Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 2008/04/09 RevisedREVISED MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA 6:00 p.m. April 9, 2008 Council Chambers 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, California 6:03:41 PM CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL /MOTIONS TO EXCUSE: Members Present: Tripp, Felber, Moctezuma, Vinson, Bensoussan, Clayton, Spethman Member Absent: None INTRODUCTORY REMARKS:- Read into the record by Chair Tripp APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 27, 2008 and March 12, 2008 MSC (Felber/Spethman) (5-0-2-0) to approve minutes of February 27, 2008 and March 12, 2008 as submitted. Motion carried. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: No public input. 1. ACTION ITEMS: Planning Commission Chair's request to hold informational and impartial public discussion and to consider going on record in favor or opposed to Proposition E. Refer to attached transcript submitted by Tigerfish Transcribing-Editing (Attachment A). 2. Permit Streamlining and measures to reduce cost and time for development entitlements, encouraging economic revitalization. 7:43:29 PM Mr. Sandoval stated that the City is looking at streamlining our entitlement processes and evaluating the function, scope of responsibilities and where there is a duplication of efforts in our seven land use boards and commission. Ms. Lytle will be giving a presentation on those recommendations and would solicit the Commission's input. 7:46:37 PM Nancy Lytle stated that CEQA and the Permit Streamlining Act function together to create a timeline for any development entitlement application in California, therefore, any streamlining efforts needs to be done within the constraints of State law requirements. Planning Commission Minutes -2 - April 9, 2008 Ms. Lytle indicated that the Planning and Building Department spends over $500,000 in support of seven commissions that make land use decisions; they are: Planning Commission, DRC, CVRC, RCC, RAC, GMOC and Board of Appeals. The RCC acts as an oversight role for CEQA staff functions, which adds an additional administrative step to the process. There is a potential to elevate the RCC to a policy- recommending role for such policy directives like the Climate Working Group recommendations, and no longer would be involved in formal review of CEQA documents, but focus on providing advice to the Planning Commission, DRC, CVRC and Council on environmental policy. RAC is advisory to CVRC and they act as a vehicle to obtain public input far quasi-judicial entitlement applications. We are in discussions with a subcommittee of the RAC and CVRC to look as the dual effort that they have. With respect to the Planning Commission, DRC and CVRC, there could be cost and time savings by delegating certain decisions that are currently made by these bodies to the Zoning Administrator. By delegating more decisions to the ZA, this official can hold hearings and decide on certain CUPS, variances, minor maps, design review and other common entitlements. Appeals to these decisions would be carried forward to the Planning Commission and CVRC. The DRC would handle major applications and the Chair could officially advise the ZA on all delegated DRC applications, in or outside redevelopment territory. 8:05:34 PM Cmr. Spethman stated that the streamlining recommendations for the B/C/C's are good, specifically elevating the role of the RCC to apolicy-recommending role, delegating more oversight to the Zoning Administrator and having a representative of the DRC be advisor to the ZA. He expressed uncertainty about the effectiveness of the RAC for many reasons; the duplicity in their role; extending the review process; its make-up, i.e. three members of the Planning Commission wearing different hats; and their role in design review, when it is the members of the DRC that have the professional expertise to do design review. 8:13:30 PM Cmr. Moctezuma stated she believes the role of the RAC is valuable and wished to clarify that the RAC #2 meeting is not a mandatory meeting; oftentimes everything is covered or fast-tract at the RAC #1 meeting; this is a topics she would like to discuss further when the RAC and CVRC meet to discuss their roles and responsibilities. She also pointed out that projects in the redevelopment area do not go before the Planning Commission and is supportive of delegating more responsibility to the ZA. 8:15:50 PM Cmr. Tripp stated he agrees with elevating the RCC's role to a policy advisory body and delegating more to the ZA. It would also be useful in expediting the process to have an updated Zoning Code to provide specific, straightforward guidelines, even to the point of defining design elements that may or may not be allowed. With regard to alcohol CUP's ,the ZA can handle them administratively unless there are extenuating circumstances, such as an over- concentration of businesses with liquor licenses and/or crime in a certain census tract. 8:21:50 PM Cmr. Bensoussan stated that although she supports elevating the RCC, it is very important that the make-up of this Commission be qualified professionals who have expertise in environmental sciences, conservation and the like. With respect to entitlements for minor projects, it is important, after public input is received, to define those thresholds, i.e. projects under a certain size can be ministerially approved by the ZA. The design guidelines of the UCSP are sufficiently detailed that if the applicant adheres to them, the design review aspect of the RAC would be greatly reduced and their focus could be on other elements of the project. Planning Commission Minutes -3 - April 9, 2008 Another way to cut down on costs would be to use community groups, like the City of San Diego does, to serve as the vanguard instead of having staff-sponsored outreaches at venues such as schools. 8:30:12 PM Ms. Lytle pointed out that Cmr. Benousssan's comment on using community groups is excellent because there is cost savings anytime you can eliminate Brown Act public meetings because of the notification requirements. 8:31:44 PM Cmr. Clayton asked how all of this streamlining helps reduce cost for the applicant. By reducing the cost for the applicant, we will attract more of their business. Ms. Lytle stated that the more we streamline our process and make it less costly and more efficient, the more we save the development community. Right now they have to reimburse us 100% cost recovery for entitlements. Other Cities of similar size who are our competitors for economic investment do not require 100% cost recovery, especially for smaller, straightforward entitlements. 8:34:17 PM Cmr. Vinson stated that streamlining is good news to any developer because time equates money; he would also like to see what the development community has to say about our process. Cmr. Vinson inquired what is the cost savings to the City with the proposed cuts in staffing the B/C/C's and streamlining the process. Ms. Lytle responded that we are cutting a management position and an administrative support position out of the Administrative budget, which is a cost savings of approximately $200,000. 8:42:33 PM Cmr. Felber stated he disagrees with some of the comments that have been made about the RAC doing predominantly design review. The RAC was created in an attempt to streamline the review of projects in redevelopment areas that previously went through the DRC, RCC and Planning Commission. He agrees that there should be a one-shot review by the RAC and favors upgrading the Zoning Administrator to do ministerial approval of minor projects. 8:58:36 PM Cmr. Bensoussan stated that because the UCSP is a specific and detailed document and has also gone through exhaustive environmental review, if a project complies with this document, the EIR process for the redevelopment areas ought to not be as onerous, particularly if the project is compliant with the UCSP. 8:59:46 PM Cmr. Tripp responded that if a project complies with the UCSP, then it ought to be made a ministerial project and moved forward to the CVRC, eliminating the need to go to the RAC. 9:00:38 PM Cmr. Clayton stated that this discussion has been of great value, however, it is very preliminary and would like to see it come back once staff has had a chance to incorporate the Commission's comments and have a more concrete plan. 3. Debrief of the March 29~' field trip to the business district tour. The commission consensus was that the tour was very beneficial and thanked Cmr. Spethman for recommending that it be organized and staff for putting it together. Planning Commission Minutes -4 - April 9, 2008 9:03:50 PM Adjourned to a regular Planning Commission meeting on April 23, 2008. Submitted by, ~ ~ ~~-t;%~ Diana Vargas b Secretary to the Planning Commission. Attachment A Planning Commission Meeting April 9, 2008 Item No. 1. Planning Commission Chair's request to hold informational and impartial public discussion and to consider going on record in favor or opposed to Proposition E. Tigerfish~ Transcribing•Editing 203 Columbus Avenue ~ San Francisco 94133 toll-free 877-TIGERFISH www.tiQerfish.com Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E [Beginning of recorded material.] [Summary: call to order, roll call, pledge of allegiance, moment of silence, introductory remarks, approval of minutes, no items taken on consent.] Commissioner Tripp: Um, let me kind of set the stage for my expectations as chair this evening. Um, we're going to be discussing a matter of community- wide interest. It's called Proposition E and it's going to be on the, uh, a ballot in June. Tonight the planning commission will be, uh, hearing public testimony and we are able to discuss this item. However, we will not be taking a vote on the item tonight, and there aze, um, several reasons for that. Um, mostly, um, mostly legal in nature, and I will explain that to you. It is the role of the planning commission and -- and we -- we see that in the government code, in our city chazacter, in -- and in our municipal code to heaz matters pertaining to planning and land use. And -- and those include matters pertaining to the general plan. And this is one of those matters. Therefore, it's within the scope of my role as chair of the planning commission, acting within the scope of my responsibility to have this item docketed for discussion this evening, and it's within the role of each planning commissioner and the planning commission to heaz this item and to gain your -- the -- what the public thinks of it on both sides -- on all sides of the issue. Um, the reason we're not going to be voting tonight is because, um, and I -- I guess life teaches us lessons and, um, Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 2 some commissioners have, uh, their names appeaz on the No On E website. Hindsight being 20/20, had I -- had I known that something that I did would have affected my ability to take action on this item, I wouldn't have done it, and I don't think any planning commissioner would have done it. So, uh, you know, I'll be 50 next month, and I don't know it all. So that was one of the things that I've learned