Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1973/04/04 MINUTES OF A RECESSED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Held Wednesday April 4, 1973 The recessed meeting of the City Council of Chula Vista, California, was held on the above date beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, 276 Fourth Avenue, with the following Councilmen present: Scott, Hobel, Hamilton, Hyde, Egdahl Councilmen absent: None Also present: City Manager Thomson, Deputy City Attorney Blick, Director of Planning Peterson, Director of Public Works Cole, Assistant Director of Public Works Robens, Assistant City Manager Bourcier, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Assistant Planner Quinney, Court Reporter Jack Tyler, City Attorney Lindberg The pledge of allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Hamilton followed by a moment of silent prayer. PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION Mayor Hamilton announced that the public bearing OF AMENDMENT TO THE EL RANCHO will now be reopened and testimony will continue DEL REY GENERAL DEVELOPMENT from those opposing the amendment. PLAN PROPOSED FOR SPORTS WORLD Testifying against the Speaking in opposition were: proposal R. G. Cooper, 604 East J Street; Josephine Napier, 666 Gilbert Place; G. H. Harvey, 372 J Street; Lt. Cmdr. Cary F. Wright, 242 East J Street for Concerned Citizens of Chula Vista; Jim Newton, 1012 Dartmouth Drive; Raquel McDonald, 600-14 Sheffield Court speaking for Mary Ann Parker, 600-31 Sheffield Court; Michael T. McQuillen, 4425 Vista Nacion; Rose Inniss, 217 East Kearney Court; Peter Watry, gl Second Avenue; L. A. Henke, 62 Pepper Tree Road; Ludmila Krutz, 1595-44 Mendocino Drive; Robert Jones, 4411 Vista Coronado Drive, Lynwood Hills; Clements Napier, 666 Gilbert Place; Carole Smith, 275 Sea Vale; John Frelinger, 304 Margo Court; Carol Cripps, 875 Durward Street; Shirley A. Sechler, 801 Hale- crest Drive; J. Scott Walker, 600-55 Sheffield Court. Objections were as follows: (1) opposed to arena but not development of the rest of the land; (2) arena is not worth the price that the people of Chula Vista will have to pay for it; (3) 50 arenas throughout the United States are classified as "white elephants;" (4) J Street cannot be deleted without an amend- ment to the General Plan - this is a safety factor built into the Plan; (5) arena will do irrevocable damage to the environment of Chula Vista; (6) can't see covering up all that beautiful land - it should be a public park; (7) Council should consider the La Nacion fault which runs through the proposed development; (8) statistics were quoted as to possible arena attendance and traffic that would be generated; (9) traffic is the major cause of air pollution; (10) statistic5 were quoted as to the amount of traffic generated from shopping centers and the eventual smog that will occur; (11) statistics were quoted as to the noise levels; (12) statistics were quoted as to economics - the amount of revenue that would be realized versus that of costs to the City. Recess A recess was called at 8:22 p.m. and the meeting reconvened at 8:44 p.m. County residents Councilman Hobel noted the number of people speaking in opposition that are not residents of Chula Vista. Protests continued Continuing with the protests: (13) it would be grossly premature relative to a market analysis to put in the shopping center; (14) regional shopping center would require un- limited development in the future to support it; (15) the arena would need to be subsidized; (16) most logical place for the arena would be Mira Mesa or Del Mar -- it should not be in this residential area; (17) residential proposed is too dense; (18) the development could occur in such a way as to require eight lanes on H Street; (19) rather than an arena, the City should have a smallbr convention center on the tidelands. Recess A recess was called at 9:40 p.m. and the meeting reconvened at 10:10 p.m. Mayor Hamilton announced that he will give the opposition one hour to complete their testimonies. Continuing with the protests: Charge of conflict of (20) Mr. Robert Jones declared that two of the interest Councilmen have a conflict of interest: Mayor Hamilton, since he owns a drug store on H Street and Councilman Scott, since he sells gaso- line - both stand to gain financially from this project, and they should disqualify themselves. Also, a recall should be initiated for those Councilmen voting in favor of the proposal. Attorney's opinion Deputy City Attorney Blick ruled that there was no conflict of interest on the part of any of the Councilmen as well as the Mayor in considering this proposal. Continuing with the protests: (21) Council should accept the Planning staff's recommendation which stated that the proposal will be detrimental to the health and welfare of