The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Statement 1981/12/15 Item 16.' • ITEM TI SUBMITT COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item ~"~'~ Meeting Date l ~~~~ Public hearing - Consideration of rezoning 18.3 acres on the south side of -• Orange Avenue at Brandywine from R-1 and R-1-10-H-P to R-3-P-12 a•Ordinance,/9'.~f- Changing the zone of 18.3 acres on the south side of Orange Avenue at Brandywine from R-1 and R-1-10-H-P to R-3-P-1~ SECOND READING & ADOPTION BY: Director of Planning ~ (4 t s Vote: Yes No X A. fAC:GROUND 1. The applicant is seeking a change of zone for 18.3 acres located on the south side of the xtension of Orange Avenue in the vicinity of Brandywine Avenue extended to Orange Avenue. The request is to change the zoning from R-1 (single family residential, 7000 sq.ft. minimu. lot size) and R-1-10-H-P (single family residential, 10,000 sq.ft. minimum lot size, sub~ec to the Hillside and Precise Plan Modifying Districts) to R-3-P-12 (multiple family residential, 12 units per acre and subject to the Precise Plan Modifying District). 2. The applicant has also submitted a tentative subdivision map known as Star/Orange Condomi iums, Chula Vista Tract 82-3, and a precise plan for the development of a 176 unit condominium project on the property. The tentative map is a later agenda item. On Octobe 1, 1981 the Design Review Committee approved the precise plan, PCM-82-5 (site plan and ar hitecture) on the proposed project subject to approval of the change of zone and to cer ain conditions (see attached letter dated October 2, 1981). 3. The Design Review Committee on October 1, 1981 and the Planning Commission on be 14, 1981 adopted the Negative Declaration issued on IS-82-6 including the mitigating cur s which is forwarded herwith for Council adoption. B. PL~P![dING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATLON ~'n October 14, 1981 the Planning Commission, by a vote of 6-0, recommended that the City ~ uncil approve the change of zone for 18.3 acres on the south side of Orange Avenue at nra clywine Avenue from R-1, R-1-10-H-P to R-3-P-11 in accordance with Resolution PCZ-82-A. C. RgCOMMENDATION: ur with the Planning Commission recommendation. C. DISCUSSION 1 Adjacent zoning and land use. P;orth P.-1 Vacant and single family dwellings South R-1 Elementary school R-1-P Single family attached dwellings (Brandywine) p-C Single family detached dwellings (Robinhood Point) East A-1-8 Vacant !~!est R-1 Single family detached dwellings Existing site characteristics. a. The project site consists of approximately 18.3 acres of vacant property ~at don the south side of Orange Avenue which will be bisected by the extension of Brand ~.~ine Avenue. The boundaries include 0.44 acres of land which is presently a part of th. elementary school property to the south (see attached locator), The applicant Form A-1~3 (Rev. 11/79) continued Page 2, Item • Meeting Date intend to acquire this property and incorporate it into his ownership either through the adjustment plat or subdivision map procedure. b. The property is characterized by a knoll located at the southeast corner of the property. This knoll, a portion of which has been previously used as a borrow area, has ve y steep slopes of 34%. The Poggi Canyon drainage flows along the northerly boundary of the project area in a westerly direction, then flows southerly across the westerly portio of the site. The easterly portion of the site is traversed (north to south) by the ma 'n branch of the La Nacion earthquake fault. The average natural slope over the entire property is 16.4%. 