Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1997/03/27 (2)MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING/WORKSESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Thursday, March 27, 1997 6:42 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: CALL TO ORDER Council Conference Room Administration Building Councihnembers: Moot, Padilia, Rindone, Salas, and Mayor Horton. Councilmembers: None City Manager, John D. Goss; City Attorney, John M. Kaheny; Conh-nunity Development Director, Chris Salomone; and City Clerk, Beverly A. Authelet BUSINESS 2. BAYFRONT Introduction and Background; History of Efforts to Develop the Mid Bayfront; Current Status of Development: Current Projects; Issues for Council/Staff; Approach; and Action Plan. (Director of Conununity Development) Introduction and Background: City Manager, John Goss, presented some background and history of the Bayfront as part of his presentation a video was shown depicting the Bayfront in 1985. Current Status of Development: Community Developanent Director, Chris Salomone, gave a brief general overview on the current status of the Bay front. ® Ron McElliott, representing the Chula Vista Yacht Harbor Coalition. stated that about a year and half ago, some of the businesses on the waterfront got together to try to do something to encourage development on the waterfront. They formed the Chula Vista Yacht Harbor Coalition which consists of key property owners, some Port tenants, City staff, and Senior Management at the Port District. They meet each month and have developed some short term and long term goals as well as a Vision Statement. They have caused several things to happen such as changing some land use designations `'vhich ,,viII benefit the uses of the property on the waterfront to make it more attractive. They urged the Council to host this workshop, because it was time to talk about the Bayfront and to sec if they could make some things happen. They will continue to promote and market the waterfront area and assist the City, Port, Rohr, Chula Vista Capital, and SDG&E in a coordinated efti~rt to master plan the area. The Coalition wants the following: (1) The City to consider the waterfront a development priority and to provide the policy direction to its stat'f to move tierward with the Port District planners to create attractive business opportunities along the waterfront. (2) They would like the City to align its zoning with the Port District zoning. Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 2 (3) They would like the City to sponsor creation of a master plan fi~r the area to include establishing objectives with dates, forming a planning district if that is appropriate, and actually hiring a land planning company to handle the master planning if that is appropriate. (4) They would like the City to prepare an amendment to the bayfront sign ordinance making it compatible with the Port District, Caltrans, and the Coastal Commission. (5) They would like to continue to support and promote the waterfront events such as Harbor Days, Artero Barrios, Bay Fair, Sunset Cinema, and maybe some day a summer pops. (6) They would like the City to recognize a name change to Chula Vista Yacht Harbor and request the Port District to make it a formal name change. (7) They would like the City to recognize the Coalition as an active partner in the planning, marketing, and promotion of the waterfront. Current Projects: Co~nmunity Develop~nent Director. Chris Salomone, presented a brief update on what is currently going on at the Bayfront. They have been talking to a major pharmaceutical company; there is a major entertainment center that is considering an area of the Rohr campus adjacent to J Street; a design is underway to put "H" Street through to Tidelands; there is a bikeway which will go through the property and will proceed northward to National City; sales of various agency properties to the Port which are being negotiated and finalized: the BECCA project; a wildlife refuge; Nature Center; tourist train from National City to Imperial Beach through our Bayfront; signage; lease of golden truss buildings: and Port District Arts Project proposal: and a National City marina proposal that will have impacts on our marina. · Executive Director. Stephen Neudecker, stated that the Bayfront Conservancy Trust which operates the Nature Center was formed as an element of our Local Coastal Plan. It was a vision to balance the needs of conservation and development; to use the revenue of development to fund conservation and use our natural resources as an essential draw attraction for the development. The bad news of the plan is that there has been no one to tax. They are currently exploring several options to fund their funding base from discussions with the Port District to discussions with the Fish and Wildlife Service to merging with the Natural History Museum or with the San Diego Zoological Society. · Laura Hunter, 1717 Kettner, San Diego, representing Environmental Health Coalition. She stated that what they hoped would come out of the workshop: (1) That the Council will come up with a series of principles or criteria for evaluating development proposals. They felt what would be primary would be a development plan that improves the quality of life of residents of the cormnunity and provide opportunities tbr the visitors and community and family building opportunities. (2) That the City Council link the Bayfront property creatively and productively with the bayfront resources. We need to develop something in the South Bay which is special and unique. (3) It has to be profitable. (4) That there be pedestrian and bike oriented passive uses are important. (5) Important to ti~cus on trying to get a development that would encourage people to coming to the Convention Center, and bring their family to the South Bay because it is more family friendly. Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 3 (6) They wanted Council to direct staff to/~>cus on ecotourism as part of this discussion and to give a high priority to proposals that support ecotourism. (7) They wanted the Council to pursue a Port District funding of an ecotour on study for the Bay resources. Their vision is that we have a County-wide ecotourism plan with the hub concentrated in the South Bay with the appropriate ecotour resort development and cultural opportunities. · Michael W. Kline, 4588 Wilson Avenue, San Diego, 92116, representing Flight Tours, Inc. which arrange bird watching tours. He pointed out the financial advantages in having such tours to the South since the area has more kinds of birds than anywhere else in the County. He asked Council to seriously consider ecotourism as a vital link to what we have to offer as part of this development strategy. · Bennett Greenwald stated that they were looking for the Council to come up with some guiding principals and ways to encourage a process that provides t~r the enhancement of development in the non-developed areas. The current zoning ordinances that we have to work under are totally inadequate today to deal with modern development. · Jim Peugh, 2776 Nipoma Street, San Diego, 92106, representing the San Diego Audubon Society, expressed that they felt there were sensitive ways of development that were compatible with conservation. He hoped that Council would look very carefi~lly at things such as building heights and buffering and types of activity. Mayor Horton stated that some of the concerns that she has heard is having the IDEC building at this particular location so close to the valuable waterfront property. She asked if there was a way that it could be moved back toward the East or to an alternative location. Mr. Salomone 1~11 that ther~ were other opportnnities besides that bnilding. These are things that we are here to talk about, the idea of land use, tourism, commercial, etc. If we see this in a vision as a tourist cormnercial opportunity on the water, then we should think about putting an industrial type use adjacent to the water. We might think about moving it back away from the water and preserving that core fi>r a tourist type facility. Councilmember Rindone stated that if the direction from the Council was to fast track a complete master plan, What would be the time frame tbr this. Mr. Salomone stated it will take 9 to 12 months to get throngh a master planning effort. What they would propose is that the City, Rohr, and the Port work together, share the costs, hire the consultants, and begin the process. Planning Director, Robert Leiter, stated that in terms of planning tbr this area, one of the approaches to be taken would be to develop, in coordination with the Port District and the property owners, an overall framework, vision, and set of goals for the overall area, and then ti~cus and do more detail planning tier some specific focus areas where development is more likely to occur in the near term where the property owners involved have a more direct interest in pursuing that. If we are able to narrow that focus to certain areas, the we could meet a lot of the goals and do it in a more rapid forum. How long it would take would depend on how much resources and staff the City would put into it. In terms of an initial strategic plan, he felt it could be compressed into 6-9 month process. Councilmember Rindone clarified that if the direction was to do a comprehensive master plan on a fast track, it would take 9-12 months. Mr. Leiter responded that it would be a very aggressive schedule, but he l~lt an overall plan could be completed within a year. · Ron McElliott, Yacht Harbor Coalition, stated that they see the development on the waterfront to have both short term and long term objectives. Long term wonld be the master planning of the area. The eighty acres that we are dealing with conceivably could have some residential. Minutes March 27, 1097 Page 4 ® Port Commissioner. David Malcolm, pointed out the only vacant parcels that aren't long term comnutted under Port jurisdiction. He stated that the Port's plan tbr the Bayfront allowed tbr greater flexibility with light industrial, manufactnring, visitor serving commercial with hotels and restaurants. At the same time they were working to put "H" Street through. They have met with Rohr in trying to move IBrward with an environmental clean up of that area. Currently, he did not believe that Rohr would want to commit to a master planning process at this stage because of the environmental cleanup process. He hoped the City Council would allow the Port to proceed with the rezoning that was requested by Mr. McElliott, then the linkages between the other areas such as the bike paths and pedestrian paths needed to be coordinated. They are doing part of that with the roadway study on "H" Street; it is not just an "H" Street study since the study contains how we are going tn link the roadway system into the main Bayfront area. Councihnember Salas asked if we had any idea as to how titr the environmental clean up of the Rohr property would set its back from putting a difli~rent type of development on the property, or if it is going to be feasible and how much is it going to cost to do the clean up? Mr. Salomone responded that there is a lot of speculation, but currently we do not have any idea. ® Art