Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1992/02/26 Tape: 332 Side: 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers February 26, 1992 Public Services Building R L__~O_~.L_~ALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Fuller, Commissioners Carson, Casillas, Decker, Martin, Tuchscber (arrived 7:40 p.m.) COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Tugenberg STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Leiter, Assistant Planning Director Lee, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Senior Planner Bazzel, Associate Planner Batchelder, Housing Coordinator Girbes, Community Development Specialist Harris, Associate Civil Engineer Ouadah, Assistant City Attorney Rudolf PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chair Fuller and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chair Fuller reviewed the composition of the Planning Commission, its responsibilities and the format of the meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None MSUC (Martin/Decker) 5-0 (Commissioner Tuchscher had not yet arrived) to excuse Commissioner Tugenberg. PC Minutes -2- February 26, 1992 ITEM 1: PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-90-09; CONSIDERATION OF DRAFT CHULA VISTA HOUSING ELEMENT 1991 Associate Planner Batchelder gave the background of the Draft Housing Element. Commissioner Casillas, who chaired the Blue Ribbon Committee, discussed the make-up, purpose, and work of the Committee. He commended the work of the Committee and staff. Associate Planner Batchelder noted that the Blue Ribbon Committee unanimously endorsed the document. The Housing Advisory Committee had also considered the document and unanimously recommended that the Planning Commission and City Council adopt the Negative Declaration and Housing Element. Community Development Specialist Harris outlined the highlights of the review of the 1986 Element. Associate Planner Batehelder reviewed the assessment of housing needs, resources, constraints, and housing objectives. Mr. Harris noted that staff recommended revision to the Affordable Housing Policy in that the Affordable Housing Policy be applied to all housing projects of 10 units or more. In the case of a requirement for 1.2 units of low-income housing, the developer would have to provide the one unit on site and then pay an in-lieu fee for the .2%. They would pay 20% of the in-lieu fee which had been established by the City Council. All projects under nine units would be exempted. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the Negative Declaration and Housing Element. Chair Fuller commented on the balanced community objectives, and stated that it was important when considering projects in the eastern territory to make sure they comply with the Affordable Housing Element. Commissioner Casillas noted that part of the review done by staff related to the jobs/housing needs which addressed the issue of the increase in the number of service-related jobs. Commissioner Carson asked how often the churches were used to provide shelter for the homeless. Mr. Harris answered that the Interfaith Shelter Network provided for 12 people for about 20 weeks during the year. Commissioner Carson was concerned about having a good balance between west and east. She did not want to create a split between the two areas and create a ghetto in the western area. Associate Planner Batchelder replied that it was one of the primary reasons the Blue Ribbon Committee suggested that staff review the multi-family residential base to ensure adequacy and to make sure the 5 % is met, and possible feasibility of providing more than 5 %. Commissioner PC Minutes -3- February 26, 1992 Casillas felt that when the implementation guidelines are detailed, there would be language included to inhibit that division of east and west from happening. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Decker/Carson) 5-0 (Commissioner Tugenberg absent; Commissioner Tuchscher not yet arrived) that based on the Initial Study and Negative Declaration, the Commission f'md that the Draft Chula Vista Housing Element of 1991 will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued under IS-92-08. MSUC (Decker/Martin) 5-0 (Commissioner Tugenberg absent; Commissioner Tuchscher not yet arrived) to adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the Draft Housing Element of 1991 as a component of the City General Plan, including the suggested revision. ITEM 2: CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-91-03, SALT CREEK RANCH SPA Environmental Review Coordinator Reid stated no comments had been received from the State Clearinghouse; however, 10 other letters had been received which were included in the EIR along with responses. He recommended that the Commission not consider CEQA Findings or the Mitigation Monitoring Program. He noted Julie McCall of Ogden, the preparer of the EIR, was there to answer any questions. Staff recommended certification of the Final EIR. (Commissioner Tuchscher arrived at 7:40 p.m.) Commissioner Decker was concerned about allocating traffic capacity on "H" Street and how it could be resolved in an EIR. Mr. Reid noted it was part of the Eastern Territories Transportation Phasing Plan, and an analysis showed there was some capacity in that system for this project, not the entire project. Those projects which had approved tentative maps would be first in line. Commissioner Tuchscber was unclear as to how traffic was allocated from one project to another. He felt other projects which had also paid for that infrastructure should receive some fair share of that excess capacity. Senior Planner Bazzel answered that the allocation of that additional capacity would not be decided until the findings of the HNTV Financing Study for SR-125 were in. MSUC (Carson/Decker) 6-0 (Commissioner Tugenberg