Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1985/01/23 Tape 256: Side 2 0-2484 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers Wednesday, January 23, 1985 Public Services Buildin~ ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman Green, Commissioners Cannon, Carson, Guile O'Neill, Tugenberg, Shipe arrived at 7:05 STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Krempl, Principal Planner Lee, City Engineer Lippitt, Assistant City Attorney Gill, Senior Civil Engineer Daoust, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, City Traffic Engineer Glass, ERDR Consultant Manganelli, and EastLake Consultant Gray PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Green and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chairman Green reviewed the composition of the Planning Commission, its responsibilities and the format of the meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (O'Neill/Tugenberg) to approve the minutes of the meeting of January 9, 1985, as mailed with one correct:on on ,page 2, para~?ph l, to.~e~..ra,,p to Route 54 to connect to Tidelands Avenue instead of ...to the ~loe/anas. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: DRAFT EIR-83-2 - EL RANCHO DEL REY Environmental Review Coordinator Reid stated that this EIR reviews the impact and revisions to the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan including the properties under the ownership of Gersten and the "out parcels" under various ownerships. Comments from the State Clearinghouse and from other agencies were included in the Commission's packets and will be addressed in the Final EIR in addition to any concerns voiced at this meeting. The EIR was intended as a master environmental document with more detailed evaluations provided at the sectional planning area and tentative subdivision map level. Planning Commission Minutes - 2 - January 23, 1985 The proposed Specific Plan Amendment includes an increase in the number of dwelling units caused by a shift from predominately single-family units to more small single-lot family and multiple-family units and the inclusion of an employment park of 93 acres. The north leg of Rice Canyon would be partially filled and used for active parks/recreation use. An alternative specific plan retains the north leg as natural open space but incorporates changes in the land use mix similar to the proposed Specific Plan Amendment. The Resource Conservation Commission recommended the Commission certify the EIR and adopted a motion expressing their concerns on the density of the project, the filling of north canyon and introduction of the industrial park. Mr. Reid then introduced Ann Nussbaum. Ann Nussbaum, Westec Services, 3211 Fifth Avenue, San Diego, in her overview of the project stated that its location is east of 1-805 and north of Telegraph Canyon Road. The adopted plan has a mixture of land uses with relatively low density and with the major part residential. The open space system includes the north leg of Rice Canyon in a natural condition, the center leg as a narrow band of open space which will be a more developed area, and the south leg also indicated as open space. The circulation system is a modified grid system. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would modify the land use to include the mixture of residential uses at a higher density plus the addition of the employment park. The north leg of Rice Canyon would be partially filled and used for active parks/recreation uses. The circulation system, which includes East "H" Street, would be changed to a loop road system coming off Ridgeback Road and would reduce through-trips in this area. Environmental Impact Land Use - The proposed designations would be compatible with internal uses and adjacent uses off-site and have no significant land use impact. Traffic - The proposed plan would increase trip generation because of the ~-T~density and would require improvement of roadways as designed in the circulation element. Those improvements would mitigate any impacts as long as they were phased as needed. Fiscal Analysis - The revenues would exceed cost under either plan, however, the proposed plan would yield greater benefits to the City than the adopted. Biological - The biological impacts on both plans are significant. The proposed Plan Amendment reduces the natural habitat and retains less of substantive habitat. The key difference is the change in use in the north leg of the canyon. Biological impacts of both plans can be mitigated only with project design alternatives. Paleontology The area includes paleontological resources, however, any impacts can be mitigated and handled through individual maps or processes. Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - January 23, 1985 Land Form Alternatives - Extensive land alteration includes grading the range tops in either plan and the proposed plan would fill in the bottom of Rice Canyon which is a significant impact from both land or biological perspective. Future grading and design review as part of the project activities would allow mitigation measures to be implemented to minimize impacts. Parks and Open Space Comparison - the proposed plan includes essentially more parks and recreation space. The adopted plan would retain more natural open space but slightly less developed parks area. Commissioner Shipe arrived at 7:05 p.m. Environmental Review Coordinator infomed the Commission that Steve Lacy, a biologist with Westec., Bob Sergeant, traffic engineer; and John McTigh, fiscal analyst, are present and available to answer any of the Commission's questions. Questions asked by the Commission included: (1) were the owners of the "out parcels" consulted and did they approve the proposed density and land use; (2) if a market study had been made of the area; (3) the depth to which the north leg is proposed to be filled; (4) why with an increase in density, is there a decrease in the amount of school acreage; (5) what is the effect of the increase in density on the property value of the existing single-family units within the area. Staff replied