Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1973/10/17City Planning Commission -2- 10/17/73 Mr. Williams said there would be some aspects of the plan which would involve Rohr, but their basic use or basic zone is not being changed or altered in any way on any of their property. Commissioner Wilson referred to the last sentence of paragraph 4 on page 2 of Exhibit B of the staff report, "Dredging for channels should be kept to a mini- mum," and asked if the Commission were making a recommendation on the Bay? Mr. Williams replied that the viability of the marshland is related to the mud- flats in the Bay; removal of the mudflats by any major channel dredging would cause problems with keeping the marsh intact, but this is not necessarily directed at a Bay-wide recommendation for dredging of channels to be kept at a minimum. Commissioner Wilson commented that he hoped someday the second Bay entrance would be cut through and also that the deep water would go down to the small boat launching ramp, and he wanted to clarify that the statement dealt only with the marsh areas. The Commissioners agreed the meaning was vague and the sentence might be deleted. Commissioner Wilson objected to the phrase, "existing substandard industrial image," in Section D, paragraph 2 of page 3, Exhibit B. Mr. Williams commented there are several major parking areas which are not landscaped; the reference was in keeping with the current trend of industrial park development and the amount of landscaping that goes in around the peripheries of buildings and parking lots. The Commissioners agreed the word "substandard" might be deleted. Commissioner Wilson wondered if the "F" and "G" Street area were zoned C-O, how it would be buffered in the absence of a natural barrier? Mr. Peterson referred to page 49 of the Sedway/Cooke report where the Sub-Area Plan for Area E shows some screen planting along that land use transition line together with some location of off-street parking areas adjacent to it. Mr. Williams believed the consultant's proposal uses the area itself as a buffer for the remaining area. In the redevelopment plan for the Bayfront, this is one of the few areas which is divided up into a number of small property holdings; the criteria in a specific plan for development of those properties are as strict as those on the larger properties. The C-O designation attempts a cohesive development on them. Chairman Macevicz voiced concern that it would not be possible to screen the huge structure housing the BART car construction. Commissioner Whitten asked if it wouldn't be possible to consider I-L zoning with a P designator so the aesthetic development could be controlled? Mr. Williams agreed it was a distinct possibility; however, the I-L zoning would provide a longer list of permitted industrial uses than taking the MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA October 17, 1973 The regular meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California, was held on the above date beginning at 7:00 p.m. with the following members present: Macevicz, Rudolph, Swanson, Whitten, Rice, Wilson and ex-officio member Hastings. Absent (with previous notification): Member Chandler. Also present: Director of Planning Peterson, Assistant Director of Planning Williams, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Assistant Director of Public Works Robens, Legal Intern Beam and Acting Secretary Scholl. Chairman Macevicz led in the pledge of allegiance to the flag followed by a moment of silent prayer. 1. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): a. Consideration of Environmental Impact Report EIR-73-3 on Basfront area b. Consideration of modifications to General Plan for Basfront area c. consideration of rezoning for various parcels in ~Basfront area d. A__d6ption of Specific Plan for the Basfront area Director of Planning Peterson briefly reviewed the staff recommendations as presented to the Commission at the September 26th meeting, and suggested that testimony be taken on all of the four items but that action be taken on them separately. In preparing the report for this meeting additional consideration was given to the proper designation of those lands bounded by "F" and "G" Streets, Bay Boulevard and the railroad tracks. The consultant had recommended that the area be placed in either a Commercial Office designation or a Light Industrial designation. The staff recommendation for this relatively small area was a difficult one to arrive at because the character of the area is industrial and several property owners have some industrial proposals pendinq on their property. Designating it for commercial offices changes the character of that area; the C-O concept is for it to serve as a buffer between the relatively heavy industry (Rohr) and the visitor recreational oriented portion of the plan to the north. The staff recommends it be zoned C-O, but an almost equally strong case can be made for a Light Industrial designation. Environmental Review Coordinator Reid