the citizens; (22) Chula Vista is a quiet and peaceful place to live - keep it that way. Rebuttal Speaking in rebuttal to the opposition were: Bill McClendon, 751Nolan Avenue; Bob Crane, 3723 Ciencga Drive; and Irma Morris~ 114 Third Avenue. Rebuttals were: (1) regarding buffer zone for Rice Canyon -- development is occurring on all sides "squeezing into the Rice Canyon area" and eventually, it will all be engulfed with developments; (2) the ticket tax and parking tax revenues were not brought up at the Planning Commission meetings; (3) called 65 people - 48 were for the project, 9 undecided and 8 were against; (4) if this arena is a "white elephant" then the question is, where are those thousands of cars going to that will be creating the pol- lution. Mrs. Esther Lassman Mrs. Lassman submitted copies of a memo dated 264 Rogan Road February 9, 1973 from Bill Robens, Assistant Director of Public Works to Doug Reid and Norman Williams, and a memo dated March 12, 1973 from Mr. Robens to Doug Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator. Mrs. Lassman noted that on the March 12 memo, the staff made the following comment on her calcula- tions of traffic volumes from Sports World on roads outside the project: "The basis for estimating or projecting these traffic flows is shown on the attached exhi- bit along with the numbers of trips on each road resulting from the current proposed land uses. Percentages shown are concurred in by the City staff, County staff and consultant." The February 6 memo concerns the ultimate traffic conditions forecast for 1-805 north of H Street, Bonita Road east of 1-805, and H Street west of 1-805. Assistant Director of Public Works Robens Mr. Robens explained that in the February 9 memo, the staff confirmed certain general conunents made by Miss Lassman last night--these were valid com- ments and can be accepted. As to the March 12 memo, Mr. Robens noted that the concurrence of the staff was based on the figures as submitted by Miss Lassman that went with the Environmental Impact Report, which he assumed was the same information Miss Lassman submitted in her testimony last night. The staff reviewed them only to note them. Mr. Robens indicated that the County and consultant concurrence was for staff figures done for the En- vironmental Impact Report. He reiterated that no one checked Miss Lassman's figures or went over them in any detail. The in- tent of her figures was noted, but the staff felt the figures were not valid for the use Miss Lassman made of them (projection of traffic into the future). Rebuttal against Mrs. Carole Smith, 87 F Street, stated they are proponent's testimony not rebutting tonight "since the burden of proof lies with the affirmative." Dr. Leonard Bloom Dr. Bloom made the following statement: Mailing address: 3003 Fourth Avenue "There are 'doers' and there are 'talkers'--I San Diego believe I am a "doer'. I have instructed my con- sultants to proceed with this project in the in- terest of what is best for Chula Vista and its citizens. I sincerely believe this end product is one that will benefit everyone. The facts that have been arrived at by the Planning Depart- ment are facts that we basically agree with--the conclusion we do not agree with, and it is the reason it is a subjective conclusion--no different than a glass of water in front of you that is half- full or half-emply, whatever you want to call it. Our conclusions are that we have developed a large parcel of property under P-C zone which provides commercial, residential, professional and recreation, I feel that recreation is very - 3 - badly needed for this community. I feel that it is something that if you approve this evening you'll be proud of, and if you look back in the years to come, you will also agree that this is something you will have done with the end result of pride and with the thought that it is of benefit to the City of Chula Vista and its residents." Public hearing closed There being no further comments, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Recess A recess was called at 10:54 p.m. and the meeting reconvened at 11:17 p.m. Testimony from County residents In answer to Councilman Hobel's query, Deputy City Attorney Blick stated that the purpose of the hearing was to hear all residents, regardless of where they live; however, the testimony of a Chula Vista resident may be considered more heavily than that of a non-resident. Discussion Director of Public Works Cole confirmed the staff's recommendation that no direct access from J Street be allowed to the arena. Support of staff for Councilman Scott asked the Planning Director arena the following question: Under any circumstances, does he feel the staff could buy the arena, by itself or any modification of the plan? Mr. Peterson answered that they could not, based on a larger