HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1974/10/16 HINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF CtlULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Held Wednesday October 16, 1974
An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, was held on the above date beginning at 7:30 p.m. in the Council
Chamber, Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue, with the following
Councilmen present: Councilmen Scott, Hobel, Hamilton, Hyde
Councilmen absent: (Councilman Egdahl arrived at the meeting at 8:4S p.m.)
Staff present: CityManagerThomson, City Attorney Lindberg, Director of
Public Works Cole, Director of Planning Peterson, Assistant
Director of Public Works Robens, Assistant Director of
Planning Williams, Senior Planner Pass, Assistant City
Manager Bourcier, Director of Parks and Recreation Hall,
Administrative Analyst Smith
PUBLIC HEARING - In a written report to the Council, Director
CONSIDERATION OF CHANGE of Planning Peterson explained that this
OF ZONE FOR APPROXIMATELY was a Council initiated rezoning to resolve
10 ACRES FROM C-T-P TO land issues which led to a moratorium on the
C-O-P AND C-C-P property which expires on October 31, 1974.
~e Council initiated this action to enable
the owner to proceed with the development of
the property in conformance with City
policies and standards.
The recommendation of the Planning Commission,
concurred by the Director of Planning, was
that 10 acres be rezoned from C-T-D to C-0-P
and C-C-P subject to precise plan guide-
lines as contained in the Planning Commission
Resolution PCZ-74-H.
Public hearing opened This being the time and place as advertised,
the public hearing was opened.
Findings read into record At the request of the Council, Mr. Peterson
read the following findin~ into the record:
1. The heavy commercial uses permitted in
the C-T zone are inappropriate in this loca-
tion. Commercial uses appropriate in this
location should be restricted to those
necessary to serve the surrounding develop-
ing neighborhoods. The C-C and C-O districts
allow the lighter retail and office uses
required to serve the neighborhood as it
develops.
2. The C-0 district permits multiple family
uses as a conditional use and the C-C dis-
trict allows a mixture of commercial and
multi-family uses. The site lends itself
to development for medium to higher density
uses by virtue of its location between a
junior high school and planned neighbor-
hood commercial area to the south,
City Council Meeting 2 October 16, 1974
3. Establishment of the C-C and C-O
districts on the property recognizes
the long standing existence of co~ercial
zoning on the proporty.
4. The planned collector street which
will bisect the property, together with
its relatively small size and its location
between a junior high school and planned
neighborhood shopping center, render the
property difficult to develop with detached
single family homes.
S. Use of "P" Precise Plan Modifying
District establishes reasonable site plan
and design review procedures which will
assure proper coordination with the planned
development to the south.
6. The subject property is designated on
the General Plan as "Retail Commercial."
The proposed new zoning categories, C-O
and C-C, conform to this designation.
Gene York Mr. York stated he is representing the
72 Sandalwood Drive applicant and that they concur with the
Chula Vista recommendations of the Planning Commission
and staff.
Public hearing closed There being no further comments, either
for or against, the hearing was declared
closed.
ORDINANCE NO. 1574 - It was moved by Councilman Hyde that this
AMENDING ZONING MAP ordinance be placed on first reading and
ESTABLISHED BY SECTION that reading of the text be waived by
33.401 OF THE CITY CODE unanimous consent.
REZONING THAT CERTAIN
PROPERTY LOCATED ON The motion carried by the following vote,
APPROXIMATELY 10 ACRES to-wit:
ON ~tE WEST SIDE OF
OTAY LAKES ROAD, 660' AYES: Councilmen Hyde, Scott, Hobel,
NORTH OF "H" STREET Hamilton
FROM C-T-D TO C-O-P Noes: None
AND C-C-P - Absent: Councilman Egdahl
FIRST READING
PUBLIC HEARING - On September 11, 1974, the Planning Commis-
CONSIDERATION OF VACATION sion considered thc proposed vacation and
OF A PORTION OF TItlRD determined that this portion of Third
AVENUE FROM "C" STREET TO Avenue is no longer necessary for public
SEA VALE STREET use and recommended that it be vacated.
All utility companies were notified and
have no objections to vacating this portion
of Third Avenue.
Public hearing opened This being the time and place as advertised,
Mayor Hamilton opened the public bearing.
Clarence Knight Mr. Knight questioned the numbers on the
117 Jefferson Avenue plat stating they did not correspond to the
Chula Vista lot numbers in the legal description.
City Council ~Ieeting 3 October 16, 1974
Director of Public Works Cole explained
that the numbers on the plat were numbers
assigned by his staff to denote certain
property owners and had nothing with the
legal description. He added that the prop-
erty owners involved were individually
notified by letter of this pending action.
City Attorney Lindberg explained the legal
implications of this proposal.
Public hearing closed ~ere being no further comments, either
for or against, the hearing was declared
closed.
RESOLUTION NO. 7486 - Offered by Councilman Hyde, the reading of
ORDERING THE VACATION the text waived by unanimous consent, passed
OF A PORTION OF THE and adopted by the followlng vote, to-wit:
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-NAY
FOR THIRD AVENUE AYES: Councilmen Hyde, Scott, Hobel,
Hamilton
Noes; None
Absent: Councilman Egdahl
CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved by Councilman Hobel, seconded
by Councilman Scott and unanimously carried
that the Consent Calendar be approved and
adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 7487 - The improvements in this subdivision have
APPROVING AND ACCEPTING been completed by the subdivider, Rancho
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN Rios Developers, in accordance with the
THAT CERTAIN SUBDIVISION original agreement. A final inspection
KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS made on September 20, 1974 showed all
RANCHO RIOS UNIT NO. 8 public improvement5 to have been completed
to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Director and in accordance with the require-
ments of the City.
RESOLUTION NO. 7488 - Perry Electric requested a 60-day extension
GP4kNTING EXTENSION OF of time due to the fact that the supplier for
TIME FOR BROADNAY STREET the street light standards cannot make
LIGHTING AND TRAFFIC delivery until November 25, 1974. If
SIGNAL MODIFICATION approved, tills will extend tile contract
BETWEEN "F" AND "H" completion date to December 6, 1974.
STREETS
RESOLUTION NO. 7489 - ~ese subdivisions consist of 146 lots and
APPROVING AND ACCEPTING are located north and south of East Orange
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN Avenue at Max Avenue. A final inspection
LARKHAVEN CHULA VISTA was made on October ?, 1974 and all of the
SUBDIVISION UNITS 3 public improvements in the subdivisions
AND 4 have been completed to the satisfaction of
the Public Works Director and in accordance
with the requirements of tile City.
City Council Meeting 4 October 16, 1974
RESOLUTION NO. 7490 - The contract work has been completed by the
ACCEPTING PUBLIC IMPROVE- contractor, R. W~ Kurtz. A final inspec-
MENTS FOR THE REMODELING tion was made on October 4, 1974 and all
OF THE CtlLORINE ROOM AT of the public improvements in the project
MEMORIAL PARK POOL have been completed to the satisfaction
of the Public Works Director and in
accordance with the requirements of the
City.
