HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1996/04/25 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL JOINT MEETING/WORKSHOP OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND
GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
Tuesday, April 25, 1996
6:38 p.m.
Council Conference Room
City Hall Building
CALL TO ORDER
1. ROLL CALL:
PRESENT:
Councilmembers Alvey, Moot, Rindone, and Mayor Horton
Planning Commissioners Davis, Tarantino, Thomas, and Willett
Growth Management Oversight Commissioners Allen, Armbrust, Dull,
Ray, Peter, Kell, and Chair Hubbard
ALSO PRESENT:
Jim Thomson, Deputy City Manager; Bob Leiter, Planning Director;
Glen Coogins, Deputy City Attorney; Ed Batcheider, Associate
Planner; and Berlin Bosworth, Secretary to the Redevelopmerit Agency
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Growth Management Oversight Commission Minutes from April 11,
1996
Growth Management Oversight Commission:
MSC [Peter/Ray] to approve the minutes of April 11, 1996, approved 7-0-2 with Hyde and Goerke absent.
PlanninK Commission:
MSC [Thomas/Willett] to excuse absence of Members Davis, Salas, and Chair Tuehscher due to their having
prior engagements, approved 4-0-3 with Davis, Salas, and Tuchscher absent.
PUBLIC HEARING
3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-96-02; REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE GROWTH
MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION' S 1995 ANNUAL REPORT--The GMOC' s 1995 Annual Report
on compliance with the City's Quality-of-Life Threshold Standards focuses on the period from 7/1/94 to 6/30/95.
Pertinent issues identified in later 1995 and early 1996 are also included. The workshop provides an opportunity
to comprehensively review the Report's findings and recommendations. Staff recommends that: (10) the Planning
Commission accept the 1995 GMOC Annual Report and recommendations as presented, and adopt a motion
recommending that the City Council do the same; and (2a) that Council accept the GMOC's 1995 Annual Report
and the recommendations contained therein; and, (2b) that Council direct staff to undertake actions necessary to
implement those recommendations as presented in Attachment B - "1995 GMOC Recommendations/Implementing
Actions Summary."
This being the time and place the public hearing was declared open.
Planning Director Leiter gave brief introductory remarks and pointed out a procedural change of having the Planning
Commission and the City Council both meet with the GMOC instead of the Planning Commission and the City
Council holding separate meetings with the GMOC.
Associate Planner Batchelder reviewed the table, Attachment B, in the GMOC report including findings on
Thresholds. He noted full compliance was not met for the first three Thresholds on the list--Police, Fire/EMS, and
Minutes
April 25, 1996
Page 2
Air Quality. With respect to Police, the shortfall was in only one of the two measures which was the Priority 1
call for services and the shortfall was very slight. With respect to Fire/EMS the non-compliance resulted largely
from a situation having to do with how the current computer system in the Dispatch Center worked -- in terms of
how it recorded Call Response Times in comparison to how the Threshold was originally structured in 1987. The
system does not have the technical ability to demonstrate direct compliance. The possibility of Threshold changes,
as well as the possibility of Police and Fire obtaining a CAD/RMS, would be discussed in the presentation. With
respect to Libraries -- with the opening of the South Chula Vista Library, Libraries would be in compliance beyond
the year 2000 based upon current population projections. With respect to bringing Sewers into compliance, the
matter of reclaimed water would be discussed. With respect to Water, both Districts have indicated sufficient
capacity and storage to meet both the 12-18 month projection for growth and also some mid-term projections based
upon a variety of matters occurring at both the State- and County-wide level with respect to guaranteed water
supplies in the future. Parks and Recreation, compliance was being based on a standard presently applied east of
the I-805 freeway. GMOC was, as it had for a number of years, recommending that the standard be applied
Citywide. With respect to Schools, both Districts have indicated sufficient capacity to handle the 12-18 month
growth projection. The GMOC raised the issue that had to do with the District's policies about optional attendance
areas and how that would affect some of the current impact. With respect to Traffic, that was largely in
compliance. There were only a few segments of the overall roadway system which did not meet the compliance.
Hence, the GMOC's indication for the potential of non-compliance. GMOC would discuss how they would like
to see some forward projections with regard to traffic. As far as the Fiscal section was concerned, all of the City's
DIF funds were relatively in healthy shape and growth was essemially paying its way as far as new facilities were
concerned.