called attention to a typographical error on page 45, line 5, of the final Environmental Impact Report. The figure "7,000" should read, "27,000." Assistant Director of Planning Williams pointed to an area beyond the mean high tide line which had erroneously been designated C-O-P on the proposed rezoning map included in the staff report. It is actually tidelands, so it should be designated T-P, and specific plans will basically control the uses. Commissioner Wilson asked if the proposed rezoning would affect or alter the existing industrial land, specifically the Rohr Industries? City Planning Commission -3- 10/17/73 approach of putting the C-O zoning on it with the possibility of conditionally permitting light industrial uses in the same area. Mr. Whitten thought perhaps the light industrial might be more compatible with the Bayfront plan and serve the area better than trying to establish a small area of office buildings that are isolated from the center of the business district. Commissioner Rudolph commented that the consultant had studied it and seemed to feel that office buildings were viable in this location. Mr. Williams observed that the cost of constructing light industrial buildings plus the addition of formal landscaping is prohibitive for the small industrial user and the consultant apparently felt that amortizing cost against an office building would be a more economical approach for the property owner. Commissioner Rice suggested I-P zoning rather than I-L. A precise plan would retain control over it, assuring compatible development, and the basic concern would be achieving the buffering effect on the north side. Chairman Macevicz declared the continued public hearing reopened. Pike Hodge, P.O. Box X, National City, owner of a parcel at 328 Bay Boulevard, bounded On the west by the railroad, on the north by California General Corp. and on the south by Jackson's Auto Wrecking yard, said the former owner of this property was Bannister Steel, which was a heavy industry. It is the only vacant site in the block, and all other lots are in light industrial use. He has a client who must move from his existing facility and would like to estab- lish on this site a sales and service facility for refrigeration of ships, milk trucks, etc. He introduced Mr. James Ahern, a broker who is working with him on the project. James H. Ahern, O.W. Cotton Co., Realtors, 223 A Street, San Diego, urged that the I-L zoning be placed on the property. He said a brief marketing study he had made shows potential office use for this area something to be considered in the future; what they are planning is an interim use with a small building improvement on slightly more than an acre of land. Ken Wood, 501 H Street, Attorney representing National Steel and Shipbuilding Co., requested that the information relative to the creation of grasslands and mudflats contained in the NASSCO presentation to the Planning Commission on August 15, 1973 be included in the Environmental Impact Report. Mr. Wood briefly reviewed the statements he had made on August 15th before the Planning Commission requesting consideration of zoning on the tidelands for construction of a shipyard by NASSCO to build supertankers. He referred to a public hearing held on October 5, 1973 by the San Diego County Compre- hensive Planning Organization relative to the coastal zone and the open space plan to consider the establishment of policies regarding development on the coast and throughout the County. One policy states, "Other uses such as non- water related industry can locate in almost any area and should not be allowed _. to locate in areas which would cut off public access and use of the coastline." A related policy says, "Residential development should be considered a rela- tively non-independent use, especially in the area immediately adjoining the City Planning Commission -4- 10/17/73 ocean and other water bodies." He said these policies are in direct conflict with the development proposed by Sedway/Cooke, and the Planning Commission should adopt a General Plan that would not be in conflict with any of those policies. He asked that the Planning Commission go on record as approving the northwesterly location requested by NASSCO, which is referred to as Sub- Area C, for shipbuilding purposes and that in the alternative, should dredging be approved to the marina, that the marina location, Sub-Area G, be the loca- tion of such zoning. Chairman Macevicz questioned Mr. Wood on the continuing need for supertankers in the light of the present Middle-Eastern conflict and the Arab countries refusing to sell oil to the United States. Mr. Wood replied that the problem in that area of the world certainly affects the marketplace and is very difficult to predict. The Alaskan pipeline will supply a fantastic demand for this type of ship, and if it goes through will be a major factor in the demand for supertankers. Commissioner Whitten inquired if NASSCO had been in contact with the Corps of Engineers to discuss dredging to the "J" Street site. Mr. Wood said he had contacted them at the time of the public hearing and had forwarded to them a copy of the report provided to the Planning Commission, with the request that they consider the needs of NASSCO in their decision regarding dredging to the Sweetwater Channel. Also, they were contacted last year at the same time as Mayor Hamilton and Congressman Wilson~s office relative to the dredging, and it was indicated the project was feasible; the problem was getting environmental approval. Mr. Whitten commented that in an unofficial conversation with them recently there had been an indication that perhaps the environmentalists' objections could be overcome, in which case use of the "J" Street site might be possible. Fred Trull, Director of Planning, San Diego Unified Port District, encouraged the Commission to pursue the idea of making a choice of some of the alternatives before them and forwarding it to the Port District for consideration. He reminded them that until the Study has been finally approved by both the City of Chula Vista and the Port District it should not be given any undue appear- ance of being an authoritative document. He agreed with the staff recommenda- tion that the EIR be forwarded to the Port District for consideration, and commented that one of the problems facing the Port District is not knowing exactly which plan to try to respond to until the Commission suggests exactly what they think is the most desirable thing to do. Robert E. McGinnis, 1700 Bank of California Building, San Diego, Attorney for the Santa Fe Land Improvement Co., an affiliate of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co., introduced Mr. Hauptli of the Santa Fe Railway Co. Robert W. Hauptli, Manager of the Real Estate and Industrial Development Depart- ment of the Santa Fe Railway and Santa Fe Land Improvement Co., 121 East Sixth Street, Los Angeles, reviewed the points he had presented before the Commission at their hearing on August 15, 1973, requesting that serious consideration be given to allowing industrial development on their property. City Planning Commission -5- 10/17/73 Commissioner Wilson asked if National Steel were to build on the site at the northwest corner, part of that land being owned by the railroad, how would Santa Fe's plan for an industrial park on their 400 acres be affected, inasmuch as NASSCO~s plan calls for much open space in the area and would seem to con- flict with Santa Fe's desires for the land? Mr. Hauptli said Santa Fe would welcome National Steel on a portion of their property, and would hope they could put other compatible industry in the general area of the NASSCO shipyard. Commissioner Swanson inquired if a certain percentage of the Santa Fe property were not in the area recommended for marsh reserve and open space, and'would not industrial development there be a complete reversal of the Sedway/Cooke plan? If National Steel were to build on part of the property, would Santa Fe be likely to be cooperative in retaining marsh or would they expect to indus- trialize the marsh land? Mr. Hauptli replied that Santa Fe had hoped the land would stay in Industrial zoning, and that they would wish to hold as much of the 400 acres for indus- trial use as they could. They have not been able to agree with the Sedway/Cooke conclusions for land uses, and feel that their thinking has been substantiated by the fact that they have not had contact from one developer who would wish to lease or buy their land to implement any of the Sedway/Cooke conclusions if the Report is adopted. Mr. Swanson asked if the property which is probably 35 - 40% marshland, 200+ acres, were retained as marshland, then Santa Fe would wish to be paid for it? Mr. Hauptli answered that if the land were taken from them and they cannot use it, they would expect to be paid for it. Upon inquiry from Mr. Swanson as to how long Santa Fe had owned the land, Mr. Hauptli said it had been purchased 40 years ago with the purpose of developing an industrial park, and at the same time they bought 400 acres in National City which is now fully developed industrially. Reva Lynch, 626 Date Avenue, Environmental Quality Chairman of the League of Women Voters of San Diego South Bay Cities, referred to the League's previous endorsement of the Sedway/Cooke plan and wished, to urge such zoning as is required to adopt that plan. She pointed out three discrepancies in the National Steel presentation of August 15: 1. (p. 15) Retention of approximately 642 acres of marsh and mudflats. The consultant's report and the EIR show a total of 398 acres. 