Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1973/09/19 MINUTES OF A REGULAR WORKSHOP MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA September 19, 1973 The regular workshop meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California was held on the above date beginning at 5:00 p.m. with the following members present: Macevicz, Whitten, Chandler, Rice, Rudolph, Swanson and Wilson. Also present: Director of Planning Peterson, Assistant Director of Planning Williams, Legal Intern Beam, Assistant Planner Yamagata and Acting Secretary Scholl. 1. Consideration of the Draft of the Open Space Element of the General Plan Director of Planning Peterson observed that the main purpose of considering the draft of the Open Space and Conservation Elements was for the Commission to offer comments to the staff on the draft elements; the formal public hearing on the two elements would be scheduled for October 17, 1973. Under State law both elements are expected to be adopted by December 31, 1973. Assistant Director of Planning Williams reviewed the draft Open Space Element and pointed out on a map the inventory of existing open spaces which includes city and regional parks, golf courses, publicly owned water areas, major utility easements, schools, cemeteries, salt marsh and mudflats, the Civic Center and other privately owned open space. Chairman Macevicz suggested it might be well to review some of the conservation efforts made by the people in the strip mining areas in the East. Commissioner Rice agreed, mentioning that abandoned strip mining coal operation areas in Illinois have been converted into highly desirable estate type home sites, with marinas and connecting waterways. He pointed out that the same kind of development might be considered for the Valley when sand and gravel deposits have been worked out and the sites fill with water; the waterway might possibly extend even to the Bayfront some day. Commissioner Chandler reminded that it is flood plain, and flood control must be a consideration. Commissioner Rice replied that the waterway itself might serve as a floodway. Commissioner Rudolph wondered how the City's plan might be coordinated with the County plan and the Comprehensive Planning Organization's plan. Planning Director Peterson recalled that the County's open space study had been rejected by the Board of Supervisors and returned to the staff for further study. Assistant Director Williams noted that the proposals in the City's plan are basically compatible with those in the CPO's, and the two flood plains and the agricultural land to the east is the only Chula Vista area open space actually shown in the CPO plan. -2- 9/19/73 Co~issioner Whitten asked if long-range open space projections might be made on properties within the City's sphere of influence, or would it be necessary to reserve such planning until property is annexed? Director of Planning Peterson acknowledged the need for looking toward expansion of the historic planning area for the City of Chula Vista to coincide with the City's sphere of influence as indicated to the City of San Diego. However, much staff time and effort goes into the definition of open space boundaries, and in order to make the best use of the staff it is necessary to wait until develop- ment is proposed for property. At that time the staff would be in a position to recommend what portions of a property should be reserved for open space. Of course, lands contemplated for purchase by the City should be acquired as far in advance as possible. Assistant Director Williams remarked that when there is a major revision in the General Plan further open space areas could be designated; the Open Space Element is consistent with the present General Plan. This plan sets all of the framework, providing necessary information for anyone considering development in the area. Commissioner Swanson raised the question: What could the City do if the owners of ranch property in the County east of Chula Vista decided to build their own new incorporated municipality? Assistant Director of Planning Williams observed that establishment of sewer service might be a natural deterrent. All capacity in the San Diego Metro S~tem has been purchased and there would have to be excess capacity available from the City of San Diego in order to buy any. The Commissioners considered the possibility that capacity might be available ink, he Spring Valley system, and Commissioner Rice pointed out they might establish their own municipal treatment plant. Assistant Director Williams expressed doubt, since building a treatment plant requires investment of a great amount of money before even starting development; and given the present water quality control and ecological sensitivities, per- mission to build a sewage treatment plant is unlikely. Planning Director Peterson said that other than looking forward to working in a coordinated fashion with the County and with LAFCO, at this point he could suggest no further means of handling such a situation. Commissioner Whitten expressed the opinion that it is not too early to consider long-range planning for the possibilities of open space and parkland in the redevelopment of older areas of Chula Vista where no open space now exists, even though the redevelopment of these areas is not in the immediate future. Planning Director Peterson remarked that in some other cities, as areas have grown older and school sites are no long necessary in those locations because the families living there have no children of school age, the school sites then become possible park sites. -3- 9/19/73 Chairman Macevicz referred to the City of San Diego's redevelopment of its Old Town, how they had purchased the property, moved out hundreds of old buildings, rebuilt the industrial area to precise plan, and resold the sites to private owners. He was not sure how they had set up their own urban renew~ project, but believed it had been accomplished with Federal funds. Director of Planning Peterson said he did not believe Federal funds were still available for that purpose. Assistant Director Williams thought the State provided funds for redevelopment, but there are rigid qualifications