Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1970/10/29 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Held Thursday October 29, 1970 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista was held on the above date at 7 P.M. in the Council Chamber. This was a joint meeting with the City Planning Commission. The following Councilmen were present: Councilmen Scott, Hobel, Hamilton, Egdahl Absent: Councilman Hyde Also present: Director of Planning Warren, City Attorney Lindberg, Acting Chief Administrative Officer Thomson, Public Works Director Cole, and the members of the City Planning Cormmission Mayor Thomas Hamilton declared the meeting opened. HIGH-RISE - CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH Mr. John Morgan, representing Jafro, Inc., developers of Holiday Estates Subdivision, Unit No. 6, reported on the proposed development of the high-rise for the Community Congregational Church on "F" Street, informing the Council that they are assured of getting the financing for this project in the 1971-72 allocation of funds. STREET BARRICADE Councilman Hobel abstained himself from the podium and requested per- mission from the Council to barricade his street, 600 block of Mission Court, between the hours of 4 P.M. and 7 P.M. on November 1, 1970, for their annual Halloween party. It was moved by Councilman Egdahl, seconded by Mayor Hamilton, and unanimously carried that approval be given for this street to be barricaded on November 1, and notification be given to the Police Department. PURPOSE OF MEETING Mayor Hamilton announced that the purpose of this meeting tonight was to discuss the R-2 zone, and the concept of development as proposed in Holiday Estates, Unit No. 6. Councilman Scott discussed the origin of the approval of the split-duplex concept, and the need for Council evaluation of the project. Director of Planning Warren discussed the methods available in the present ordinance, for construction of Iow-cost housing by developers. Chair- man Leslie Rice reported on the recent workshop held by the Planning Commission in which they discussed all aspects of the split-duplex developments; the monotony of the architecture of the houses; parking; curb cuts, etc., and recommended to the staff suggested revisions to the ordinance. Member Kyle Stewart spoke of the ~Ot lot in Unit No. 5, declaring that the City must maintain these mini-parks; if they continue to approve these playgrounds, they may be burdening the City staff with the maintenance of these parks. He felt that park areas should be irmmediately adjacent to school sites. Member Herbert Hillson discussed the renderings submitted by developers when requesting approval of these subdivisions. The Cormmission relies on these renderings and, in many cases, the final outcome is not what is pictured. He would, therefore, suggest that the developers be held liable to develop the project depicted by their renderings. Member George Chandler felt they should, perhaps~ go back to the 7~000-square-foot minirm/m lot to 8et a little wider lot for this type of development. Councilman Egdahl left the meeting at this time. Member Edward Adams remarked that he is satisfied with the outcome of these projects as they have produced a low-cost home, which was the original intent. City Attorney Lindberg spoke of his meeting with Samuel Weinstein, Assistant Regional Director of the Metropolitan Development Office in San Francisco, who looked over the initial plans for the first development (Unit 5) and felt that the federal government could be well-advised to finance this type of development one hundred per cent and then it could be resold at a very low interest rate to those people who are in need of this type of housing. Mr. John Morgan stated the cost of these houses are: 2 bedroom, $17,500; 3 bedroom, $19,500, and 4 bedroom, $21,500. Councilman Scott spoke of the need for more amenities in this develop- ment for the people who are going to live in this area. Councilman Hobel cautioned that this particular area (Holiday Estates, Unit No. 6) is being saturated with this same type of housing. Mr. Morgan stated that the developer does not "make a nickel" on the construction of the house; it is on the land. He discussed the price of the houses and the amount of income one must make to qualify for its purchase. Mr. Eugene York, 280 "K" Street, stated that the lenders dictate the type of development a contractor can build. He compared this type of develop- ment with that of a condominium, favoring the condominium because of the greater amount of open space available. The Mayor called a recess at 8:20 P.M., and the meeting reconvened at 8:35 P.M. Director of Planning Warren submitted the map of Unit No. 6, and briefly explained the proposed development, stating that the Planning Commis- sion recommends approval of the map. It was moved by Councilman Scott, seconded by Councilman Hobel, and unanimously carried that action on this matter be held off until the next regular meeting of the Council, November 3, 1970, in view of the fact that a full Council was not present. Councilman Egdahl returned at this time (8:45 P.M.) MEETING REGARDING LAFCO ACTION City Attorney Lindberg stated that the City of San Diego has been informed that a portion of that city will be detached for the purpose of pro- viding f~e ~ervice from a special fire district. Mr. Lindberg added that he is meeting with the City Attorney of San Diego in the morning to make up a united front in this regard. Councilman Scott moved and seconded by Councilman Hobel that this City Council vigorously oppose LAFC's action; that the Mayor and all Councilmen who are able to do so, attend this meeting to state their protests; also a copy of the Council's Resolution No. 5811 be sent to Mr. Knox to see whether it is contrary to his original intent. Mayor Hamilton commented that the meeting tomorrow morning (October 30, 1970) would be between the City Attorney and that of the Attorney of San Diego. He directed Mr. Lindberg to inform them that this Council is one hundred per cent behind them and urge that city to adopt and pass the resolution as recommended by this Council in order that, with bigger cities in support, they can have something to present to LAFCO. Councilman Scott withdrew his motion, and Councilman Hobel withdrew his second to the motion. FENCE - 300 BLOCK OF "L" STREET Councilman Scott discussed the rezoning request before the City Council several weeks ago (August 11~ 1970) for 315-321 "L" Street to R-1 which was denied by the Council. He has noticed that the fence which surrounds the com- mercial property, cuts this residential property off from the rest of the R-1 area. This was not the intent of the Council, and he is requesting that some- thing be done about it. Director of Planning Warren explained that this was discussed with the developer and he is not sure whether, under the existing ordinance, they can require the developer to construct this wall. Councilman Scott questioned the Attorney as to the legal aspects of this action. Attorney Lindberg requested that this question be deferred until the next meeting (November 3, 1970) at which time he will give the Council a report on it. FRANCHISE BUILDINGS Mayor Hamilton commented on the construction of franchise and other businesses which are opened for business and then shortly thereafter, are boarded up. He asked the staff to check into establishing some regulatory provisions whereby the property owner must maintain the landscaping of the property, after the business closes, as though that business was still in operation. ADJOURNMENT The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 8:55 P.M., to the meeting of November 2, 1970 to be held at 3 P.M. in the Administrative Conference Room. City Clerk