3. Extension of Brandywine Avenue. a. Brandywine Avenue presently stops at the southerly boundary of the property approximately 570 feet west of the easterly property line. The street is to be extended and co nected to Orange Avenue at a point approximately 190 feet west of the easterly proper y line. The proposed alignment will skirt the west side of the knoll which will be ext nsively graded to accommodate the roadway. b. The extension of Brandywine Avenue will divide the property into two areas. The ro d will require approximately 1.7 acres leaving a total of 16.6 net acres. There will b 4.9 acres with an average natural slope of 34% on the east side of the road and 11.7 a res with an average natural slope of 8.3% on the west side. • 4. Existing zone density. Th~ present zoning would permit two units to be constructed on the east side of Brandy ine Avenue and 33 on the west side fora total of 35 units. 5.~ Proposed development. Th applicant proposes to develop a 176 unit condominium project on the subject proper y. There will be 168 units on the westerly lot and 8 units on the easterly lot for an ove all density of 10.6 dwelling units per acre. The density proposed on the westerly lot wi 1 be 14.3 units per acre, whereas the density on the easterly lot will be 1.6 dwelli q units per acre. The proposed development is dependent upon the transfer of a portio of the density allowed on the area east of Brandywine to the area on the west. 6.1 General Plan. a. The subject property is designated on the General Plan for residential use at a d nsity of 4-12 dwelling units per acre. The proposed zoning at 12 units per acre is con istent with the General Plan designation. b. Afire station is also designated in the general vicinity by the General Plan. The Fire Department has indicated that a station is not needed at this location so the developer need not reserve or dedicate any land for this purpose. c. Orange Avenue is a designated scenic route. Special emphasis regarding e d sign, landscaping, architecture and building setbacks must be placed on the elo went to insure that the goals and objectives of the Scenic Highway Element are met. ~~~ ~ continued • E. Page 3, Item Meeting Date YSIS 1. The subject property is fairly well isolated from adjoining uses by streets and topog aphy. The proposed zoning is in keeping with the development immediately to the south (Brandywine), which is attached single family housing at a density of about 9 units/ acre. The proposed rezoning conforms to the General Plan and the configuration of the grope ty is well suited to attached housing. In addition, the cost of the required publi improvements, such as streets, sewer and major drainage, would tend to make single famil development prohibitively expensive. In view of these factors, it is appropriate to zon the property to permit a higher density. 2. The proposed density of 12 units per acre would permit an overall yield of 209 units, while the 176 units proposed is closer to a density of 11 DU/acre. Therefore, the P1 nning Commission has recommended R-3-P-11 zoning and made provision for the dis- tribution of the units over the entire property by the inclusion of paragraph 2.d in its re olution. 3. distri Planni upon t approv w mi If the developer's efforts to acquire approximately 1/2 acre from the school is unsuccessful, that area would remain in the R-1 zone. Condition 2.e of the Commission's resolution makes the rezoning of the school property contingent approval of the subdivision map to include the excess school property or the of an adjustment plat map. ~ ~"'~"2` • ~~ ~ ~ r by the Gkty~C;o~ar~"il cifi Chu{a Vista, C~~:i4,forr~ia Dated 1 eZ ~ lS- ~ 1 RESOLUTION N0. PCZ-82-A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE REZONING OF 18.3 ACRES ON THE SOUTH • SIDE OF ORANGE AVENUE AT BRANDYWINE AVENUE FROM R-1 AND R-1-10-H-P TO R-3-P-11. WHEREAS, a duly verified application for the rezoning of property was filed ith the Planning Department by Star Corporation