Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1973/04/03 MINUTES OF A REGULAR ~{EETING OF T}iE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Held Tuesday April 3, 1973 A regular 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, Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue, with the following Councilmen present: Councilmen Scott, Hobel, Hamilton, Hyde, Egdahl Councilmen absent: None Also present: City Manager ~omson, City Attorney Lindberg, Director of Public Works Cole, Assistant City Manager Bourcier, Director of Planning Peterson, Deputy City Attorney Blick, Environmental Review Coordinator Ried, Assistant Planner Quinney, Court Reporter Jack Tyler The pledge of allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Hamilton, followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES It was moved by Councilman Hyde, seconded by Councilman Scott and unanimously carried that the minutes of the meeting of March 27, 1973 be approved, copies having been sent to each Councilman. PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL BY CLARICE T. OLIN OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PILGRIM EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH FOR A CHILD DAY CARE CENTER ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 175 FIFTH AVENUE, AN R-3 ZONE Francis Gee Mr. Gee, speaking for the applicant, stated 169 Fifth Avenue that in view of the apparent interest at this meeting for the next item, they wish to ask for a continuance of this public hearing to another meeting. Motion to continue It was moved by Councilman Egdahl, seconded by Councilman Scott and unanimously carried that the public hearing be continued to the meeting of April 10, 1973. PUBLIC HEARING - Mayor Hamilton read a prepared statement in CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT which he discussed the conduct of the meet- TO THE EL RANCHO DEL REY ing. He noted that a Court Reporter was GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN present to record the meeting, and asked PROPOSED FOR SPORTS WORLD tke audience's cooperation in adhering to the rules governing the meeting. Sam Blick Mr. Blick declared that there were eight Deputy City Attorney findings which the Council must make to a reasonable degree: 1. This proposal is in harmony with the General plan -- an amendment to the General Plan ~ould be an acceptable satisfaction of this requirement, and that a General Plan could not contem- plate a Sports Arena. 2. The Sports ~orld project could be ini- tiated within two years of the adoption of this modification. 3. and 4. These do not apply since they address themselves to the residential and industrial-type projects. 5. The development will be appropriate in area, location, and overall plan- ning for the purpose proposed, and furthermore, the surrounding areas will be pro~ected from adverse effect. 6. The streets, as proposed, will be able to carry the traffic. 7. The Sports World project can be justi- fied economically as to location and will provide facilities that are needed there. 8. The surrounding area can be zoned compatibly with the development. The Environmental Impact Report will be con- sidered - the statements within the report will be considered; however, it will not be reviewed in regard to amending lt. The ordinance states that the Planning Con,dis- sion shall decide what will be in the Report, and this has been accepted by the Planning Commission. Jim Peterson Mr. Peterson explained that the hearing is Director of Planning for an amendment to the existing Planned Community zone. He referred to the written report submitted to the Council in which he detailed the differences between the Sports World General Development Plan and the proved E1 Rancho del Rey General Development Plan. Mr. Peterson remarked that the staff presenta- tion was based on the arena and shopping center area and not the residential aspect of the plan. The staff recommendation was a denial of the plan, and this was based on the findings that they felt could not be made as required by Section 33.520 of the Zoning Ordinance, Finding No. 5: "In the case of institutionalj recreational, and other similar non-residential uses, that such development will be appro- priate in area, location and overall planning to the purpose proposed, and that surrounding areas are protected from any adverse effects from such development." It is the feeling of the staff, in evaluating tho applicant's circulation plan and system of land use, that adverse effects would be realized in the Lynwood Drive area and resi- dences along J Street. Finding No. 6: "~at the streets and thor- oughfares proposed are suitable and adequate to carry the anticipated traffic thereon." The staff feels that under the thoroughfare system proposed by the applicant, that finding is difficult to make. If the connection fo J Street is eliminated in favor of the connection to L Street and to Telegraph Canyon Road, then that finding will become easier to make. This will be especially true after the opening of Interstate 805. ~e staff felt that the impact on the com- munity in terms of traffic, noise, air pollution, massive alteration of the existing topography was an unacceptable environmental impact in this location. Douglas Reid Mr. Reid discussed the role of the Environ- Environmental Review mental Impact in the planning process. Coordinator He spoke about the impact of the air quality that this development would have on the regional air cell; the noise factor on certain streets in the City; the need fcr public services (fire and police); the schools, traffic and grading. Mr. Reid added that during the ten-year development period, there would be a revenue to the City of $1,200,000. During the first four years, however, it would