Council Member Rindone asked why Southwestern College was not considered for inclusion under schools.
Associate Planner Batcheider replied that at present the Threshold standard does not address community colleges
or above, it dealt with primary and secondary education. That issue had been brought up in past years and the
question was whether the City wanted to consider expanding the Threshold standards to include colleges.
Council Member Rindone pointed out he had brought up the issue last year. Staff should presem to the GMOC to
see if the college system can be expanded to be included in the Threshold standards in next year's report.
GMOC Chair Hubbard responded the GMOC would be most receptive to the recommendation for inclusion of the
college system.
GMOC Chair Hubbard presented the GMOC report and discussed each Threshold area. Chair Hubbard
complimented the Planning Department and, especially Messrs. Leiter and Batcheider, for their work and
acknowledged those City departments which provided needed information. Mr. Hubbard highlighted those areas
which would have budget ramifications: · The computer dispatch system which the GMOC saw as a very vital
addition to the Police and Fire departments. The system, once implemented, should improve the efficiency of the
Police and Fire personnel as well as providing the Chiefs with better management control and better recordkeeping.
· The GMOC felt that Master Planning--the availability of assignments, work program prioritization of department
staff--for Police, Fire, and Library facilities, needed to be addressed in the current budget cycle. · To ensure
Development Impact Fees (DIFs) maintain compliance with Fiscal and other Thresholds, the GMOC was
recommending adequate staffing and work program prioritization so DIFs can be reviewed and updated as necessary
on a regular periodic schedule--every one to two years. · Drainage monitoring and installation of recommended
drainage monitoring devices for Telegraph and Poggi Canyon drainage basins should occur as part of the 1996-97
capital outlay program. · Traffic monitoring, to assure longer-term Threshold compliance and the avoidance of
traffic congestion in key traffic corridors, such as H Street, Palomar, Telegraph Canyon Road, Otay Valley Road,
etc. and the continuing provision of adequate staffing and budget to monitor and develop traffic projections, was
a critical need. · The Park Implementation Plan (PIP) provision for internal work program priority to assure
completion of the PIP and related study of Eastern Territory park issues by the end of 1996 was also considered
important.
Minutes
April 25, 1996
Page 3
GMOC Hubbard proceeded to address each of the 11 Thresholds: [1] Police, [2] Fire/EMS, [3] Air Quality,
[4] Libraries, [5] Drainage, [6] Sewers, [7] Water, [8] Parks and Recreation, [91 Schools, [101 Traffic, and
[11] Fiscal.
GMOC Report -- [1] Police: Chair Hubbard noted Police met the Thresholds in three of the four areas. The area
where the priority was not met was for Priority 1 calls, i.e., emergency calls. The Threshold standard called for
Priority 1 calls was 84 percent of dispatches to be within 7 minutes with an average time of 4.30 seconds. The
actual was 84.9 percent and the average response time was 4.37 seconds. The GMOC was concerned as this was
the fifth consecutive year that Priority 1 calls had not been within the Threshold.
Mayor Horton asked staff about the status of funding with regard to the purchasing of the CAD system in the 96-97
budget year.
Mr. Leiter responded that item would be presented in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) as part of the 96-97
budget presentation and at that time staff would make specific recommendations regarding financing issues.
Deputy City Manager Thomson added staff has been through the RFP vendor process. At this point funding would
be the major issue to be discussed.
Mayor Horton asked if the funding would be available during fiscal year 96-97.
Mr. Thomson stated there were some funding sourues and it was a problem staff was working on.
Council Member Alvey asked if the system had to be purchased at one time or could it be purchased over several
years.
Mr. Thomson replied staff was looking at various options for possible phasing the purchase.
Council Member Alevy asked about grant funding.
Fire Chief Hardiman said meetings were being held on this issue. Staff was cautiously optimistic as there appeared
to be a variety of funding sources which were in the process of being identified which could be used.
Council Member Moot asked when the Police was not meeting the response times on Priority 1 calls, was it
occurring in all sections of the City, or only in certain sections of the City.
GMOC Chair Hubbard noted that was a good question but that GMOC did not know the answer. That was another
solid reason why the CAD system was so important. The Police cannot break that information out at the present
time.