Sellgren, Rohr, stated that they are concerned about the financial implications of all of this. This will be a hnge financial imposition. They would study this carefully, weigh the consequences, and decide which way to go atler that. They were not in a position to commit now. · Bennett Greenwald stated that in order to move this process tbrward, part of the question about moving this tbrward is commercial reality and rationality and that has to do with developer intensity and the change of uses in this area. Until the landowners hear development intensity questions addressed specifically and until land uses are changed, and until there is a clear pathway to development, no one is going to do anything. Councilmember Padilia stated that we cannot dictate to the property owner what they are going to do. · Cheryl Cox, representing Chula Vista Capital stated that they have tbcused on visitor oriented commercial because it tends to make sense liar people who live and visit here and it makes financial sense for the person who owns the property and wants to create some development. If a landowner who says he cannot build this, then it is not going to get built. And yet to leave 100 acres of developable property vacant, doesn't make sense for the landowner. Councilmember Moot suggested that the City work in cortjunction with the Port to evaluate their proposal fbr their land use designations to see if we agree and if it is compatible with what we want to do. If it is, we could adopt it as ours. We could get the subcommittee together to review their plan and if we are all in agreement then the problem is solved. Mr. Salomone stated that the Port's land use designations are very broad. They allow a tremendous amount of flexibility. They also do not allow residential, and we see residential as a component of the City's redevelopment areas. He did not feel that we would want to adopt their land uses. · Commissioner Malcolm stated that the Port was asking tbr flexibility as well as to make certain that the environment was being protected at the same time. He hoped that the City would put in environmental protections like the Port's or work with Rohr to come up with a plan so the area can be zoned which will give us the flexibility needed. Mr. Leiter stated that our existing plan is over ten years old. Today, the Coastal Comnussion and the City are looking at things differently, so we could work toward this type of approach. If we ti3cus on this area, we can do the same kinds of things that the Port has done. · William Claycomb, President of Save Our Bay, stated that if you put people at the water edge, you will remove a great deal of the habitat (water birds) because the water birds do not like people. Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 5 Mr. Salomone stated that the circulation needs to be updated, but first you want to see what a project is going to be in order to make the circulation element fit it. Councilmember Padilia added that the dictation issue is real on both sides that it requires cormnon definitions. We don't know what the economic incentives are going to be until we start framing concepts with one another; it has to be done together. Councilmember Rindone felt that everyone wants to move forward and have sonle clear directions given to staff. He f~lt that the Council was dancing around what needed to be done. · Pat Barnes, representing SDG&E, stated that they were not planning to close or dismantle the South Bay Power Plant. There is a parcel of land 'known as the Liquid Natural Gas site which is close to 30 acres and is available. They have had AMCOR, a paper recycling company; CalMat who wanted to put in a batch plant where they mix concrete rock; a Japanese Company was looking for something near a railroad and freeway access. She stated that whatever was put there would have to be something which the City would have to embrace. They would not be considering decommissioning the South Bay plant because it is needed. Mayor Horton stated we needed to schedule another meeting. Alter listening to the dialogue, we need to come back with some reconunendations. If anyone else has some recommendations, they cotdd contact staff. It may be beneficial to have a Saturday morning session. Mr. Goss stated that we do have money in the budget to join the Port and others in ternIs of trying to do a plan as quickly as possible. What staff is looking tbr is direction from Council such as do you want to see all of the industrial there, do you want to see commercial: what kind of vision do you have. M (Rindone) to direct staff to colne back in 30-45 days with a budget fi}r a master plan which includes sub- budgets for the strategic planning areas fi)r each of the fnur major players: SDG&E, Rohr, Port, and Chula Vista Capital; also include a set of milestones and dates of what has to be accomplished in order to define those things and to put them into a Vision Statement; then calendar the dates and get moving. AMENDMENT TO MOTION: Seconded by Moot with an amendment to create a standing subcormnittee of the Council to specifically meet with the Port District and review their proposed plan and meet in conjunction with Rohr and the Yacht Harbor Coalition to review their specific input as to what they would like to see, so that this process works and Council can take responsibility to see that it moves fbrward. VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: Motion passed unanimously 5-0. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were none. Meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m. ADJOURNMENT Respectfully submitted. Beverly A. Authelet, CMC/AAE City Clerk