2. Exhibit L, a report by Dr. Barry A. Vittor in support of the statement that mudflats and marshland areas have been successfully created by man. In response to a letter of inquiry, Dr. Vittor, who is affiliated with the University of Alabama Marine Science Institute, in a letter dated October 9, 1973, referred to being raised in E1 Ca, on and City Planning Commission -6- 10/17/73 obtaining his M.A. at San Diego State in 1968. He commented that the "pattern of industrial pressure-environmental defense is dis- turbing the sorry state of marshes and tidelands in that area already." He noted that the EPA sent out a directive six months ago prohibiting all encroachment of dredging on salt marshes, and the Interior Dept. is also greatly concerned about marsh destruction. He said his marsh island study had been delayed but should begin in the next year, and "To date, no information exists regarding the real feasibility of large-scale marsh island creation: pilot projects are underway, though, which will indicate which plants will grow best and how to plant them under varied conditions. In any system, cover- ing an area with more than 2 or 3 inches of spoil will effectively destroy habitat." He concluded by referring to the long-term value of the organic matter produced by the salt marshes which enters the bays and supports rich fisheries. 2. (p. 17) There are only two shipyards in the United States--one in Balti- more, Maryland at the Bethlehem Steel Yard and one at the Brooklyn Navy Yard--where such supertankers and LNG tankers can be built. Of the first six federally subsidized contracts for LNG tankers, three will be constructed by the Newport News subsidiary of Tenneco and three by the Quincy, Mass. yard of General Dynamics Corporation. There are other U.S. shipyards capable of handling the large specialized vessels: Ogden's Avondale, Miss. yard, Todd shipyards and Litton Industries' Ingall Division. Mrs. Lynch pointed out that gas liquefaction plants, pipelines and storage plants would need to be operative before there was need for the tankers. She stated the League of Women Voters recommend the necessary zoning to implement the Sedway/Cooke plan, knowing that such plan has no recommendations for a shipyard therein, and that such plan would make the tidelands and waterfront available to the people. Jack Duncan, President of Dixieline Lumber Co., 3250 Sports Arena Blvd., San Diego, urged that the area with I-L zoning be left with that designation. After years of trying to find the right location to establish a retail building products facility in Chula Vista, they recently negotiated with Charles Offerman for an option on his property at the northwest corner of Bay Blvd. and G Street. The site is well suited for the use because it is freeway oriented for delivery trucks and has track frontage for rail delivery. Construction would consist of a 9000 sq. ft. retail store building and a 60,000 sq. ft. storage building for building products such as lumber, plywood, gypsum products, concrete products, etc. They would anticipate employing about 26 people. Dixieline has been established in the San Diego area since 1913, and they have facilities in E1 Cajon, Escondido and the Sports Arena area of San Diego where their general offices are also located. Commissioner Whitten asked if the property were zoned I-L-P, which would give the City architectural control as to what type of buildings might be located there, would the Dixieline Company have objections? City Planning Commission -7- 10/17/73 Mr. Duncan thought there would be none, as they are anxious to out up an attractive facility. Commissioner Wilson inquired how large the property is. Mr. Duncan replied that it contained 3.2 acres. Ted Bell, 70 "J" Street, President of Campgrounds Enterprises, Inc., operators of KOA Campgrounds in Chula Vista, asked that the Commission consider recreational vehicle park use in the tidelands area. They have had some discussion with the Port District on sites, and hope in the near future to start working with the Port District on design and location. He was of the opinion that such a park was needed in the area and would provide much public enjoyment, not only for tourists but for local people as well. It also has support facilities such as the general store, which would be a service to those using the day-use park. Chairman Macevicz asked what area was being considered and would it require a modification of the plan? Mr. Bell said it would require a slight modification because it would be quasi- public, but it will be landscaped and will be a park when it is finished. The area considered best for the project would be the 25 acres to the west of Rohr on the filled area, which would provide beach frontage on two sides, and would tie in well with the marina. It would not create a traffic problem and could provide some public parking area; it would be near the water and would develop beach area for public use. Legal Intern Beam suggested that inasmuch as testimony had been allowed on specific projects in the proposed Bayfront area, perhaps Mr. Hodge should be invited to make any further comments he might have relating to his project. Chairman Macevicz was under the impression that Mr. Hodge had completed his presentation, but was amenable to hearing any further remarks Mr. Hodge might wish to make. Pike Hodge felt his case had been presented. He said for the past two years he has been working on the project, which was