Council Member Moot stated his concern was, as the City grew further to the east, that Priority 1 calls in the more
distant part of the City not meeting the Threshold because of the distance between the Police Station and those
residents.
GMOC Chair Hubbard replied that could very well be, but no one has that answer.
Police Capitan Jim Zoll stated, to answer the question the Police could not answer the question. The Police has
looked at the east vectors in restructuring the beats as relates to the number of people. There was not the capability
in the current system to measure this.
Council Member Moot asked how many units at any given time were east of I-805.
Police Captain Zoll responded generally there were four, but sometimes up to eight.
Minutes
April 25, 1996
Page 4
Council Member Moot took it that there were a number of units that were always kept east of 805 to respond to
an emergency.
Police Captain Zoll replied that was correct. Other cars from another sector would be moved out east if, for
example, two cars were required to be at Headquarters for any period of time for whatever reason.
Council Member Alevy asked at what point would Captain Zoll believe the City should seriously consider a
substation in the eastern sector.
Police Captain Zoll said when the City started expanding into the SPA areas. It was 14 miles from the current
station to the Olympic Training Center.
Mayor Horton inquired if Captain Zoll knew how close substations were located to each other in San Diego.
Police Captain Zoll did not know. San Diego has substations within a geographic area to cover a certain amount
of area.
GMOC Chair Hubbard stated while it was a Council and Police Department decision to determine to work out of
substations, the GMOC encouraged that it be done in a forthright manner because of the concern to meet the
Thresholds.
Council Member Alevy asked if the CAD would give decisionmakers the ability to readily look at Thresholds.
GMOC Chair Hubbard's understanding was that the CAD would provide the Chief of Police and his staff an array
of information, all the statistics necessary to take full advantage of their staffing.
GMOC Member Kell said the primary purpose of the CAD was to get the emergency vehicles much quicker to
wherever they were needed. One of the aspects of the CAD system was that it would improve the efficiency of
writing reports as the computer system generates a lot of the detail so that a brief narrative would complete the
report. This would be true for both Police and Fire personnel.
Council Member Rindone pointed out when the issue was raised again last year, the City Manager's Office
responded it was not part of the overall master planning of the Police. Council may want to have staff look at the
master planning of the Police for some other reasons, of which this was an important component. Traffic patterns
and time of day has a great deal to do with response times, than the distance from the east.
GMOC Report -- [2] Fire/Emergency Medical Services: Chair Hubbard stated Fire/EMS had the same issues
applicable to this department as did the Police. The recommendations were synonymous. The Threshold was not
met for Fire. The CAD system would meet the same provisions as was discussed about the Police Department.
The GMOC was very strongly recommending that the CAD system be implemented and staff provide the Master
Plan development on a timely manner.
Council Member Moot wanted to know why with Fire Stations spread around the City, was the same pattern of
response time deficiency being seen in both departments.
GMOC Chair Hubbard replied there was another unique feature with regard to the Fire Department Threshold.
That was that the recording system utilized a formula whereby Dispatch was given a 30 second time, and then
response time was calculated based on turn-out and travel. Now, it was the total time. The 30 second timeframe
was no longer being used; a different time schedule was now being used. It would not be fair to say that Fire
Department services have declined.
Fire Chief Hardiman clarified that the standard being used for response time was adopted in 1987 and a set amount
of time--30 seconds--was allotted to the Dispatch Center and was separate from Total Response Time. However,
Minutes
April 25, 1996
Page 5
now, Total Response Time included Dispatch, Turn Out, and Travel Time. In the past five years or so, there has
been greater emphasis on protective clothing and the amount of Turn Out time it took to don equipment and get on
the apparatus and secure ourselves safely in the apparatus; that component has actually increased. Currently, the
Fire Department is performing a rather exhaustive, laborious method of examining what Fire's Total Response Time
is. Fire personnel, even before CAD was implemented, hoped to see some improvement in Time. Staff has been
working with Management Services to try and idemify more accurately the Priority Calls within the Department.
In the past year, some calls were categorized as emergency calls, when in fact, they were not. These calls should
not have been measured against the GMOC standards. Staff was doing an exhaustive study to separate Code and
Non-Code responses.
Council Member Rindone noted the number of Emergency Calls volume increased by 9 percent over last year. The
Response Time was under the 85 percent Threshold but was it greater or less than 9 percent compared to last year.