study referred to this evening and last evening--this is the traffic analysis made by the County which measured this City's thoroughfare system proposed on the Plan against the land uses proposed on the Plan. These are way out of balance, and he would not recommend any major traffic generators be approved until this is resolved. Economic need for shopping Councilman Egdahl asked Dr. Bloom if the regional center shopping center was a necessary item to the sports arena. Dr. Bloom declared that the arena and the regional shopping center stand on their own, but because of costs, will have to be a part of sports world from the standpoint of total cost of the project and the development. The arena would be developed first, and the shopping center after 1-805 is completed. Imposing conditions Councilman Hobel questioned the legality of the Council imposing conditions of approval regarding a time table for development. Deputy City Attorney Blick indicated the City could exact this from the developer. Dr. Bloom declared that he would be willing to allow, other than the arena and House of Ice, any further development, or issuance of occupancy, to be tied to the completion of 1-805. Recreation-Commercial In answer to Councilman Scott's question, Dr. Bloom noted the uses proposed for the recreation- commercial areas, and the professional office use. - 4 - Commitments for shopping Councilman Scott asked Dr. Bloom about any center commitments he has for the regional shopping center. Dr. Bloom stated he has a written documentation from a major shopping center developer who has developed 28 regional shopping centers through- out the country stating he is willing to sign a lease, at this point, for the regional shopping center. This man's commitment is tied with the major stores. Traffic analysis Mr. Cole and Mr. Robens commented on their traffic study which showed that after the con- struction of 1-805 with the full development of Sports World, including residential, that the road facilities proposed by the developer are adequate and will handle the traffic. There will be congestion at times but it will not be serious congestion. Uses at the arena Mayor Hamilton questioned the Council's right to state what events will occur at the arena. Deputy City Attorney Blick remarked that the Council had some prerogative here, especially in the hours of operation. Councilman Egdahl's opinion Councilman Egdahl said he felt that four out of the eight findings were "clouded": the lack of harmony with the General Plan, lack of protection for the surrounding areas; overloading of streets, and economics in terms of what the City will receive and what it would cost. Motion to sustain Planning It was moved by Councilman Egdahl and seconded by Commission recommendation Councilman Hyde that the recommendation of the Planning Department and Commission be sustained. Discussion Discussion of the motion followed. Recess A recess was called at 12:10 a.m. and the meeting reconvened at 12:22 a.m. The Council discussed the traffic problems, the shopping center, economic factors, massive grading that will take place, citizens' survey made a few years ago, and the fact that the precise plan for the developments would have to be approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. Clarification of motion Councilman Egdahl remarked that the specific hearing being held tonight deals with the modifi- cation under the P-C zone, and the motion is to deny that modification, and accept the recommenda- tion of the Planning Department and the Planning Commission. Councilman Hyde agreed to the second. Councilman Mobel's opinion Councilman Hobel discussed the alternatives sug- gested by the opponents stating there was no way possible that the City could buy the land out there for open space. He felt that a City that overlooks developments will be a stagnant city, and rather, should look ahead for broader tax bases. - 5 - Amended motion Councilman Hobel offered an amended motion stating that the recommendation of the staff be denied. He stated he was concerned about the amount of acreage around the sports arena, but felt the eight points have been met to his satisfaction. Point of order A point of order was called concerning the motion. Deputy City Attorney Blick asked the City Clerk to read the modified motion made by Councilman Egdahl and asked that the Council take action on this motion, or have it withdrawn. City Clerk Fulasz read the motion as made by Councilman Egdahl, which was to deny the modi- fication of the P-C zone and accept the recom- mendation of the Planning Department and Planning Commission. Discussion of motion Mayor Hamilton read from the staff's report in which they stated that the question of the arena was not a land use question, but is a basic decision which the Council has to make based on