RESOLUTION NO. 7491 - The contract work for the construction
ACCEPTING PUBLIC IMPROVE- of an 8" sanitary sewer in Bay Boulevard
MENTS FOR THE CONSTRUC- north and south of "E" Street has been
TION OF BAY BOULEVARD been completed by the contractor, Manuel
SEWER NORTH AND SOUTH Arrieta & Son. A final inspection was
OF "E" STREET made on October 7, 1974 and all of the
public improvements in the project have
been completed to the satisfaction of
the Public Works Director and in accordance
with the requirements of the City.
UNANIMOUS CONSENT ITEM:
RESOLUTION NO. 7492 - In conjunction with the work to be
WAIVING REQUIREMENTS OF performed by the contractor, H. E. Hazard
SECTION 1109 OF THE CITY Contracting Company, it is the intent of
CHARTER AND AUTHORIZING the City to mix PLYOPAVE or cause it to
THE ~UR~tASING AGENT TO be mixed with said asphalt concrete;
CONTRACT WITH TEXTILE such work to be accomplished by City
RUBBER AND CHEMICAL COMPANY forces for the overlay on Telegraph
FOR 4,400 GALLONS OF GOOD- Canyon Road and Otay Lakes Road.
YEAR PLYOPAVE L-170 LAYTEX
TO BE USED IN TIE ASPHALT
CONCRETE OVERLAY ON TELE-
GRAPH CANYON ROAD AND 0TAY
LAKES ROAD
(End of Consent Calendar)
RESOLUTION NO. 7493 - Director of Parks and Recreation Hall
APPROPRIATING EXISTING reported that a maintenance contract has
AND ANTICIPATED FUNDS been prepared for Open Space District
FOR THE CONTRACTUAL No. 1. He asked the Council to appropriate
MAINTENANCE AND CO~ODITY $1,370 for utility costs, $26,200 for
PURCHASES NECESSARY FOR contractual maintenance service and $3,000
THE MAINTENANCE OF OPEN for replacement of plants, trees and shrubs.
SPACE DISTRICT NO. 1
City Manager Thomson explained that this
district (#1) will secure adequate revenues
to sustain its operation during its fiscal
period.
Resolution offered Offered by Councilman Scott, the reading
of the text was waived by unanimous consent,
passed and adopted by the following vote,
to-wit
AYES: Councilmen Scott, Hobel, Hamilton,
Hyde
Noes: None
Absent Councilman Egdahl
City Council Meeting 5 October 16, 1974
REPORT ON PROPOSED STATE In a written reports Assistant to the
ADMINISTRATION OF HUD City Manager Wittenberg explained that
"701" PLANNING FUNDS the Governor's Office of Planning and
Research has requested that Chula Vista
and other cities over 50,000 population
volunteer to fall under the jurisdiction
of the State when applying for Federal
Comprehensive Planning and Management
Grant Assistance (IIUD "701" Funds).
It was Mr. Wittenberg's recommendation
that Chula Vista not volunteer to accept
State administration of these funds during
fiscal year 1975-76. He added that a
decision regarding any future City/State
or City/Federal relationship should hinge
on improvements in the State approach and/or
new Federal regulations.
Report accepted It was moved by Councilman Hobel, seconded
by Councilman Hyde and unanimously carried
that the report be accepted.
REPORT ON PROPOSAL OF City Manager Thomson noted that on Sept.
THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 24, 1974 the City Council agreed to
FOUNDATION FOR PROJECT ON participate in a project on open space
OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION acquisition, management and maintenance
~4ANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE research to be a cooperative effort with
at least nine other California cities
and the Environmental Analysis Foundation.
Mr. Robert Small, representing the Founda-
tion, informed the City'Manager that the
project has been dropped due to few cities
deciding to participate in the program.
Report accepted It was moved by Councilman Nobel, seconded
by Councilman Scott and unanimously carried
that the report be accepted.
REPORT ON QUESTIONNAIRE In a written report to the Council, City
FROM COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO Manager Thomson noted that the Council
REGARDING ITS 1975-76 referred this matter to the Manager for
BUDGET his recommendation as to an appropriate
response.
He stated that the intent of the County
Board of Supervisors to attempt to increase
participation in its i97S-76 budget process
by citizen and local public and private
organizations is a worthy goal; however,
the questionnaire, as submitted, is inade-
quate. Mr. Thomson added that without a
thorough understanding of the specific
goals and objectives, types and levels of
services p~rformcd, sta££ingcomposition,
opefatinz pTocedurc$, and thc like, ~'rating
by the Council would be superficial and possibly
lead to more harm than good.
It was the City Manager's recommendation
that the questionnaire be returned to the
County devoid of responses with a request
for County development of some other ~orb
realistic approach.
City Council Meeting 6 October 16, 1974
Council discussion Discussion followed in which the City
Manager explained that he did contact the
County twice about getting further informa-
tion on this questionnaire.
Report accepted It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded
by Councilman Hobel and unanimously carried
that the report be accepted.
Mayor Hamilton felt the City should say
it wants to see the ration of City funds
versus the outgo of funds in the incorporated
areas. The Board of Supervisors should
relate how much the City of Chula Vista
is paying and the services the County is
providing.
REPORT ON STATE City Manager Thomson explained that Com-
RESOURCES MEETING munity Development Coordinator Henthorn
IN SACRAMENTO attended the meeting held on October 2,
1974 and has submitted a written report
on the meeting.
Report to be sent It was moved by Councilman Hobel, seconded
to Council by Councilman Hyde and unanimously carried
that the report be put into the Council's
mailing packet for the meeting of October
29, 1974.
REPORT OF INCREASED Director of Planning Peterson reported
TRAFFIC ON SECOND that his department contacted the California
AVENUE: REPLY OF THE Department of Transportation regarding the
DISTRICT DIRECTOR OF traffic problem created by the State's
TRANSPORTATION TO THE closure of the direct road linkage between
PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S the South Bay Freeway (S-54) and 30th Street
LETTER OF AUGUST 14, 1974 in National City,
The District Director of Transportation
expressed the belief that Second Avenue
is being utilized by motorists who are
familiar with the street system of Chu]a
Vista and accept it as "shortest, least
congested route to downtown Chula Vista."
He added that the construction of $-54
westerly to I-$ will eliminate the traffic
problem on Second Avenue since the State
proposes no interchange at Edgemere Avenue.
Traffic Department Mayor H~railton questioned why this traffic
function report was going through the Planning
Department and not the Traffic Director.
~lr. Peterson said that this matter was
raised at the Planning Commission level;
however, he agreed that it should be
handled by the Director of Public Works.
Report accepted It was moved by Councilman Hobel, seconded
by Councilman Scott and unanimously carried
that the report be accepted and that the
Planning Department be directed to work with
the California Department of Transportation
in an effort to provide a solution to the
traffic problem on Second Avenue.
City Council Meeting 7 October 16, 1974
STATUS REPORT ON Director of Parks and Recreation Hall
TENNIS PROFESSIONAL, reported that Mr. John Movido, Tennis
SOUTHWESTERN COLLEGE Professional at the College tennis
facility has asked to be relieved of
his contract. A check with the Finance
Department showed that Mr. Movido has
not realized the financial gain he
anticipated in this program.