compatible with the zoning in the Sedway/Cooke plan for the site. He has acquired a tenant for the property and now a change of zone is being proposed for it, so he has a problem. He asked if the Commission were going to take action on the zoning and make some decision? Commissioner Whitten commented that the area was still under moratorium and the Commission could only make recommendations. Mr. Hodge said he is in a position where he must do something or give up the project and he asked for a recommendation as to his course of action. Chairman Macevicz referred the question to Mr. Peterson. Director of Planning Peterson thought that what Mr. Hodge should be seeking was to convince the Commission that the area bounded by F and G Streets, Bay Boulevard and the railroad tracks not be designated for office use, but zoned for light industrial. That would accommodate the use which Mr. Hodge has in mind, and come closer to accommodating the use the Dixieline Lumber Co. has in mind, too, since that could be allowed as a modification under precise plan. City Planning Commission -8- 10/17/73 Commissioner Whitten believed that Mr. Hodge was asking would it be possible for him to come to the City with an application to have the moratorium lifted on his piece of property, such as Anthonys had. Mr. Hodge understood that would be possible only if the planned zoning for the Bayfront is in agreement with his request. Mr. Peterson agreed that was so, and it would be up to the City Council to make a decision on the request to remove the moratorium. Mr. Hodge realized the Commission's problem and agreed wholeheartedly that this is the time and the opportunity to make a study and set the decor for the future of the Bayfront while it is undeveloped; on the other hand, he, too, has a problem. Commissioner Whitten observed that even if the Commission made recommendations, they would go first to the Port District for their recommendations and then to the City Council for their action. Planning Director Peterson pointed out that rezoning would not be necessary because the property now is zone I (Industrial). If the Commission and the City Council determined that the use proposed by Mr. Hodge were the proper one in that location, all the Council would have to do would be to lift the moratorium as it applies to that property. Since the property is now zoned I, Mr. Hodge could proceed on that basis. George Parker, Manager of Facilities for Rohr Industries, expressed concern that the proposed zoning would prohibit the further expansion of Rohr, which is a company that has been expanding and continues to expand. The only area left for their expansion is to the north, and they feel they would support the Santa Fe Railroad's request for industrial zoning. If that is not zoned Industrial, then they would like to see the area between F and G Street, including F and G Street, excluded from the zoning proposals, so Rohr does have room to develop at least further to the north. Ken Wood, Attorney for NASSCO, wished to respond to Mrs. Lynch's criticism of their Report: (1) On page 15, that figure does include the land under the water, as shown in the consultant's report. (2) Relative to the creation of mudflats and grasslands, the report contains an article referring to the successful planting and growing of a tidal salt marsh on Bolsa Bay, Maryland, and a copy of a letter containing the California Department of Fish and Game recommendations for creation of a saltwater marsh ecological system. (3) In terms of the size of the ships being discussed, his information was that there are presently two locations available for the construction of super- tankers, and the other facilities are for their repair. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. The meeting recessed at 8:39 and reconvened at 8:52. Commissioner Whitten found the EIR on the Bayfront to be very comprehensive and asked if Mr. Reid felt the adoption of the specific plan was the place for strong implementation language rather than the EIR? City Planning Commission -9- 10/17/73 Environmental Review Coordinator Reid believed it should be a combination of the two. The proposed mitigating measures in the EIR were kept rather general because the specifics had already been spelled out in the Bayfront plan itself. Commissioner Whitten supported the modification to the General Plan, and agreed with the Sedway/Cooke plan. He opposed the staff's recommendation for the C-O-P rezoning and would like to consider in greater detail the proposals for development in that area. He also opposed the Santa Fe and NASSCO proposals for industrial zoning. He thought the area south of the J Street Marina would be an excellent location for a shipyard if the dredging of a deepwater channel were accomplished. He believed further information was necessary before adoption of a specific plan for the Bayfront could be undertaken. Commissioner Swanson expressed concern that preservation of the marshlands and beautification of the Bayfront--desirable as it is--may