recently. Anyway, that's why we're not voting on it. And I'd like to thank the Office of the City Manager, uh, the planning director and the assistant planning director and the Office of the City Attorney in helping us, uh, move forwazd through this, tonight. So, having said that, I'm going to ask, uh, each planning commissioner if they have any comments in advance. Um, Commissioner Spethman? Commissioner Clayton? Commissioner Bensoussan? Commissioner Vinson? Comrissioner Moctezuma? Commissioner Moctezuma: Yes, I do have a couple of comments because I will have to recuse myself because I have property [in the Third Avenue] district. I just would like to make a comment to everybody that we are all individuals as well as planning commissioners. We, as I'm sure everyone, we each have our own opinions, our preferences, our likes, our dislikes, our beliefs. I like chocolate ice cream better than vanilla, and blue is my favorite color. I like certain materials better than I do others. We aze supposed to be thinking individuals, which we are, and we always come to these seats with our own life's experience and our own opinions. I assume and hope that you all expect us to do that. Chula Vista -Item 1-Prop E Page 3 Because we have opinions, it absolutely does not mean that we have formed conclusions or that decisions are made. We come here with an open mind and we listen to items before us with an open mind. It's not like a jury, where we're supposed to not know anything. We get staff reports, we get documents, we're supposed to make site visits, we're supposed to inform ourselves, have questions, have opinions, and then listen to everything -- presentations, the information, the public testimony, and make a decision. It would be a terrible shame if we were expected to stop thinking, stop having experience, and stop having opinions in order to sit and to do this job that we're asked to do. And I think that it's very sad if the public -- members of the public, or anyone else suggests that this process is tarnished or flawed in any way because we come as thinking individuals with life experience and opinions and suggest that, because of that, we don't listen or have an open mind. And that's all I wanted to say. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you, Commissioner Moctezuma. Commissioner Felber? Commission Felber: Uh, no comment, other than to second that emotion -- emotion. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. Thank you very much. Um, Deputy City Attorney Mr. Shyree is, uh, you have the floor, sir. Mr. Shyree: Yeah, just a procedural matter. Um, before Ms. Moctezuma leaves the dais, um, we need to, uh, also inform the public that there is an oral communication section. Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 4 Commissioner Tripp: Which I have neglected to do inadvertently, and, uh, presuming that the commissioners are done, and before you leave the dais, aze -- would anyone in the public like to speak to the planning commission this evening, under oral communications? This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak to the planning commission on any subject matter within the commission s jurisdiction but not an item on today's agenda. Each speaker's presentation may not exceed three minutes. Seeing none, thank you very much, and, uh, my apologies for ne -- neglecting that. Um, first -- I'm sorry, Commissioner Moctezuma, you're on the light. Okay, thank you. Commissioner Moctezuma is recusing from this item. Commissioner Bensoussan, you have the floor. Commissioner Bensoussan: Uh, yes, thank you, um, chair. I -- I was unsure what you, um, were calling upon us to speak to the issue or to the process or what when you did the first rounds before any staff presentations. So I -- I just wanted to know was that intended to be, um, the extent of our comments, or are you going to -- Commissioner Tripp: Not at all. It was an -- it was an -- an intent -- it was my effort and intent to allow some flexibility in tonight's meeting, and, uh, you're welcome to -- to speak at any time you're called upon. Just get on the lights. Commissioner Bensoussan: Okay. Well, I -- I just would like to make, um, one statement, um -- Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 5 Commissioner Tripp: Please do. Commissioner Bensoussan: I agree that we -- we must always come with an open mind to these, um, meetings and, uh, but I also am, uh, awaze that we've had workshops where we have been given, um, direction to, uh, be cazeful about going on record, um, advocating, et cetera, prior to heazing something. And I -- I personally, um, believe that this commission -- I -- I don't think the nexus why this commission is even hearing this item tonight. I -- I think that, uh, it -- it was a bad call, um, all the way azound, and, um, I -- I think that we should just heaz it and not make any deliberation. Hear the -- what the public has to say, and not make any deliberation, because I -- I don't see any point to it. Thank you. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you, Commissioner Bensoussan. And, uh, I'll respond to that. Um, as chair of the, uh, appointed -- as elected chair of your appointed planning commission, um, it was my role by government code section, uh, 65103, each planning agency shall perform all of the following functions [to] have this m -- m -- matter agendized for discussion. [It's a role ofJ the planning commission to prepare periodically, review, and revise as necessary the general plan, implement the general plan through actions including but not limited to the administration of specific plans, and zoning and subdivision ordinance. And we do this through the city staff. Annually review the capital improvement program of the city or county and the local public works projects of other local agencies for their consistency with the general plan pursuant to section 65400 of the government code. Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 6 Endeavor to promote public interest in, comment on, and understanding of the general plan and regulations relating to it. Consult and advise with public officials and agencies, public utility companies, civic, educational, professional, and other organizations, and citizens generally concerning implementation of the general plan. Promote the coordination of local plans and programs with the plans and programs of other public agencies. And perform other functions as a legislative body, your city council, provides, including conducting studies and preparing plans other than those required or authorized by this title. Once again, I was acting within the scope of my responsibilities as chair of the planning commission, and when any other planning commissioner is elected as chair, he'll have the same prerogative. Thank you. First action item, planning commission chair's request to hold informational and impartial public discussion and to consider going on -- it says consider going on record in favor or opposed to Proposition E. We will not be considering that. This will be a public discussion and planning comrission discussion only. Uh, having said that, uh, we have city staff, uh, here. Once again, I would like to, uh, commend the city manager's office, the attorney's office, and our planning staff. Thank you for attending and helping us work through this manner. You have the floor. Is there any staff comment? Mr. Sandoval: iJh, Mr. Chairman, uh, no, we don't have any, uh, staff comments. We're here if -- if you have any factual questions, we can answer those, but, uh, we're available. Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 7 Commissioner Tripp: Thank you, Mr. [Sandoval]. Mr. Shyree, any comments from the city attorney's office? Mr. Shyree: Uh, no, sir. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you. Okay. With that, we will, um, move right into public comments. Mr. Peterson? Jim Peterson followed by Peter [Watry], followed by Todd [Hoff, Kevin ONeil, and Jennifer Landsreth]. Mr. Peterson, you have the floor. Welcome. Jun Peterson: Thank you. I am a retired city planner. Uh, I was funding duector here in Chula Vista way back in 1963 to '73. LTh, I've worked for a total of 32 yeazs after receiving a master's degree in planning. Uh, I've worked for six different cities in California and Colorado. Uh, and I'm also a member of the Crossroads 2 boazd of directors. I'm not speaking for them this evening. I'm speaking just for myself. I'm -- I'm intending to vote in favor of, uh, Proposition C, and -- and many of the people that I've talked to in circulating petitions and knocking on doors, some in my neighborhood, some outside my neighborhood, uh, I have come to believe that there is an overwhelming support for buildings along Third Avenue between E Street and G Street not to exceed 45 feet in height. That was made very cleaz during the general plan update, both in, uh, conversations about the core azea [of] the urban core specific plan, and in general comments and surveys that the city staff took at the beginning of that general plan update process. I have a couple of exhibits here that you won't be able to see very well, uh, from where Chula Vista -Item 1-Prop E Page 8 you are, but I have handouts that I will give you at the end of my presentation. Um, one of the most striking things, I think, occurred -- as far as I know, it was at -- at the very first meeting, uh, that the city held, kind of a kickoff meeting designed to get the residents of Chula Vista stirred up, interested in coming down to these various community meetings to voice their own opinions about how they wanted Chula Vista to look in 20 or 25 yeazs. One exhibit that I have here -- I -- I think this was from that first meeting, November 2 -- or November of, uh, '02 -- I don't know the exact date. There was a written survey and I think an oral survey where people raised their hands if they supported certain things, and they mazked it down on their sheet if they supported, uh, other things. Out of that first meeting, I'm pretty sure this was the very first meeting that -- the -- the issue that seemed to raise the most concern was people wanted to see that the community character of Chula Vista be retained. There were 2,113 people who expressed that {as opin -- as -- as] their major concern. There were other concerns. I won't go through them all, uh, but you can see, hopefully, that faz and away the major concern of everybody was they wanted to preserve the historic community chazacter of Chula Vista. Mr. Sandoval: Mr. Chairman? Just for, uh, Mr. Peterson's benefit, if you would like, you can place the graphic on the desk to your left, and there's a camera that will show it on the -- the screen, if you prefer. Chula Vista - Item i -Prop E Page 9 Commissioner Tripp: Just set it down there, Mr. Peterson, we'll try to -- move it to your left. That working? We'll try to help you get your message across. There you go. Now turn it over. Perfect. Jim Peterson: [I can't see it.] Commissioner Tripp: Oh, I see -- I see what the situation is. Jim Peterson: I -- I do have handouts that I -- Commissioner Tripp: Please, continue. There we go. Jim Peterson: During that same