Fire Chief Hardiman responded the Fire Departmere responded to 82 percent. That was due, somewhat, to the
awareness of making all company officers try to meet the Threshold Standards.
Council Member Rindone said the point he was making was the percemage of efficiency improvement as well as
the number of Emergency Calls increasing simultaneously by 9 percent.
Fire Chief Hardiman pointed out that with managed care by the health community there was going to be much more
emphasis to direct patients to the correct facility and not the nearest facility; and, therefore, the capitation services
of all those hospitals would be competing directly with the 911 system. There was a great deal of emphasis and
concern within the Fire community that call volumes would see a rather sharp decrease in the future. Chula Vista,
as yet, has not seen that. When the Fire Department saw that type trend developing, staff would get back to
Council on that.
Council Member Alevy asked about the Master Plan for the Fire Department.
Associate Planner Batcheider said it was either the 1987 or 1989 Master Plan for the Civic Center. Council would
see CIP proposal coming with the budget process as the GMOC recommended a strategic plan to update the Public
Facilities DIF.
Council Member Alevy asked when was the last time the City's overall Master Plan was updated.
Planning Director Leiter replied the City's General Plan, which was the basis for all the Master Plans and facilities
was updated in 1989. The Facility Master Plans have all been updated at different timeframes. The two that
Planning Department staff agreed with GMOC were the most critical, were the Police and Fire, particularly Fire.
What the Fire Master Plan would do would take the updated General Plan including all of the Otay Ranch Plan
updates that have occurred and then look at the appropriate location of all fire stations--existing and future--to meet
response times for the entire General Plan area and also estimate the cost of those facilities. That information is
then used to update the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee. The Fire Station Master Plan, in terms of
priority, was number one in terms of allowing staff to then make proper decisions about citing fire station when the
Plan update was done.
Council Member Alevy concurred both Master Plans needed to be updated quickly. He advocated a mechanism
that would trigger a regular re-looking at all master planning on some sort of regular basis.
Mayor Horton noted staff was working on that at the present time.
Fire Chief Hardiman said for the Fire Department, it should be a Master Plan update and not an interim Plan
update.
GMOC Chair Hubbard stated the Council was cognizant that master planning required an investment of key staff
Minutes
April 25, 1996
Page 6
time and that was the rationale in GMOC's indicating, for Council consideration, this would require a look at during
the budget process.
GMOC Report -- [3] Air Quality: Chair Hubbard indicated that living in Chula Vista, one enjoyed good air
quality by comparison to most of San Diego County, Orange County, and the Los Angeles area. There has been
a recommended change in the Air Quality Threshold. Council has looked at this and the GMOC would recommend
that this be adopted so the City would be in compliance with Thresholds. The City should be complimented for
the efforts it has made in terms of trying to provide continued services which would improve the air quality, such
as natural gas vehicles and so on.
Council Member Alevy asked if the City was in compliance with the schedule of the Federal Clean Air Act.
GMOC Chair Hubbard said while the City was on schedule it did not meet the Federal air quality regulations but
that the City had taken steps to bring it closer.
Council Member Alevy asked how Cbula Vista was doing compared to the rest of the region.
GMOC Chair Hubbard replied better than most areas.
GMOC Report -- [4] Libraries: Chair Hubbard stated the GMOC recommended continuing to stress the need to
take, in a timely manner, the update of the City's 1987 Libraries Master Plan. The GMOC was requesting the
Council direct staff to ensure that interim and permanent library sites issues were fully considered during the course
of the EastLake Master Plan evaluation effort and the on-going Otay Ranch planning effort. The GMOC saw a
potential problem should the present Village Center site be determined to be inadequate and should the selection of
a new site be necessary.
Mayor Horton commented the County was going to try and build a County library and the funding source for that
was going to be to impose a one-half cent sales tax Countywide. How would that impact the City's future planning
for some of the facilities in the City. The Mayor stated she was concerned about how residents would feel about
having to pay for a County facility. This was something the Council needed to be cognizant of.
Deputy City Manager Jim Thomson informed Council the Chula Vista Library Director was keeping abreast of that
issue and there would be a report going to Council in the near future.