for procuring them. Commissioner Rice commented that much land is still vacant along the southerly boundary of the City, either in the City or adjacent to it, and it might be an appropriate time to indicate potential open space there. He wondered if perhaps the City and County could participate in a joint plan. Assistant Director Williams thought the Park Plan Element might be a more appropriate place to include that. Much of the vacant land is in areas near or adjoining commercial development and is all being held for commercial uses, even where industrially zoned. From a financial aspect, such property is very difficult to acquire for park land. Chairman Macevicz suggested the possibility of the owners bequeathing a few acres to the City for a park, and believed the City should publicize and en- courage the making of such bequests. Commissioner Rice mentioned property owners negotiating an exchange of property with the City or an exchange of property for open space or park land for a City service, such as preparation of terrain. He referred to a recent attempt by people in the Montgomery area to organize a park assessment district, so it is obvious they recognize their need for open space. Commissioner Whitten felt that the City must take a very strong approach to land and how it will affect mankind. He believes everyone does not have the intrinsic right to develop land for the highest financial reward without regard for the living environment which is created, a'nd strong and perhaps imaginative pressures must be used by the City to produce desirable living conditions. It may take some kind of legislative force, or it may take court action, and it may cost the City some money, but in the long run the money will be well spent to achieve this. Chairman Macevicz called attention to vacant land near the San Diego Gas & Electric Company yard at Hilltop Drive and Main Street where it might be pos- sible to get people interested in some kind of joint open space development. Commissioner Rudolph offered some comments and suggestions on the Open Space Element, which are as follows: The element is too general. It needs to be more specific to guide the Commission and the Council in making decisions: which agricultural lands, which canyons, flood plains, historic sites, and where and how much and by what criteria urban space shall be preserved? -4- 9/19/73 Objectives for urban form could be: a) Large open space lands are to be interconnected. b) Wide, continuous open space shall be preserved on the perimeter of the planning area to define the city and to prevent urban sprawl. The ideal width should be stated. c) All citizens shall be within walking distance of large open space, say, within half a mile. d) Neighborhoods shall be no larger than, a specified diameter, and shall be surrounded by open space to define neighborhoods and provide accessibility to all citizens to large open space. e) Each neighborhood shall contain a central open area, or commons, which will be the focal center of the community and contain green space, children's play area and, immediately beyond its perimeter, limited, walk-to commercial facilities shall be allowed. Additional objectives might be utilization of utility easements: a) SDG&E power line easements. b) Cal-Am hilltop water tank sites. (The tanks can be protected; just open the space around them for the neighbors.) Other than by park fees and planned developments, the element offers no suggestions about how open space will be preserved, zoned, financed. ~nventory of Existin§ Open Space Areas (p. 2) Are schools and the Civic Center open space? It seems to me they are urban uses. Implementation Program (p. 6) #16. The Sedway/Cooke Bayfront Plan will provide parks and access to all shorelines on the bayfront. #17. Recognizing the Bay itself as a large open space, efforts will be made to minimize filling in the bay and to minimize visual dis- ruptions to the bay. Implementation "The increased values of urban land and potentially developable land not included ~n the open,space plan were found to approximate the loss in values of the open space landS, thus preserving total region-wide land values." This suggests that with any given population, population growth rate, and state of the economy, the pressures for development are the same, and the amount of money available to purchase space for development are the same -5- 9/19/73 regardless of the amount of land available for development. This suggests some procedures to be applied in preserving open space to ensure fairness to the land owners, the developers, and to the taxpayers, (who see their hard-earned tax dollars for public improvements result in sharply rising prices for the lands that benefit.) (Railroads in the 19th century.) 1. Development rights. It is the PUD concept applied area-wide. 2. Unearned increment. A transfer tax could, by being used to purchase open space, return to these owners the profits realized by develop- able land because of the removal of open space lands from the private market. Chairman Macevicz pointed out that water tank sites are usually posted and their boundaries fenced because of the possibility of contamination, vandalism or sabotage. Commissioner Whitten asked about the ideal percentage of open space to inhabited space, and Commissioner Rice inquired how Chula Vista compares with other municipalities in terms of open space? Director of Planning Peterson replied that guidelines set up by the National Recreational Association attempt to formulate an acceptable percentage, which is fairly specific in the case of parkland but not well defined on open space in general. The requirements of the Chula Vista Park Dedication Ordinance are on the low side and should probably be increased. One yardstick for determin- ing the amount of open space would be that required by the Hillside Develop- ment Ordinance. Commissioner Rudolph wondered how the Open Space Element works to shape urban form and if criteria might be listed for the Commission to use as guidelines rather than trying to define areas on a map. Assistant Director Williams thought it was related to the Hillside Development Ordinance. With the existing