration, the high school district indicated they would not require a school at that site, and the development plans were modified to include the area in the residential development. To eliminate confusion it is appropriate to amend the Specific Plan to eliminate that high school designation. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. As no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Stevenson expressed concern over deleting this school site since he felt future development would result in the need for another high school to the east of 1-805. The Commission discussed the matter and concluded that since the tentative map had already been approved on the site that it was pointless to continue with the high school designation on the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. MS (O'Neill-R. Johnson) The Commission recommends that the City Council redesignate the subject 50 acre site within the Ranchero Sectional Planning Area from "high school" to "low density residential, 2-3 DU/acre" on the plan diagram of the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. The motion carried with Commissioner Stevenson voting no. DIRECTOR'S RE PORT Director of Planning Peterson reported that next week's meeting will be a study session to begin at 5:00 p.m. and be followed by dinner. He also reported that Commissioner Pressutti has been in the office and looks good, however, his doctor has advised him not to attend Planning Commission meetings until after the first of the year. In response to a question concerning the alleged violation on the O'Neill property on "I" Street, Mr. Peterson advised he had referred the complaint to the Zoning Enforcement Officer but has not had a reply from him. COMMISS ION COMMENTS Commissioner G. Johnson requested that the condition of the public parking lot on Del Mar Avenue be referred to the Parking Place Commission. Commissioner Stevenson advised that he read recently that the City of Del Mar had passed a new ordinance regulating adult book stores and related activities. He requested that a copy of that ordinance be obtained for the Commission's review. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Pro Tem R. Johnson adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. to the study session at 5:00 p.m. on December 9, 1981 and the next regular business meeting at 7:00 p.m. on December 16, 1981. Respectfully submitted, e en Mapes, Secreti