GMOC Member Ray commented a number of discussions focused on increases in technology and the reduction in
size requirements for libraries as they go to computerized book reading and such of that nature. The GMOC not
only looked at the size of a facility or square footage, and the dollars devoted to that aspect, but also look at what
technology was going to be.
Platruing Commissioner Tarantino responded to what Planning Commissioner Ray said. In addition to the research
and that aspect of libraries, they do serve a social need, particula~y for young people as they tend to congregate
in libraries as it was a safe place to meet, they do their homework there. The City should not forego the space in
terms of technology. There were two functions of a library--one was very social and one was the
research/knowledge aspect.
GMOC Member Ray replied their discussion focused on the requirements of book/magazine storage and things of
that nature.
Mayor Horton thought the City needed to closely follow the trend with regard to the size of libraries due to new
technologies.
Planning Commissioner Tarantino said he would hate to see libraries become storefronts.
Minutes
April 25, 1996
Page 7
Council Member Rindone said the Mayor was correct as this was a field that was being worked on in literacy. In
fact, the State Job Training Conference Committee set up by the Governor was looking very seriously at our
libraries--and Library Director Palmer was aware of this--with regard to kiosks/shopping centers/storefronts because
of the access of computer databases and new technologies. What Mr. Tarantino was pointing out has always been
a beneficial function of libraries. As the State was going, because of limited funding, and under the rubric of
technology that social function could be lost. The City needed to examine what it, as a City, valued. It was
realistic to understand that what the Mayor was saying was the direction that was seriously being examined. The
City may not want to follow the trend in which the State may be heading.
GMOC Report -- [5] Drainage: Chair Hubbard said the GMOC recommended Council approve the additional
drainage monitoring stations proposed in Funding Year 1996-97 CIP for Telegraph and Poggi Canyon drainage
courses and that Council direct appropriate staff to take proactive re-evaluation of potential funding sources for
needed drainage improvements in western Chula Vista and report back to the Council and GMOC on prospects and
proposed efforts to obtain them. Several of the identified priority projects have no funding source and need to be
given attention through an aggressive effort.
Council Member Moot asked about the Army Corps of Engineers project.
Senior Civil Engineer Steve Thomas stated that project was from Fourth Avenue downstream and what the Council
Member was asking about was the project from Hilltop to Third Avenue. The City has a CIP project proposed for
that. Staff will get information on that project.
Council Member Alevy asked about a project which was west of Willow Street.
GMOC Chair Hubbard said it was a County project.
Senior Civil Engineer Thomas said in late 1993 the City had a joint project with the County to improve a small
portion downstream of Willow Street as part of their regional park. The City got Federal disaster funding for that
project, but the scope of the project was limited and the FEMA funding was limited by concern for the wetlands.
That particular project functioned quite well during the 1994 storms. There have been discussions with the County
regarding expanding the scope of that project. There happen to be two water lines in the vicinity which would
require $500,000 each to relocate. Staff has encouraged the City of San Diego to replace that line as it was quite
old and encouraged the Sweetwater District to relocate their line.
Council Member Alevy asked if there was a timeline on that.
Senior Civil Engineer Thomas said the County had the lead on that.
GMOC Report -- [6] Sewers: Chair Hubbard stated the GMOC recommended Council continue to support staff
and consultive efforts to expeditiously develop a strategic plan which ensured sufficient future sewage treatment
capacity to meet the long-range buildout needs of the City's adopted General Plan and suggested these efforts should
coincide with future use of reclaimed water.
GMOC Member Ray commented he was surprised by what was reported last year about innovative things the
industry was doing P- from ballooning pipelines to putting rubber barriers in them -- to extend the life of these
systems, and whatever the City could do to support that would be beneficial.
GMOC Report -- [7] Water: Chair Hubbard commented, from his perspective as serving as the Chair for the
InterAgency Water Task Force, of which representatives from the two water authorities in the City participate, he
was very pleased by the work of the Task Fome and the cooperation of City staff and the water authorities. A lot
of progress has been made in the past few years to make certain the City has a dependable water supply. The
GMOC was recommending that focus be given to the topic of future availability and usage of reclaimed water and
Minutes
April 25, 1996
Page 8
that both local water districts include discussions of their present efforts and status of reclaimed water development
in next year's reports to the GMOC.
Council Member Alevy wanted to know if the GMOC advocated a position, and if so, which position, be taken with
regard to the emergency storage plan.
