Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRCC MIN 1991/10/16MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE CHIILA VZSTA~ CALIFORNIA Conference Room 1 6:00 p.m. Public Services Building Wednesday Auoust 21, 1991 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista ROLL CALL' MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chairperson Wheeland, Committee members Castro, McFarlin, Palmer, Platt Member Roberts, with notification Member Berlanga, without notification Associate Planner Frank Herrera-A Deputy City Manager Jim Thompson Director of Libraries Rosemary Lane Planning Technician Patty Smith Motion (Castro/Platt) (4-0, McFarlin abstaining) to approve the minutes of the July 3, 1991 meeting with the following corrections: bottom of page one should read 'Marshalls and Border Patrol'; spelling of Lettiere corrected on page two. OLD BUSINESS' In response to the notice that the Traffic Engineer's report would be presented to the committee on September 4, 1991, Chairperson Wheeland stated that she was very disappointed in the lack of action; she noted that she felt the committee was not taken seriously. INFORMATION ITEM/REPORT: Rosemary Lane, Director of Libraries, updated the committee on the progress of the proposed library at Fourth and Orange Avenues. She noted that the Parks and Recreation department had hired POD,a landscape firm called, which had submitted various plans that had been presented to numerous committees. She stated that as she recalled, the MPC had favored a park primarily, and had strongly supported the library and a community center; other items had been less favorably viewed by the committee. Ms. Lane showed the committee the site plan that had been submitted to the state library for a grant; this site plan had been viewed as that with the best chance for gaining grant approval. She stated that a 35,000 sq.ft. building and 175 parking spaces, calculated according to a state required formula, were included on the site plan. Ms. Lane informed the committee that the language of the grant required that the land be used to provide direct library services; this library included an exhibit hall, a conference MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE -2- AIIGUST 21. 1991 room, a literacy center, technical user center, and other amenities. However, she noted that the community center was no longer included, as a result of the language. Member Palmer stated that the community center was not a crucial item to this committee; members agreed that grassy areas and an amphitheater had been more important. Ms. Lane stated that if the plan shown was thus acceptable, a new grant would not have to be applied for. She further informed the committee that if the area originally reserved for the community center had to be reinstated, she would have to reapply for the grant; this application was costly, and carried no guarantee of approval. Ms. Lane added that although the grant did not include sufficient funds for an amphitheater, she had recommended to Parks and Recreation that one be built. Member Platt asked about the one-plus acre area that was designated as future parking; Ms. Lane responded that it had to be developed for library purposes, and that a community center did not qualify as such. She noted that the area referred to could be subtracted from the proposed plan, but the grant would have to be reapplied for. Ms. Lane added that if a reapplication was submitted and subsequently and denied, the originally approved plan could be reinstated. However, the re-application fee would be lost, and approximately a year's time as well. Member Palmer stated that she would not like to see anything happen that might endanger this library or encourage support of an alternate location outside of Montgomery. Chair Wheeland stated that the plan displayed was basically what this committee wanted anyway. Ms. Lane added that the amphitheater would be considered an element that met the library purpose criteria, as it could be used for library programs. Member Castro agreed that delays in developing the approved library should be avoided. Chair Wheeland asked if the City Council was to make the final decision on whether the area in question was to be deleted from the plan? Ms. Lane stated that the Council would make this decision, after all affected committees had made recommendations. She added that it appeared that the Parks and Recreation Board appeared to be split in their opinions of this issue, as they had desired more recreational facilities on the site; this had originally been designated as a park site. Member Palmer asked how the Library Board felt about this issue? Ms. Lane responded that they had mixed feelings, as it was felt that commitments had been made to support a community center on the area in question. She added that the library was often used for Parks and Recreation activities, so there was a history of cooperation between the two departments. Chair Wheeland asked if the committee's vote should be given MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE -3- AIIGIIST 21. 1991 at the September 4th meeting? Ms. Lane responded that this was appropriate, and that the issue was not yet scheduled for the Council. Chair Wheeland stated that she felt that time was of the essence; Ms. Lane agreed. Jim Thompson, Deputy City Manager, informed the committee that given current time frames required by the contract, theoretically there was up to a year to work out the issue of the area originally designated for the community center; he did not want the committee to feel rushed or constrained by time. Chair Wheeland and member Palmer stated that, to the contrary, the committee wanted this item to be resolved as quickly as possible. Member McFarlin asked about the naming of the library? Ms. Lane stated that this issue was sitting for the time being. Chair Wheeland asked if it would be possible to have this item addressed by the Council when they considered the library plan for final approval? Associate Planner Herrera-A stated that this would be up to the Director of Libraries; Ms. Lane added that it was not wholly her decision. Mr. Thompson interjected that as there was some controversy attached to this issue, he would advise that it be addressed after the library had obtained final approval. Ms. Lane agreed that this was a controversial and emotional issue, and that addressing it after approval was the best approach. OTHER BIISINE88• Chair Wheeland asked for clarification of the terms of office for committee officers; although this