on August 20, 1981, application . PCZ-82-A, and WHEREAS, said application requested a change of zone for 18.3 acres on the outh side of Orange Avenue at Brandywine Avenue from R-1 and R-1-10-H-P to -3-P-12, and WHEREAS, An Initial Study, IS-82-6, was conducted by the Environmental Review ommittee on September 17, 1981, which concluded that there would be no significant dverse environmental impact from the proposed rezoning of the property and issued draft Negative Declaration, and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission set the time and place fora hearing • n said zone change, and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose was iven by the publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at east 10 days prior to the date of said hearing, and WHEREAS, a hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely :00 p.m., October 14, 1981, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was hereafter closed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Commission finds that in accordance with the findings stated in he Pegative Declaration issued on IS-82-6 this rezoning will not have a signif- cant adverse environmental impact and adopts the Negative Declaration with the itigation measures listed therein. 2. From facts presented to the Commission, the Commission finds that ublic necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice support • he change of zone for 18.3 acres on the south side of Orange Avenue at Brandy-- ine Avenue from R-1 and R-1-10-H-P to R-3-P-11, with the following precise lan guidelines: a. A 20 foot building line setback shall be maintained from all street • ~~ rights-of-way. b. Parking areas and interior driveways shall not be located closer than 10 feet from the public sidewalk. • c. Fencing and walls over 4 feet in height shall not be located closer than 10 feet to the bact< of the sidewalk. \~~ 0 d: The density of 11 units per acre may be calculated over the entire net acreage of the subject property within the zone boundaries estab- • lished by this ordinance, however, not more than 8 dwelling units may be constructed on the property located on the east side of the extension of Brandywine Avenue. e. The rezoning of the 0.44 acres of R-1 zoned property shall be contingent upon the approval of an adjustment plat or subdivision map including the property into the boundaries of the property along the south side of Orange Avenue. If the 0.44 acre is not included in the subdivision the zoning for that area shall remain R-1. 3. Findings in support 4f applying the "P" Mlodifying District are as ollows: a. The subject property or the neighborhood or area in which the property s located in unique by virtue of topography, geological characteristics, access, • onfiguration, traffic circulation, or social or historic situations requiring pecial handling of a development on a precise plan basis: The subject property is a wedge shaped parcel with a diversity of topography, having a steep knoll on one end .and a drainage channel traversing the other end. In addition, the proposed development will require the widening of a major road and the extension of a residential collector street through the property. b. The basil or underlying zone regulations do not allow the property wner and/or the city appropriate control of flexibility needed to achieve an fficient and proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent zones: The attachment of the "P" District will enable the applicant to achieve an overall density of 11 units per acre and insure that not more than 8 units may be constructed on the easterly lot. 4. The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that said ,'' hange of zone be approved. 