GMOC Chair Hubbard thought that was an issue the GMOC should stay out of.
Council Member AIevy asked if the City was concerned about the overall issue of emergency water storage.
GMOC Chair Hubbard said the City was certainly concerned as the City was dependent on that.
Associate Planner Batcheider interjected there had been a recent shift on this issue from the GMOC to the
InterAgency Water Task Force.
GMOC Report -- [8] Parks and Recreation: Chair Hubbard stated the GMOC recommended that Council direct
that the Park Implementation Plan be completed and available when the GMOC commenced its next review cycle
in October 1996. This has been a major topic of discussion and high on the City's priority for a number of years.
The GMOC also asked that the Council direct appropriate staff finalize the revised, draft Parks and Recreation
Threshold Standard amendment presented in Appendix I and return it for formal public hearing adoption with the
PIP no later than October 1996. The GMOC certainly supported the revised Threshold as it applied to the
Thresholds citywide as opposed to simply in the Eastern Territories. To complement that, the PIP would allow
Parks and Recreation to incrementally move toward compliance with that revised PIP over a 20 plus year basis
which would give it adequate time to work. The GMOC was very much aware that development in the west was
highly restricted due to there not being much space left. This would take time to reach full compliance.
Planning Commission Member Ray pointed out the J Street Marina was included as a credit for the western portion
of Chula Vista, although it was not within the City boundaries and secondly, the Planning Commission recently took
tentative action on the Otay Ranch to give a credit of 25 to 50 percent for the neighborhood parks and allowing the
Parks and Recreation Department to come up with some kind of measurement for amenities such as a gym or pool
or tennis court versus just open space park land with grass. There should be some sort of measurement developed
to give credit for amenities as opposed to just an open park.
Planning Commission Member Tarantino asked if there was any move by staff in terms of looking at parks of less
than five acres on the west side as to whether or not they were feasible.
Planning Commission Member Willett said Parks and Recreation performed a study last year and took a cursory
look at the issue this year and were looking at parcels that come within 2-1/2 acres (414 feet by 414 feet).
Council Member Alevy noted while there was not a lot of land available in the western portion of Chula Vista to
create enough parks to meet the City's Threshold Standards, was the City looking at developing a formula to
develop credits for facilities/amenities. What would be the mechanism to create a formula and would it be feasible?
Associate Planner Batcheider acknowledged staff had completed an analysis of that portion of the evaluation and
that would be forwarded to Council.
Council Member Alevy said he looked forward to receiving that information. There was not a lot of land available
on the west side and to call the City Threshold deficient because of that was not fair to the City nor the Parks and
Recreation Department.
GMOC Chair Hubbard was aware there were sensitive issues with regard to such a formula and recommended the
formula be worked out with caution.
Minutes
April 25, 1996
Page 9
GMOC Report -- [9] Schools: Chair Hubbard pointed out the GMOC observed both the elementary and high
school districts would have sufficient facilities to meet any anticipated growth for the next 18 months. However,
over a 5 to 7 year forecast, additional facilities would need to be built. At the same time there was concern with
overcrowding in certain schools. Some students are being bused at the District's discretion or by families' request.
As a case in point, EastLake High School has lots of space. Bonita Vista High School was crowded. As one looked
at the recommendations, one can see GMOC heard and responded to some of those concerns. These were issues
that the Council may choose to get involved in, if they so desire. One suggestion would be that the City might want
to consider, in cooperation with the two school districts, forming a comparable kind of task force, as is the
InterAgency Water Task Force, which would meet on a regular or required basis to discuss these kinds of issues.
Planning Commissioner Member Willett commented on Appendix J, page 3, Baldwin SPA 1, regarding the high
school being located in the southwest portion of Village 1 or the northwest portion of Village 2. That was in error
and should be corrected.
Assistant Planning Director Ken Lee noted the change would be made.
Planning Cormmission Member Willett supported the GMOC comment about a cooperative park in a school location.
The City and high school have certain agreements for specific schools but there has not yet been established an
overall policy recommendation. Consideration should also be given to an agreement with Southwestern College.
Assistant Planner Batcheider stated it was staff' s understanding there would be a number of independent agreements
for school sites in both eastern and western Chula Vista for shared use of facilities.