Mr. Hall added that Mr. Jack Pepiot,
1343 Costa Avenue, Chula Vista, has
indicated his desire to accept this
position.
It was Mr. Hall's recommendation that
Mr. Movido's resignation be accepted as
of November 15, 1974 and accept Mr.
Pepiot's offer to provide the services
through a negotiated interim contract not
to exceed six months.
During this six-month period, the staff
would restudy the existing contract and
based on staff recommendations and Council
concurrence, on or before July 1, 1975 the
City could solicit interested pro-
concessionaires for this position.
Report accepted It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded
by Councilman Hyde and unanimously carried
that the recommendations be accepted as
stated by the Director of Parks and Recreation.
STATUS REPORT ON Director of Parks and Recreation }{all
LIGHTING AND RESURFACING reported that Mr. Tucker, Business Manager
TENNIS COURTS JOINT for the Sweetwater Union High School District,
SCHOOL-CITY PROJECT informed him that the general contractor,
GAF Electric, is on schedule for the
resurfaclng and lighting of the twelve
tennis courts and will complete the project
on December 12, 1974.
Report accepted It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded
by Councilman Hobel and unanimously carried
that the report be accepted.
REPORT ON "J" STREET Director of Public Works Cole stated that
NO PARKING SIGNS the "No Parking" signs recently installed
on "J" Street between 1-5 and Broadway will
be removed.
Because of the aesthetic quality of entrances
to the City, as desired by the City Council,
it is deemed more appropriate to paint the
curbs red in this area.
Ne further explained that the supplier is out
of red paint at this time, and the curbs
need to be painted once a year. If they
cannot get the paint and the curbs look bad,
his staff may have to hang the signs on the
light fixtures (at a future time).
Report accepted It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded
by Councilman Hyde and unanimously carried
that the report be accepted.
City Council Meeting 8 October 16, 1974
REPORT ON TRAFFIC CONTROL Director of Public Works Cole submitted
ON TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD a plat showing the area in question. He
DURING RESURFACING noted the detour which will be used by the
OPERATIONS passing motorists. The work will be
accomplished in four days.
Report accepted It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded
by Councilman Hyde and unanimously carried
that the report be accepted.
MAYOR'S REPORT
Bus Tour Mayor Hamilton announced that the Council
will take its second bus tour on Saturday,
October 26, 1974 from 8:00 a.m. to 12
noon. The public is invited to take the
tour; however, because only two mini-buses
will be used, reservations will be accepted
from the first 33 who call in.
The Council concurred that the members of
the Parks and Recreation Commission and
the Planning Commission should have priority.
The City Clerk was directed to contact them
individually.
October 24 Conference Mayor Hamilton reminded the Council of the
Conference to be held on October 24
beginning at 7 p.m. to discuss and evaluate
the park land dedication/park acquisition
fee arrangements.
Hospital Fund Request Mayor Hamilton asked for a Council decision
on the request for funds in participating
in "Save-a-tteart" Day for the benefit of
the Community Hospital.
Resolution to appropriate It was moved by Councilman Hobel and seconded
money for ad by Mayor Hamilton that a resolution be
brought back appropriating the money for
advertisement ($300.00) and that the City
Clerk have the control over the content
of the ad.
Substitute motion It was moved by Councilman Hyde that in lieu
of the $300.00 for the ad, the Council
appropriates $300.00 in the form of some
tangible commodity that would demonstrate
the City's interest and support for the
Hospital.
No second to motion The moiion died for lack o£ second.
Speaking against motion Councilman Scott spoke against the motion
stating the Council should not appropriate
money for ads -- he could support some-
thing that would be needed by the entire
community that might be connected to the
llospital. At this time, he does not see
this need.
City Council Meeting 9 October 16, 1974
Motion fails The motion failed by the following vote,
to-wit:
Ayes: Councilmen Hobel, Hamilton
NOES: Councilmen Scott, Hyde
Absent: Councilman Egdahl
DELEGATE AND ALTERNATE It was moved by Mayor Hamilton, seconded
FOR LEAGUE CONFERENCE by Councilman Scott and unanimously carried
that Councilman Hyde be designated as the
Delegate and Alternate for the League
Conference to be held in Los Angeles
on October 20-23, 1974.
COUNCIL CO~B~ENTS
PARK-SCHOOL COMMITTEE Councilman Scott asked to be relieved from
the Park-School Committee. They meet at
7:00 a.m. and because of the nature of
his job, he cannot attend these meetings.
Motion to relieve Council- It was moved by Councilman Hobel, seconded
man Scott of this assign- by Mayor Hamilton and unanimously carried
ment that Councilman Scott be removed from this
assignment.
Motion to appoint Councilman It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded
Hyde by Councilman Hobel and unanimously carried
that Councilman Hyde be appointed to this
Committee.
The City Clerk was directed to notify the
School District of this action.
AIRPORT DECISION Councilman Hob¢l reported that this decision
has been delayed. It will be back before
the Comprehensive Planning Organization
(CPO) Board in November.
ENTRANCES TO CITY Councilman Hobel asked the staff to remove
the tumbleweeds now growing in abundance at
the entrances of the City.
THIRD ANNUAL AWARDS Councilman Hyde expressed the Council's
DINNER thanks and appreciation to the City Clerk,
Deputy City Clerk and the Council's
Secretary for their work in putting on the
Third Annual Awards Dinner.
Letter to be sent It was moved by Councilman Hyde, seconded
to Chamber by Mayor'Hamilton and unanimously carried
that a letter be prepared by staff for the
Mayor's signature, to be sent to the
President and Executive Vice President of
the Chamber of Commerce thanking them for
their cooperation in staging this event.
LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION Councilman Hyde asked about the status of
the new Library facility.
City Council Meeting 10 October 16, 1974
City Manager Thomson explained that a report
is now being prepared by the Library staff
regarding programming for activation of the
Library, relating to staffing and other
elements.
Councilman Hyde suggested this report be
brought to the Council at the Conference
scheduled for October 24, 1974, if possible.
LETTERS OF APPRECIATION It was moved by Councilman Hobel, seconded
REGARDING CONTRACT by Councilman Scott and unanimously carried
SERVICES that a letter of thanks be sent to Mr. Jack
Movido, Tennis Pro, thanking him for his
services to the City.
CONFERENCE WITH It was moved by Councilman Hobel, seconded
SUPERVISOR WALSH by Councilman Scott and unanimously carried
that the date of November 4, 1974 at 7:00 p.m.
be scheduled for a Council Conference with
S~ervisor Walsh.
PLANNING SEMINAR AT It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded
UCSD by Mayor Hamilton and unanimously carried
that a resolution be brought back author-
izing payment of the tuition of any Planning
Commissioner or member of the Planning
Department, or member of the City Council,
that would like to attend this meeting
(two-day program). As part of this Resolu-
tion the people attending these classes
(November 8 and 15) are to go on their own
time -- there will be no time-and-a-half.