not be viable unless serious consideration is also given to making it self-supporting. He asked Mr. Peterson's opinion of Rohr's request for industrialization to the north. Director of Planning Peterson noted that the basic Land Use Element, Figure 3, of the consultant's Report designates that for an Office-Park use, but further north of that, between "E" and "F" Streets is an area for Expansion Reserve. He thought if the Commission were to determine that the area between "F" and "G" Streets and adjacent to Rohr should remain in an industrial use, then per- haps the area designated as Expansion Reserve would serve as the transitional area between the industrial and the recreational commercial. At present it may be difficult to see the market that might exist for office uses in that location, but he believed the major basis for the consultant's recommendation contemplates that if the City is successful in implementing the plan, rather sophisticated types of office uses would be attracted to the area. Commissioner Rudolph agreed the EIR was comprehensive and would give much information on which to base future decisions and judge development EIRs. She felt after the three years Sedway/Cooke had spent on the study, they had presented an excellent plan for creating a commercial recreational complex on the bayfront, which they said was viable. She did not believe changes in the plan allowing for industrial development such as the shipyard should be made, especially without further study. Mr. Cooke had said that traffic generated by Rohr and the shipyard, if the southern site was used, would basically deny the public access to the waterfront. She agreed with the staff recommendation that the "F" Street area be zoned C-O with the provision that under a conditional use permit other uses would be considered. She believed carefully planned redevelopment would be necessary to change the image of the bayfront and she proposed one of two things be done: delete all references to the shipyard and pass the Bayfront General Plan, the zoning and the Specific Plan as proposed by Sedway/Cooke, or recommend to the Council that the moratorium be continued and request Sedway/Cooke to conduct a study of the impact the shipyard would have on the City, its employment growth and economy, on the environment--including the dredging--and on the Bayfront Plan prepared by them, including traffic and marketability. Commissioner Rice thought it necessary to maintain a sense of practicality and agreed with previous comments that there was a need for some tax generating type development to make the overall Bayfront Plan a financially viable one. City Planning Commission -10- 10/17/73 He endorsed consideration of the "J" Street marina site for the National Steel development if dredging and fill are possible to accomplish. He believed the existing Industrial zone might be left in the "F" Street area if the modifying P zone were added so precise planning control were retained, and he also looked with some favor upon Mr. Peterson's suggestion that the expansion reserve area then be used for commercial office use and serve as the buffer. Chairman Macevicz thought that the consultant's report was rather vague on the suggested zoning for the area between "F" and "G" Streets, but felt that the community's major industry, Rohr, should not have their expansion area cur- tailed. He has come to the conclusion that over a period of years the shipyard would not greatly benefit Chula Vista and believes the Sedway/Cooke Plan should be adopted in its entirety, with the exception of the "F" Street area, which should be left in the Industrial zone, and the Expansion Reserve area zoned C-O and used as the buffer. Commissioner Rudolph asked if the "F" Street property were zoned C-O, would industrial development be prohibited in that area? Assistant Director of Planning Williams replied that Figure 33, page 62, of the consultant's report showed the area designated Research Industrial, but the text designated it as C-O, so he had called Mr. Cooke who said that the text contained the correct explanation. Mr. Williams thought that the flexibility is in the specific plans. If the C-O were adopted, under the specific plan I-R and I-L uses might be con- ditionally permitted. MSUC (Whitten-Wilson) EIR-73-3 be adopted as presented as the City's RESOLUTION NO. EIR-73-3 Environmental Impact Report on the Bayfront area and copies be forwarded to the San Diego Unified Port District for their consideration prior to action on discretionary acts by the City Council. Commissioner Rudolph moved that recommendation be made to the City Council that the General Plan be amended by incorporating into it: Exhibit A to amend the General Plan map; Exhibit B with the modifications allowing water oriented industrial uses in Items A-4, B-1 and B-5 deleted to amend the General Plan text; and, Exhibit C to provide interpretive guidance. Commissioner Whitten seconded the motion for discussion. After the Commissioners had examined Exhibit B to determine