Planning Commission Member Tarantino asked if staff got the feeling, during discussion that the Sweetwater Union
High School District, if it was willing to take a look at the boundaries of EastLake, because of the fact that most
of the attendance area lay in the optional boundary area. Was Sweetwater willing to take another look at that and
correct the problem.
GMOC Chair Hubbard had to say no. There was discussion and Sweetwater staff and they felt that would be a
sensitive issue to their Board and others.
GMOC Member Allen stated the boundaries of schools was a very sensitive political issue and it was not something
a representative of the school district could readily say they would look at that. It was a Board policy issue. There
was always controversy when the Board began to look at the change of boundaries from one place to another.
Mayor Horton asked if Sweetwater Union High School Board Member Jim Cartmill would like to interject any
comment with regard to that issue.
Mr. Cartmill said because there was a choice program in the District, the Board felt that all students should have
the opportunity to attend any high school they wanted as long as there was space. He said he would be glad to take
the issue back to the Board for discussion.
GMOC Report -- [10] Traffic: Chair Hubbard prefaced his comments on traffic by indicating the GMOC was
very gratified with the extensive report provided by the Public Works Department, especially their sincere efforts
to monitor and be very much on top of what was happening within the City regarding traffic. GMOC was
requesting that the City Council direct the Engineering Division to continue to include 5 to 7 year performance
projections for the City's major arterial streets. It was very important that the department have adequate staffing
to continue with that monitoring program. The GMOC was recommending that the City Council actively support
plans for the development of the full SR-125 freeway or tollway facility which was deemed critical in terms of
alleviating the potential traffic congestion in the east and east/west arteries.
GMOC Report -- [11] Fiscal: Chair Hubbard stated, in essence, what the GMOC was saying was that the City
has done a good job developing the Development Impact Fees program and the GMOC was recommending, in order
Minutes
April 25, 1996
Page 10
to make certain, that Council was very much aware that the program was essential to providing services and keeping
the Thresholds were they were and that staff must continue to pay attention to these. The GMOC would raise the
question as to who assumes the responsibility that the DIFs are developed accordingly during any subsequent year.
Who assumes that responsibility, the Manager's responsibility or departmental responsibility?
Planning Director Leiter answered the question, stating the Transportation DIF was prepared by the Public Works
Department's Engineering Division and the Public Facilities DIF, which covered libraries, fire stations, and other
non-transportation facilities, historically was handled by the Management Services Department. Because of the
dissolution of the PAPE unit, there was on-going discussion about that going into the Public Works Department.
That was being addressed and clarified in the budget process and would be reported to the City Council.
GMOC Chair Hubbard stated that concluded the GMOC report.
Mayor Horton thanked each Member for participating in the process and joint workshop. The Council, Planning
Commission, and GMOC knew how important these Thresholds were to maintaining the quality of life for Chula
Vista and their efforts were very much appreciated.
Planning Coatmission Member/GMOC Member Ray, speaking as an individual, said he would like to see the City
Council look at the development of a solid waste Threshold for the City. The City has more control over this than,
say, it does for air quality. The City has a much better opportunity to create a viable standard that was enforceable
so that the City could actually do something about it as opposed to something such as air quality. I would like the
City Council to take that as a recommendation for next year's GMOC -- to create a Threshold.
PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION: [Thomas/Wi!lett] that the Planning Commission hereby accepts the
1995 GMOC Annual Report and recommendations as presented and recommends that the City Council do
the same, approved 4-0-3, with Davis, Salas, and Tuchscher absent.
CITY COUNCIL MOTION: [Horton/Moot] that Council accepts the GMOC's 1995 Annual Report and the
recommendations contained therein, approved 4-0-1, with Padilia absent.
CITY COUNCIL MOTION: [Horton/Moot] that Council hereby directs staff to proceed in implementing the
recommendation as presented in Attachment B and include those comments as made by various Members as
this meeting, approved 4-0-1, with Padilia absent.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
ADJOURNMENT AT 8:09 P.M. to a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission on May 1, 1996 at 7:00 p.m.
in the City Council Chambers, and to a Special Workshop Meeting of the City Council on April 30, 1996 at 6:00
p.m. in Conference Rooms 2 & 3 of the Public Services Building, and thence to the Regular City Council Meeting
on May 7, 1996 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
Respectfully submitted
Berlin D. Bosworth, Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency