Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1985/04/16 ~ MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Tuesday, April 16, 1985 Council Chamber 6:00 p.m. Public Services Building ROLL CALL Councilmembers present: Mayor Cox, Councilmembers Malcolm, McCandliss, Scott, Moore Councilmembers absent: None Staff present: Ci ty Manager Goss, City Attorney Harron, Assistant City Attorney Gill, Director of Finance Christopher The Council met at 6:00 p.m. to continue discussions in Closed Session (adjourned from the meeting of April 12, 1985) regarding matters of potential litigation. The Council recessed to Closed Session at 6:01 p.m. and reconvened for the City Council meeting at 7:10 p.m. ~ WPG:0576C PAG - - .. , . II MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Tuesday, 7:10 p.m. April 16, 1985 ROLL CALL Councilmembers present: Mayor Cox, Councilmembers Malcolm, McCandliss, Scott Moore Councilmembers absent: None Staff present: City Manager Goss, Assistant City Attorney Gill, Assistant City Manager Asmus PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, SILENT PRAYER The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Cox followed by a moment of silent prayer. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE MEETINGS OF APRIL 9 and 11, 1985 Mayor Cox noted on the minutes of April 9, Item 19, he abstained ~ from voting on the resolution for appropriation of funds on Las Flores Drive. The minutes of April 11 should reflect that staff is to come back with a report regarding the trees along the route of the Greg Rogers house which were not trimmed in preparation of the move. MSUC (Moore/Scott) to approve the minutes as amended. 2. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING THE DAY OF TUESDAY, APRIL 16, 1985 AS TEACHER DAY USA IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA The Proclamation was presented to Marilyn Montgomery of the Sweetwater Education Association. 3. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS a. URGING SUPPORT OF BAYWIDE ANCHORAGE MANAGEMENT PLAN BEFORE , CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION (Unified Port District) The Unified Port District requested support of the Baywide Anchorage Management Plan (clearing of the hulks and derelicts in south San Diego Bay, as well as bringing order to the anchorage -, areas in and around Coronado). u City Council Meeting - 2 - April 16, 1985 MS (Moore/Scott) a letter be prepared for the Mayor's signature incorporating the tax recommendations in support of the Bayfront Management Plan. Councilman Malcolm not~d that former Mayor Callahan of Coronado and County Supervisor Bilbray expressed concerns on this item and requested a meeting with Port Authority Commissioner Rick. MSUC (Cox/Malcolm) to continue this City Council meeting to the meeting on Thursday (following the Redevelopment Agency meeting) and to docket this item. b. REQUEST TO ANNEX TO CHULA VISTA - HOLIDAY ESTATES TOWNHOUSES The Holiday Estates Townhouse Homeowners' Association Board of Governors requested annexation of their condominium project located in the unincorporated area near Hilltop and Orange Avenue to the Ci ty of Chula Vista and also to include their neighbors of the unincorporated section around Hilltop Drive which extends north of Main Street. The Association asked that the City assume any cost involved in the annexation process. Robert Fox, representing Holiday Estates Townhouse Homeowners' Association, stated the Association voted to support this request to annex to Chula Vista and to include their neighborhood as they have no community identification other than Chula Vista. They supported the resolution contingent on no cost incurred to the Homeowners' Association. MSUC (Malcolm/McCandliss) to waive the fees (and refer to staff to process). PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 4. PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MCDONALD'S/SIXPENCE FREEWAY SIGN REQUEST AT "E" STREET AND I-5 FREEWAY - McDONALD CORPORATION (Director of Planning) This being the time and place as advertised, Mayor Cox opened the public hearing. Director of Planning Krempl explained that on March 13, 1985, the Planning Commission approved a 35 foot high, 150 square foot freeway sign for the proposed McDonald's/Sixpence development at the northeast quadrant of "E" Street and the 1-5 freeway. The City Council was apprised of this action and has called the application up on appeal. City Council Meeting - 3 - APril 16, 1985 - The Planning Commission's action is in conformance with the underlying C-V Commercial Visitor zoning which permits a maximum 35 foot high, 150 square foot freestanding sign. The "pO Precise Plan guidelines state that signs should be oriented to "E" Street. Both McDonald's and Sixpence requested and received approval for monument signs of 50 square-feet and 75 square-feet. Two temporary freestanding freeway-oriented signs (Anthony's and Days Inn) have been approved in the vicinity of "E" Street and the Bayfront side of the I-5 freeway. Both signs are scheduled for abatement on July 1, 1985. The Director of Planning recommended that Council deny the request for a freeway sign. Council discussion ensued regarding the existing mobile gas station sign scheduled to be removed in 1990 when the sign abatement program takes effect; signage for other businesses along "E" Street interested in freeway signs would be considered off-site and they would have to get an easement or access through other owned property and the Council's reponsibility to the applicant on guidelines for redesigning signs. Bill Gardner, 8840 Complex Drive, Suite 300, San Diego, representing McDonalds declared that within 60 days, McDonalds will have to decide whether or not to continue with the project - they need a definitive answer from Council on the sign allowance. He added: the restaurant and motel need the sign exposure to just ify the expense of the land; explained this project will generate $150,000-$170,000 a year in revenues to the City; McDonald's will not go ahead with the project unless