cost the City over $1,000,000. The last six years, there would be a declining revenue resource; the fifth year would see a revenue of $658,000 and the tenth year this would diminish to $80,000. Income distribution from various land uses in the project are: 60% from commercial development 12% from the arena 18% from the residential development 10% from other sources Admission tax and parking tax (assuming a 50% capacity) with 200 events, there would be an income to the City of SZfl0,000 B year. La~e Co~ Mr. Cole submitted a written report in which Director of Public Works he discussed the 391 acres of the development currently in the process of annexation as it related to traffic, grading, drainage and sewage. The report recommends approval of the general development plan with certain modifications and with many specific conditions. Traffic - Dltimate traffic volume5 on City streets were projected through use of the computer program evolved by San Diego County. On the basis of the large traffic volumes projected, it will be necessary for the City to carefully control development to prevent gen~ration of intolerable volumes of traffic upon the City street system in the future. It is thc recommendation of the staff that land uses be closely related to the existing topography. Operation of arena prior to opening of Interstate 805 was discussed. Mr. Cole indicated it would be bas recon~nendation to utilize L Street and Telegraph Canyon Road rather ttmn East J Street as a primary access to the arena. Further, that the arena connection to J Street be deleted from the general development plan and that this connection be replaced by a road from Telegraph Canyon Road to H Street extended east of the arena area. Mr~ Cole further discussed the traffic generated to Sports World after the opening of Interstate 805 and the grading that will take place. In answer to Council's queries, Mr. Cole remarked that it was the opinion of the staff that £, H and L Streets could handle the traffic generated from the arena, parti- cularly after Interstate 80S is completed. In answer to Councilman Scott's question, Mr. Cole stated that his staff did not make a detailed analysis of the comparison of this project with that of the Gersten project; however, six lanes were projected for this same area that the staff now feels needs eight lanes. Even with Gersten's development, there was a high volume of traffic predicted for this stretch of H Street. Mr. Peterson confirmed the fact that the staff would have the same recommendations to make to the Council tonight, if consideration was being given to the original P-C zone. Recess A recess was called at 8:15 p.m. and the meeting reconvened at 8:28 p.m. Slide presentation Mr. Lou Quinney, Assistant Planner, showed a slide presentation of the area. Public hearing opened This being the time and place as advertised, Mayor Hamilton opened the public hearing. Planning Commission findings City Clerk Fulasz read the following findings into the record: Planning Commission reconmlended denial of the amendment to the general development plan based on: 1. Findings as required by Section 33.1311 of the Zoning Ordinance could not be made. 2. The proposed change would result in the creation of ~n unsatisfactory living environment in the vicinity of the development and along streets providing access to it. 3. Traffic, noise, air pollution, discom- fort and massive alteration of the topo- graphy would not be offset by any public benefit resulting from implementation of the proposed change. - 4 - 4. Street system in the Plan cannot begin to accommodate the land uses and many streets would have to be upgraded to freeway status or the intensity of land uses would have to be substantially de- creased.. Donald Worley, Attorney Mr. Worley stated he is the attorney repre- Seltzer, Caplan, Wi lkins, McMahon senting Dr. Leonard Bloom. He stated the 3003 Fourth Avenue, San Diego Plan before the Council was one of history- making. As to the eight findings, Mr. Worley declared that these would not have been made even under the old plan, so arguably, the modification itself does not produce any new findings or any new adverse findings. Mr. Worley discussed the three items of con- troversy: traffic problem, prematurity of the commercial facilities, and the staff's contention that this is not an ideal loca- tion for an arena. He explained that: (1) the traffic was a temporary problem which would be greatly al- leviated after Interstate 805 is constructed; (2) Dr. Bloom has commitments from four major tenants to lease space in the shopping center; (3) as to the location, this was one of six sites suggested by the Planning staff. In referring to staff's comments, Mr. Worley pointed out the Planning Director's comments in which he stated that the question of the sports arena was a basic decision which the Council would have to make on the basis of value judgments. Mr. Charles Christensen, Mr. Christensen declared that the modifica- Civil Engineer tion of the P-C zone, which is their appli- 233 A Street, San Diego cation, does not require the eight findings of fact; nevertheless, at Dr. Bloom's request, this material was immediately given to the staff. He indicated that with the construction of Interstate 805 this development would become a separate community and would have a minimal bearing on the characteristics and changes in the City. Mr. Christensen referred to the study by Dr. Thomas J. Ashley of Ashley Economic Services, Inc., of development in San Diego which corroborated the fact that not only does industrial and commercial development pay its own way, but new residential does also. Mr. Christensen then reviewed the modifications of the general development plan: 1. Reduction in the size of the regional shopping center