WRITTEN CO~qUNICATIONS
Verified claim for damages - Ms. Meyer has filed a verified claim for
Margaret Meyer, 211 "E' Street damages in the amount of $222.00. She
Chula Vista claimed that on June 3, 1974, she slipped
and fell on some loose piece~ or chips of
cement on the sidewalk on the north side
of "E" Street, east of Third Avenue, turning
her ankle, she fell fracturing her nose
and scratching her eyeglasses.
Report requested It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded
by Councilman Hyde and unanimously carried
that the City Attorney submit a report to
the Council on the problem concerning the
lateness of the claim.
Recommendation of Chamber of The Board of Directors of the Chula Vista
Commerce regarding South Bay Downtown Association recommended that the
Court Complex City work with the County of San Diego
to establish the South Bay Court Complex
on the former "F" Street school property
site. They felt that it would not only
complement the current services provided
in this area but would enhance the Down-
town area and a rejuvenation process might
take place on 'this peripheral area of this
complex.
City Council Meeting 11 October 16, 1974
Motion to meet with It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded
Downtown Association by Councilman Hyde and unanimously carried
that someone from the staff or from the
Council meet with the Downtown Association
(at one of their meetings) and explain
exactly what process this Council is in
and get some feedback from that group.
LETTER TO JACK WALSH Councilman Hyde asked if Mr. Walsh received
a copy of the letter that went to the
Mayor and Council of National City re~arding
joint revenues for the proposed shopping
center.
City Clerk Fulasz remarked that she was sure
it went out, but would double-check.
CLOSE MEETING TO Mayor Hamilton closed this business meeting
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY at 8:32 p.m. to the Redevelopment Agency
MEETING meeting. The meeting reconvened at 8:34 p.m.
RECESS A recess was called at 8:34 p.m. and the
meeting reconvened at 8:52 p.m.
(Councilman Egdahl arriued at the meeting
at this time.)
APPOINTMENTS TO YOUTH It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded
CO~qlSION by Councilman Hobel and unanimously carried
that the following appointments be made
to the Youth Commission:
Beverly Cuevas
David Peter
Terry Garrison
Ken Roberts
Reappointments It was moved by Mayor Hamilton, seconded
by Councilman Scott and unanimously carried
that approval be given to the five commis-
sioners seeking reappointment:
Susan Saffer
Tim Nader
Debbie Avery
Lisa Lassman
Curt Welker
PUBLIC HEARING (CONTINUED) - Mayor ttamilton stated that the public hearing
CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT has been closed. He noted that the Council
TO THE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT is required to certify the EIR by minute
PLAN AND SCHEDULE FOR THE action and direct staff to prepare the
450-ACRE PLAZA DEL REY resolution.
COMPONENT OF EL RANCHO
DEL REY
Motion for EIR Certification It was moved by Mayor Hamilton, seconded by
Councilman Egdahl and unanimously carried
that the Council does certify that the
final EIR has been completed in compliance
with CEQA and the State Administrative
Guidelines.
City Council Meeting 12 October 16, 1974
Motion stating Council's It was moved by Mayor Hamilton, seconded
review of EIR by Councilman Hyde and unanimously carried
that the City Council has reviewed and
considered the information contained in
the EIR.
MODIFICATIONS TO THE PLAN Council discussion followed regarding the
plan submitted to the Council (Exhibit
DLB-"E") by the applicant. Councilman
Scott asked for staff comments on this Plan.
Planning Director's comments Planning Director Peterson remarked that
the staff has not reviewed this proposal
and therefore, he would not have any
definite opinions on it.
Mr. Peterson reviewed the aspects of the
alternate plan noting that (1) the streets
have been modified to comply with the
Engineering's recommendations; (2) it
enlarges the Village area to the north of
"H" Street - 650 to 750 dwelling units;
(3) size of shopping center is the full
1.2 million square feet; (4) overall
dwelling units is the same as original
proposal - 1454; (5) the dwelling units
are distributed in a different fashion
throughout the area as well as the
enlargement of the Village area -- the
are north of this labeled "single-family"
has a density that is still above what
the Hillside Ordinance would allow;
~O) elementary school and park have been
relocated.
Commercial area Councilman Hobel referred to the public hear-
ing of the Planning Commission (September
11, 1974 - page 14) which sets out 121.6
acres for commercial of which 85.6 for the
regional shopping center, 25.8 for recrea-
tional-commercial and 12.2 for professional
offices. He asked if the 120 acres proposed
for commercial on this alternate plan
would be comparable with this 121.6 proposal.
Mr. Peterson indicated it would.
Councilman Egdahl commented that Mr. Worley,
in responding to the City Manager's recom-
mendation of 100 acres stated they could
live with this reduction, but could not,
at this time, define how many acres will be
devoted to the regional shopping center
development itself.
Open Space Councilman Hobel asked about the open space
acre2ge.
Director of Planning Peterson explained that
the staff does not know what the open space
acreage will be on the north side of "W'
Street, but on the south side there is an
increase of 20 acres.
City Council Meeting 13 October 16, 1974
Discussion of the Mr. Peterson presented the alternate plans
Alternate Plans that were prepared for the Planning Commis-
sion.
Councilman Egdahl explained the three plans
this way:
The original proposal of DLB Corporation
was for 20, 60 and 40 for commercial
zoning with the balance for open space.
The Alternate Plan (Exhibit DLB-"E") had
flipped the townhouse area into 20 acres
of commercial and 20 of open space -
distribution of the acreage is questionable,
but it is 100 acres of commercial.
The staff's plan has 80 acres of commercial
and 40 acres of townhouse with the same
open space as the DLB proposal.
E1 Rancho del Rey Plan Councilman Scott asked how the proposal
changes the phases of the development as
far as the total E1 Rancho del Rey plan
is concerned.
Mr. Peterson explained that the E1 Rancho
del Rey Plan (Exhibit Planning -"A")
allowed for commercial development in the
first phase - this was limited to 50 acres;
the total combined footage of the regional
shopping center was 476,000 square feet.
Time Period Element In answer to Councilman Scott's query,
City Attorney Lindberg stated that a
resolution could be brought back declaring
that the zoning would be "A-S" unless the
precise plan were submitted within a two-
year period.
Density of Development Councilman Scott mentioned that in this
whole E1 Rancho del Rey project, the areas
that would be of B substantial benefit to
the developers are being doveloped first
(high density); then the low density area
is being developed at a later time. He
would like to see the housing developed
at a later date. Councilman Scott explained
that he is talking about the 1400 acres
(this is 450 acres of the total part) out-
side the P-C zone, and would like to see
the low densities developed prior to the
townhouses and Village Concept.
Director Peterson remarked that the Council
can set the phasing of development under
this P-C procedure and one concern should
be the reservation of open space in the
area to the east.
Road construction Councilman Scott asked for the staff's
comments concerning: (1) dropping the
street between "H" and Telegraph Canyon
Road and (2) development of "H" Street
to its final size and development.
City Council Meeting 14 October 16, 1974
Director of Public Works Cole recommended
that "H" Street be improved and connected
to the already existing "H" Street easterly
in the E1 Rancho del Rey with its first
phase.