signage is granted; a reduction of sign size would be agreeable. Donald Sodaro, President of Sixpence, 1511 Lorna Verde, Santa Ana explained Sixpence is a sublessee for McDonalds and if signage is refused, they will not have a project. He hoped Council would uphold the Planning Commission's recommendation or give some guidelines as to the size of the sign. In response to Councilman Scott's question regarding the slgns (bowling alley and mobile) that will be phased out in 1990, Mr. Sodaro stated Sixpence would not be agreeable to having the sign phased out at that time. Al Binford, 699 "E" Street, Chula Vista, Manager representing the All Seasons Inn suggested a "reader board" sign noting eVen though their sign is very low, they have been able to attract business. They support the Council on its desire to keep signs in respective positions but they need the benefit of the signs on the freeway to focus on the businesses along "E" St. There being no further comments either for or against, the public hearing was declared closed. ----,--- . - City Council Meeting - 4 - Apr il 16, 1985 Counc il discussion ensued regarding the type of sign allowed Sixpence under the existing Code which would be a wall sign facing the freeway; discussion of locations and sizes of 1-5 signage; Bayfront sign unwarranted - applicant could be successful in this location without signage; signage standards needs to be practiced; need for decision for McDonalds in order for Sixpence to make decision for their project; freeway signage generates impulse buying and increased business; sign abatement program requires conforming signs by 1990; proposal to approve freeway sign with a 5-year grandfathering clause to come back to Council; normal pole sign for McDonalds/Sixpence to be required to be removed in 1990; special provisions would eliminate abatement requirement in 1990. MSC (Malcolm/McCandliss) to deny the (freeway sign) request. Mayor Cox voted "no". Sa. CONSIDERATION FINAL EIR 83-2, EL RANCHO DEL REY SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT (Director of Planning) b. RESOLUTION 11991 CERTIFYING FINAL EIR 83-2, EL RANCHO DEL REY SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT c. PUBLIC HEARING GPA-83-7 - AMENDMENTS TO EL RANCHO DEL REY SPECIFIC PLAN - GERSTEN COMPANY (Director of Planning) This being the time and place as advertised, Mayor Cox opened the public hearing for Items Sa, band c. Director of planning Krempl explained the subject of this hearing is a request by the Gersten Company for certain amendments to El Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. Included in this proposal by staff are 10 "out parcels" not under Gersten ownership but within the specific plan area. Three of the out-parcel owners have made separate requests for their properties and have been so advertised. In addition, staff has included for continuity purposes, but not for amendment, the remainder of the entire El Rancho del Rey Specific Plan Area. Director of Planning Krempl explained that Environmental Review Coordinator Reid and Mr. Larkin from WESTEC will comment on the EIR followed by Mr. Paul Manganelli, staff project planner who ~ will review this project. Mr.. Andrew Schlaefli, Vice President of Urban Systems will talk about traffic mitigation and impact. Mr. Krempl explained this draft EIR was issued for public review on October 19, 1984 involving a revision to the El Rancho del Rey Spec if i c Plan. The Draft EIR was circulated by the State Clearinghouse and their 45-day review period has closed. ---¡- . I I r .. City Council Meeting - 5 - Apr il 16, 1985 The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the EIR on January 23, 1985. No verbal testimony was taken; however, several letters of comment were received. They have now been incorporated into the final EIR along with a response to those comments. The proposed project involves a Specific Plan Amendment for , 1673.5 acres of the 2450 acre El Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. Of this, 1582 acres are under ownership of the Gersten Company and the remaining 91.5 acres are under var ious other pr i vate ownerships. The property is located east of Interstate 805 and north of Telegraph Canyon Road. Existing topograpy of the site consists of east-west trending ridges and intervening valleys. Major roads in the project area include Telegraph Canyon road on the south, East "H" street (which is presently constructed with two lanes) through the central portion of the property, and Otay Lakes Road along the eastern and northeastern portion of the site. The original proposed Specif ic plan Amendment as described in the Draft EIR would involve an increase in the maximum permitted dwelling units from 4220 to 5928. The proposed plan would provide a 93.4-acre Employment Park designation adjacent to East "H" Street. Other land use changes include the addition of a public facilities designation to accommodate community service uses (9.9 acres), an increase in acreage designated for parks/recreation uses (from 27.0 acres to 90.5 acres), and a decrease in natural open space acreage. Staff analysis included: land use, traffic circulation, fiscal analysis, biological resources, cultural resources, paleontological resources, geology/soils, landform/aesthetics, noise, schools and parks, recreation and open space. Mr. Krempl explained the Planning Commission considered this item on March 27 and denied the proposed amendment reaffirming the adopted plan; however, the Planning staff supports the amendment to the El Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. Mr. Krempl discussed the proposed improvements in the staff's proposal; the density factor; and staff's support of the employment park as being viable subject to some stringent design standards which can be compatible with its particular setting within the rest of the project and general environment. staff recommends 4,228 units for the Gersten holdings and 4,598 units for the total Specific Plan area including out-parcels which are the subject of this amendment. - City Council