General Plan the urban form is rather nondescript; but, if in revising the General Plan, the central business district and the areas around the major shopping centers are emphasized, and consideration given to not only the horizontal shape, but to the vertical shape, then form elements in terms of open space can be added to it. Commissioner Swanson suggested that many privately owned areas which are topographically impracticable for development could be made into mini-park areas by the City, at some expense, of course, and the owners might be happy to get them off the tax rolls. Chairman Macevicz agreed and pointed out that here is where property might be bequeathed to the City, even if it meant cutting off a lot where it starts downhill or is otherwise inaccessible. Commissioner Whitten commented there are areas in some of the existing parks which might be made more available to the public. He also thought the Draft -6- 9/19/73 Open Space Element rather idealistic and provided no real basis for doing anything. Assistant Director Williams replied that basically the items listed under the implementation section are the means presently available for implementing this plan. Some of the open space will be acquired through the Hillside Develop- ment Ordinance, if this is adopted, and other open space through the Parkland Dedication Ordinance. Some of it obviously is not in the City of Chula Vista and will be acquired by the Regional Park Plan of the County; some of it is already in public ownership. One of the most critical plans for acquisition of open space will be the Seismic Safety Element of the General Plan, because once hazard areas are identified, they can probably be added to the open space program. Where an area is potentially subject to extreme liquifaction in an earthquake, a Hazard zone is likely to be imposed. Then it would require a very great amount of money for development or there will probably be tax relief proposals which will allow it to become open space. 2. Consideration of the Draft of the Conservation Element of the General Plan Director of Planning Peterson commented he believed the Draft of the Conserva- tion Element was fairly self-explanatory. In evaluating it, he finds that other than mineral resources of sand and gravel and some sensitive ecological areas such as the Sweetwater Marsh, Chula Vista has little else in the way of resources to conserve. Commissioner Rudolph expressed concern about losing agricultural land to urbanization and quoted from the California Tomorrow Plan: "Two-thirds of all sea life is dependent on coastal estuaries. Two-thirds of California's estuaries have been destroyed by development. Of those that remain, another 42% are destined for destruction by the year 2000. Freeways planned for the coast will accelerate this process." (p.12) "...each year California loses 60,000 acre-feet of topsoil as a con- sequence of clear-cut logging, forest fires, cuts and fills from housing and road construction, and bad farming practices. Extensive irrigation has caused a buildup of salts in the soils of the San Joaquin and Imperial Valleys. As a result, millions of acres of productive land are threatened. Originally, California had 8.7 million acres of prime agricultural land. Over two million acres of this land have already been urbanized. By 1980 almost one million additional acres will be subdivided, making a total loss of about one-third of our best agricultural land." (p. 1) Talking about how it will be in California Two: "Land should be taxed according to its zoning category." "Buyers of raw land are no longer able to take the capital gains benefit on their profits when they sell." Mrs. Rudolph then referred to notes which she would supply to staff. For the Commission's information, the major points are presented below. Since the United States and world population is growing rapidly and since affluence is rising in many foreign countries, thereby escalating world demand for food, and since worldwide most arable, non-marginal land is already in production and the green revolution has failed to meet its objectives, and since agricultural lands are being lost to soil depletion and to development, and particularly since the U.S. has this year seen the forerunner of the results of world food shortages, it is critical that every effort be made to preserve in agriculture all prime agricul- tural lands. Agricultural lands thus retained will also provide shape to urban form, provide permanent breathing space as part of the city's open space system, and keep a more natural landscape close to the citizens of the city, and especially their children, as well as contribute to the economy of the area. (p. 2) Item 13 on page 5 of the Open Space Element specifies the Natural Resource Overlay Zone. Perhaps it should be mentioned in this element also. On page 3, under Water Bodies, should the marsh and floodways be d~scussed inasmuch as they are on the map? When the Conservation and Open Space maps are combined, with the addition of other relevant maps -- parks, seismic -- the City should be studied to determine: 1. Areas which must not be converted to urban uses. 2. Locations for an open space network which shape urban form, which frame neighborhoods and link together the open spaces. (Attention will be paid to children's walking routes, hiking and walking paths, separated bicycle and equestrian paths.) On page 6 (Policies),"Support .... new legislation:" legislation should be initiated and pressure should be applied to get it passed to accomplish the objectives. Pressure the State to rapidly research and adopt a policy and land use map to identify those lands which should be kept in agriculture to avoid shortages of agricultural land and its products for future generations. Pressure the State to rapidly research and enact new legislation which will give local governments the tools which they need to ensure that valuable agricultural lands will not be lost, and that will provide fairness to the land owner and the taxpayer and economic viability to the farmer. Pressures that can be used: Contact the city's state legislative delegation to outline the needs and suggest necessary legislation.