5. That this resolution be transmitted to the City Council and a copy ransmitted to the owner of the property. • PAS~ED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIP, thi 14th day of October, 1981 by the following vote, to-wit: AYE Commissioners R. Johnson, Stevenson, G. Johnson, Pressutti, Green and Williams NAY None ABS NT: Commissioner O'Neill ~TT ST: -~~ C ~ v .~ ~~ retary ~. e Chairman _ ,~. K t~"- a ~~ ~ ~~ i l l l l ~~i. ' ~1 ~ 4. / a ! / i ~ / ~ I ~9 //~ i ~i i ~f '~l ! ~ ~~I ~ I I i ___ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \\ / ~ \I ~e . _ ~. U ~~. . \. OUAI~ J IN ~ ~~~ i ~ I I~ ' ~~~- > s R+EN ~ r_T I 1 I i ' °IVERA N T I I ~ ~ .-~~ RIV ~+:. C7 ! ~ --~ w III ~~~, ~q a ~ D~ ~- _~~LL~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ m ~~ ,_,__ avEN~E ~~ ORANGL~ _ ! J~'1iQ~ ~~ R-1 and R /-lO-H-P u.~® _ ~ ~ TQ ~ ~ R-3-P-12 p~ ~ ~~~'SCE ~ ~,~ ~~ ~~ '' ~ ~ ' h ~~ , . / ~ ,y ~, ~~ ~ s~ti _ ~ ~ ~ ~ o y. J ~ f 0e~ ~~ ,~~ . P a /~~~~ -~ ~ ~ S~'AR~QRAN Gc LOCATOR d 7 PCZ- 82-A ~ctnd PCS - 82-3 (~ ~~ury~ ~o r • • \O- October 2, 1931 Star Corporation 8290 'Dickers Streit, Suite C San Diego, CA 92111 Attention: Mr. Stuart Pi. t±urwitz: Dear Pir. Hurwri tz The architectural ar;d situ clans for your proposed Star/Orange Condominiums project was r_onsiderPd by the Design Review Committee at a ~uh1 is ~?earl np ~?n October 1 , 1 ~?3l . Follo~~aina the hearirc the Cor.•mittee adopted the Gcnditioned Negative Declaration issu~ad cn IS-o?-C covering this project i ncl udi nn the fell oa~i n~ r,i ti nati r;~ r~teasures ; 1. Recor.~mendations ccntair.eci in the neology/soils report shall be inc:~rporated into t"1e nro~eo`: incit~cf'nr a ronditicn prohibitirg ry structures from being constructed within the c5' wide caul t zcr,e. 2. ±~raint:c,e calc~°iations and r~lans shall he submitted to the City Engineer prier to any grading on the site. Aro~aer engineering techni!;ues shall mitigate any adverse irepacts. 3. raativa mart material shall be included in the erosion control plans for neti~riy graded slopes. In addition, all graded slopes shall be rounded ~,rd smoothed to the existing natural slopes, sub,iect to approval of the City's LandscaQe Architect and the City cngin~er. 4. ;lritten assurance shall be cbtained from the appropriate school districts that adequate classroom space will be available for students c;snerated by this nro,ject. 5. Fark land acquisition and development in-lieu fees shall be paid by the developer prior to development of the project. 6, A minimum ~' high masonry ~~~all shall be constructed along Orange Avenue (aporoxiriately 2,000' lone) in accordance with recommenda- tions in the acoustical report submitted by the applicant (New Horizons, 1981). • • • a Star Corporation 6etober 2, 1881 Page 3 The Committee also ap; roves, tft~ arc~itectu;~e an:~ t?te site ?lam, includinc the revision subr~itteci on Gctol~er 1 and marked "1-C", subject to the following conditio-;s~ 1. A proposal si~a11 be submitted for Committee review which stows the perir~eter ~,vall staggered to permit a variation in the land- scaping exposure along Grange ,venue. T',n exterior design of this masonry °,~all s'~a11 "e submittEd for review. T'te wall shall Ee a rtinimum of ~' in height. This proposal steali include revisions to private fencing and the recreation area fencing. 2. A rtin;a~ur~ ,.iir~ension of 1~?' o` iQvel aria for landscaaina stall be Etrovi did i ~}~~t~en ±i~e ~„-~cr ~;ine :~f' th ~ si de~~:a1 < and the perimeter ;;al i aorq C~r~;ttcz;~ ;~.vr~nue ~+nr t;te wai3 er fencA along ~rand~~vrine ~,ver;ue . 3. Tf~e p~li~.-;t':'s :~rogosaT r"or t~~A "Cao~`~ Cod' type private fence design ("crzcnial ~4.±ar .~reod frith 3 ca;?} is f(~e pr°rerred privatQ fLncP ~'~ i ,;; . ~. The lartdscane area along .'rand~win:~ Avt.rrue ac~jGcent to structures 1 4nt' `~' s';a11 '~e a trir,ti'Ul or 1; feet in width kyith ::'~ foot hiC}h roundir,a, or :, ~' root i;igr ;casonr;r kra11 continued frog th? wall on ~ranrc :1venu~. .