HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1974/01/15 Item 04a,b
AGENDA. ITEM NO. [4a/b]
. ...
CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF: January 15,1974
Public hearing - Consideration of specific plan for the Bayfront Area.
ITEM TITLE: Resolution - Adopting specific plan for the Bayfront Area
INITIATED BY: Director of Planning
BACKGROUND
See background on preceeding item; General Plan Amendment for Bayfront Area.
~ecific Plans for the Bayfront Area
As authorized by State Planning and Zoning Law, the Chula Vista City Code provides
for the adoption of Specific Plans under section 33.302 and 33.601 (3).
The subarea policies and criteria section of the SedwayjCooke report Chula Vista
Ba'front Plan and Pro ram, pages 23 through 57, has been prepared in a manner
w 1C perm1ts 1t to e a opted as the specific plan for the bayfront.
SedwayjCooke divided the Bayfront into subareas as shown in figure 10 on the
attached Planning Commission Resolution No. PCM-73-24. The consultant then
prepared specific plans for each subarea, designating the types of uses permitted
intensity of use, standards for development including type and location of
structures, siting, landscaping and other design considerations essential for
proper site development.
Changes Recommended by the Planning Commission
A. Until a final decision has been made on the National Steel and Shipbuilding
Company proposal to locate a shipyard in the Bayfront area, the plans for Subarea
E, where the Commission proposes the shipyard be considered, should remain
flexible. To accomplish this the Commission recommended the following additions
to the specific plan for subarea G:
(continued on supplemental page)
Resolution ~] Ordinance [ ] Agreement [ ]
Plat [ ]
ATTACHED:
See EXHIBITS ~~ No. 1,2
Financial Statement: NA
Commission-Board Recommendation: The Commission by a 7-0 vote adopted Resolution
~-73-24 recommending that the City Council adopt the Specific Plan proposed by
SedwayjCooke with the revision included in Resolution PCM-73-24.
Department Head Recommendation: Concur except that the specific plan for Subarea
E should be as proposed by SedwayjCooke.
City Manager Recommendation:
Concur with Department Head. If and when Rohr has a specific planned use which
would require expansion room and rezoning, it could submit for a plan modifica-
tion via regular procedures.
1(7/t/0
_.__..~... '_'___"'_'-'<'__L'.__~_""<""""_"""""""""",","-,~",~""",<-"",,,,,,,,,,,.-"-'.........._.~.....'-""
AGENDA ITEM NO. ," 4a', b
Supplemental Page No. 2
1. On page 20 of the attached Resolution PCM-73-24, (page 54 in the
SedwayjCooke Report) under "Land Use", the first sentence has been changed
to read "there are two major land uses and a third alternative use proposed
for this subarea." (Underlining indicates ad'aition)
2. On page 20 of the attached Resolution No. PCM-73-24 (Page 55 in the
SedwayjCooke Report) in the center of the page, above "Circulation",
an additional paragraph has been added to the land use section as follow3:
liAs an alternative to the uses discussed above, major water-
oriented industrial uses, such as a shipbuilding plant, should
be considered for Subarea G if additional investigations pertaining
to traffic circulation and dredging indicate the feasibility of
such a use and that there will be no adverse impact upon the
feasibility of the balance of the adopted plan. Should such use
be determined to be, feasible, the Circulation and Development
and Conservation Criteria discussed below will have to be sub-
stantially modified. II
B. Change in Subarea E
The Planning Commission has recommedned a change in the land use plan for this
subarea from Administration and Business Service to Industrial Use for two
reasons:
1. To provide an area for potential expansion of Rohr Industries.
2. Existing development between the railroad right of way and Bay
Boulevard from F Street to G Street is industrial in nature and recent
proposals for development by property owners in this area of an industrial
nature.
The policies and criteria for Subarea E have been revised as recommended by
the Planning Commission and are included in the attached Planning Commission
Resolution No. PCM-73-24 on pages 14 and 15.
/?7N?
......"......"--."""......-....,.., ---, ,._,-,....,_......_....,...,-,----,-,-,-----._-