Meeting - 6 - April 16, 1985 Further that the City Council: (1) Approve in concept the proposed amendments to the El ~ Rancho del Rey Specific Plan map and text as modified by staff. .. (2) Refer the amendment back to the Planning Commission for consideration. Environmental Review Coordinator Reid stated the Draft Environmental Impact Review (EIR )was released for public review in October 1984 and was extended into January 23, 1985. On January 23, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the document and at that hearing no verbal testimony was taken. There were several written comments from agencies and individuals and those have now been incorporated into the final EIR along with appropriate responses. Subsequent to the review of the draft EIR, the project had several dramatic changes made mainly in response to the problems identified in the EIR. Therefore, it was necessary to prepare an addendum to the EIR to assure that it adequately evaluated the impacts of the proposed plan. It is the conclusion of the addendum that the EIR is adequate for the review of the project as currently proposed. It is the basic conclusion of the final EIR that all significant impacts can be mit igated to a level of insignificance with the exception of air quality and biological impacts. The Planning Commission certified the Final EIR at their March 25 meeting and recommended that Council certify this document. Mr. Tom Larkin, 3211 Fifth Avenue, San Diego, Project Manager for WESTEC Services, the firm that prepared the EIR, provided a description of the EIR findings and described the project characteristics and the major conclusions of that EIR. Some of the issues discussed by Mr. Larkin were: the future developments within the specif ic plan area which would reduce natural habitats on site, the project generating a greater number of trips than the adopted plan which would require a variety of street improvements and intersection improvements to mitigate potential impacts; the fiscal impact analysis completed by public affair consultants and included in the final EIR; the land form and aesthetic impacts which were evaluated in the EIR and tend to be signif icant with the conversion of the site from a rural area to an urbanized community; and the air quality impacts. The report concluded that those impacts could be adequately mitigated. . - .. ---,-- City Council Meeting - 7 - Apr il 16, 1985 Andrew Schlaef li, Vice President of Urban Systems, 4540 Kearney Villa Road, Suite 106, San Diego responsible for the supplemental report, stated that his firm analyzed extensively the existing interchanges, traffic count and identified the locations the project would impact. No specific traffic mitigation measures were proposed since it could not be known with any degree of certainty which of the many alternative measures would be the most appropriate unless the existing traffic conditions at that time were taken into consideration. He pointed out that "H" Street (which is the interchange most significantly impacted) had evidently been designed with development in mind as indicated by the southbound to eastbound loop: yet, to forecast that the loop would need signal control was impossible at this time. His firm recommended a monitoring program with mitigation measures based on information current at the time needed. In answer to Councilman Scott's question regarding the number of average daily trips on East "H" Street, Mr. Schlaefli stated that specific impacts on "H" Street are approaching 50,000 cars per day. City Engineer Lippitt noted the highest traffic generation in Chula Vista at the present time would be at Bonita Road between willow and Otay Lakes Road (30,000 trips daily). Mr. Schlaefli discussed the traffic impacts of the project referring to the special study done for the City by SANDAG. He discussed the impacts with emphasis to the exchanges on I-80S; the residential element will generate approximately 43,000 trips; the primary difference between the adopted plan is in the industrial area where in the adopted plan there is no industrial development and in the modified plan there is about 141. 3 acres of industrial use - that use alone generates about 21,000 trips. Mr. Schlaefli added the primary use is on East "H" Street in the central portion of the project; noted the peak hour traffic characteristics for industrial uses will be occurring in a direction that is opposite from the predominant residential use; based upon cumulative impacts they used the SANDAG computer model to establish a "project only" assignment of traffic; they reviewed the SANDAG analysis, concurred in its findings and used that data to address the impacts of the revised project. Mr. Schlaefli further testified that the priority impacts for the project were at two freeway interchanges: "H" Street and Telegraph Canyon Road. The cumulative traffic flow at "H" Street just east of Interstate 805 was 47,800 - approaching 50,000 - about 72% of the traffic. At Telegraph Canyon, the projection was 40,700, again, east of Interstate 805 on Telegraph Canyon. The project contributing only about 11,000 or 20% of the total traffic flow. ----or--- . - " City Council Meeting - 8 - April 16, 1985 He concluded it was extremely important to have a monitoring system to keep track of what is happening in the City - traffic count data must be gathered and continually monitored and evaluated as it is impossible to project when and where problems will occur. Continual evaluation can identify problems before they become critical as the correction may be expensive or the correction is time consuming to implement. , Councilman Moore indicated his surprise regarding Mr. Schlaefli's comments that the interchange designs function well now - in regard to travelling north on I-80S and "H" Street and the requirement to have to corne to a full stop on a six-lane highway. Paul Manganelli, 119 West Walnut, San Diego, Planning Consultant, showed slides of the project area noting the out-parcels not under ownership of the Gersten Company, the original Specific