Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1982/02/09 Item 5a, b, cCOUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM Item ~~, b , Meeting Date 2(~J82 Public hearing - Consideration of East College Sectional Planning Area plan for .E: 34.3 acres at the northeast corner of Telegraph Canyon Road and Otay Lakes Road; tentative subdivision map for Telegraph Point, Chula Vista Tract 82-2; CEQA findings on EIR-80-6A; overriding considerations for approval of project. a. Resolution ~c~~ Approving East College Sectional Planning Area plan b. Resolution~~,~7- Approving tentative subdivisio,~ map for Telegraph_Point, Chula Vista Tract 82-2 c. Resolution ~~,/6,~'- Adopting CEQA findings on EIR-80-6A and Statement of Over- riding Considerations for Telegraph Point SUBMITTED BY: A. BACIQGROUND Director of Planning (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X ) 1. The applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map known as Telegraph Point, Chula V sta Tract 82-2, in order to subdivide 34.3 acres located at the northeast corner of Telegra h Canyon Road and Otay Lakes Road into 14 lots (11 residential lots and 3 open space lots) i the P-C zone for the development of 256 condominium units. 2. The proposed development encompasses the entire East College Sectional Planning Area of the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan; therefore, the tentative map also qualifies as the req fired Sectional Planning Area plan. 3. In April, 1980, by a vote of 5-2 the Planning Commission approved a very contro- versial plan (petitions bearing over 600 signatures opposed the plan), filed by another develop r to construct 256 units at this same location. This plan was later withdrawn prior t City Council consideration and the site was subsequently purchased by Pacific Scenes. The new plan was prepared to address specific areas of concern relating to views and building proximity with the adjacent single family residential area, covered parking, and architectural design. 4. The supplemental Environmental Impact Report, EIR-80-6A, on this project has been previously forwarded to the City Council. B. RECO~`'IMENDATION: 1. Certify that EIR-80-6 A has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the environ- mental view procedures of the City of Chula Vista and that Council has considered the information contained therein in its review of this project. 2. pprove the Planning Commission and Design Review Committee's recommendation for approval of the East College Sectional Planning Area-plan, PCM-82-8. However, the Design Review C mmittee deleted a recommended condition of approval requiring a contrasting paving material for the private drive areas. I recommend inclusion of such a condition to help make the distinction between public and private areas and to provide some additional texture to the s reetscape. Accordingly, I recommend that the following condition be added as a conditio of approval: ontrasting paving material shall be installed to delineate public drives from rivate drives; the design and pattern shall be subject to approval of the Zoning dministrator. 3. pprove the Planning Commission's map for elegraph Point, Chula Vista Tract ~ /~~~~ Form A-1 3 (Rev. 11/79) recommendation for approval of the tentative 82-2, in accordance with resolution PCS-82-2. continued Page 2, Item 6a, b, c Meeting Date 2/2/82 4 Adopt the CEQA findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations contained in Plann ng Commission Resolution EIR-80-6A (CEQA Findings) attached. C. PL/~NNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: On January 13, 1982 the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that Council: 1) app ove the East College Sectional Planning Area plan in accordance with Resolution PCM-82 8; 2) approve the tentative subdivision map for Telegraph Point, Chula Vista Tract 2-2 in accordance with Resolution PCS-82-2; and, 3) adopt the CEQA findings and Statem nt of Overriding Considerations in accordance with Resolution EIR-80-6A (CEQA Findin s). D. DISCUSSION 1. Existing site characteristics. The subject property is a vacant 34.3 acre parcel with an average natural slope of approxi ately 20% and an elevation difference from the lowest point to the highest elevation of 143 eet (417' to 560'). Other topographic features of the property are two minor draws w ich drain to the south and an abandoned section of Otay Lakes Road which cuts diagona ly across the southwest corner of the site. The property is bounded by Otay Lakes Road on the west and south and by single family dwellings on the north and east (R-1 zone). A porti n of a neighborhood commercial zone abuts the northwest corner of the property. 2. E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. The E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan designates 25.6 acres of property as medium density residential, 6 to 10 dwelling units per acre, and the remaining area as open space. Based on this density range, 153 to 256 dwelling units may be constructed on the site. he applicant is proposing to construct 256 condominium units. 3. Proposed development. The proposed project will consist of 256 condominium units located within 32 two-story, eight-u it structures, served by a public street system with two points of access from the adjoini g streets (Otay Lakes Road). More specific information is as follows: a. Structures. Each of the 32 buildings will be a two-story (28 feet high) 8 unit structure with 4 two-c r garages and 4 one-car garages. There will be 3 ground floor units and 5 second floor u its, two of which are located over the garages. The upper units will have their own ext rior stairway. The buildings are set at an angle to the street rather than the traditi nal parallel setback, allowing the setbacks to vary with an average of 25 feet. Se'.;back along Otay Lakes Road range from 25 feet to 260 feet. b. Architecture. The structures will he of contemporary design with stucco exteriors, wood trim and asp alt shingle roofs. There