HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1983/12/27 MINUTES OF AN PNJnURNED PEGULAP ~EETING OF THE CITY COU~!CIL
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Tuesday, December 27, 19~3 Council Conference Room
3:00 p.m. City Hall
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers Present: Mayor Cox; Councilmembers Moore, McCandliss,
Scott
Councilmembers Absent: Councilman Malcolm
Staff Present: City Manager Goss, City Attorney Harron, Director
of Community Development Desrochers, Planning
Director Gray
l. ORDINANCE 2059 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE OTAY
VALLEY ROAD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PROJECT AREA -
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION
On December 20, 1983, Ordinance 2059 was placed on first reading. MSUC (Scott/
Moore) to place the ordinance on second reading and adoption.
Mr. L. F. McKenna, 1347 Mountain View Lane, representing the Citizens Action
Network, requested he be allowed to comment. Mr. McKenna wished to reassert his
position that the project was ill conceived, the E.I.R. deficient procedurally,
and he had grave shortcomings about how the project was being reviewed and
felt there were major'~ole~ in it. He asked the Council to have staff move
forward with positive measures, to establish a project area committee expeditiously,
and that the General Plan amendment be pushed through as quickly as possible.
He also questioned when the Ad Hoc Committee on Hazardous Wastes would be
formed and put into high gear, and that the City adopt a promotional program
for this area similar to that used for the Bayfront.
The reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved
unanimously.
Councilman Scott left the meeting after the vote.
Councilwoman McCandliss questioned what kind of timing the City is looking at
for the General Plan Amendment. Director of Planning Gray stated that the next
General Plan amendment would be in April.. It could be done sooner depending on
whether or not an E.I,R. is required, If an E.I.R. is not required, obviously
the timeframe could be shorter.
Mayor Cox inquired as to when the Design Review Manual for the area would be
completed. Director of Community Development Desrochers stated that staff was -
working on a list of priorities that have to be completed for the Otay Valley
Road project and they are attempting to ascertain the concerns of the nearby
residents, He indicated that Berryman & Stephenson, Inc., consultants, have
been working on a manual based on industrial park criteria, which hopefully
could be used as part of the City's Design Review Manual. It would be an
addendum to the existing manual, and if the Berryman & Stephenson work is
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - 2 - December 27, 1983
acceptable to staff, it will be recommended to the Council sometime in the next
few months.
Mayor Cox stated that contact has been made by the City Manager with various
agencies to line up their respective appointees for the Ad Hoc Committee on
Hazardous Wastes.
Discussion ensued regarding the steps to be taken in the design review process.
Community Development Director Desrochers explained that the Berryman & Stephenson
report on standards for industrial park development will include buffers, ingress
and egress, setbacks, color coordination, etc.
Councilwoman McCandliss questioned whether in the interim period (between now and
when the district is legally accepted and the General Plan amended) there might
be any plans filed, and whether there might be a retroactive effect on these
interim plans. City Attorney Harron responded that the City could impose a
moratorium until the General Plan amendment is considered. Community Development
Director Desrochers also noted that all processing has to go through a precise
plan review. Councilwoman McCandliss then questioned whether it was staff's intent
to notify the Council as soon as possible about any plans filed for this area during
the interim period.
~ISUC (McCandliss/Moore) that staff notify the Council as soon as any preliminary
plans are being seriously discussed ~or the project area.
Mayor Cox asked when the Berryman & Stephenson report would be completed.
Community Development Director Desrochers believed it would be ready sometime
in February.
Mayor Cox then questioned how the City could pursue annexation of the area to
the City rather than have property owners seek annexation piecemeal. Director
of Planning Gray explained that the pronerty has to be pre-planned and pre-zoned
with LAFCO approval regardless of who petitions annexation. If the City wants
to initiate annexation, it might be an alternative for the City to pick up the
LAFCO fees. Mayor Cox inquired, if no action was taken at this time, would a
pre-zoning be done at the time of the General Plan amendment? Director of
Planning Gray responded that this was correct.
Councilman Moore indicated that the County has new regulations regarding annexa-
tions and fees are collected differently than under the present property tax
exchange formula. He felt the County should be encouraged to use the existing
fee formula in this case.
Mayor Cox questioned whether there was anything the City should, or could, be
doing prior to the General Plan amendment. Director of Planning Gray replied
that the only thing that could be done is to have the property owners sign the
annexation form,
MS (Cox/McCandliss) that staff be directed to contact the property owners
involved in the County parcel to seek support and signature to annexation documents
with the understanding that a redevelopment area will be in effect and the
Redevelopment Agency would pay the cost of annexation fees.
Councilwoman McCandliss was concerned as to what the fees might be, and a
substitute motion was offered.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - 3 - December 27, 1983
SUBSTITUTE MOTION
MSUC (McCandliss/Moore) for staff to seek information on those fees and come back
to Council in one week for consideration and potential funding sources.
2. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT (None)
3. MAYOR'S REPORT (None)
4. COUNCIL COMMENTS
a. Councilman Moore asked for an update on the sign for the Senior Citizen
Information and Referral Center. Director of Community Development
Desrochers stated he would bring a report back to Council in the near
future.
b. Councilman Moore mentioned that, other than the trees outside the Civic
Center, no City buildings were decorated for the holidays and that perhaps
next year the Information and Referral Center could be decorated. Mayor
Cox reported that at a recent meeting of the Tree Lighting Ceremony
Committee, the possibility of moving the tree lighting ceremony from the
Civic Center to Memorial Bowl next year was discussed and is under study.
c. Counc~woman McCandfiss commented that there did not seem to be as many
explorer scouts at the snow ceremony this year as previously, and perhaps
the number should be increased next year.
d. Councilwoman McCandliss referred to an article in last week's Star News
regarding the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan. She was concerned as
to the timing of issuin~ a Dress release the day of a public hearing,
which appeared to predict the Council's actions, and felt it was in-
appropriate. City Manager Goss stated that the Public Information
Coordinator had been ill and the press release was prepared by the
consultant, Nuffer-Smith. Councilwoman McCandliss felt that issuing a
press release so close to the public hearing "smacked of predestination."
City Attorney Harron requested that the Council call an executive session for
the purpose of discussing litigation.
MSUC (Cox/McCandliss) that a Closed Session be held following the meeting.
There being no further business, the Council recessed to Closed Session at
3:35 p.m. The secrstar~ was excused and the City Manager reported that the
session adjourned at 3:55 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT AT 3:55 D.m. to the Council meeting scheduled for Tuesday, January 3,
1984 at 7:00 p.m.
JENNIE M. FULASZ, CMC
STATE OF CALIFOP~IA ) ~FIDAVIT OF POSTING ORDER
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss OF ADJOURN~.~NT OF .~ETING
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Jennie M. Fulasz, being first duly swol~ depose and sayl:
That I am the duly chosen, qualified and acting City Clerk of the
City Council of the City of Chula Vista;
That the re9u]ar meeting of the Council of the City of
Chula Vista was held Tuesday, December 20, ]983
and said meeting was adjo~l~qed to the time and place specified in
the order of adjournment ATTACHED HERETO:
That on Wednesday, December 2], ]983 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 me~ting of December 20, ]983
was held.
S~Lbscribed and sworn to before me this
day of
19
Notary PLLbliC in and for said County
and State of California
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Held December 20, ]983
The City Council met in the Council Chamber at the Public Services
Building, 276~Fourth Avenue on the above date at 7:00 p.m. with
the following
Councilmen present: Cox, Moore, McCand]~ss, Scott, Ma]c0]m
Councilmen absent: None
ADJOURNMENT
The Mayor adjourned the meeting at ]2:00 a.m. until Tuesday,
December 27, ]983 at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Conference
Room, City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California.
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 December 20, ]983