Plan area and a portion not under construction. This portion is included for continuity purposes since the residential land use categories in the amended plan differ from those in the original plan although the total number of units will not exceed designations. Mr. Manganelli traced the history of the project from its purchase in 1968 stating the proposed amendment involves the remaining undeveloped 1,582 acres of Gersten-owned land and the ten out-parcels. He described the density category changes in which each range (0-2, 2-4, 4-6, 6-8, 8-12 and 12-20); signified the density permitted the applicant's requested lncrease from 4,216 dwelling units to 4,634 represents a density increase of about 10 percent in actual figures but 37 percent when looked at as a net figure with the employment park area density from the original plan transferred elsewhere on-site. Mr. Manganelli described the housing type locations; noted the major commercial uses confined to the south side of East "H" Street near its intersection with I-805; that 56 acres have been designated for park purposes and 613 acres for open space where rare plant and animal species can exist in safety. In reviewing the public facili ties, Mr. Manganelli stated the water distribution facilities would adequately serve the uses proposed by the specific plan amendment; the Rice Canyon outfall has the capacity to accommodate the sewage from the project; however, additional faci li ties would be required to handle peak flows and new trunk sewers are proposed for the north and south legs of Rice Canyon; existing and proposed drainage improvements will accommodate storm runoff in the pro ject area; police service is adequate although additional personnel and equipment will be required as development of the project occurs; a new fire station should be on-line by the time development occurs on the project site; a site for a branch library is still "floating" but a . I I - ---¡------r . City Council Meeting - 9 - Apr il 16, 1985 request will be made for a potential site to be located in the general vicinity of East "H" street; the locations for the elementary and junior high schools are on an "if/as" needed basis; ~ school financing figures are not available as both districts are readjusting their fees; and an analysis of the fiscal impact of the proposed plan on the City indicates that the employment park would have a positive cost impact on operating revenues. The owners of the out parcels haVe been contacted and those who did not request a specific density have been assigned one commensurate with adjacent property. With regard to the employment park, Mr. Manganelli referred to the report by Market Profiles which points out that there is a limi ted number of large-scale, new industrial parks in the South Bay and recommends such an establishment. Councilwoman McCandliss inquired about the limitations placed on the employment park to insure it is compatible with the residential area. She commented it was pretty much an island completely surrounded by residential housing. Mr. Manganelli agreed it is surrounded by residential housing but it is also first surrounded by and totally bound by canyons. He noted the architectural control prOV1Slons and the landscaping commenting that the architectural treatment should not be left to just a facade but should include all sides because of the existing neighborhood. The Council recessed at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened at 9:10 p.m. In answer to Councilwoman McCandliss question, Mr. Krempl stated the employment park could be viewed as a very light industr ial. area, perhaps even more comparable to a research park with emphasis on manufacturing. He stated he agreed with Councilwoman McCandliss that the standards should be defined - perhaps a new ordinance in the project area which would actually set new regulations for development of the industrial area in conjunction with the SPA. Mr. Krempl stated staff's rationale for its recommendation regarding the employment park is: (1) standards requir ing landscaped setbacks could create an aesthetically pleasing environment. (2) Traffic circulation - before park is approved, additional traffic studies will be required. (3) The opportunity exists to fill an identified "market need". (4) The advantageous fiscal impacts to the City are based upon the presence of an employment park because of its positive effects on the tax base. -----..--- . - 'r ~ City Council Meeting - 10 - April 16, 1985 (5) Employment park would provide additional jobs for the City. (6) Assist in dispersing industrial areas within the City's planning area. (7) Property located with easy access to I-80S. (8) Public facilities are available to the site. (9) site would provide canyon access and views to employment park employees. Assistant City Attorney Gill stated that if Council decided to approve the proposal by either staff or the developer, since no resolutions are included for approval, he suggested continuing formal action for one week for the preparation of the documents. Gary santar, representing Santar and Associates, 3151 Fairway Ave, Kearney Mesa, Planning Consultant for the Gersten Company showed slides of the Specific Density Plan for El Rancho del Rey. He explained his firm looked at this plan and several other alternatives with respect to engineering and marketing input and carne up with a plan for 5,300 units. As a result of that study and discussions with staff, that figure was modified with a plan -- for 4,634 units. Mr. Santar discussed the plan, each type of density category and type of development to be expected:. 0-2 area in northern portion of the project for estate and custom home type lots for very large single-family development. People who would initially buy in the 2-4 area would move up into the 0-2 area when they could afford it. This is also for executives and owners of the businesses in the employment park. The 2-4 area, traditional detached single-family developments on standard size lots. The 4-6 area spotted throughout the project is for single-family detached smaller lots with smaller clustering, some patio type units oriented toward open space and common areas characterized by location adjacent to green Space. The 6-8 unit area, scenic ridge on the canyon, sub-detached on smaller lots, beginning to be attached and clustered in common open spaces, recreation features particularly in the more attached areas. 