~i. ~n a1~i3rr;ate ~1 t`,;3 ^latt S~1d1T D2 re;,urn3d ,;,0 the ~e5ign eYiekV Coru~i±tep i f :';? ~}ne acre ;arc ~l a t ±;t,~ _~eu hk~ast corner of the project is r;o~ ~~cuuir;aci ~y the aoaiicant. 6. ~',ddi ti oral ' a~~~sca ai ng si.al l be provi d`d in single-1 oaded open aarkin.; areas lacated ~;ritain ~arkinn courts, subject to the approval of the t;it~i's Lan~:lscape ~rt:hi ~'ect. 7. The exisin~~ ntrro.-r ar•oa on lot '~ snai i se supple~~tented with trees, shruns and ground cnvQr kr`~f~re approeriato. This shall be coordinated with tltp Cit~~'s Landscape Architect. B. 7evelopr~ent maiclAli~^es s'~all ba s+.~!xnitbod prior to final subdivision map apnrovr.l srftich include t't~ maximum size and materials and colors of future sunshade areas. Suggested guidelines are as follows a~ A ~maxirau~:~ size of 300 sq. ft. for sunshades; b} ?_x2 lumber at 3" on center; c; stain to Hatch the building trim color. 9. Roof material ;hall he a pattern of asphalt textured shingles. 10. All buildincas shall ;^aintain a r+~inimurr setback of ?.0 feet from Orange avenue. -, . Star Corporation October Z, 1981 • Page 3 Apprnval of tE~.~ nrecis~_ pi~,n teas !:asr:c` Gn tine follnt~7inR findings regarc! i nn the 7ro,j ect : Y a . ^i:at auc': pf.~•-~a r~~:''? pct-, 7o;.~er tlir aircum~7tancea of tht~ particular Case,vc Ge trir^r; n to Z tC7 tYlt? iu,a Lt~ ~, 9Q;fEt'f Or c"C~71r?2°QZ 1J6 Z fa2'Q o ~ ~?erso728 resirirr, or r~ori:i72r i.2 t3.c v~.eir:ir.;;, o.^ in,ju~~ous to propert7,~ or i77.l,rove- 7rc7~ct~7 ire tre: v~cini~.+. Tr1° (?ropQS~,I t:Onc'^,;:'i!^:ii;f? nroiect 4 i' i ^r^`.'i;it S±reet ir~provements on Frand~r~~;in~= a~~~! C:rGne Avenue a;'~ic'-~ ui?1 be cf t:enifit to area residents, and t•:il i elirinate sc~c}~ existi:~~~ nuisa~tices to ad,jacer,t property owners as talc nCi"rSE. +rc),^: Gr~C'OCtf~ Vn'3'i~l3S. "r=1n4n°_ 1T'~rt3Ve"1L'nt5 1h'f11 aISO ~e or benefit *o adjacEn~ prtl~~rr.:;' O~~n~:r':. . ~~. 1/'.C~± 31,LC1'. j~'Zf17: ~Q~'2.`,''2E'f~ t~:~: p?rL.~LG'2~-~~GF: O ~ tlt'• C-~pZ;:Cat20n Of t 8 a 1'o:ai~,..,~~• Win;^;r'v°c;; rt- ..ei~;"o-_~~ i7n ~'c~~~ic:_ .: .St.~»:. The ^rc~.ject is de_;irner` to orPSer~~c e>:istinc s'o~+e areas to the extent feasi`-~1 ~ are' to ^rc+.Pik~t lar.~'sf~:~:ir?~ -1~,,~~ "Y'ane~ F~venue; a 'scenic highway" aS ~f?Sinn3t°~.~ F,'! trl~=' ^'.'?'1 rc;' "d"i. . C. .~if:al G.72`.i F':,CF-i'~~i.07?.? Crr!:,itF-'. •"• 7~?~tfi.,,^-1. i;",r'v-].C':~ '2'.77T:' t1«G~ 7AYlG'E'2'Zt~'1.YLCj' ,L'onil'l~' • raquire7nents erall uc u~arrant~~' o;°~~- u7re7: r~ceesar~,1 to meet the purpose a72d apPlicatio:~ c~ tr2e ? t'recia~~ f'lt:!72 t;cc"?`fvi7:;~ ~;~.~~r~act. Thy, prc-7ect i ^v;,l ~~=.:s a reG,action i n t',e setbac!; renui regent along (`range ~,venuc: t:~hici~ rill pct k~e sicnifi:.ar,t d,~c to tii~, r~asonry wall required b;;~ an acoustical anal~.'si; an,~ the landscr~+;e tuf`er Alarmed for this area. The average seti~:.cl; ~,,i it ~e -'! ~'ec±~ cr 5} ff~et Przater thar', required for a major roe ~. d. Fiat ap>^roval o;' t?:is plan fr:ZZ ccm~orr to tine general plan and the aciopter."± poZici•es c.`' ti2G> C~t~.~. The proposed dc~velooment and project density is within the density limits of the General Plan. In addition the preservation of open space and introduction of an additional dwelling type in this section of the corrnrtunity is in beeping with the goals and objectives of the General Pian. If you have any questions concerning the conditions or required mitigating measures, olease contact the Planning Department at 575-51D1. Very truly ,yours, Kenneth ~=. Leo Principal Planner hm a~ cc: Dale Ftaegie Rrchitects, 2Z1C~ Pyvenida de la Playa, La Jolla, CA 82037 ~~ CEP Associated, 5466 Complex Street, Suite 2D8, San Diego, CR 9?lz3