As to the street connecting "H" to
Telegraph Canyon Road, the staff felt
that if "H" Street is connected on through,
it was not necessary to have that street
in the first phases ofthe deyelopment~ Upon
completion of the residential units in the
area, then that Street 5 would serve a
purpose.
"J" Street Councilman Scott expressed the Council's
feeling in not having "J" Street being
utilized as a collector street for this
project.
Mr. Cole remarked that the people using
"J" Street will be those going to Rohr
or the Bayfront or those people living
on "J" Street who will be going to the
shopping center.
Industrial Park Councilman Egdahl raised the following
questions: (1) Does the Council want a
regional shopping center in this location?
(2) If the answer is yes, will the Council
modify the General Plan that calls for a
50-acre center? (3) What shall be that
modification?
Councilman Egdahl stated he could
support an industrial park in that area
over that of aregional shopping center.
He noted the industrial park developments
at Rancho Bernardo and other areas that have
used rough terrain with very little grading.
Council discugsion followed this proposal
with each member viewing his opinion on
the subject. Councilman Scott remarked
that with the construction of 1-805 and
"H" Street, this area must be filled in,.
Another comment was that his property
was owned by someone other than the City.
The proposal before the Council tonight is
a modification of the E1 Rancho del Rey,
and Councilman Scott continued, the Council
should stick to that.
Councilman Hyde said he was attracted to
Councilman Egdahl's suggestion and if the
present plan was not before them, the
industrial park would'have received high :consider-
ation, lte added that the Council should not
set the idea aside altogether - it could
be considered as a combination to the shop-
ping center.
Size of Shopping Center Council opinions were expressed concerning
the ultimate size of the regional shopping
center.
City Council Meeting 15 October 16, 1974
Road System Mayor Hamilton commented on the Public
Works' request that the applicant submit
a plan and that they will design the road
system for it. The ~ayor discussed the
600,000 square foot figure recommended by
the Planning Director indicating that the
Director had no specific basis for this
figure. He (the Mayor) added that he is
concerned about the architectural control
to be placed on this, along with the type
of development; therefore, at the precise
plan stage, a lot of these questions can
be taken care of. There is a question of
what is a regional shopping center --
what size is a regional center.
Knowledge of tenants Councilman Egdahl asked if it would be
possible, at the time of precise plan,
(if the proposal is approved), the Council
can insist on knowing who the major tenants
of the shopping center will be.
City Attorney Lindberg indicated that the
Council did not have the right to insist
on any tenant or type variety store that
would normally be found in a shopping center.
At the time of the precise plan, the Council
can insist on very strict architecturalcontrol
and quality control over the construction which
would probably eliminate discount operations
~ the Center.
RECESS A recess was called at 10:05 p.m. and the
meeting reconvened at 10:23 p.m.
Air Quality Councilman Hyde discussed the statement
made by Environmental Coordinator Reid
at a previous meeting that the air quality
in the San Diego basin is improving. On
the basis of prosent generating pollutants
it is improving; however, not at the rate
to meet the EPA standards by 1977.
Phase I Development In answer to Councilman Egdahl's question,
City Attorney Lindberg stated that the Council
has control over the submittal of the
precise plan for the full 750,000 square
foot shopping center. The Council would
work out in detail the design on this first
phase, determine what would be done with the
balance of the property until the other
phaees would be started, and the building
permit issued would be for the total
development.
(The following is a transcript)
PLAZA DEL REY PUBLIC HEARING
October 16, 1974
Hamilton: Any other questions?
Scott: Mr. Mayor, I don't have a polished motion
but I do have some points here that I think
might be points that we have for discussion
so we can resolve this point by point rather
than generalities. And so I'll make a motion
encompassing about 8 points here, or 9 points,
and then we can attack them one by one and
perhaps come to some decision, I would
move that we approve the modification of
Pl~a del Rey and that the project contain
a shopping center of not more than 750,000
square feet and the number of dwelling
units be no more than 1,000 and that a buffer
zone be utilized to the northern part of the
project for single family dwellings. Also
that the...
Hyde: Would you identify the buffer zone again
please.
Scott: Yes, it would be from Lynwood Hills on the
northern edge of the project to which would
be single family and no multiple family and
townhouses up on the northern edge as shown
on Exhibit "C" there. That would be single
family...
Egdahl: Along the northern boundary of the project,
then?
Scott: Right.
Hyde: Where it says natural open space?
Scott: Yeah. All except the.. where I'm looking at
is where it says single family, single family
and then the area to the right of that where
it says townhouses and that would all be
single family and no townhouses on the
northern edges of the property.
Egdahl: The buffer zone of which you speak then is
that the whole northern development would be
single family...
Scott: Single family housing, right, and that the
property would be zoned A-8 until a precise
plan would be brought within a period of
two years. The next point is that Telegraph,
the road between Telegraph Canyon and "H"
Street, would be dropped. Streets would
be aligned as suggested by ~taff. Grading...
Hamilton: Are you talking about the recommendations
of Public Works?
Scott: Right. Public Works, right. As recommended
by the Public Works. That the grading be
minimal to bring within the spirit of the
Hillside Ordinance and that the staff bring
back recommendations and a study of the
Hillside Ordinance to be applied to the rest
of the entire project. Also I would like
to see, I would move that "H" Street be
fully developed within the first two stages
of development rather than the third stage,
and that's my motion, Mr. Mayor, to get
something on the floor.
Hyde: I'll second the motion for discussion.
Question. You indicated a shopping center of
750,000 square feet. I don't think you
indicated any acreage, or I missed it.
Scott: No, I didn't. The acreage that I have would
be 20/80 with 20 open space, 20 recreation-
commercial and 80 as the shopping center
area and 20 as open.
Hyde: Eighty acres ultimately for the regional
center?
Scott: Right, and 20 as open space.
Hyde,. Twenty is open space?
Scott: Right. Rec/commer~ial would be the other 20.
Hobel: Nothing in there for professional in the Rec/
commercial.
Scott: No, I don't include that in the recreation-
commercial. If they want to put something
professional it would have to be out of the
100 acres.
Hyde: I'm not sure I have it right so I'd to make
sure.
Scott: Yes.
Hyde: The regional shopping center, 80 acres?
Scott: Yes.
Hyde: 20 acres of open space?
Scott: Yes.
Hyde: Another 20 acres of commercial called
recreational-commercial?
Scott: Yes.
Hyde: And 750,000 square feet is the total package?
Scott: True.
Hyde: Second the mo%ion.
Egdahl: No phasing on that? That's not a first phase
expandable to 1.2 million.
Scott: This is my motion, as put on %he floor.
3
Hobel: Are we still asking on clarification on the
motion?
Hamilton: Yes we can. We will take them one at a time,
and not vote on the entire motion at one
time.
Hobel: Under the 80 acres of the shopping center does
that mean all permanent roads in and all de-
veloped peripheral around the shopping
center in the 80 acres?
Scott: ~11 those are gross acres, yes.
Hamilton: I think he later on said that he wanted to
take the recommendation of the Public Works
Department in regards to regards to roads.
Scott: Right.
