Loading...
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