will be two basic color schemes; 9: grayish stucco with light t dark gray wood trim and reddish brown asphalt roof shingles; and 2) light beige with light to dark brown wood trim and the same reddish brown asphalt shingles. The roof design is a pitched gable. ~~`~h~ continued Page 3, Item 6a, b, c Meeting Date 2/2/82 of 9.3 units, ba 1 con,} and the c. Lots and units. The 14 lots will be developed with a total of 256 units for an average density snits per acre. Each eightplex will contain 2 one bedroom units, 5 two bedroom tnd one 3 bedroom unit. Units range from 849 sq. ft. to 1295 sq. ft. Patio, and required storage areas exceed the minimum requirements of the Design Manual zoning ordinance. d. Streets. The project will be served by a public street system. There will be six new streets, plus additional dedication for the widening of both the east-west and north- south s gments of Otay Lakes Road (6.8 acres to be dedicated). __ The streets will have a 5.5 foot sidewalk on one side only. The streets are "single loaded" (units on one side only) and the public sidewalk is on the side opposite the uni s. It should be noted that an interconnecting walk system will meander along the sin le loaded unit side as well. The 56 foot segment of "B" Street is from Otay Lakes Road to the intersection with "D" Street. e. Grading. The proposed grading plan will affect approximately 90% of the site and cause 295,000 cubic yards of cut and fill. The majority of the slopes will be at a ratio of 2 to 1 ith some flatter slopes proposed along portions of the east-west segment of Otay Lakes R ad. The grading concept will create three horizontal levels for the buildings. The hig est level will range between 10 and 40 feet below the residential area to the north. A number of retaining walls are proposed within the interior of the project. f. Parking. The garages will provide 12 covered spaces in each eight-unit structure, a ratio of 1.5 paces per unit. In addition, there will be approximately 210 curb which t gether with the 384 garage spaces brings the total Parking spaces, of 2.3 spaces per unit). The recreation area will have an additional 194papking spacesio he majority of the structures (28) are so located that some of the back-up area from the garage encroaches into the street right-of-way. Based on a 19 foot long car (standar) with the drive located 12 feet from the rear of the car, there will be instances when the rear of the car will be at the curb line when the driver will first be able to see any ncoming traffic. As a safety measure, the garage door should be a minimum of 17 feet rom the curb line (15 feet from the property line). Miscellaneous. he plans reflect the general location of several children's play areas which will need ref nement in conjunction with the final approval of the overall landscaping plan. ~-~~~~~ continued Page 4, Item ~,~ , b.~ E. E~JVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS 1~ Background Meeting Date 2/2/82 I is the policy of the State of California that every public agency, including the City f Chula Vista, should not approve a project if it would result in a significant envir nmental impact and it is feasible to substantially lessen that effect. Only when there are specific economic, social, or technical reasons which make it infeasible to mitig to an impact, can a project with significant impact be approved. envi 2. ~refore, when an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more significant mental impact(s), one of the following findings must be made: a. Changes or alternatives have been required of, or incorporated into the project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR, or - b. Such changes or alternatives are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency, or c. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible full mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. Mitigable Impacts. Si nificant impact in the following areas has been avoided with the project design or con itions of approval: a. Geology (EIR-80-6, Sec. 3.1) b. Soils (EIR-80-6, Sec. 3.2) c. Biology (EIR-80-6, Sec. 3.7) d. Schools (EIR-80-6, Sec. 3.13) e. Transportation (EIR-80-6, Sec. 3.17) 3. ThE social insigni 4. The project Significant impacts following impacts are considered significant. There are specific economic, ind technical considerations which make infeasible full mitigation to a level of =icance [see Planning Commission Resolution EIR-80-6A (CEQA Findings)]: a. Aesthetics (EIR-80-6A, Sec. 2.0) b. Land Form Alteration (EIR-80-6A, Sec. 3.0). Overriding Considerations following overriding considerations support the recommendation to approve the based on the final EIR and other information in the record: Any time a vacant 34 acre property is developed with several hundred housing units, the result will be a significant impact on the natural land form and the aesthetics related to that form. This will be partially mitigated by the construction of an attractive residential complex which will help to ful- a. continued r 1 Page 5, Item ~a h Y..c._ Meeting Date 2/2/82 KGL:DDI fill the social need for housing which should be relatively moderate in cost as compared with detached single family homes. b. The project has been lowered in elevation from a previous proposal and structures have been sited so as to retain a good portion of the views presently afforded existing residents nonth of the site. c. A substantial portion of the grading to be accomplished is necessary in order to widen Otay Lakes Road. The on and off site widening of Otay Lakes Road will benefit traffic circulation and improve safety along this heavily traveled street. d. Complete street improvements, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, and drainage facilities, will provide for efficient water runoff and safety for pedestrians, autos and bicyclists. e. The proposed development complies with density guidelines of the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. t;hm f t Dated °~' ~ ~ "" 8 °~-- ~' ~~~~