Hamilton: I think that this..
Scott: Those are gross acreages, not...
Hyde: Mr. Scott, could you clarify once again
for me the buffer zone that you're talking
about. On the map up there, I don't know
if you can see it, there's a street labeled
Street "B" which is north of "H" Street.
Scott: What I'm really saying is anything above the
what we had the ring of "B" Street, I can
read "B" Street, I have very good eyes, and
"B" Street and "C" Street, anything ab~
that and Lynwood Drive Road, anything north
of that would be single-family.
Hyde: And where is the buffer zone that you are
talking about? '~ ~
Scott: Well, that's what I'm talking about is the
buffer zone between that and then the rest
if there is any townhouses would have to be
in the village concept and %o %he south of
that area.
Hyde: The village would be essentially as shown
here.
Scott: Yes, essentially. Right, we're inside
the circle.
Hobel: ~ou.'re saying village concept now.
Scott: Well that's what the, was proposed by the
Planning staff, yes sir.
Hyde: What would be the size of that buffer zone?
Did you say 20 acres?
Scott: I don't know what the acreage is. Let's see,
it says up there .. it doesn't have the
acreage up there. It says how many dwelling
units?
Hyde: It says 340 townhouses DU, next to the
elementary school.
Scott: 179, is it? Dwelling units?
Hyde: But there would be a buffer zone in between
those single-family especially the townhouses
and B Street.
4
Egdahl: It would be like the DLB-Exhibit"E"
Scott: Yes, something like that. (Not audible-discussion)
Hyde: Oh! The single-family is the buffer zone?
Scott: Yes.
Hyde: Oh, I beg your pardon--misunderstood.
Hamilton: Any other comments. I would like, No. 1,
to ask Mr. Cole if the motion as Mr. Scott
stated it with the dwelling units and the
li~aitation on the square footage of the
shopping center would make any impact on the
recommendations that you had for the traffic
circulation?
Cole: We had, of course, traffic circulation based
on the 1.2 million square footage and so
traffic generation would be reduced. How
much, I don't know, just like that. We'd
have to take a look at that part of it.
Well, that's about all I can say ~out
that traffic generation unless Mr. Robens
can speak to that a little more.
Hamilton: I know it would be rather difficult but I
assumed that there would be an impact.
Cole: The amount of reduction woul~ probably
not reduce the width, you know, would not
take from a six-lane would not reduce it down
to four lanes for instance, and the eight
lanes down to... it wouldn't be that much of
a reduction to pull them down that much.
There was one other thing that I wanted to men-
tion to the Council if I might, and that had
to do with the development of "H" Street.
We had indicated that our share of "H"
Street would be two lanes and half the median--
we did just a rough calculation--and our share
would be something over half a million
dollars. And if we were to build, that
is participate in this, and I'm not sure,
that's why I was trying to find out what the
phasing, what the date would be. It might
have quite an impact on our gas tax program ~
and I don't have our six-year program before
us to tell you what that would be, but
I thought the Council should recognize that.
The other thing we could do while the Council
doesn't want to leave the street unimproved,
the traffic generated in that period could
probably be handled without the center
two lanes and the island and we could leave
it dirt until we could finance it for instance.
I know that's not the Council's desire but
if we got into that kind of difficulty we
still have that opportunity to not build
that portion at the outset.
Hyde: Mr. Mayor, a question for Mr. Scott. In
your previous discussion you indicated
your concern over the phasing of the
development of the residential area out of
a concern that we might have a situation
where almost, well, the high density would
be built in the vicinity of the 450 acres
and then that area to the east, in the
remainder of the 1400 acres, would be left
5
out and to be developed at a later time
with possibly great pressures to increase
the density of it because of economic factors
at the time. You haven't suggested in
your motion the phasing of this as I thought
you might do with your previous comments.
Scott: Well, idealistically I would propose that
it be something like Mr. Egdahl's industrial
park. That's what I would like to have,
but I see problems in this way, is that what
I'd rather have is have "H" Street, and
I think if we have "H" Street through, I think
that development to the east would be better
within the control of the City Council.
That's the pragmatic view I'm taking.
Hyde: And trust the later Councils to hold the line?
Scott: Well, right.
Egdahl: Mr. Mayor,
Mayor: Yes.
Egdahl: Questions of Mr. Scott concerning the
proposal. "H" Street fully developed within
the first two stages of development- what
do you envision to be the first two stages?
What does that mean?
Scott: They gave us three stages and I didn't think
that the first stage, regional shopping
center was ... for "H" Street development
so I took the second stage and I think Mr.
Cole could better answer that for you,. (inaudible)
Hamilton: Mr. Cole.
Cole: The second phase as we understand it from
the EIR's, that would be the %o%al improve-
ment of the 450 acres. So it would be the
regional shopping center and all of the
units would be built in that area.
Egdahl: Thank you. The second question I have is:
You recommended that the staff apply the "H"
modifying zone to the entire project. Now
that to me needs some refinement. By entire
project are you meaning everything in the
whole PC area with the exception of this 450
acres, including this 450 acres or just
this project itself.
Scott: OK, its quite obvious with the land fill
project that we have that we can't apply
the Hillside Development Ordinance to this
piece of property. A~d that's why I said
that the grading would be minimal to bring
within the spirit of the Hillside Ordinance.
My con~nent was actually that we have the staff
look into the possibility and bring it back
to the Council, as quite obviously we can't
zone that with this Public Hearing. We'll
need an additional public hearing, but I
would like to be on record of having the
staff looking at that and considering that
as a possibility of preserving the unique
characteristics and the character of that
area, the Hillside...
6
Egdahl: I understand that and this is what I'm
struggling with here and need some refine-
ments..
Scott: Well, its some additional outside of the
450 acres. That that isn't developed in the
PC zone as we know as E1 Rancho del Rey.
Hyde: Question for Mr. Scott. In the regional
shopping center area you indicated that
there should be 20 acres of open space.
Would you have any particular instructions
as to how that should be situated or leave
it up to staff or staff with the applicant
or what?
Scott: The presentation we had was to put the open
space in front. I would...
Hyde: Where is "front" along "H"?
Scott: Along "H" Street. I would like to have that
part of the planning phase and maybe they
could come up with a unique utilization of
that 20 acres, thereby creating a much
more a~sthetic and pleasant surroundings
rather than just limit the staff to putting
the 20 acres in front. Perhaps we could
have 5 acres for parks within the area or
some other creative-type use of the 20
acres of open space within the regional shop-
ping center itself.
Hyde: Was it intended that that be landscaped open
space?
Scott: It was certainly intended to be landscaped
open space.
Egdahl: One other question, Mr. Mayor, If I may.
Mayor: Yes, Mr. Egdahl.
Egdahl: Under this proposal, motion before us.
Excuse me. Does the motion call for, or
does it not require that it call for some
type of architectural control, perhaps
even scene control for the regional
shopping center proposed?
Scott: Well, I would put on the recommendations
that were given to us by the staff as far as
the precise plan and ~2%e precise plan did
ask for architectural controls, so that
would be included in the proposal, yes.