along with the reloca- tion on the north side of H Street; 2. Elimination of a substantial quantity of apartment development which was re- placed by the sports arena and recrea- tional-commercial complex; S. One-third reduction in the total resi- dentSal density by an intelligent use of the topography resulting in a substantial decrease in the amount of grading required. Speaking for the proposal Speaking in favor of the amendment to the general plan to allow the development of a sports arena and shopping center were: Irma Morris, 114 Third Avenue; Tom Emmons, 1009 Mission Court; Kathy Gay, 214 Oxford Street; Jean Hars}~nan, 3742 Festival Court; Doug Walker, 1225 Broadway; Bob Crane, 3723 Cienega, Bonita; Ken Kolk, 530 Azalea on behalf of Kiwanis group; Charles Pattullo, 311 Twin Oaks; Gertrude Clark, 30 Tourmaline Street; Tom Preston, Sr., 1025 Broadway; Bill McClendon, 751Nolan Avenue; and Betty Tatu, 1412 Nolan Avenue. They favored the concept for the following reasons: (1) Mrs. Morris stated she has ob- tained 1800 signatures in favor of the de- velopment as opposed to the 174 in opposition; (2) it will gain national prestige for the City; (3) regardless of the development, police and fire protection must be provided; (4) a solution to the traffic problem will be bussing of the people to the arena; (5) people that fight progress in Chula Vista have lost out on the tuna factory, perhaps the ship- building yard and now the arena which in all probability will go in National City; (6) cautioned against a devel~I~ent that ~ould:occnr in that area which would be similar to that of Spring Valley; (7) in 1940 the City fathers gave Mr. Rohr permission to locate in Chula Vista over protests of the people; (8) in the 1950'5, opposition stirred over the shopping center contemplated for Fifth Avenue and H Street; (9) noted the many uses of the arena along with the benefits of its close proximity to the senior citizens of this City; (10) the situation has been blown up all out of proportion - feel the City should give it a chance; (11) people adapt to any situation, and in a matter of time, they will adapt to having a sports arena; (12) traffic flow will not be constant; (13) there is a possibility of rapid transit system from the present shopping center to the arena; (14) spoken to a great number of people and most of them in favor of the arena; (15) the project can be controlled in a logical, reasonable development; (16) easier to work with one developer than twenty or more; (17) this will determine what type of community we will have for the next twenty or thirty years; (18) there is presently no good shopping center in the southeast portion of the City; (19) there will be opposition to any type of development in the area; (20) noted a personal traffic study made; (21) as a taxpayer, does not want to have to bear the expense of an election for a referendum; (22) streets in this city can handle the traffic; (23) there i5 a definite need for the development. Recess A recess was called at 9:45 p.m. and the meeting reconvened at 10:05 p.m. - 6 o Speaking against the proposal Speaking in opposition were: Carole Smith, 87 F Street; Sue Olson, 589 East J Street; Esther Lassman, 264 Rogan Road; and Eugene Coleman, 1670 Gotham Street. Their objections were as follows: (1) not enough support for two arenas in the County; (2) if we do not halt the Plan now, the City will be faced with an insolvable problem; (3) 4 out of 5 nights the arena will be in use, and it was noted that a number of these events will probably be used for rock concerts; (4) the property tax that will be realized from the arena development will be $72,000 a year, and this would not cover the cost of services the taxpayers would have to provide for the develop- ment; (5) jobs provided by the arena would be negligible; (6) Dro Bloom's proposal has been turned down in other cities; (7) business will be taken away from our merchants; (8) noted the number of major chain stores that would not come in to compete with Broadway; (9) Mrs. Lassman submitted a report noting the projected average daily traffic generation figure for Sports World, the daily traffic volume increments up to the year 1990, and the yearly numerical in- crease of daily traffic volume on L Street up to the year 198S; (10) Dr. Bloom will not build in the County because the citizens of this com- munity will pay for the services needed to sup- port the development, and the County will not; (ll) at this time, there is no answer to the drainage problem that will exist in the develop- ment; (12) the development does not provide even the economic base, merely a degradation of land in this City's sphere of influence; (13) recom- mend that the Council accept the Planning Directors recommendation to rezone the land A-8 until a complete study can be made. Drainage discussed In answer to Councilman Scott's query, Mr. Cole declared that the first thing a contractor does (speaking of 1-805 construction) is to put in the drainage; therefore, the State will install the drainage facilities by the time the sports arena is in and operating. Recess A recess was called at 11:20 p.m., and the meeting reconvened at 11:47 p.m. Number of people wishing Councilman Hyde commented that the City Clerk to speak still has over 20 forms filled in by the people wishing to testify tonight. Motion to recess It was moved by Councilman Hyde and seconded by Councilman Hobel that the meeting recess until tomorrow night, Wednesday, April 4, 1973, at 7:00 p.m. Motion carries The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Councilmen Hyde, Egdahl, Hobel Noes: Councilmen Scott, Hamilton Absent: None Mayor Hamilton recessed the meeting at 11:52 p.m. to the meeting scheduled for Wednesday, April 4, 1973, at 7:00 p.m. City Clerk ~