Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1978/05/31 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA May 31, 1978 A special business 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: Chandler, Smith, G. Johnson, Renneisen and O'Neill. Absent: Commissioner Pressutti, and with previous notification, Commissioner R. Johnson. Also present: Director of Planning Peterson, Senior Planner Pass, Director of Public Works Robens, Assistant Director of Public Works Lippitt, City Attorney Lindberg and Secretary Mapes. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chain~an Chandler, followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (G. Johnson-Renneisen) The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of May 17, 1978 be approved as written. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Chandler called for oral communications and none were presented. Chairman Chandler then advised that City Attorney Lindberg wished to address the Commission. City Attorney Lindberg reported that he had attempted to explain at the meeting of May 17th--but was apparently unsuccessful according to the minutes-- that the reference to the Specific Plan should not have been on the agenda as a public hearing. He advised that it is his concept that the Specific Plan would be the implementation of the P-Czone at some future date, and the matter which concerns the Planning Commission at this meeting is a plan for the development of E1 Rancho del Rey. A hearing on that plan was closed on May 17th and the consideration by the Commission this evening should therefore be a closed discussion, with no public testimony. He stated there should be no consideration of item no. 2 on the agenda, as a public hearing on a Specific Plan. Director of Planning Peterson expressed surprise at that announcement, noting that it was not his understanding of the City Attorney's comments at the meeting held two weeks ago; and that it is his own belief that a Specific Plan may be adopted only after public hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council. City Attorney Lindberg reported that he has prepared a Specific Plan ordinance, but prior to its adoption the Planning Commission should consider a modification of E1 Rancho del Rey's General Development Plan and Schedule under the P-C zone and submit their recommendation to the City Council. At some future time, upon adoption of an ordinance that would change the implementation of the P-C zone to a Specific Plan operation, the development would be implemented and brought into accord with the actions of the Planning Commission. He ruled that the public hearing for consideration of that revised General Development Plan has been closed and there shall be no further discussion of it. -2- May 31, 1978 Commissioner O'Neill expressed concern that the public hearing on the revised plan was closed at the previous meeting with the intent that people would be heard again, and new evidence brought forth and allegations answered during the hearing on the Specific Plan. Commissioner Renneisen contended it rests at the pleasure of the Commission as to whether to reopen the public hearing, and he agreed with Mr. O'Neill that all has not been heard on this and there are additional statements and rebuttals which should be heard tonight. Attorney Lindberg advised that reopening the public hearing would require that all parties involved in this matter be properly noticed as to the reopening. He pointed out that four hours of testimony was received at the previous meeting and while the City is obligated to afford due process rights to all parties, they are not obligated to afford due process under two different items on the same proposal. Mr. Peterson pointed out that the proposal for adoption of a Specific Plan is being processed under Section 19.06.030 of the Zoning Ordinance which requires that a public hearing be held before the Planning Commission and City Council. Attorney Lindberg reported it was not his intent to adopt a Specific Plan in accordance with the existing ordinance of the City, but rather to amend the existing P-C zone General Plan requirement which would ultimately be converted to a Specific Plan proposal for implementation. He objected violently to the continuation of two public hearings on two proposals for the same plan. Commissioner Renneisen noted that there was discussion~ the last meeting put forward by Mr. Lindberg in favor of considering the development proposal as a Specific Plan; he personally was not in favor of that and felt the Commission should now move ahead under agenda item no. 1 for revision of the General Development Plan of E1 Rancho del Rey. Attorney Lindberg concurred with Commissioner Renneisen that the Commission should resolve the revision of the General Development Plan and Schedule under the P-C zone, as previously discussed, and the Specific Plan approach will be coming back before this body at a later date. Chairman Chandler suggested reopening the public hearing on agenda item no.1. Attorney Lindberg reiterated that the public hearing was closed and cannot be reopened where there has been no notice to any party at all. In response to a question from Commissioner O'Neill, Mr. Lindberg advised that the Commission could obtainanswers to questions regarding previous testimony if persons were present who could answer specific questions. It was moved by Commissioner Renneisen, seconded by Commissioner Smith, that item no. 2 on the agenda be filed and the Commission proceed to consider item no. 1. The motion passed by unanimous vote of the five members present. Peter Watry requested permission to comment on the Sanford Goodkin report which was just presented at the previous hearing,, and he now wished to make comments on the contents of that report. -3- May 31, 1978 Attorney Lindberg again stressed that the public hearing has been closed and no further testimony may be presented. Director of Planning Peterson advised that he had not been made aware of the City Attorney's position on this matter prior to the opening of the meeting and he felt this project is too important to the community to cut off testimony at this point when it had been indicated at the previous meeting that the two items would be merged under a public hearing to be resumed at this meeting. The item should be readvertised if that's the only way additional testimony can be taken. Commissioner Renneisen asserted it is difficult to proceed at this time when there is not agreement between the various staff departments; he therefore felt it would be appropriate for the Commission to continue this hearing, or reschedule the hearing for a subsequent date. Mr. Peterson advised that the earliest date for which this could be readvertised would be June 21st. It was moved by Commissioner Renneisen, seconded by Commissioner Smith, that the public hearing be rescheduled for June 21st and that the City Manager, City Attorney and Director of Planning get together and agree on the procedures prior to that date. Sam Blick, attorney for Otay Land Company, acknowledged that he was out of order, but pointed out there have been many public hearings on this proposal, both sides have had an opportunity to be heard, and it is time to draw the line to end the public testimony. The motion for rescheduling the hearing carried by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Renneisen, Smith, O'Neill, Chandler NOES: Commissioner G. Johnson ABSENT: Commissioners Pressutti and R. Johnson CommissionerRenneisen stated that as the maker of the motion he wished to state for the record that he is as opposed as he can possibly be to delaying this any further, but felt the Commission has no choice. He reiterated his request th~t~ the City departments agree on the procedure to follow. Director of Planning Peterson had no Director's report to present tothe Commission. ADJOURN~IENT Chaiman Chandler adjourned the meeting at 7:40 p.m. Respectful ly submitted, Helen Mapes