Hobel: Both, Mr. Mayor if I may, both for the
regional shopping center and ~_he residential?
Scott: For the entire plan.
Hobel: For ~he entire plan.
Hyde: Mr. Mayor, another question for Mr. Scott.
In your previous discussion before your
motion you indicated that you thought it
would be desirable, if it could be done
legally, to have the wording of such an
ordinance implementing this proposal
that there be a time limit placed upon the
life of this plan. That there be a
demonstration that this has begun by a
7
certain time, if it has not then a~tself
destructs or back to something else.
Scott: In the motion, Mr. Hyde, was that we zone it,
through this hearing we would zone the entire
property A-8 and it only be modified on the
presentation of a precise plan and if, within
two years, we had no precise plan that A-8
zone would be there, right.
Lindberg: Mr. Mayor, I might speak to that. I would
certainly like the opportunity to refine that
and it should be understood throughout
this that what you adopt in the way of a
general development plan should be accompanied
by a ~hedule and I would think that the staff
should then refer you back to the schedule
that was presented with the applicant's
plan and you modify that to somehow correlate
with w~t has been recommended by Mr. Scott
or what may be ultimately adopted through your
deliberations on each point.
Egdahl: Mr. Mayor.
Hamilton: Yes.
Egdahl: Mr. Lindberg, it would not be required at
that point, that would be another modification.
We're really taking two modifications in
one act. As I understand the motion, we
are modifying the general development plan
to reflect A-8, but it would be subsequently
modified again to reflect the different kind
of zoning and development if a precise plan
comes before us within a time limit. Would
that require another public hearing?
Lindberg: What I am suggesting is that I believe we can
work out the appropriate language that would
stipulate that in the event that they don't
meet whatever time schedule is developed that
we would not then be left with again the
existing general development plan of the PfC.
zone and that in fact the PrC~ zone would no
longer exist and there would be a need to at
the point of failure to produce a need to
start the proceeding over again.
Egdahl: One final question if I may, Mr. Mayor, and
that is %he motion calls for a maximum of
750,000 square feet and would be in effect a
denial of the applicant's wish for this to be
a phase one with a maximum of 1.2 million.
In setting this maximum, would it be possible
for the applicant to return at a later date,
and we've heard the road system is designed
for a million two, etc. will remain
essentially the same. Would it be possible
for %he applicant to come back and ask again
for a modification to increase %he size of
the center should '~he economics be favorable
to that to what he is requesting -- a
million two -- another half a million square
feet.
Lindberg: The applicant would have that option at any
point if he chooses in accordance with the
motion made by Councilmam Scott to say,
"I no longer care to go forward with this."
He can come back to you and ask for a
modification.
8
Egdahl: And any action on our part to obviate that
possibility would be, in effect, illegal
because we would be binding a future Council
in some way?
Lindberg: Well, you would be attempting to place a
limitation on the legislative power of a
Council, yes.
Hobel: Mr. Mayor, question if I may. Mr. Scott,
in your motion, and it's point 6, the
street alignment as reconunended by the
Public Works Department, in your recom-
mendation Street A, which is the ring road
around the middle of the shopping center,
in Phase 1 that is to be completed and
tying in it both ends of "H" Street?
Cole: Yes, in Phase I, but it does not go on the
north side. Phase I is the commercial.
Hobel: There will be no temporary roads; that complete
ring road will be completed?
Cole: The south side -- I'd better refer to the
notes -- just a minute...
Hobel: Well, the reason I raise the point is because
the applicant spoke during his testimony in
regard to the fact, that of temporary roads,
and then they would become permanent when they
went into the next phase.
~cott: Mr. Mayor, it was explained to us that
'~temporary" was not only temporary in the sense--
only in the sense that they wouldn't be used
after a certain date, not temporary as
far as construction is concerned. Of course
if you havea realignment I think you would
ask for permanent roads because this was on
the other alignment and they discussed
that temporary road.
Hobel: Once again, my point gets to my concern
in regard to the east of the shopping
center where there may be either left in
natural state or in grading with fill there
or something. If the road's in, you know, I
would assume then we have control on that
part the same way we do in the residential in
regard to putting in some type of planting
and irrigation, so that we don't have a bleak
space there existing. Would the grading
ordinance apply in that area too?
Cole: Yes, any of the grading it would apply. Mr.
Mayor, if I may speak to the question about
the improvement of Street A, in our recom-
mendations we refer to that as Street 2 but
it's the same one and we indicate that its
full improvements, the interchange is built
on the west end - west intersection in
Phase I, but on the east intersection
it isn't constructed until the third phase,
later.
Hobel: So, what are you saying Mr. Cole? That
there would be a...
Cole: That's right, we don't have a Phase 3
anymore, we would have~ because of what
9
you'redoing. So it would be I suppose a,
with the completion of the residential, that
the interchange on the east end...
Hamilton: Complete interchange.
Hobel: Well then you're saying that %here would
be a temporary road coming off there at some
point and coming back up to join "H" Street,
rather than coming over to that area where the
church and school is. Is that what you're
saying?
Cole: No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that
the complete road would be constructed in
Phase I.
Hobel: In Phase I?
Cole: Correct.
Hobel: Okay.
Hyde: Mr. Mayor, question for Mr. Scott again.
On the residential dwelling units you indi-
cated 1,000, not to exceed 1,000. With
essentially the spirit, if not the letter of
the "H" zone applied in the design. Is
that correct?
Scott: That's correct.
Hamilton: If I may ask for a couple of clarifications
from ~r. ~Scott, I would like to know why
he put a maximum of 750,000 on it. I
know if we were to take the Planning Director's
recommendation, it would be 600,000, and
if we would take the Manager's recommendation,
it would be a phase - this amount as the first
one and then allow, upon conditions,
certain conditions, up to 1.2. And you've
just set a maximum of 750,000.
Scott: Well, Mr. Mayor, I think I probably arrived
at the 750,000 the same way as the Planning
Director arrived, at the 600,000 and I know
that 1.2 million is a large shopping center.
It would be the largest in San Diego County.
I know what 750,000 square feet is a large
shopping center. What I'm trying to do
is scale this down to some reasonable
area that I think wouldn't over~ "H"
Street and wouldn't have an adverse effect
on the atmospheric conditions that might be
generated from the project. I could pick
694,322 and I think that would be just as
reasona~.
Hamilton: Well, the reason that I ask was for that type
of clarification.
Scott: Well, I think it was stated by the applicant
that 750,000 would be the initial phase;
therefore, that would indicate to me that it's
a viable number.
Hamilton: Yeh. The only reason I brought it up was
because that in the comments that were made,
it said if the applicant wished at a later
date to ask for more than the 750,000 that
might be passed on here tonight or may not,
that this would be of course up to somebody
else, and I was wondering if it would not
10
be better for this Council to say, to give
conditions for it. Of course you have
the experience here to go back on, and also you
could have continuity in the developing of
the center in the area of the hundred acres
so that if this did come about at a later
date that the planning for it woul~ be
much better than if it were an addendum later
on, and that we would be able to carry on with
the continuity and the type of design and
all that we are after.