value judgment. Site locations Discussion followed as to the six sites which the staff proposed to Dr. Bloom for an arena. Mr. Peterson indicated he was aware of these recommendations noting the one for the waterfront area which he felt would be preferable. City Manager Thomson explained that the sites proposed where made under the direction of the former Planning Director, and proposed in general terms--it was not a blank check recom- mendation. Motion failed The motion to deny the modifications of the P-C zone and accept the staff's recommendations failed by the fo]lowing vote, to-wit: Ayes: Councilmen Egdah], Hyde NOES: Councilmen Scott, Hobel, Hamilton Absent: None Motion to accept proposal It was moved by Councilman Scott and seconded by Councilman Hobel that the proposal be accepted with the following modifications: 1. Eliminate all but 66 acres of the commercial- recreation. 2. Eliminate all attached single-family and apartments, 3. Eliminate strip commercial along H Street. 4. Study the remaining acreage in the E1 Rancho del Rey P-C zone with a look toward making all that land that hasn't been brought before the City Council conform at least to the concept agreed upon in the Hillside Grading Ordinance. Discussion of motion Discussion by the Council ensued as to density standards for the detached residences. Council- man Scott indicated this would be a matter of precise planning and could be based on standards developed after approval of the Hillside Develop- ment Ordinance. He added he is accepting the 70 acres for the regional shopping center. Recess A recess was called at 12:55 a .m. and the meeting reconvened at 1:05 a.m. Clarification of motion Councilman Scott clarified the motion stating that the 66 acres involves 50 acres for the arena and 16 acres for recreation-commercial; these figures are net figures. Statement from Dr. Bloom Dr. Bloom stated he respected the wishes of the Council to delete the areas as stated and place those for future study. He accepted the con- ditions of the motion. Resolution to be brought Councilman Scott confirmed the fact that his back motion indicated a resolution should be brought back at the next meeting. Refer to Planning Commission Councilman Hyde questioned whether this would go to the Planning Commission for a report. Deputy City Attorney Blick stated the ordinance does not provide for this; however, there is no objection to refer this back as a matter of good zoning practice. Mr. Blick stated the motion tonight is final, but as a formality, it would have to be phrased in the form of a resolution. Mr. Blick asked that the Council not delay action on the resolution that would be back at the next meeting pending a report of the Planning Commission, but rather, the Planning Commission be given an opportunity to review this. Motion carries The motion to approve the proposal based on the four conditions carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Councilmen Scott, i{obel, Hamilton Noes: Councilmen Hyde, Egdahl Absent: None PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION Mayor Hamilton stated this would be continued OF ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF for one week. CHULA VISTA OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS SPORTS WORLD PHASE I ANNEXATION EMERGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 1459 - The California Environmental Quality Act of ESTABLISHING ENVIRONMENTAL 1970, as amended by AB 889, required the REVIEW PROCEDURES - FIRST Secretary of Resources to develop State guide- READING AND ADOPTION lines for the environmental review of projects by local agencies. The local agency must be in conformance with these guidelines by April S~ 1973. Ordinance placed on first It wa5 moved by Councilman Hobel that this reading and adoption ordinance be placed on its first reading and be adopted and that reading of the text be waived by unanimous consent, The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Councilmen Hobel, Hamilton, Hyde, Egdahl, Scott Noes: None Absent: None - 7 - UNANIMOUS CONSENT ITEM: RESOLUTION NO. 6809 - Offered by Councilman Scott, the reading of the URGING THE SAN DIEGO MUNICIPAL text was waived by unanimous consent, passed JUDICIAL DISTRICT AND THE and adopted by the following vote, to-wit: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO IN- AYES: Councilmen Scott, Hobel, Hamilton, CREASE RATHER THAN DECREASE Hyde, Egdahl MUNICIPAL COURT SERVICES IN THE Noes: None SOUTH BAY COURT IN THE CITY OF Absent: None CHULA VISTA Mayor Hamilton announced that ali other items on the agenda are to be continued to the meeting of April 10, 1973. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hamilton adjourned the meeting at 1:16 a.m. to the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, April 10, 1973, at 7:00 p.m. City C~k