committee normally elected officers in December, all committees were now changing terms of office to coincide with the fiscal year? Mr. Herrera-A responded that this was correct, and stated that this was mandated by the amended ordinance. Member Palmer asked if the election of officers could be done at the next meeting, as there were only five members present? Mr. Herrera-A stated that this was the committee's decision. He informed the committee that member Roberts had asked that he be called to meetings only if there was a lack of a quorum; otherwise, he wished to be excused permanently. Member Palmer asked when a new member was to be appointed? Mr. Herrera-A stated that he would check on this. Member Palmer stated that she recommended the election be postponed until the next meeting, when more members could be present. Motion (Palmer/Wheeland) (5-0) to continue the election of officers until the regular meeting on September 4, 1991, due to the lack of regular members present. MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE -4- AOGIIST 21. 1991 CHAIR REPORT: Chair Wheeland presented information on the proposals being reviewed by the Citizen's Advisory Committee for SR 125. Member McFarlin noted that routes on the map presented were not even labeled. Wheeland stated that she wanted to keep the committee abreast of the happenings at these advisory committee's meetings; she added that there would be no advisory committee meeting in September however, as there were now two lawsuits against California Transportation Ventures, one pursued by the City of Chula Vista and one by the State Engineering Association. Potential routes were explained and discussed; Chair Wheeland noted that if proposed freeway entrances and exits were not in place in time for a developer's needs, fees could be paid by the developer to obtain them. Member Palmer asked if Eastlake had not had conditions attached to development requiring the completion of SR 125 prior to development? Mr. Herrera-A responded affirmatively. Member Platt asked Chair Wheeland if California Transportation Ventures appeared to have already decided upon the routes? Chair Wheeland responded that she thought this was true for the most part. She added that interestingly, all of the proposed routes were listed as being inconsistent with local plans; further, those affected by the proposed routes all appeared to be opposed to them. Chair Wheeland stated that she would like to see an accounting of how CalTrans spends it funds, and would check into this in October. Mr. Herrera-A stated that before public funds could be used for any state route, it first had to be recognized on the state map; this had not yet been done with SR 125, and would have an affect on the timing of this project if done publicly. COMMITTEE COMMENTS: Member McFarlin stated that she had spoken to the mayor recently as a private citizen rather than a committee member. She informed members that she had expressed concerns about Council support for the Montgomery area and for the recommendations of the committees that represented this area. She felt that committees had been set up for the purpose of placating the Montgomery residents, and added that she felt that the recent Council appointment of a non-Montgomery resident further represented a lack of support for the Montgomery community. MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE -5- AIIGIIST 21. 1991 STAFF COMMENTS: Mr. Herrera-A stated that further clarification was needed regarding the amendment to Ordinance #2.48.200 of the municipal code to establish the Montgomery Planning Committee; specifically Ordinance #2418. This item would be brought to the attention of the City Attorney's Office for an opinion. However, he cautioned that it might take an inordinate amount of time before a response is available for this committee. Member McFarlin asked about the proposed merging of the Montgomery Planning Committee with the Southwest Project Area Committee? Mr. Herrera-A responded that he and Lance Abbott were still discussing this item with the City Attorney. Chairperson Wheeland noted that members of one committee would not necessarily meet the requirements for membership of the other committee. It was noted that this issue would probably not be resolved for quite some time. ADJOIIRNMENT• The meeting was adjourned by Chair Wheeland at 7:15 p.m., to the Special Joint Meeting of Wednesday, September 4, 1991 at 6:00 p.m. in the Public Services Building, with the regular meeting of the Montgomery Planning Committee to follow at 7:00 p.m. in Conference Room #1 of the Public Services Building. ~~ '~~,~,~~}-1~, Patt ,Smith, Recorder MINUTES OF A MEETING OF TAE MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE CNULA VISTA, CA 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers Wednesda Se tember 4 1991 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL• MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Wheeland, Committee members Palmer, McFarlin, Platt, Berlanga. MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: SPECIAL MEETING: Members Castro and Robert, with notification. Principal Planner Gordon Howard Director of Libraries Rosemary Lane Parks and Recreation Director Jess Valenzuela Rosemary Lane, Director of Libraries, gave the presentation. She gave a brief history of the library site at Fourth Street and Orange Avenue. The site was selected for a library by the City Council in August, 1990. At that time, a library and community center/gymnasium were proposed for the site. In the process of application for State Bond money, modifications were required which removed the community center/gymnasium from the plans. Such uses were not considered "library" uses, and thus would not qualify for state funding and would make the project less competitive with other applications for library grants from throughout California. It was thought that the community center/gymnasium could be built on the portion of the site designated for future expansion, but terms of the state library grants required that the site must be used for library purposes for fifty years. Alternative #1 represents the current application for state bond money, and designates the entire site except for the area under the San Diego Gas & Electric transmission lines for library or future library purposes and parking. Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks and Recreation, continued the presentation. He presented Alternative #2, the staff recommendation. This alternative includes the library, along with an open air ampitheatre, passive park uses, and parking Staff Presentation areas. This alternative is recommended because it will still fall under the definition of "library" uses which will allow the City to receive the state grant, and it will also provide some park uses (in short supply within the Montgomery community) to area residents. Alternative #3, which includes a gymnasium/community center, is not recommended at this time because it would require re- application to the state for the library grant, which could jeopardize the entire project. However, there is a big need for a gymnasium/community center facility within the Montgomery community. If the facility is not located at Fourth St. and Orange Ave., then other parks must be considered, including Loma Verde, Otay, and the future Otay Valley Regional Park. In response to a question, Director Lane affirmed that Alternative #2 requires no resubmittal to the state -- however, it does require additional council expenditure authorization for the park improvements. She noted that the proposed ampitheatre will be looked upon by the state as a big additional plus for the project. Member McFarlin noted that she is very happy about the ampitheatre proposal since it will provide a place for artists to perform. Montgomery certainly needs more park facilities, but the library and its facilities are a great opportunity for this particular site which should not be passed up. Chairman Wheeland expressed a strong desire for the project to go forward -- she is very worried about potential delays and the resultant impact upon the state funding source. Library Trustee Alexander supports Alternative #2. While there is still concern about the proximity of the San Diego Gas & Electric transmission lines, Alternative #2 does not place any of the major facilities under them. General discussion about the impacts of Electro-Magnetic Fields (EMF) occurred. Member Hall of the Parks & Recreation Commission expressed regret that a gymnasium could not be placed on this site, and although he supports Alternative #2 as the best possible plan under the circumstances, he warned that no alternative gymnasium site within the Montgomery community is on the horizon. Member Palmer indicated that the Montgomery Planning Committee since its inception has supported a library on this site --a gymnasium can be placed at another location within the community. Motion passed (Platt/Berlanga) (5-0) to approve the original application (Alternative #1) and get the contract with the state for the grant money signed and move the project forward MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE -3- September 4, 1991 with all deliberate speed. The Parks and Recreation Commission continued its discussion of the issue. Motion (Lind) to support Alternative #1 as shown in the grant application, but move forward with Alternative #2 and support it at a later date during the project's design phase. Member Sandoval-Fernandez indicated that she thinks it is imperative to strongly support Alternative #2 in order to provide for some park facilities ont he site. She expressed concern about the lukewarm support for Alternative #2 implicit in the motion, and believes that if Alternative #2 is not strongly supported at this time, it may not come to fruition. In response to a question as to the actual staff recommendation, Director Lane explained that the staff recommends that the existing application for state grant money (Alternative #1) be retained at this time. After the grant is awarded, during the detailed design phase, staff will direct that the Alternative #2 plan be planned and resubmitted to the state as a "minor refinement." Director Lane believes that the state will enthusiastically accept the design changes in Alternative #2, since they clearly make for a superior project. Also, the City Council will need to authorize additional local money be spent for the park improvements ont the site. Motion restated and passed (Lind/Sandoval-Fernandez) (4-0) as follows: Accept the original concept plan (Alternative ~1) but keep looking forward to Alternative #2 as the ultimate development plan for the site. STAFF REPORT' Report from the Department of Engineering on Traffic Issues within the Montgomery Community There was no one present from the Engineering Department regarding the report submitted to the Montgomery Planning Committee. Chairman Wheeland stated that the written communication provided did not answer the committee's concerns. She strongly requested that Hal Rosenberg of the Engineering Dept. attend the next meeting to personally interact with the Montgomery Planning Committee on these issues. Member McFarlin agreed with the Chairman's assessment of the MONTGOMERY PLANNING COMMITTEE -4- September 4. 1991 Engineering Dept. response. General discussion ensued on the issue of truck parking adjacent to the car auction business on Main Street and the need for further addressment of this issue. Member Berlanga asked for addressment of the dangerous intersections on Main Street, mainly the Main St.-Industrial Blvd. intersection and the problem with the dangerous railroad bridge adjacent. Motion passed (Wheeland/Palmer) (5-0) requesting attendance of Hal Rosenberg at the next Montgomery Planning Committee meeting to personally discuss problem traffic areas within the community in detail. OTHER BIISINESS• The Chair reported that no additional SR-125 meetings had occurred. There were no committee reports. Gordon Howard (staff) reported on a meeting with the Fenton Company regarding a proposed residential development at the south end of Rios Avenue within the San Diego City limits, and indicated that the property owner offered to make a presentation on the proposed project to the Montgomery Planning Committee once it is officially submitted. Members expressed concern about the impact of this potential project on the Otay River Valley Regional Park plan, and requested that the project also be reviewed by the Otay River Park Citizen's Advisory Committee. Staff was requested to add to the next agenda an item regarding the need to ensure park uses at the site at the intersection of Fourth Avenue (Hermosa Avenue) and Main Street and the sending of a letter to the Parks & Recreation Commission to that effect. The issue of the merger of the Montgomery Planning Committee with the Southwest Redevelopment Project Advisory Committee is still being reviewed by the City Attorney. RNMENT: At 8:00 p.m. to the regular meeting of October 2, 1991, at the Lauderbach Community Center. ~ ~~~ Gordon Howar Recorder