the suggested deletions, Commissioner Whitten withdrew his second and the motion died for lack of a second. City Planning Commission -ll- 10/17/73 MSC (Whitten-Wilson) Recommend to the City Council that the General Plan RESOLUTION NO. PCM-73~20 be amended by incorporating into it: Exhibit A to amend the General Plan, revised to show the area bounded by "F" and "G" Streets, Bay Blvd. and Tide- lands Avenue designated Administrative and Business Services to remain in the Industrial category; Ex- hibit B to amend the General Plan text; and Exhibit C to provide interpretive guidance, and a copy of the Resolution be transmitted to the San Diego Unified Port District The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Members Whitten, Wilson, Rice, Macevicz and Swanson NOES: Member Rudolph ABSENT: Member Chandler MSC (Whitten-Wilson Recommend to the City Council that the Bayfront area RESOLUTION NO. P£Z~73-N be rezoned from I to P-C, R-3-H-P, I.-P, T-P and C-V-P, as shown on Exhibit A, and a copy of the Resolution be transmitted to the San Diego Unified Port District. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Members Whitten, Wilson, Macevicz, Swanson and Rice NOES: Member Rudolph ABSENT: Member Chandler MSUC (Rice-Rudolph) The public hearing on adoption of Specific Plan for the Bayfront area be continued to the meeting of November 28, 1973 to allow for further study. Commissioner Rudolph believed that in view of the changes that have been made, the Commission should recommend to the City Council that Sedway/Cooke make a study of the impact the shipyard would have. The completed Sedway/Cooke study was not an EIR: it was the study of the best land use for this area, and a shipyard was not considered when the study was made. The other Commissioners felt that until such time as the Corps of Engineers might be allowed to proceed with the dredging, the development of a shipyard is not feasible and a study of its impact would be premature. City Planning Commission -12- 10/17/73 2. PUBLIC HEARING: a. Consideration of revision of the General Plan for approximately 21.75 acres on the south side of Ota~ Valley Road~ extending approximately 990 feet east from the 1-805 right of way~ from A~riculture and Reserve to Limited Industrial b. PREZONING - 5.2 acres on south side of Otay Valley Roa~ approximately 600 feet eaS't of 1-805, to I-L ~Limited Industrial) - ~CZ-73-E Director of Planning Peterson reminded the Commission that there was an annexa- tion under way for the Pacific Telephone Company property in this area, and prior to annexation the property must be prezoned; in order to prezone it to Limited Industrial the General Plan needs to be amended. Staff is of the opinion the area is appropriate for this kind of land use. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened; as no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Whitten-Rice) Recommend to the City Council amendment of the RESOLUTION NO. PCM-73-21 General Plan designation for the 21.75 acre parcel on the south side of Otay Valley Road, extending approximately 990 feet east from the 1-805 right of way, from Agriculture and Reserve to Research and Limited Industrial MSUC (Rice-Rudolph) Recommend to the City Council the prezoning of 5.2 RESOLUTION NO. PCZ-73-E acres on the south side of Otay Valley Road, approxi- mately 600 feet east of 1-805 to Limited Industrial 3. Consideration of request for deferral of public improvements at Bonita Road and Willow Street - Richard Wilson Director of Planning Peterson advised this is a routine deferral of public improvements; however, the necessity for establishing the three conditions recommended in the staff report is no longer present because the County has agreed to install these improvements in exchange for the extra right of way which the property owner provided for the street widening. MSUC (Rice-Whitten) The request for deferral of public improvements at Bonita Road and Willow Street be approved. Commissioner Wilson abstained from voting on the motion. 4. Consideration of O~en Space Element of the General Plan Director of Planning Peterson advised that th~s item and the following one had been contemplated for a public hearing; however, it was discovered they were not advertised in the newspaper. He suggested that a special meeting be held City Planning Commission -13- 10/17/73 in order that these items might be considered at a public hearing and adopted by the City Council by December 31, 1973 as required by the California Govern- ment Code. MSUC (Rice-Whitten) A public hearing for consideration of the Open Space Element of the General Plan be held at a special meeting set for October 29, 1973. 5. Consideration of Conservation Element of the General Plan MSUC (Rice-Whitten) A public hearing for consideration of the Conservation Element of the General Plan be held at a special meeting set for October 29, 1973. The meeting was adjourned by Chairman Macevicz at 9:52 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Leoda Scholl Acting Secretary