absent) to certify the Final EIR. PC Minutes -4- February 26, 1992 ITEM 3: PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-91-04: CONSIDERATION OF SALT CREEK RANCH SPA PLAN, PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN AND P-C REGULATIONS - The Baldwin Company Senior Planner Bazzel noted that as part of the SPA Plan the Planning Commission was being asked to consider the Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan. The Planned Community Regulations and Design Guidelines should be continued to the next meeting of the Planning Commission. He then gave the background and a detailed description of the project and addressed some of the issues involved and mitigation proposed. Regarding Community Purpose Facility sites, Mr. Bazzel noted there were two proposed with a total acreage of approximately 11.4 acres, which would leave a deficiency of approximately 4.4 acres. The developer had proposed a reciprocal agreement with the Parks Department and the City for the 22-acre community park to include a reciprocal parking arrangement to offset some of the acreage requirement. Conditions of approval proposed by staff were that the final acreage requirement for the Community Purpose Facility site be resolved and finalized prior to the tentative subdivision map. Mr. Bazzel noted that staff bad been working with a consultant regarding the Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water Quality Plan, and recommendations were included in the staff report. Also included was the Public Facilities Financing Plan. Senior Planner Bazzel stated a letter had been received from the Sweetwater Union High School District that day regarding the Public Facilities Financing Plan and their request to modify some of the language. Commissioner Decker, referring to Condition 27, page 24 of report, asked why the Director of Parks & Recreation should approve final details of habitat enhancement, protective measures for sensitive species, brush modification and temporary irrigation. He felt it would be a biologist's job rather than the Director of Parks & Recreation. Mr. Bazzel answered that the Director of Parks & Recreation was involved in the coordination of the open space maintenance districts; within those open space maintenance districts would be a large number of sensitive plant species that they need to deal with. Proper coordination with that Department was necessary with the Habitat Conservation Plan. Commissioner Decker - Condition 49 - Developer shall commit to funding fair share of park & ride facility -- what's fair share; and was the developer willing to go along with undefined fair share? Mr. Bazzel deferred that question to the developer. Commissioner Tuchscher asked why there was no type of product at mid-point -- with 1/4 acre lots, or 10,000 sq. ft. lots. PC Minutes -5- February 26, 1992 Senior Planner Bazzel stated that at the General Development Plan stage, there was a strong emphasis by Council and by the Commission that larger lot sizes be provided; therefore, staff felt that in order to get the 1 and 2-acre lot sizes in the eastern area, it was necessary to allow some provision for a percentage to go below the 1/2 acre which is normally the residential estate-type lotting. A minimum of 15,000 sq. ft. size was required. There was no provision for the area between 8,000 and 15,000. Assistant Planning Director Lee explained that the percentage area of estate housing represented over 1/3 of the site. In another project, there may be a larger lot commitment, but not to that extent. Commissioner Tuchscher commented that non-clustered 1/4-acre lots were needed in the eastern Commissioner Decker, regarding Public Facilities Financing Plan - page 3.33, asked about fees for police substations, and if there would be a substation in that area. He felt there was a great need for one. Assistant Planning Director Lee noted it would be revisited. Commissioner Decker, referring to page 5.1-17, commented that it would be nice to find out what it would really cost the city to operate facilities listed in Figure 41 after they are turned over, which would give a better idea of the ultimate cost of development. Chair Fuller noted the Growth Management Oversight Commission had last year begun to address life-cycle cost when they asked for financial review of most public facilities financing. Commissioner Carson referred to density credit - land use element 6.3 - extraordinary benefit. She asked if the 72 units went into the medium density, and where the extraordinary benefits were. Mr. Bazzel explained that the extraordinary benefits were required when exceeding mid- point density for the project as a whole. At Commissioner Carson's request, Mr. Bazzel said staff would supply the exact wording from the General Plan. Commissioner Casillas asked for clarification of community purpose facility acreage and how it would be accommodated. Mr. Bazzel explained that until a reciprocal agreement was reached, the 11.4 acres would be required. This would come forward prior to the tentative subdivision map. Commissioner Casillas, referring to Condition 51, asked where the water main pressure was measured. Mr. Bazzel answered that it was at the fire hydrant. Planning Director Leiter, referring to Section 6.2 of the General Plan, responded to Commissioner Carson regarding the mid-point range emphasizing the project as a whole was considered. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. PC Minutes -6- February 26, 1992 Claudia Trolsi, representing Baldwin, gave some background of the project and introduced Van Stevens. Van Stevens, of Forma, described the open space system connections to corridors and elements to the Chula Vista and surrounding County areas, the vehicular circulation system, parks, recreation features, trail systems, habitat elements, and residential components. Claudia Trolsi returned to the podium and requested a change in a condition on page 19 in the Public Facilities Financing Plan, clarifying the distinction between the timing for the HNTV Study for the ability for the City to determine who would be allocated the additional capacity, and the administrative issues with respect to updating the Eastern Chula Vista Transportation Plan and the DIF. Another condition change on page 24, condition 23, item d - proposed trail system - transition from industrial to residential was a concern for Baldwin and EastLake. Because this was a condition that both property owners had to work with, Baldwin asked that the trail be a shared responsibility in terms of the land being set aside for it by both parties. She asked that the sentence "The trail shall be located entirely within the Salt Creek Ranch project boundary" be stricken. Commissioner Decker asked if the could applicant live with "fair share" in Condition 49. Ms. Troisi answered affirmatively. Commissioner Decker asked what size trees would be planted. Ms. Troisi answered that they would use whatever was acceptable to both Parks & Recreation and Planning. Commissioner Decker inquired about the reversion of community purpose facility sites--page 1-49 - Reversion of sites to applicant. Discussion followed as to whether or not the property should be held for a certain length of time and whether or not it should revert to the applicant. Ms. Troisi said every effort would be made to sell the property to a church. Commissioner Tuchscher was concerned about the location of community purpose facility sites. He was not comfortable with reversion to the applicant. Commissioner Casillas asked how long developer should have to hold on to the property. Assistant Director Lee noted that Council would revisit the ordinance after a certain period of time. Commissioner Decker was concerned about maintenance of the equestrian trail and how to keep motorcycles off the trails. Ms. Troisi explained that the Salt Creek corridor and the trail network would most likely be maintained by the landscape maintenance district. Assistant Director Lee noted that issue could be followed up with the Parks & Recreation Department. Ms. Troisi said there would be fencing on both sides of the trail which would make it more difficult. PC Minutes -7- February 26, 1992 Commissioner Decker, referring to page 1-54 - minimum speeds should be maximum speeds. Commissioner Decker, regarding page 1-166 - number of trees per lot to be maintained by open space maintenance district - would like to see two trees per lot if possible. Commissioner Decker commended the applicant on the grading of the property. Commissioner Decker asked if the trail undercrossing at "H" Street & Hunte Parkway would be lighted. Ms. Troisi said the design would be worked out with Engineering and Planning. Sue Strayer, 2846 Villa de Alizon, Bonita, of Bonita Valley Horsemen, was concerned with the equestrian trails, and said they would be happy to work with Baldwin to address issues such as "horse apples" and horse gates, and the tunnel. She asked that Baldwin consider extending the equestrian and hiking trail to go from the East "H" Street area to head north connecting to the two vista points. She suggested that the trail go north, then from east to west, back south or perhaps a loop. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. At Chair Fuller's request, Senior Planner Bazzel explained that staff recommended exclusion of the P-C Regulations and Design Guidelines, the CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf felt staff's preference would be to have time to review the proposed changes in the conditions and take into consideration any comments the Commission may want to make regarding that, and bring the item back for action at the next meeting with the Mitigation Monitoring Program and other documents. Assistant Planning Director Lee suggested the public hearing be reopened and continued to the next meeting. Commissioner Tugenberg could review the tape of the meeting in order to comment or take action at the next meeting. A written communication had been received from EastLake Development relating to two conditions, relating to a sound study and a sales disclosure document. This letter had been received at the meeting and needed to be reviewed and responded to by staff. Chair Fuller reopened the public hearing on PCM-92-04: Consideration of Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan and continued the public hearing until the meeting of March 11, 1992. Assistant Planning Director Lee stated that if the Commission had any other items they would like staff to consider before the meeting, it would be helpful to obtain that before the next meeting. Commissioner Casillas asked staff to prepare a paper on the philosophy of the density transfer. PC Minutes -8- February 26, 1992 MS (Carson/CasiHas) to continue PCM-91-04 to March 11, 1992. Commissioner Tuchscher commented that he was very uncomfortable with the buffer between the business center and the residential area, especially Neighborhoods 5 and 6. He felt there would be a problem getting anything built during the second phase of the business center after residential had been built. VOTE: 6-0 to continue PCM-91-04 to March 11, 1992 (Commissioner Tugenberg absent) DIRECTOR'S REPORT - None COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS Commissioners Decker, Tuchscher, Martin, and Casillas expressed interest in attending the League of California Cities Planners Institute to be held in Anaheim in April. Assistant Director Lee noted staff would review the budget and decide how many Commissioners would be able to attend. ADJOURNMENT AT 9:50 p.m. to the Regular Business Meeting of March 11, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. N~ncy Ril~y, S~cre/tary Planning Commission