8-12 units per acre category, attached townhouses and condominiums but more oriented toward townhouse type of development, developed quite commonly on open spaces, common greens and recreational features. - 11 City Council Meeting - - April 16, 1985 12-20 units per acre, stack flats, condominiums and garden apartment areas where each development has an orientation for open space and recreational features as a part of the project. The other dominant land use is the employment park featuring open space expansion from bluff to bluff. In addition to a width of 1,000 feet, there is a tremendous vertical difference between the residential vertical development and the open space. This substantial separation is naturally done by the canyons. Mr. Santar then noted the character of the modern industrial parks; the arrangement of open spaces; the system of trails both within the canyons and within the development areas which will link the schools, parks and employment area including equestrian trails; the proposed specific plan which is being formatted to fit in with the rest of the other SPAs which have been approved; the administrative plan for each development; and the performance criteria for the proposed establishment of the SPA. Mr. william Robens, representing Gersten Company, 690 Otay Lakes Road, Chula vista stated the plan is designed around the views and integrated with the canyons taking advantage of open space corridors as well as utilizing a trail system. The proposed plan features an employment park, a new circulation system, new emphasis on preservation, new land use locations and addresses the housing needs of today, 1985. Changes have occurred since the inception of the adopted plan in 1978 with cost increases, higher interest rates and a growlng preference for attached homes rather than the detached which were popular in 1978. Mr. Robens showed slides and discussed the following: circulation, traffic, sense of community, biology and open space, canyon treatment, trail system, single family detached project, balance, fiscal benefits, employment benefit from employment park, SPAs, and estate lots. Mr. Robens explained the fiscal benefit, (assuming a 20-year build-out) of the net revenues which would accrue to the City $12-$14 million more for the proposed plan than for the existing plan. After 20 years, the proposed plan revenueS as compared to the existing plan will be $825,000 a year. The employment park market study showed a clear need for an employment park in the South Bay area. Gersten has proposed 90 acres; staff has increased that to 150 acres. Most of the fiscal benefits accrue to the City from the employment park. The aesthetic benefits from the employment park will be a park-like atmosphere. ----r ! I I r City Council Meeting - 12 - Apr il 16, 1985 In summary, Mr. Robens stated Gersten Company has developed a plan which conforms better than the 1978 plan with outside professionals and staff input. He discussed the development of El Rancho del Rey Unit No. 6 located south of "H" street, 350 units (50 units per year). The major development is the turnover of land owned by the Gersten Company at one time but sold at least 5 years prior to the 1978 plan and the Gersten Company has not participated, in any way, with that project. Mr. Robens added that the City, along with the Gersten Company constructed "H" Street and when that was constructed, it became possible to construct future developments. The City had imposed a west to east policy on the developer which meant they could only realistically develop along Telegraph Canyon Road. That opened up the opportunity for developing a new plan and for more development. Also, interest rates decreased after skyrocketing for several years and house prices started to stabilize. After five years, (since 1978) the Gersten Company took a look at a new plan. They hired a series of professionals to prepare a plan. In addition, staff has taken a very critical look at the plan and recommended many changes which helped Gersten bring back a much improved plan than originally submitted. Mr. Robens declared that the reasons for supporting the plan are circulation, traffic, biology, open space, canyon trail system, single family detached project, more balance, has fiscal benefit to City, employment benefits, employment park and SPA improvements, provides estate lots, canyon treatment, sense of community, traffic and circulation. Councilman Scott commented on the purpose of the 0-2 density which was to preserve the ruggedness and unique geographical land mass, thus allowing the developer to cluster in order to protect the environment. He further commented on the reasons for the phasing of the original plan (west to east). Cliff Roland, llOO Industrial Boulevard, Chula Vista, did not wish to speak; but wished to go on record as approving the plan. Dr. Wendy Longley-Cook, 1007 Fifth Avenue, San Diego, representing United Enterprises, stated they have reviewed the plan and feel it provides a reasonable balanced land use mix and would be an asset to the area. They urged Council to support the amendment as proposed. Peter watry, 1181 Second Avenue, Chula Vista, representing "Crossroads" stated the two proposals represent significant changes from the existing plan. He reviewed slides of the existing plan describing a brief history of its 1972 initiation . I I ----r-- 1 ~ City Council Meeting -13 - April 16, 1985 and referendums. Mr. wat~y asked Council not to ignore the existing plan before approvlng the changes, adding there is a need for a more balanced community. The City needs estate-size homes - it already has more than enough low and moderate income units. Mr. Watry urged Council