Scott: ~ell, I understand your rationale, but my
rationale is this, that what I would like
to see is a maximum of a 750,000 square
foot project. If a Council subsequent to
us seems it proper to add it, I don't want
that to be part of my responsibility; that
would be their responsibility.
Hamilton: The other question would be that both the
City Manager and the Director of Planning
have said that there should be some flex-
ibility in the number of housing to encourage
better planning. You set a maximum on
%hat.
Scott: I think you have flexibility below that.
You know, when you say 1,000 to 1,200
what you're actually saying is that you can
build up no more than 1,200, and your
flexibility is underneath that - below
that. I have brought that down to 1,000
and the flexibility, therefore, I could
say - no more dwellings than between 800
and 1,000.
Hamilton: Okay, just asking. Now, the question that
I'm going to ask is that would it be within
your motion that the design system for this
shopping center, if you desire it to be 750,000
square feet, that the road system be
redesigned to fit the 750,000 rather than
the 1.2 so that there would be no possi-
bility of raising that at a later date?
Scott: Well, I think that the comment we got that
we received from the Engineer is that the
road system, whether it was 750,000 or
1,200,000, would be approximately the same.
Is that a true statement, Mr. Cole?
Cole: Yes. I think that's true. One question
that the applicant could probably raise,
and rightly so, would be the second
interchange - which is an expensive item -
that is, the easterly one, and that might
be close.
Scott: Well, I think what we're really going to
have to do is if, I think we're going to
have to take a Vote on this and if it fails,
we'll certainly have to come up with another
motion. If it passes, I think we'll have
to send it to the staff to put it in resolution
form and also to bring a report back to the
Council with what they feel on the phasing,
what they feel about their response to the
motion. The final meeting certainly isn't
going to be tonight and I think two weeks
from now we could have that.
11
Egdahl: Mr. Mayor, at 11:02 and 30 seconds I'll
call the question!
Hamilton: We're going to vote on these part at a
time?
Hobel: I want tot
Egdahl: More questions?
Hobel: Yeh, I'd like one more.
Egdahl: Withdraw.
Hobel: I'd like to The other point is not in
Councilman Scott's motion, I wish it could
be incorporated and I want to get back to
the architectural thing again. I realize
that we truly address ourselves to the pre-
cise plan, but if this thing should pass I
think we should convey at the beginning --
at least I want to convey -- is that if
we're going to have a regional shopping
center out there, if we're going to have
a village concept and that, that we
convey that we want something unique. I
for one, do not want to see a large concrete
structure out there. I want something
that's unique, different, that'll be a
really beauty spot from this type of fac-
ility to the community in both phases.
And I'd like to see that conveyed on the
front end. I realize that you really address
in the precise plan to all these things, but
I think it's only fair to all of us to convey
this. ~
Scott: Well, if it's okay with the second, I would
add that as another item.
Hyde: Architectural control?
Scott: Architectural control.
Hobel: I realize you have no ordinance on the
books or anything in this regard.
Lindberg: Mr. Mayor, might I explain... Some of the
comments that I've been having with the
City Manager, I think that it is essential,
even though Council has fairly well hammered
out this motion on the anvil of your
discussion, that it be reduced to writing
and that the Council really have the oppor-
tunity to reaffirm the preciseness of the
action and the adoption of the General
Plan, and at the same time that the staff,
once it is reduced to writing, have the
opportunity of conferring with the applicant
here to determine a feasible time schedule
which is al~o an element that the Council
must adopt. And when Council adopts both
of those elements, it would then be
appropriate to also make your necessary findings
and we have provided a list of suggested
findings. We've also provided a list of
overriding circumstances for your con-
sideration and then the matter could be
referred back to the Planning Commission for
report. I'm saying though it is essential
we get both the development plan modification
and the modification of the time schedule,
which are the two elements that are re-
quired by the P-C zone.
Scott: Mr. Mayor, I wonder if we might get a
comment from the staff far as time wise.
Hamilton: I think they'd like a break to get that
information to us. It will only take just
a minute to do this.
Scott: I think Mr. Worley has a comment.
Don. Worley: Can I make one comment, Mr. Mayor?
Hamilton: Yes, you may.
Don Worley: Don Worley appea~ing for DLB Corporation.
Some of the conditions that are contained
in the motion which just passed may be
extremely difficult, if not impossible,
for the applicant to live with. I would
just like at this time to ask for the
assurances of the Council that we may,
in this interim period while this ordinance
is being prepared, have the opportunity to
communicate in writing and if necessary to
comment orally when the ordinance comes
back on the conditions and our position
with respect to them.
Hamilton: I don't think you would be precluded by
any person to make any comment either for or
against the decision that's been made so far.
Don Worley: Thank you.
Hamilton: I think it would be appropriate. I'm
going to call for a five or ten minute
recess so Mr. Thomson can get with staff and
come up with a time certain.
(Recess)
Hamilton: I voted "no" on %he motion that was before
us because I felt that the limits that
were placed on it sometimes, and this is
a personal feeling of mine, that it would
cut down on the uniqueness of development and
things that we were looking for. I do not
object to the motion. It was just a
philosophical thing, in my opinion, and
if Council will allow, I would like to change
my vote to a "yes."
(Vote taken - all AYES)
Hamilton: Mr. Thomson, you were asked a question.
Now, answer the question.
Thomson: Yes, Mr. Mayor, in consulting with the
Planning Director and Director of Public
Works and the City Attorney, the outside
date - in other words we'd try and beat this,
if we could - but, would be to place the
package in the mailing of November 22 for the
meeting of November 26, so that it would be
ready if Council wishes to act on it at the
meeting of the 26th for referral then to the
Planning Commission.
Hamilton: Mr. Lindberg.
Lindberg: Mr. Mayor, I would suggest that the draft
of the resolution, of course, will be
available for Council rev~w on the 29th
of this month(your next Council meeting)
so that you can see precisely the details,
as I say, and make sure it is what you in-
tended to adopt.
Scott: Mr. Mayor, what I would like to see, I
would like to see at our next Council
meeting a rough draft as proposed by Mr.
Lindberg, so we can take an action on
that and see if we have what we want and
what we intended to have. And at that time
reaffirm it and then refer it to staff to
work with, uh, the numbers up, and at that
time I think we possibly could refer it to
the Planning Commission at the same time,
couldn't we? It seems to me the 22nd seems
like a tremendous amount of lead time.
Hamilton: Well, he had just a few minutes to talk to
the staff.
Scott: No, what I'm talking about is doing the
work concurrently.
City Manager: Mr. Mayor, we plan to proceed on the re~o-
lution as we understand it tonight, during
the time which the Attorney will draft the
resolution, it will go to Council for ap-
proval. In hopes that, our understanding
would be correct, we would also hope to
beat this date. This is an outside date,
and so that you understand our intent.
We will try...If we hit it right then we
may be able to reduct the delay time.
Scott: Okay, fine.
(End of Transcript)
ADJOURN~.~NT Mayor Hamilton adjourned the meeting at 11:18
p.m. to the meeting scheduled for Thursday,
October 24, 1974 at 7=00 p.m.
City Clerk