meeting, uh, a number of -- by -- by far and away, again, the number of comments on this issue, uh, the majority of comments -- 164 comments addressed concerns about rapid growth and crowding of the city as a result of this, uh, heroic general plan update procedure. You can see that that, by faz, uh, that was the major concern that the group expressed during that meeting. Down here, uh, ranking pretty low in terms of number of comments was the ohe that says the city needs higher densities for transit. Commissioner Tripp: Excuse me, Mr. Peterson. How much more time do you think you need? Jim Peterson: Maybe five more minutes? If -- if there's a time limit -- Commissioner Tripp: If you could -- if you could do it in three more minutes, I'd appreciate it. Diana, if you would set the clock for three more minutes -- that way Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 10 -- we don't have a lot of speakers, I think eight minutes is a reasonable time to be fair to everyone. Please continue. Jim Peterson: So you can see that very few people supported the idea that we need higher densities for transit. This next one is -- is a little bit [repetitious] of -- as compared to the first one, but again, faz and a way the 107 comments, uh, in favor of maintaining the small town atmosphere that Chula Vista has historically enjoyed. These -- these were published, uh, by the city staff, uh, not too long, I think, after that first kickoff meeting in -- in November of 2002. If we need any further evidence about how Chula Vista seems to feel - - Chula Vista residents seem to feel about high-density development, I'm sure we all remember the uproar that occurred when [Jim Pierree] proposed his twin condominium towers at the corner of Fourth and Eighth Street. IJh, I think finally, uh, Mayor Padia -- there was such an uproaz that -- I understand that Mayor Padia finally suggested to Pierree that he just withdraw his proposal, and he did that. And then when the urban core specific, uh, plan was adopted, uh, people had become awaze, uh, that the council perhaps was leaning towazd, uh, higher-density development, I think mainly because of the Pierree item. Uh, they began to feel like they were ignored, the city council had, uh, the city staff had invited them to come down, offer your opinions as to what the, uh, community should look like in the future. They did that. The council thumbed their nose at them, didn't pay any attention. So an initiative campaign was undertaken. I went door to door myself. Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 11 Uh, we turned in the signatures, of course. I think everybody knows this, so I won't go into too much detail. There was an error made, uh, in the publication of the intent to circulate petitions. The city council rejected it on that basis, again, discazding the -- the -- the fact that -- I think it was over 20,000 people had signed a petition saying we want to vote on this. Again, the council thumbed their nose at them, did not put it on the ballot. So we went out, knocked on doors again, did the same thing all over again -- Commissioner Tripp: Thank you, Mr. Peterson. Appreciate your testimony there. Thank you. Commission Vinson, I noticed you're on the lights. What's your intention, sir? Commissioner Vinson: Uh, just to ask a question. Commissioner Tripp: Mr. Peterson, aze you available for a question from the planning commission? Jim Peterson: Sure, sure. Commissioner Vinson: Hi, [uh -- uh, good evening], thank you for being here today. Uh, were you the, uh, on the planning -- as a director of planning during the general plan, uh -- Jim Peterson: Oh, no -- 19, uh, 1973 to 1982, a long time ago. Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 12 Commissioner Vinson: Along time ago. Did you -- did you -- you -- you said you participated in some of those public heazings. Did you -- do you know how many there was? Two, 5, 10, 20? Jim Peterson: In -- in this last general plan update? Commissioner Vinson: Yes, sir. Jim Peterson: Oh, there was far more than that. We had communities in high schools and community centers, uh, conference room here in -- in City Hall, uh, I would say there must have been 40 or 50 meetings. Commissioner Vinson: Wow. Did you -- did you participate, or -- or was there, uh, I'm not the smartest cracker in the box, but --but I'm not broken. Was there any of the, uh, Prop E, was there any public hearings on that or actual, uh, public gatherings with regazds to Prop E that you can, uh, remember? Because I think I might have missed one or two. Jim Peterson: Are you talking about meetings of the -- of the eventual backers of -- ofProposition E? Commissioner Vinson: No, sir. Uh, open to the public, for the public to -- being posted to the public and for the public to participate and listening to the -- Jim Peterson: [CTnintelligible] in fact, I'm not aware of any meetings that, uh -- uh, the people who -- who, uh, were supporting it had [on it]. It all -- it all Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 13 occurred afterwazd when many of us just felt like the council [didn't listen to them]. Commissioner Vinson: That's fine -- that's fine, sir. Thank you. Commissioner Tripp: I -- I was just going to suggest, since that's kind of a factual item, that our staff might be able to point out how much outreach and how many meetings occurred. Jim Peterson: Oh, I'm sure they would. Yeah. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you, Mr. Peterson. Mr. Sandoval? Mr. Sandoval: Yes. We had approximately 90 public meetings on the general plan update. Commissioner Tripp: 9-0? Mr. Sandoval: 9-0. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. Mr. Vinson? All done? Okay, thank you, sir. Um, let's see, next up, Mr. Watry, front and center, welcome, sir. Peter Watry: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Peter Watry. I live at 81 Second Avenue. Commissioner Tripp: You have eight minutes, by the way. Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 14 Peter Watry: Oh, okay. Uh, is Proposition E a great idea? No. Is it a good idea? Yeah, it's good, but it's not great. Uh, let me tell you what great would be. Now, this involves a general plan. And every -- every now and then, the state makes us redo the general plan. And I was very much involved in the 1989 update and, again, as all you were, in the 2005 update. Now, the 1989 update had a lot of public hearings and so forth, but nothing like the 2005 update, as you've just indicated. They had all . kinds of outreach. And so out of all these outreach, out of all these programs, hundreds of people had their voice -- either said something or filled out a form or did a -- did a, uh, survey or something. And as the sum result of hundreds of people doing all that, out of all that mess, finally comes a general plan, and the council finally adopts a general plan. And that's kind of consensus. Nobody likes it, but everybody can live with it, what -- what general plans usually are. And so it's adopted. And ours is adopted in December 2005. Now the question is what happens now? Does the council treat that with -- with some respect and some reverence? Or is it just a piece of paper, a technicality? Unfortunately in the past 30 years I've been around here, it's always been treated just as a piece of paper. If a developer comes in and wants to change it, no problem, we do it four times a year, just get in line. And that's the problem. Uh, and -- and so what does happen, as I just indicated, a developer comes in, one person comes in, has a different idea, and it goes to the council, and the council changes it. And -- and that's just -- that's -- Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 15 that's wrong. It, uh, it -- it -- the -- the council ought to say you can't change this general plan that was developed by all these people unless you have good reason, and the burden of proof should be on the developer to show why the will of the people should be overcome. And there aze cases where it should be. That's why it's flexible. And that's the way it should be done. Thafd be the great idea, if the council would respect the general plan and show it some reverence, but they don't. They treat it like a technicality. And so the -- Prop E is not -- is not a great idea, but it's a good idea because it says that you're not going to change this general planthat -- with respect to heights -- that the people have come up with, through all these hearings, unless you can really have the people say it's okay. Let me give you a perfect example. K, uh, KOA -- one of the things discussed in the, uh, 2005 update was the KOA property and the 40 vacant acres adjacent to it. Now, because of topography, that's kind of a little site all by itself. And the general plan steering committee was presented with four or five alternatives, and they discussed this and they discussed that and certain levels of development and so forth. What they fmally came up with, what they finally approved, was open space active recreation with an overlay of a community pazk. And that's what they built it on, that's what the planning commission okayed, that's what the council okayed, and that's our new general plan. As in the past, the ink wasn't even dry and a developer shows up, a long-time Chula Vista developer shows up and wants to put 500 to 600 Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 16 condos there. Clearly he was indicating that he didn't caze what the general plan said. Now, we have evidence that he was involved in getting that -- that permission and those -- those options and so forth before December 2005, yet he never came before the general plan steering committee, he never came before the planning commission, he never said a word to the council, he was assuming that the planning -- that the general plan, whatever it said, it didn't matter, they would just change it when he got there. And based on past behavior, he was perfectly justified in assuming that. And that's the problem. That if our -- the best situation would be a council that shows some respect for the general plan, and our councils have not in the past. So Proposition E is a bad way to fix something, but it's better than just nothing. And so I'm -- I'm just sorry it has to be done. I hate regulations, but regulations usually occur because of abuses. And the city councils of the past have abusedthat -- that -- that general plan by not showing it any respect. Thank you. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you. You mind if I ask you a question, Mr. Watry? I guess I have to call on myself. Um, you mentioned that the citizens of Chula Vista were very involved in the -- in the general plan. And, um, let me ask you, are -- aze -- do you happen to be a member of Crossroads? Peter Watry: Yes. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. Can you -- can you take a guess on the membership number of Crossroads? Chula Vista -Item 1-Prop E Page 17 Peter Watry: Between 500 -- it's over 500. We always say approaching 600, but 501 is approaching 600. Commissioner Tripp: So 500 to 600 is a fair statement? Peter Watry: Yes. Closer to 500. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. Got afactual -- thank you, Mr. Watry. I've got a factual question for staff. What's, um, what's the population of the City of Chula Vista? Mr. Sandoval: It's approximately 220, 225,000. Commissioner Tripp: 225,000. Any idea of how many of those might be registered voters? Male Voice: [Unintelligible.] Commissioner Tripp: Okay, okay. So the membership of Crossroads is probably less than 600 in a city with 225,000 population. Okay. Thank you. Um, another factual question for staff. What is the process for amending the general plan? Does the government code allow for amendments to the general plan? And is the planning commission -- does the community have a role in -- in that participation and how does the planning commission and council fit? Why would someone want to amend the general plan? If you could just take a stab at making notes on each one of those. Thank you, Mr. Watry. Mr. Shyree: The, uh -- uh, state law allows you to amend the general plan up to four times a year. Uh, that can be more than one application, but those Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 18 aze -- they can be batched. Uh, the process is that an application is filed and, uh, and analyzed by staff, and then, uh, public hearing is held at the planning commission level, the planning commission, uh, is responsible for making a recommendation to the city council, and the city council, at a publicly noticed, uh, hearing, then can make a detemunation on, uh, on the general plan application. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you. And -- and why -- why would someone want to amend a general plan that's taken years to formulate, gone through 90 outreach hearings, and been fairly exhaustibly studied? Why would -- why would anyone want to amend it?] Mr. Sandoval: The, uh, you know, that's obviously up to the individual landowner or developer but, uh, you know, it's when their development desires aze in -- inconsistent with existing land use designation within the general plan would typically be the reason. Commissioner Tripp: Okay, and Mr. Sandoval, I know you've been in the planning professional for many, many yeazs -- certainly not 50 years -- but can you give us an idea of how many yeazs you've been in the planning [service]? Mr. Sandoval: Since, uh, 1973. Commissioner Tripp: So that looks like, what, maybe 35 yeazs? Mr. Sandoval: Yes. Chula Vista -Item 1-Prop E Page 19 Commissioner Tripp: Okay. And -- and during that 35-year career, and -- and -- and it's been a -- awell-deserved career, because you're a fine professional, can you hazazd a guess at how many community plan amendments that you've seen processed? Mr. Sandoval: I -- I wouldn't know. I'd say, you know, there's been hundreds, but .. . Commissioner Tripp: Okay. And -- okay. Thank you. One other question. Um, Mr. Shyree, the process for amending general plans, is that contained within the government code or municipal code or what -- what -- what's the -- the -- the state -- what are the rules that allow that? Mr. Shyree: It's actually contained in our municipal code and state law. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. Thank you very much. Thanks, again, Mr. Watry. We appreciate your -- Peter Watry: I just want to make sure -- it's my fault -- it was not speaking on behalf of Crossroads. Commissioner Tripp: I understand that, sir. Peter Watry: On behalf of myself. Commissioner Tripp: I understand that. I just wanted to get a ballpark idea of how many folks aze in Crossroads, be -- because you did mention, to the best of my recollection, that there was some representation on behalf of the city from that group. Chula Vista - I[em I -Prop E Page 20 Peter Watry: Anyway, I was speaking on behalf of myself. Commissioner Tripp: I understand that, sir. Thank you. Oh, I'm sorry. Of Mr. Watry? Mr. Watry, would you be kind enough entertain a question from -- Commissioner Clayton, you have the floor. Commissioner Clayton: Mr. Watry, I had a question, um, regarding what you were talking about with the outreach meetings that they were having and that they had the opportunity for these people to come and give their input. Did the people have the opportunity to give their input at each of these meetings that you know of, or is it that really what -- you want me to ask staff? Peter Watry: Boy, the -- the meetings ran -- every kind of different meeting -- I just don't remember. Some -- some were -- some you spoke at, most of them, as I remember, you filled out forms, filled out surveys. Some you went and talked to people of different stations. I can't remember, [but by input]. Some were quite informal. I'm not sure what you mean by that. Commissioner Clayton: Okay, thank you. But I'll -- then I'll ask Mr. Sandoval -- Commissioner Tripp: Mr. Watry, Commissioner Bensoussan's after Commissioner Clayton, and so I don't mean to bounce you back and forth, but -- Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 21 Commissioner Clayton: What -- what I was wanting to know is that at these opportunities for, um, the public to give their input, they were -- it was encouraged and they could give their input? Mr. Sandoval Uh, yes, we had a -- if you're talking back to the 2005 general plan update -- Commissioner Clayton: Yes. The 90 meetings where the hundreds of people attended. Mr. Sandoval: Yeah. What -- what we did is we had some, uh, community-wide forums that were held, and then, um, we had five different committees. We had a -- a -- a steering committee and then we had subcommittees on different, uh, subjects. All those were available to the public and, uh, you know, the attendance varied. But obviously at the large community events there were a lot of people, and at the subcommittee meetings, there were fewer, but they were all open to the public. Commissioner Clayton: Thank you. And then my next question is, is that -- the summary of that information, is that what was developed to create Mr. Peterson's graphs? Mr. Sandoval: I'm trying to remember. I believe what he's referring to might have been, uh, the outcomes out of one of the first town hall meetings. We had a -- a number of town hall meetings. Commissioner Clayton: So I guess what I'm getting at is that if those people -- if people repeatedly attended these meetings, then they Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 22 Mr. Sandoval repeatedly gave their input, and that input was repeatedly put into the statistics, is there a possibility that Mr. Peterson's statistics might be slightly skewed? Um, I don't really know. The -- the document he displayed, I believe, was what came out of our first, um, citywide work -- workshop. We actually had it at Chula Vista High School and had booths and people provided input, and I believe that's where that came from. Commissioner Clayton: There was no way to determine whether the same people put the same input in repeatedly or whether this input was from different people? Mr. Sandoval: Yeah, I really don't -- don't know. I don't know if you remember. Commissioner Clayton: Okay, thank you. Jim Peterson: I think some of the early meetings were informational, before they started taking input, as I remember. Commissioner Tripp: Uh, Commissioner Bensoussan, you have the floor, ma'am. Commissioner Bensoussan: Well, having participated on one of the subcommittees for several yeazs on the general plan update and on the steering committee, um, I -- [and even the visioneering] before the committees were formed, um, I have a distinct reselection of the graphs that, uh, Mr. Peterson showed and, um, it's my recollection, and I think Mr. [Betchel] can, um, confirm or deny that, that those graphs Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 23 were prepared by staff. They reflected 6,000 comments that were, um, taken from the public, 6,000 comments, and they were reduced into a series of -- of graphs and spreadsheets that we studied after they had been produced. So I'd just like Mr. Betchel to confirm or deny that. Mr. Betchel: Mr. Chairman, that's true. Commissioner Bensoussan has a very good memory, and they -- they did come from the condensed, uh, collective input from our first round of community issue gathering. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you. All set. Okay. Commissioner Felber, you have the floor, sir. Commissioner Felber:I was just going to -- I -- I think it's settled. I was going to say I attended one of those same things at Benita High School and I think the -- the -- I think it was probably a com -- a compilation of the -- those similar meetings at different locations, so -- Commissioner Tripp: Thank you. Commissioner Clayton? Commissioner Clayton: I was just trying to get some clarification because this is such an important issue as to exactly what the representation was, seeing as our -- our chair has already addressed the -- the fact that there are some, uh, some special interest groups that I would want to know that, if these statistics were available, aze they truly the statistics of independent people in the city or aze they repeated comments from specific groups. And that's all I was trying to get to. Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 24 Commissioner Tripp: Thank you. Thank you, again, Mr. Watry. Uh, Mr. Todd Hoff? Welcome, sir. You have eight minutes. Todd Hoff: Thank you, I appreciate the opportunity. I appreciate that. Uh, my name is Todd Hoff. I'm the chief operations executive for Scripts Mercy Chula Vista Hospital. We're located -- Commissioner Tripp: Just a little bit closer to that mike. Todd Hoff: I'm sorry. I'm the chief executive officer at Scripts Mercy Chula Vista Hospital. We're located at 435 Eighth Street. We have, uh, over 1,100 employees, uh, providing healthcare to this wonderful community. Uh, I want to give you a little background on the hospital. We're a safety net hospital. Um, we face significant financial challenges. The hospital lost $35 million over the past five years. Although we've made significant improvements in the past three yeazs, those losses aze due lazgely to high numbers of uninsured or underinsured patients that we treat. Last yeaz alone, we provided $18 million in uncompensated caze. It's important to consider the financial challenges in any discussion of redevelopment of our campus. Scripts, we are a nonprofit healthcare system with very limited capital dollars. Campus development is funded through a combination of borrowing, net revenue, and philanthropy. At Chula Vista, we have flat revenue and minimal philanthropic support, both of which make borrowing even more challenging. Now, regazding Prop E, tonight's discussion, Chula Vista already has a process in place to see public input to create and make changes to the city's general plan that we've heard today. Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 25 Limitations on our ability to develop our campus makes financing more difficult because they add cost and uncertainty to the process, which then makes borrowing difficult. From Scripts's perspective, we have a limited amount of land, and the proposed height limit further constrains our flexibility to plan a healthcare facility that will meet the healthcare needs of our community, not just today but in our future. The added cost that the ddditional zoning constraint placed on us means we'll be spending these limited resources, uh, in an unprecedented way. So we appreciate the opportunity to shaze our position of no support for Prop E. Thank you. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you, sir. Uh, Mr. Kevin ONeil, welcome. Kevin O'Neil: Good evening. Kevin O'Neil, 621 [Del Maz] Avenue. Um, I was on the steering committee for the general plan update, so I -- I have same similar recollections. And, uh, in the eazly visioneering outreach, there were a lot of the same people, and this is a problem that you have where you have any organized group or constituency that can come in and voice an opinion when the majority sort of stays home and -- and - - and tends to their -- to their households and that. So you're going to tend to get a skewed number in any event. So that's -- what's what I remember. I do recall that in three well- argued meetings, we -- we came up with the height recommendations for Third Avenue, E to H, and there was a -- a -- a compromise that was worked out between the nothing to the anything groups, and it is different than what the urban core specific plan would allow today because concessions were made to try and find some peace. And that, Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 26 of course, is going nowhere because there is a lawsuit revolving around that. It was a lawsuit on the EIR, as I recall, for the general plan, and they have come from the same place. So we aze nowhere moving forwazd on this because there is -- is a small group that doesn't want it. And I don't know what's right, and I don't know how tall a building should be, and I'm not sure that someone at my age should be deciding into the future what the city should look like. It should be those folks that we're going to leave it to, the kids and the young adults who should come. Unfortunately, the young tend not to be aware of anything other than what is immediately in orbit azoand them. And I guess when you get older you begin to caze maybe a little more about things. But change is inevitable, we shouldn't be afraid of change. Um, the thing that kills this initiative for me is the permanence of it. The fact that it has to go through a vote. And the -- the imposition that it puts on something like the hospitals, any of these other uses that might ask for it, the smaller uses. Um, that, to me, is the killer. It is -- it is -- a building, as you guys well know, should be judged in context with the use and the mission, and you decide whether this is the right fit in the community, not just for the shape of it, but what, in fact, it brings to the community. And that would be the prudent way to, uh, to -- to address this. Now, I have a question and, you know, the devil is in the details of this thing, as to whether it's a good thing or a bad thing or a great thing or just a good thing. And if -- if I may, in the -- in the language of this proposition, the third iteration of it, um, it says the general -- they should have a Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 27 voice in -- in protecting the general plan against changes that will increase traffic congestion, overburden existing facilities, including parking, and cause visual impacts. Um, it -- it says that high-rise buildings have a place in Chula Vista. They should be located where transportation systems have been built to serve them. I have to question that. Have been built to serve them. That would indicate to me that the only place in the entire city where these systems have been built would be the E Street and the Eighth Street trolley stops. They would not be the bay, they would not be the - - the Eastern Urban Center, nor would they be the University Site. So the question I have is what does, you know, what does that mean? Does that mean that the infrastructure system far the transportation system has to come first? It will not come first because you cannot finance them without rider ship. It wouldn't be prudent to do it. Otherwise, we'd build all of our parks and all of our libraries now, even though we don't have the people that -- that aze going to use them. And then it follows on and says that, um, that end where existing neighborhoods will not be disrupted, displaced, or overburdened. Now I question does E Street and Eighth Street, aze they going to be exempt from that requirement of existing neighborhoods not be disrupted, displaced, or overburdened? Who is the azbiter of that? In fact, what is the transportation system requirement? It doesn't say here, and I'm -- I'm sorry that Mr. [Jentz] isn't here to explain this, what he meant, and hopefully if he says, no, I meant that's fine, that he'd be willing to Chula Vista - Item i -Prop E Page 28 indemnify the city if somebody chose to -- to, uh, to fight the increased density and height in those areas. So, again, the devil is in the details. Maybe it's a good thing, maybe it's a great thing to limit the height in Chula Vista. My problem is this one has enough flaws and problems in it that I would be afraid of how we undo it. We've got to go back to the voters to do that, and that's going to cast money and that will cost time. So there aze -- there are -- there aze places that aze structurally in this thing and -- and -- and it doesn't go faz enough. They will claim that it -- it -- it protects the -- the, uh, university site. They put a paragraph in there that -- that says it exempts west of 5. Why not even a sentence below that pazagraph that says the university site, uh, would be protected as well? And, remember, the university site, as our consultant envisions it, is not this -- this azea with a moat azound it that has a definite boundary. What he's looking at is -- is one where the tendrils of the private move into the campus and the campus moves out and -- and there is a melding of that -- that boundary line. So how do you define which is what? Is it only the university site or is it actually the -- the public or the private azeas that would be part of that university site, the R&D, the -- the rental dormitories or student housing, not just what's on the campus itself. So there -- there aze so many problems that I see coming out of this thing that it -- it -- it -- it makes it very difficult forme to even be passive on it and say, well, you know, maybe it goes and maybe it doesn't go. And I'm not building anything over 65 feet or 85 feet, so what do I care? You ought to caze because you're going to need some of these things that you Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 29 don't even know yet. We certainly need the hospitals. We may need the courthouses. You know, we're going to need the -- the, uh, schools. Sweetwater has a, uh, has property on Third. Avenue. They needed administrative offices. There is no money in the state budget for them to pay for non classrooms. And Mr. Mosier, I heazd him this morning, the, uh, the . attorney for Mr. Jentz, uh, claims that, well, schools, they march to a different drummer, they don't have to be held by this. Not actually accurate because that only applies to classrooms. Any other facilities, non teaching facilities, aze that. So that could limit the ability of Sweetwater, one of the largest high school districts in the state, to be able to afford their -- their -- their, uh, administrative on Third Avenue. Thank you. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you, Mr. O'Neil. Commissioner Bensoussan, you have the floor. Commissioner Bensoussan: I have a couple of questions. Um, first to the city attorney, um, could you enlighten us as to the, uh, lawsuit regazd - - regarding the general plan that Mr. O'Neil referred to? Um, is -- is there an ongoing lawsuit about the general plan? Mr. Shyree: Uh, no, there's no lawsuit on the general plan. I don't know if -- if Mr. ONeil may -- may have misspoken and maybe meant the urban core specific plan. I don't know. Chula Visa -Item 1 -Prop E Page 30 Commissioner Bensoussan: Okay. Uh, he mentioned both, actually. Um, and is there anything that would prevent the city council from bringing forward an initiative in November that would amend Proposition E to exempt hospitals? Mr. Shyree: Well, no. Commissioner Bensoussan: Thank you. And, uh, just one, uh, one comment I'm -- I'm compelled to make is that, um, it has been touted by the city on numerous occasions that the general plan update was an unprecedented outreach. I've heard our director of planning and, um, many staff members and council members talk about the unprecedented outreach, um, of the general plan update process. That this had never been done before, to be as inclusive as it was. And it's now being implicated as tilted or tainted. And that bothers me, having sacrificed many, many hours over many years. So I just wanted to say that. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you. Mr. Shyree, question. Um, can you enlighten us on if there are any lawsuits or legal actions pending over the Proposition E matter? What's going on? MR. Shyree: Yes, there's a lawsuit, um, filed right now, um, regazding the mayor or the city council's, um, argument against Prop E and the rebuttal, which is currently, uh, going through the court system. Actually we'll have a hearing this Friday. Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 31 Commissioner Tripp: Okay, thank you very much. I think this is the last speaker. Um, Jennifer Landsreth, welcome. And you have eight minutes. Jermifer Landsreth: Thank you. Commissioner Tripp: Sure. Jennifer Landsreth: My name, again, is Jennifer Landsreth, and I'm a resident of Chula Vista and also a parishioner of St. Rosalina Pazish. Our coordinator of our building project was unable to attend this evening, so I was asked to come and present our situation. Last summer we received a conditional use permit to build a new school, hall, and church. Proposition E would require a vote by the people of Chula Vista to approve the building plans for our church. Even though we received approval for the concept of the church from the city council, we would not be grandfathered under Proposition E because we have not received building permits or have begun construction. Very similaz to the hospitals, as a religious, nonprofit organization, we do not have the funds or the resources to cover the costs in having our building plans placed on a ballot for voter approval. We accept, uh, we understand and respect the concerns for preserving the historic chazacter of our community; however, we do not support this initiative as it would greatly impact our ability to build our new church. Thank you for the opportunity to shaze our concern and our position on this initiative. Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 32 Commissioner Tripp: Thank you. Um, I have a question for staff, um, are there any pipeline provisions for projects that may currently be reviewed? What are the rules under this thing? Mr. Betchel: Well, under our -- our just municipal code or are you -- Commissioner Tripp: Well, the -- the speaker mentioned that -- don't let me put words in your mouth, but I thought I heazd that existing projects going through the system could be adversely effected. Is that true? Or does this have a date at which it would begin to affect projects? Mr. Betchel: Mr. Shyree, if I heard the speaker correctly, I believe she was referring to the provisions that are in Proposition E itself as to, um, if it was to pass, those projects that had reached a certain point of-- of approval would be considered to be exempted from it, and I think that's what she's speaking to. Commissioner Tripp: And what is that point, Mr. Betchel? What -- what -- how many projects might this affect or -- Mr. Betchel: I -- I couldn't say that at this point. Commissioner Tripp: Mr. Shyree, would this have an adverse impact on projects that aze submitted by a certain date or would projects need to be submitted by a certain date to not be effected? Mr. Shyree: I think what I would refer the commission to on any questions regazding the substance of Prop E is to the city attorney's impartial Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 33 analysis, which is in -- in the, uh, packet. Um, there aze -- could be issues with Prop E that could be the subject of future litigation, and I'd rather not get into that right now. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. That would be speculation on your part and that's inappropriate for this venue? Apparently so. Thank you. Okay. Uh, Mr. Peter [Rulan]? Mr. Rulan? I'm sorry. I'm song, Commissioner Bensoussan, my apologies. Got ahead of my -- myself. If you could just beaz with us for a moment. Commissioner Bensoussan was on the board. You have the floor. Please proceed. Commissioner Bensoussan: Yeah, I just had a question for the last speaker, from St. Rosalina. Is -- is that project, um -- Commissioner Tripp: Ms. Landsreth. Commissioner Bensoussan: Ms. Landsreth. Is thatproject, um, permitted for over 84 feet? Jennifer Landsreth: Greg Smith, who's the coordinator of the building project, has been the person who's been working on this, and I have not actually been involved in any of that, so I can't answer that question. Commissioner Bensoussan: But it's my recollection that project came to the planning commission and it's mostly atwo-story, uh, project with the exception of the sanctuary itself, uh, which I thought was somewhere in the neighborhood of a four, maybe five-story building. So I -- Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 34 personally, I don't recollect that it was over 84 feet, so I -- I just am wondering how this proposition would therefore impact it. Jennifer Landsreth: To my knowledge, I know that the -- the school building is a two-story building. Now the church, however, is where I am not certain as to the measurements as far as the height. If you would like to contact Deacon Greg Smith at, uh, um, St. Rosalina Parish, he can give you all -- all of that information. Commissioner Bensoussan: I probably still have the files. I just thought since you were making that statement that you, um, had the facts. Jennifer Landsreth: This was, uh, alast-minute substitution. Thank you. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Spethman -- you might not want to leave yet, Commissioner Spethman might have a question for you. Commissioner Spethman: No, I don't necessary have aquestion. I -- if memory serves me correctly, and -- and looking at those plans and, um, you know, azchitectural renderings when that project came before the planning commission, I seem to recall some kind of a tower element, um, on the campus. Um, and -- or -- or a spire, um, as it relates to the -- the, um, the sanctuary, that, you know, the main church building. Ithink -- I think there was an element. I don't, um, happen to recollect the exact height, though. Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 35 Commissioner Bensoussan: That's exactly my position as well. I believe it was in relation to the church; however, I don't know the measurements. Commissioner Spethman: Correct. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you. Mr. Rulan? Peter Rulan: Thank you. Good evening. I'm Dr. Peter Rulan. I live on 98 Cook Court. Uh, I have a business on 256 [Landis]. I've been in town 25 yeazs as a doctor. And I love Chula Vista. LTh, I'm the president and founder of Chula Vista Taxpayers for Responsible Planning. Uh, I finally did that this year because I felt that, uh, we have been silent for too long, people who work and live in Chula Vista. Uh, the -- the -- the only voice I ever heazd were people were saying we're -- we're limiting -- people were limiting growth and saying no to everything. Meanwhile, I was looking at my neighborhood, uh, growing weeds and vacancy -- vacant lots and -- and I guess I'm too much in the middle of my cazeer to see Chula Vista fall apart around me. Um, I don't have the -- I -- the hospital needs to -- needs to expand. I see, uh, vacant lots up and down, uh, Third Avenue. Uh, it's a different philosophy. I think we all love Chula Vista equally, but I would hope that, uh, we just -- we start letting the cities and the planners and the -- whatever's been going on for years, [to let us be], so we can start p, uh, progressing in our town. Uh, the city needs money to pay its bills and staffing and firemen, et cetera. I mean, I'm just tired of all this fighting going on for yeazs and yeazs, and it seems Chula Vista - I[em 1-Prop E Page 36 to be by a small group of people that have some good intentions but a different philosophy. And, uh, I just, uh, I can't -- I don't have the luxury of, uh, staying home and not seeing my world aoound me. I work downtown, and I have to maintain the image of my practice. And come -- come -- come and visit me one day, look at the backyards around me, and the streets and the weeds and the mess. That's very embarrassing to me. And, uh, and I just hope that people sometimes, uh, look at our point of view, that we -- we need progress now. We don't need it in -- in, uh, whenever everything's perfect and correct. I mean, work with the city, work with the planning committees, work with the -- the sign, uh, the city's slowly dying, I think. And we need to give it some life. And I think development of a hospital would be one, less regulations would be another one, uh, working with the city government and planners, uh, to make sure everything works well. But I -- I do trust the government more than other people do. Uh, I think the system works well. [And -- and it requires citizen input], I believe in that, but it's, uh, I just implore you all to -let the city get -- get -- get going again. [It's been a plan for] many years. Uh, so, uh, thank you very much. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you, sir. Commissioner Bensoussan, you have the floor. Commissioner Bensoussan: That was for the last speaker, and I've forgotten my question. Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 37 Commissioner Tripp: Okay. All right. Are there any other folks that would like to be heard on the matter? Okay, seeing none, that would conclude public testimony on the item. And we would open it for, uh, any commission discussion. Uh, Mr. Shyree, if you have anything to add, please feel free. Okay. Mr. Shyree: Nothing to add. Commissioner Tripp: Um, going by the lights, Commissioner Bensoussan, you have the floor. Commissioner Bensoussan: Yeah, I just remembered. It was a question for staff about spirals on churches. Um, what -- what would -- would Proposition E impact spirals on churches? Mr. Sandoval: Commissioner, I'm not really sure. Commissioner Bensoussan: Okay, thanks [unintelligible]. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you. Commissioner Clayton, you have the floor. Commissioner Clayton: Yeah, Ijust -- I just had a question for the city attorney. Could I have a little bit more clarification on your answer to, uh, Commissioner Bensoussan about how the city council in the future would be able to make an effort to exempt a hospital if this were to -- ifProposition Ewere to be approved? Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 38 Mr. Shyree: Uh, the city council can move forwazd at any time and -- and do a -- an initiative to the ballot or to promote something to the voters. Um, the difference is that under acouncil-sponsored initiative, it would have to go through environmental review, which is different than acitizen- sponsored initiative. Other than that it's pretty much the same process. Commissioner Clayton: So it would still go to a general vote? Mr. Shyree: If that's the way the council wanted to set it up. Commissioner Clayton: Okay. Thank you. And I -- I just had a -- an answer for, uh, for Commissioner Bensoussan. If you look on page 5 of, um, I just had it here -- on page 5, number C, it does include any rooftop [appeazance], so I guess the sphere would be included in the height. Commissioner Bensoussan: [CTnintelligible.] Commissioner Clayton: Thank you. Commissioner Tripp: Commissioner Vinson, you have the floor, sir. Commissioner Vinson: Yeah, thank you. Um, it's, uh, I'm surprised that the -- the seating in the audience is not totally jam-packed with -- with people all the way azound the room, especially with the -- with all of the interest and all the newspaper interest that has -- that has occurred over the last couple of weeks with regards to Prop E. Um, I just hope that over the -- over the next couple of weeks, the next five weeks Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 39 before the election, that those that are -- those that aze for it and those that are against it really try to educate the -- the public because when this goes aboard and -- and goes for a vote, it is really critical that if -- ifthis goes and gets passed, that the public understands what they're passing. And it is also just as critical that if it is opposed, that they understand what they're opposing. And I really see the difference in -- in the different people in the room trying to make sure that they get an understanding of this proposition and -- and me, myself, as well, trying to get an understanding of -- of why it -- it works and why it doesn't work and why it should be and why it shouldn't be. And as Mr. Watry had -- had, uh, eloquently said eazlier that, you know, the general plan was -- was not perfect, but it was a -- it was a combination of compromises and -- and making things work. I just hope that this proposition as it comes forwazd with clarity is written the right way and the public itself really will understand and -- and not be missed, uh, miscued on whaf it's about, because it will be of importance in our city. And that's all. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you, sir. Commissioner Spethman, you have the floor. Commissioner Spethman: Um, Mr. Shyree, this question is for you, and I'm not sure that we can talk about it, I'm not sure that we can go into any kind of detail about it, but if I start on this thing and you, um, don't want me to complete it, then just tell me. Um, regazding EIRs, um, if Prop E does pass, um, what about an ER -- EIR [and] let's say a -- a certain group or -- or, um, certain groups are not satisfied with the Chula Vista - Item i -Prop E Page 40 mitigation efforts, um, can they challenge the report and, um, and require that it be decided -- that it be put to a vote and decided by voters? Mr. Shyree: Is -- is your question can -- can an EIR -- voters -- people that don't like the results of an EIR, don't like the mitigation measures, put that to a vote? Commissioner Spethman: Correct. Mr. Shyree: Um, that would not be the normal way to do it. Um, and they probably could not do that. You would challenge it through, uh, writ of mandate, through the, um, code of civil procedure. Commissioner Spethman: Can you kind of go into a little more detail. I -- I don't understand the legalese there. Mr. Shyree: Well, you basically c -- challenge the EIR on -- on -- on whatever grounds you may be challenging it against, and youre going in and you ask a court to make a decision and then -- whether to uphold the EIR or to say, no, it wasn't adequate, go back and redo it. Commissioner Spethman: Okay, so it would be in the form of a lawsuit as opposed to a vote by, um, the community or the citizens, and this would also entail -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- um, slowing the process and -- and actually freezing the project from moving forwazd? Mr. Shyree: It generally does not -- Chula Visa -Item 1 -Prop E Page 41 Commissioner Spethman: Even if -- even if it was avoter-approved project, somebody could dispute the EIR and it would preclude the project from moving forward? Mr. Shyree: Well, for want of a better term, EIIZ cases aze very fact-sensitive, but in general, a project can still go forward even though it's under a lawsuit. The courts will not generally stop the project. And that might sound counterintuitive, but that's -- unless the petitioners or the plaintiffs against the project would request an injunction and the court grant that, the project could still move forward and courts gen -- generally do not grant injunctions on projects in environmental lawsuits. Commissioner Spethman: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you, sir. Uh, Commissioner Felber, you have the floor. Commissioner Felber: Yeah, I'm going to make some comments. I'm going to play off of a couple of other commissioner comments eazlier. Um, I think some of you might know, as Commissioner Tripp mentioned eazlier, that, um, some of us, myself being one of them, uh, have made some public -- have -- have come out publicly on our position -- on my position on, um, on Prop E. At the time that I did that, I didn't know that we were going to be hearing it at the planning commission. I -- I've always tried to, um, uh, refrain from, you know, making some kind of a public comment on something un -- until we've heazd it here, so that, you know, uh, it -- it -- there's no appearance that, you know, I've already Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 42 made up my mind. But by the same token, I think Commissioner Moctezuma made a good point, that whenever we heaz something, whenever we see something or -- or find out about something, we all have an initial reaction. You know, good or bad or -- or maybe in some cases it's indifferent, we don't have enough information to really know one way or the other. Um, but I think that's probably a minority of the times. Most of the time we -- we have an initial reaction, uh, oftentimes favorable or unfavorable. Um, so, you know, even when I -- even when I come with an initial opinion on something, um, I always try to keep my mind open, even until the last minute. There have been times where I've had -- had, uh -- uh, a feeling or a belief on something and I've changed my minute -- I've changed my mind the minute that I actually, you know, cast my vote, um, whether it be at the ballot box or whether it be on this dais. And, uh, so, you know, I -- I just want everybody to understand that, that, um, you know, I always come here with an open mind, and I -- I -- I -- if there's information that comes before me that - - that causes me to reevaluate my -- my opinion or change my mind, um, I -- I -- I do that. But I also want to point out, too, that, you know, somebody earlier tonight mentioned, um, that on various occasions, the -- the counsel and -- and, I don't know if he also believesthat -- that this planning commission has done the same, where, uh, people will come forward and give their opinions. And we decide differently and I -- and my sense was that sometimes that gets viewed as we're not listening. And I just want to assure you that, uh, you know, that's not the case. But not Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 43 deciding the same -- not believing the same thing that somebody else does or a group of people doesn't mean that I haven't listened. It just means I have a different opinion. And so, um, you know, I -- you know, again -- again, I just want to ensure that, you know, just because I make a decision different than -- than you might doesn't mean I haven't listened. Um, somebody also mentioned, the idea of community character at these, uh, community meetings that were held on the general plan. And, you know, that was a pretty compelling statistic, but I think, you know, when people filled that out or -- or -- or went through that exercise, community character, to me, is more than just buildings. Community character, to me, is, uh, you know, what kind of services do you have, hospitals, public safety, city services, amenities in the community, um, recreation, places to eat, places for entertainment, places to -- to shop and -- and, you know, live life basically. And so community character, to me, is more than just buildings and I don't know that necessarily people, when they did that exercise, were specifically thinking of building height. I think, in general, they were speaking of the general community chazacter. That's not to say that building height might not have been a part of it, um, but I -- I think it, you know, there -- there might be more to it than that. There's -- there's also, you know, there's so -- there's so much to consider here. There's, you know, there was a recent council meeting, uh, that I watched where, uh, a property owner on Third Avenue made a -- a very impassioned speech about, um, you know, what's happening -- what -- what he believes is happening on Third Avenue and how, you know, Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 44 it's deteriorating, there's not the life there that's needed. I know many of us have wanted, you know, Trader Joe's and other things like that to come to -- to Western Chula Vista. And, you know, they don't believe that there's enough business here for them, and that's why they've not been willing to come. Um, so that's something to take into consideration. Does -- does this height initiative affect that or not? Um, you know, I think we've -- you know, over my lifetime, having come to Chula Vista in the eazly '60s, um, it seems to me that, uh, the West isn't -- not to say that there aren't, uh, exceptions to this, but, in general, the West is not what it used to be. Um, Third Avenue is not as active and vibrant, Broadway is deteriorating, um, other than a few spots here and there. Um, so again, how does this -- how does this initiative affect that? You know, I've lived in all parts of the city. I've -- I've lived in the urban core, I've lived elsewhere in the west, I've lived in the southwest, I've lived in the east. Got in-laws in the -- in the west and parents in the southwest, sister in the east. So, you -- you know, I don't look at Chula Vista as one area or what's going to affect me, because I've got family, I've got connections in all parts of the city. And I think; you know, we need to consider what's best for the entire city. Um -- um, you know, Idon't -- I don't -- I don't want to see Chula Vista dominated by, uh, high-rises. I don't think anybody that's for Proposition E or, excuse me, against Proposition E does. Um, but I think the thing that people need to consider is what -- what's going to give the city the flexibility to grow in the best way, to make the best and highest use of the land, um, that we have to develop Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 45 or redevelop, as the case might be. And, um, and so those are things to consider in deciding which way to -- to decide on Prop E as well. And I guess my final comment is somebody made a -- a comment eazlier, I think it was, uh, Mr. O'Neil about, you know, whether or not he might necessarily be the best person, uh, to make the decision. What about the people that are going to inherit -- inherit the decisions that we make today? And -- and one of the things I've noticed, um, over the last few yeazs since I've -- I've gotten on the planning commission and been more involved in -- in different azeas of the city and whatnot is it seems to me that most of the people that come to these meetings, most of the people that sit on this dais, most of the people that are involved in the different community groups, for the most part, um, we're, for the most part, middle-aged or senior citizens. And I -- I agree with Mr. ONeil that I want to see -- I want to see and hear what the young people think. And what-- what we're going to leave them and what they want to see, uh, their city to be in the future and so I've advocated -- and I hope it will come to pass some day -- thatmaybe we even get the Youth Commission involved in -- in kind of at least, uh, the more major, uh, future-affecting projects in Chula Vista, such as the urban core, the bay front, or, you know, Prop E or -- or, you know, various kinds of things. And to have them look at them in general and -- and help -- and -- and weigh in on the decision. And let the planning commission and -- and council know what -- what they would like to see. Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 46 iJh, I think that's a great, uh, resource to tap into and that way we can get the perspective of the young people that are going to inherit the decisions that we make today. So, you know, those aze all the kinds of things that I've been thinking about as -- as I look at this, and, um, you know, I hope everybody looks -- is looking at and considering all these things, because all these things will have an impact on how we decide which way to come down on Prop E. It's -- it's -- it's an important matter that -- that will affect the future of Chula Vista. And I -- I think it's -- it's one worthy of considering, um, all of the impacts that -- that would occur. Thank you. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you. Um, Mr. Shyree, I was going to try to piggyback on some of Commissioner Spethman's comments. Are you familiaz with the California Environmental Quality Act and the EIR process? Mr. Shyree: Yes. Commissioner Tripp: Can youtell me what the basic purpose of CEQA is? I -- and I'm not trying to put you on the spot. I can elaborate. I think it's to disclose the impacts of projects. Mr. Shyree: Yeah, CEQA is, uh, stands for the California Environmental Quality Act, it's codified in the public resources code under, I think, section 21,000. And basically what it says is any project that's a discretionary matter going before a -- an agency has to look at and disclose, um, the environmental consequences, um, of that project and then there's certain procedural aspects to it, um, a different type of, uh, environmental documents that could be looked at. I think we've all Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 47 heazd the terms, uh, negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, and environmental impact report. And, again, it's, um, all discretionary projects in California, um, have to have CEQA review. Commissioner Tripp: Or the environmental coordinator in the -- acting for the lead agency could determine that they're exempt as well, correct? Mr. Shyree: Correct. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. And if a developer proposes aproject -- get me if I'm wrong -- under CEQA, staff would propose what's called -- perform what's called an initial study, correct? Mr. Shyree: Correct. Commissioner Tripp: And that initial study would compare the impacts of that project with the adopted thresholds of that agency and make a call as to whether they were not significant, therefore a negative declazation might be appropriate, or if potentially significant, they would look at mit -- mitigation measures. Mr. Shyree: Correct. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. And if the developer chose to modify the project to adopt mitigation measures so that it was not, uh, those -- those issues were below the thresholds, then that project could comply with CEQA, correct? Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 48 Mr. Shyree: Correct. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. One other question, and -- and if the impacts to a project were so significant, and the environmental coordinator, acting on behalf of the lead -- lead agency believed that an environmental impact report was required under the California Environmental Quality Act, does staff have the ability to prepaze what's called a statement of ovemding consideration citing economic or social issues? Mr. Shyree: Only if an environmental impact report is prepared. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. And then does the -- do the -- does the elected body, meaning the city council, have the authority to review that environmental document and, uh, take action in -- in determining whether overriding s -- considerations may exist and certifying or not certifying that environmental document? Mr. Shyree: Yes, they're required to do so. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. And does the California Environmental Quality Act allow for a public outreach process so that the public has a chance to comment, in advance, on potential environmental issues? Mr. Shyree: Yes, for a mitigated negative declaration, there's a required 30-day review period. For an EIR, there's a required minimum 45-day public comment period. Chula Vista -Item 1-Prop E Page 49 Commissioner Tripp: Okay. And it's either 15 -- section 15131 or 21131 that allows any public -- any citizen to appeal the determination of the environmental coordinator of the lead agency, whether it be an exemption, neg dec, mitigated neg dec, or EIR to the elected body, is that correct? You might get me on the section. Mr. Shyree: You might get me on the question. I'm not sure. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. Can -- can a citizen appeal the determination of the envirommental coordinator with regard to an exemption, a neg dec, a mitigated neg dec, or an EIR to the elected body? We can recess and I'll find the section. Mr. Shyree: I, you know what, in all my years, that has not come up, so I don't know. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. Let me just make a point here. The City of San Diego and the California Environmental Quality Act contain a provision allowing the determ -- the environmental determination on any project to be appealed to the elected body. That happens to be the city council. And the people of the City of Chula Vista elect the city council to make policy calls and project determinations on behalf of the project. Um, anyway, I think it's 15131. I may be wrong. Any other comments? Commissioner Bensoussan -- oh, one more -- one more, I'm sorry. For staff, has, um, Mr. Sandoval, uh, in your 35 years of planning experience, aze -- are you also familiar with the redevelopment process? Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 50 Mr. Sandoval: Somewhat -- somewhat familiaz. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. If the elected officials and the -- and the citizenry -- and -- and - - and there has been a lot of public input, if they have created redevelopment azeas, is the success of those redevelopment azeas better achievable if the regulations are flexible or more constrained? Mr. Sandoval: Youknow, I -- I -- I think it depends. Um, you know, you can look, uh -- uh, the, uh, regulations themselves provide structure and guidance to a developer and the developer wants certainty. Um, flexibility, uh, can provide more opportunities, um, you know, and so I think that -- that's how I would look at [two -- both estimates]. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. Um, one other question, does a -- does a height limit constrain flexibility? Mr. Sandoval: I -- I think it really depends on what the development proposal is. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. And can you -- can you comment on what value, if any, does flexibility play in a -- in a -- in a, uh, successful general plan? Mr. Sandoval: We, uh, typically the general plan, um, is not a real specific document. What the general plan will do is provide policy direction, and a general plan will pro -- provide basic land use determinants, detemunes the types of uses that can go in different places. Um, so typically the general plan won't be very specific. What it'll do is provide policy guidance and a specificity will come at the, uh, specific plan [or the zoning ordinance] level. Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 51 Commissioner Tripp: Okay. Thank you. And then a last question. Has any type of economic analysis been done on -- on Proposition E on how -- as to how it may affect positively or negatively the future growth? Mr. Sandoval: Uh, not that I'm aware of. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. All right. Thank you. Commissioner Bensoussan, you have the floor. Commissioner Bensoussan: Uh, with respect to that last question, I -- I had heazd that there were three -- at least three studies that have been done, uh, economic, financial studies that have been done on Proposition E or iterations of Proposition E over the last, uh, yeaz. Um, so I -- I think that, uh, I would -- I would say that maybe, uh, maybe a call to the, uh, city respective, uh, department might -- you might be able to, uh, turn up one of those studies. As I'm -- I'm pretty sure that they have been done. Um, and with all due respect to Commissioner Felber, the last time I checked, young people have the right to vote on Proposition E, um, not just middle-aged and seniors. Um, and then there's always, um, the possibility that if the Proposition E passed and -- and, uh, it -- it was, uh, unpopulaz, it -- it -- there could be also another initiative voted on by the people to undo it. So propositions aren't always engraved in stone. And, um, since there's been so much talk about EIRs and CEQA, um, I -- I wanted to, for the benefit of the public, read, um, a sentence from the city attorney's impartial analysis that was part of our packet. And, um, particulazly Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 52 because out in the community, I've heazd on two or three occasions, um, Dr. Rulan's group, representatives from Dr. Rulan's group, make adamant statements that if Proposition E passes, projects will no longer be subject to EIR. And so I would like to, um, read -- for the benefit of the public -- this one sentence from the city attorney's impartial analysis. A project proponent affected by this proposition would be required to comply with all existing planning, design, and environmental review process, but could not obtain final approval unless and until voters approve the project. Thank you. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you. Um, Mr. Sandoval, uh, Commissioner Bensoussan alluded to three studies that have supposedly been done. Are you aware of any of those studies? Mr. Sandoval: Um, I -- I actually did want to speak up. Um, the planning and building department, May of last year, we did a study. Now, it wasn't really an economic study. Ours was more of a land use analysis. And, uh, you know, I'm not aware of other studies. I just don't know either way. Commissioner Tripp: Did the study on land use analysis cite any economic concerns that may or may not exist or did it allude to any, you know, is Prop E bad for the -- the su -- the potential success of the redevelopment area from an economic perspective? Or is it good from an economic perspective? Chula Vista -Item 1 -Prop E Page 53 Mr. Sandoval: Our -- our -- the analysis that my department did didn't really get into the economics. All we looked at, uh, really is in terms of, uh, of land use capacity. So we didn't really get into the economics. Commissioner Tripp: Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Felber, you have the floor, sir. Commissioner Felber: Yeah, just, uh -- uh -- a clarification to Commissioner Bensoussan. I was not talking about, uh -- uh, voting. The Youth Commission, I believe most of them are high school students, um, many of whom aze probably not 18 and can't vote. Uh, my comment had to do with, uh, them being maybe a source of advice to the planning commission or the council as we look at land use and major, uh, things that aze going to impact Chula Vista in the future. LJh, regazding the Prop EIR -- Prop E EIR, uh, city attorney's analysis, um, Mr. Shyree, could you confirm -- I -- I believe I spoke, um, to the city attorney, uh, Monday and just want to clarify and make sure my understanding was correct, because I was confused by that statement also, given the, uh, claims by the No On Prop E folks that, uh -- uh, no EIR would be required. Under -- under Prop E there's potentially two scenarios that a developer could -- could advance his project. One would be to go through the -- to come to the city and apply, uh, for, you know, for his project. In that case, he would have to go through all of the normal reviews, including EIRs, commission reviews, council, so on and so forth, as applicable for the given project. The other option that the -- the developer could do would be to go duectly to the voters, get, uh, signatures for petition and, in that case, an EIR would not be required. Is that correct? Chula Vista - Item I -Prop E Page 54 Mr. Shyree: That is correct. Commissioner Felber: Okay, thank you. Commissioner Tripp: Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes the, uh, discussion on the matter, thank you for your attendance. Uh, the planning commission will be in recess for five minutes. Thank you. We have one more item. [End of recorded material.]