to (1) have the large lots kept in the plan; (2) question the location of the employment park; (3) be concerned with the 48% traffic increase projected; (4) proposed ~ abolishment of the individual SPA's; (5) retain the 500 estate-size lots. Gerald LaLande, 4608 Villas Drive, Bonita, one of the owners of the out-parcels (No. 8) requested a change in density for which staff is recommending 2-4 du/ac. He commented, as a small developer, he could not afford to develop this property at the lesser density. There being no further comments either for or against, the public hearing was declared closed. In answer to Councilman Moore's question, Director Krempl commented that if the project was approved, staff will have a permit issue criteria for each SPA for Council approval regarding traffic study, public facility plans and financing, specific SPA plans and street and road update. The applicant's responsibility, as it pertains to off-site improvements would be defined as each SPA comes in. There would be a set of zoning regulations for the employment park; insurance of the development of the "upper end" of the area and an agreement requir ing development wi thin a given period of time; each SPA will be looked at as it will be developed and phase-lines will be defined in advance. Mayor Cox clarified that the approved plan has six SPAs encompassing the Corcoran Ranch and the SPAs do not provide for phasing. Mr. Krempl added the other SPAs were included for continuity phases - there would be no change within those. Further discussion ensued as to the rationale of going from 90 acres of the employment park to the 140 gross. Councilman Scott stated he was against the plan as it shows a tremendous increase in traffic but does not show much improvement in the terms of engineering to solve the problem. RESOLUTION (5b) OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MALCOLM, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent passed and approved with Councilman Scott voting "no". ---,- - . . I r City Council Meeting - 14 - April 16, 1985 Councilwoman McCandliss commented the employment park is a new and important addition to the plan. In her analysis of plan she has taken it as a whole and for sees 50,000 trips on "H" Street. When people are going to and from work, the amount of traffic on interchange loops is "atrocious" and she noted the kind of modifications necessary. The employment park is generating 21,000 additional trips and she would like to see more attention given to the estate lots and larger units. MS (Moore/Malcolm) to accept the following five conditions of ~ approval: 1. staff work with developer to increase the number of estate lots. 2. Have a permit issue criteria for each phase-li ne or subarea within the Corcoran Ranch to insure update on traffic study and corrective action prior to permit issue of the next phase - that would also include public facilities. 3. staff would work with the developer and come up with an implementation plan similar to the one in redevelopment of Otay Valley Road to insure employment park quality in design and usage. 4. Staff also prepare a development agreement prior to permit issue in conjunction with the developer prior to Council approval. 5. Out parcel owners be allowed to corne forth on an individual basis if they warrant density change. The motion passed with the following vote to-wit: , AYES: Cox, Malcolm, Moore NOES: McCandliss, Scott ABSTAIN: None Councilwoman McCandliss noted 1,150 units transferred to the development area and asked for a reduction of the 1,100 dwell ing uni ts in the development area to be reworked and brought back to the City. MS (McCandliss/Scott) to require a reduction of 1,100 dwelling units for the entire SPA area. Mayor Cox commented staff's plan is more supportable from his posi tion than the applicant's proposal. There have been a number of changes which have occurred OVer the last seven years since the original plan was approved. It is reasonable to assume that those areas closest to "H" street would be a higher density developed area than those areas closer to the south and north leg of Rice Canyon. The housing styles are different, the buying I~ City Council Meeting - 15 - April 16, 1985 styles are different than they were seven or eight years ago, and just to pick out 1,100 dwelling units may not be doing justice to staff or applicant's recommendation. Councilman Scott said he could support the 1978 plan; however, cannot see the logic of taking 1,100 units from the employment park and moving them to another location. Councilman Malcolm stated he could support sending it back to the Planning Commission asking for some reduction in the number of units. Councilwoman McCandliss asked the Planning Director if this plan was to go back to Planning Commission what would be the next step. Director Krempl stated the developer would be asked to respond with an alternate proposal, and if staff did not feel it was adequate, an alternate proposal it would be taken to the Commission. The motion failed by the following vote to wit: AYES: McCandliss, Scott NOES: Cox, Malcolm, Moore ABSENT: None MSUC (Moore/Malcolm) for staff recommendations 1 and 2 (delete the word "in concept"). The staff recommendations are: 1. Based on the discussion contained in the Issues and Recommendations Sections, staff recommended that the City Council approve "in concept" the proposed amendments to the El Rancho del Rey Specific Plan map and text as modified by staff. 2. Refer the amendment back to the Planning Commission for consideration. The motion carried with Councilwoman McCandliss and Councilman Scott voting "no". 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS a. Michael Helmer, 701 "B" Street, Suite 355, San Diego, representing the Helmer Company stated he wants to build some houses in an out-parcel in the Casa del Rey Subdivision. He explained there are compelling and aesthetic reasons for the development and requested a reconsideration of their hearing since they were not able to be present at that last meeting. . . City Council Meeting - 16 - Apr il 16, 1985 MSUC (Cox/McCandliss) to redocket this item for Council consideration. (Councilman Scott left the meeting at this time). CONSENT CALENDAR (7-10) ,k MSC (Cox/Moore) to accept the Consent Calendar with Councilman Malcolm abstaining on Item No.8) 7. RESOLUTION 11992 ALLOCATING THE SUM OF $400 FROM THE CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND FOR THE COST OF PRINTING THE INTERNATIONAL FRIENDSHIP COMMISSION BROCHURE (City Clerk) On September 11, 1984 the Council approved having the International Friendship Commission put together some type of brochure on the Sister Cities of Chula Vista with factual data which will be of interest to the citizens of Chula Vista and people who inquire about the City's Sister Cities. The cost of printing the 1000 brochures will be approximately $400. The $400 will be allocated from the contingency reserve. The balance of this contingency reserve will be $20,084.00. 8a. RESOLUTION 11993 APPROVING FINAL MAP OF CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 81-4 ,BONITA LONG CANYON ESTATES - UNIT 1, ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC THE PUBLIC STREETS DEDICATED ON SAID MAP, AND ACCEPTING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA THE EASEMENTS GRANTED ON SAID MAP WITHIN SAID SUBDIVISION, AND APPROVING AGREEMENT FOR THE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY SAID SUBDIVISION (Director of Public Works/City Engineer) b. RESOLUTION 11994 ACCEPTING GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR SEWER PURPOSES FROM BONITA LONG CANYON PARTNERSHIP c. RESOLUTION ll995 ACCEPTING THE DEDICATION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE NORTHERLY HALF OF EAST "H" STREET EAST OF OTAY LAKES ROAD AND OFFICIALLY NAMING IT EAST "H" STREET d. RESOLUTION ll996 ACCEPTING THE DEDICATION OF THAT PORTION OF CORRAL CANYON ROAD OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY OF BONITA LONG CANYON ADJACENT TO EAST "H" STREET AND OFFICIALLY NAMING IT "CORRAL CANYON ROAD" - ,r ----"--' - . -~ City Council Meeting - 17 - April 16, 1985 Councilman Moore noted his concern regarding the channel for potential flooding, the retention basin, low flow channel, outlet channel and potential erosion as it pertains to that area through the golf course. The final map for Chula Vista Tract 81-4, Bonita Long Canyon Estates, Unit 1 has been checked and found to be in general conformance with the tentative map. The developers have executed the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. In respect to one of the conditions of approval, the developer has acquired and dedicated off-site right-of-way to provide half street width improvements (50 feet north of centerline) for the missing segments of East "H" street from Corral Canyon Road to otay Lakes Road. Forty feet of pavement will be provided easterly of the existing centerline. The recommendation is to approve the resolutions (a-d). Councilman Malcolm abstained from voting on this item. He stated he did not have a copy of the final map and couldn't reasonably cast a vote for or against it. 9. ORDINANCE 2110 AMENDING CHAPTER 1.04 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO CITY LIABILITY - FIRST READING (City Attorney) This ordinance provides that for purposes of tort liability, the requirements of the Municipal Code relating to official duties are not to be considered mandatory. 10. ORDINANCE 2109 AMENDING SECTION 10.72.050 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE BY AUTHORIZING THE CITY COUNCIL TO WAIVE OR LOWER LICENSE FEES FOR BICYCLES - SECOND READING AND ADOPTION (City Attorney) This ordinance was placed on first reading at the meeting of April 9, 1985. The amendment allows the City Council to waive bicycle license fees at its discretion. End of Consent Calendar RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES, FIRST READING 11. RESOLUTION 11997 APPROVING LIABILITY INSURANCE POLICY WITH PLANET INSURANCE COMPANY AND APPROPRIATING $146,088 FROM THE PUBLIC LIABILITY TRUST FUND (Director of Finance) ----r-- , - " ~ City Council Meeting - 18 - Apr il 16, 1985 Finance Director Christopher explained the San Diego County Cities Risk Management Authority recently received notice of cancellation of its liability insurance policy from Planet Insurance Company. Chula vista's insurance coverage is cancelled along with the Cities of Coronado, Del Mar, Escondido, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside, Santee and Vista. Planet offered to reinsure all of the cities, with the exception of Escondido, at much higher premiums. The current policy offers broad form coverage including insurance for inverse condemnation, discrimination and subsidence. This coverage will be eliminated from the new policy. The new policy with Planet is effective April 1, 1985, and the premium payment is due May 1, 1985. The amount to be appropriated from the City's Public Liability Trust Fund is as follows: Premium for coverage of $6 million $147,088 ~ Premium for excess coverage to $20 million 25,000 Subtotal $172,088 Less credit for premium paid on cancelled policy (26,000) Total appropriation $146,088 Staff recommended appropriating $146,088 from the Public Liability Trust Fund's unappropriated balance of $978,000. Councilman Malcolm expressed concern regarding the lack of choices available of the bids. Mr. Christopher assured him of the 60-day cancellation notice and Planet Insurance Company's offer to reinsure the City effective April 1. The Joint Powers Authority has gone out to bid and if a better bid is received, then a 60 day termination notice can be used. If the City went out to bid to other companies, then there is a possibility of receiving a cancellation date and being uninsured. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MOORE the reading of the text was wai ved by unanimous consent, passed and approved with Councilman Scott absent. 12. RESOLUTION ll998 MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATIVE TO THE PROPOSED STATE ENTERPRISE ZONE AREAS AND AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF THE ENTERPRISE ZONE APPLICATION TO THE STATE - (Community Development Director) . - . r - City Council Meeting - 19 - April 16, 1985 At its March 19, 1985 meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare an application for assistance under the State-sponsored enterprise zone program. The proposed enterprise zone areas are the Otay Valley Road industrial area and the proposed Bayfront tourist-commercial area. Prior to submission of the application to the State by April 17, 1985, the City must make certain findings relative to these areas. The Community Development Director recommended that the City Council find that the application areas are depressed and that designation of those areas as enterprise zones is necessary in order to assist in attracting private sector investment and authorize submission of the application to the state. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MALCOLM, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved with Councilman Scott absent. 13. REPORT OF THE CITY MANAGER a. City Manager Goss noted that saturday, April 27 at 8 a.m. has been set for the goal-setting workshop. A facilitator will - be present; however, Councilman Malcolm will not be present. b. City Manager Goss noted the Community Development Department advises that the Council needs to appoint two members to the Escondido Mortgage Revenue Bond Committee which meets 2-3 times a year. Mayor Cox recommended this be redocketed for the Thursday meeting. c. City Manager Goss gave the Municipal Pursuit question: To how many outside agencies does the City of Chula Vista provide contractual data processing services? Seven. They are the cities of El Cajon, Coronado, Imperial Beach, santee, Chula Vista Sanitary Service, SCOOT, and the Union of Pan Asian Communities. The second question was how much revenue has the data processing division earned since it began providing contractual data processing services to other agencies. The answer is $720,000. 14. MAYOR'S REPORT a. Mayor Cox commented the Amex Grand Opening on Sunday was a high mark for the City of Chula Vista as it was the City's first high-tech industry. That facility started construction January 2 and completed construction April 1. A - 105,000 square-foot building was constructed in 90 days and breaks all records for Chula Vista. He complimented staff for extraordinary cooperation in completion of this prOject. . II --,-- 1 city Council Meeting - 20 - April 16, 1985 - b. Mayor Cox noted the ground breaking for Integrated Systems (north of Amex). This will also be a high-tech industry. Construction will started June 1 and will be completed by october 1. c. Mayor Cox commented on street improvements being put in front of Amex consisting of curbs, gutters and sidewalks. He would like to see curbs being put in on the west side of "J" street. MSUC (Cox/Moore) staff to report on cost and potential scheduling of those improvements - for curbs, gutters and overlay on that particular portion of the roadway (in front of Amex). d. MSUC (Cox/Moore) for a staff report on the Otay Valley Road Assessment District. 15. COUNCIL COMMENTS a. Councilwoman McCandliss noted the disrepair of the parking lot at the shopping center on Fourth Avenue and" F" Street. She expressed concern this could become an immediate liability of the City. MSUC (McCandliss/Cox) for staff to look into this (parking lot in need of repair) and report back to Council as to what can be .- done. I b. Councilwoman McCandliss commented on the Council referral list not being up-to-date. Assistant City Manager Asmus noted staff is behind in getting out an updated tickler and will provide an updated copy. c. Councilman Moore noted the Beautification Awards Dinner will be held at the San Diego Country Club on Apr il 30 (5th Tuesday). d. Councilman Moore reported that on June 24, LAFCO will consider Chula Vista's Sphere of Influence. The meeting will be held in the Council Chamber. Councilman Moore commented that Council authorized each Member to invite a business person and their spOUse to the Awards Dinner and suggested someone from AmeX be invited. ADJOURNMENT AT 11:45 p.m. to the Council meeting following the Redevelopment Agency meeting on Thursday, April 18, 1985 at 4:00 p.m. and to the regular meeting of April 23, 1985 at 7:00 p.m. . I I ---.,------r . -lATE OF CALIFORNIA) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING ORDER - COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) ss OF ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING CITY OF CHULA VISTA) I, Jennie M. Fulasz, being first duly sworn depose and say: That I am the duly chosen, qualified and acting City Clerk of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista; That the reqular meeting of the Council of the City of Chula Vista was held Tuesday, April 16, 1985 and said meeting was adjourned to the time and place specified in the order of adjournment ATTACHED HERETO: That on Wednesday, April 17, 1985 at the hour of 9:00 a.m. I posted a copy of said order at a conspicuous place on or near the door of the place at which said meeting of April 16, 1985 was held. ~~~ Y City Clerk - I u MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING - OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Held April 16, 1985 The City Council met in the Council Chamber at the City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue on the above date at 6:oå p.m. with the following: Councilmen present: Cox, Malcolm, McCandliss, Scott, Moore Councilmen absent: None * * * * * * * * * - ADJOURNMENT The Mayor adjourned the meeting until Thursday, April IB, 1985 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers~~ City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. (FOLLOWING THE REDEVELOP- MENT AGENCY MEETING) I. JENNIE M. FULASZ. City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that this is a full, true and correct copy of an order by the City Council at the meeting of April 16, 1985 ~ JENNIE M. FULASZ. CMC, Cit Clerk City of Chula Vista, California -