that {1) the Specific Plan Amendment results in an upgrading of the adopted plan and is considered an improvement by the owners; discussion between the developer and the owners is an on-going affair; and the owners have been requested to make known what density and land use is considered appropriate; {2) the market study was reviewed by staff; {3) the fill-depth of the canyon was indicated on an overhead projection; {4) there is no direct relationship between density and school acreage; the school district specification of one elementary school site in the project takes into consideration other school sites not within the geographical limits of the SPA ; representatives of the school district were present and would address the Commission later; (5) density and its justification will be discussed in greater detail when the particular project is considered; the EIR under discussion is to present the Commission with the "worst case scenario" of what the impacts would be, their significance and if they are mitigable. The Commission expressed concern about traffic conditions in the area and asked for an elaboration of the impact from E1 Rancho del Rey, EastLake and other proposed developments in the next l0 years; how to keep from being "drowned in traffic"; the effect on the intersections and the treatment of the intersections in the EIRs presented. City Traffic Engineer Glass using the 1995 SANDAG projection, which includes the full build-out of E1 Rancho del Rey, EastLake and adjacent development projects, declared that the development of E1 Rancho del Rey by the current proposal would add +l?,O00 trips per day on 1-805 north of "H" Street; and south of "H" Street, 4,000 trips per day. Taking the entire eastern area, and PlanninO Commission Minutes - 4 - January 23, 1985 again assuming the build-out of EastLake I and ERDR as proposed, there would be a total of 160,000 trips per day on 1-805 north of "H" Street compared with the existing volume of +80,000 trips per day. He affirmed, however, that the impact on the freeway Ts not as critical as on the interchanges which are involved with our streets they will be the critical factor. Mr. Glass suggested that ramp improvements can facilitate better distribution of traffic. This is included in the EastLake phasing and funding program and he assumes ERDR will follow a similar format. He pointed out that the key element in making such decisions is through the use of an annual review. He finalized by saying the traffic can be handled through mitigating measures, but how they will be phased, and what is entailed is not known at this time. Commission Tugenberg asserted that if 125 is not extended to SR 54,that by the addition of an industrial park on "H" Street, the second EastLake artery is closed and Telegraph Canyon Road remains the only road without any impediments because Bonita Road is beyond redemption. Commissioner Green asked if the EIR for ERDR treated the intersection of 1-805 and if so, to what level of specificity. Ann Nussbaum explained that the SANDAG Study addressed the proposed amendment to the E1 Rancho del Rey project and EastLake, and the count given by Mr. Glass included both projects at a macro level. The specific break-out of ERDR and EastLake have not been made at this stage so the data is unavailable. Planning Director Krempl pointed out that the EastLake Public Facilities Financing Plan shows intersection improvements with 805 in stage IIc "install interim operational improvements, ramp widening, parking prohibitions at East "H" Street at 1-805 and Bonita Road at 1-805." This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. William Robens, representing E1 Rancho del Rey, 690 Otay Lakes Road, Bonita, stated the develope~ agreement with the EIR and indicated the presence and willingness to answer questions of himself, the Project Engineer, the Planner and the Biologist. Mr. Roberts entered two biological reports (1) "El Rancho del Rey Biological Reconnaissance and Planning/Design Consideration, 29 March- 1 April 1982", prepared by Chambers Consultants and Planners, April 1983; and (2) "Biological Resources Assessment - A Comparison of Three Specific Plans for E1 Rancho del Rey", prepared by Michael Brandman Associates, December 1984. Mr. Robens explained that prior to project implementation, a biological study was made (Chambers Consultants and Planners) which indicated that filling in the north leg of Rice Canyon would not have significant biological impacts. On the basis of that report, the project was implemented. When the EIR was received from Westec Services, the variance was so great that the applicant contacted a third biologist, Michael Branden, for his input. This biological study reported impacts of significance somewhere between the other two conclusions. Planning Commission Minutes - 5 - January 23, 1985 Commissioner Green thanked Mr. Robens and said the reports would be included in the Final EIR. James Bennett, 981 Telegraph Canyon Road, Chula Vista, 27-year owner of property asked the effect of the change of density on his property which was shown as 42 units in the adopted plan. He was informed by Paul Manganelli, ERDR consultant, that his property is designated for some 40+ units based on the assignment of 6 dwelling units/acre on the southern portion of the property wi th 4 units/acre on either si de of East "J" Street. Gary Centi, Centi and Associates, 3151 Airway Avenue, Costa Mesa, declared he represented the Land Planners for the project and advised of his willingness to answer any questions. John Linn, Chula Vista City School District, 84 East "J" Street, Chula Vista, declared that the school district is not in accordance with the location of the school in the community spine; however, before the SPA Plans are presented, it is felt this can be resolved and he would like that statement to be made a matter of record. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. The meeting was recessed at 7:50 and reconvened at 7:57. 2. CONSIDERATION OF FINAL EIR-84-1 - EASTLAKE I 3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-84-9 - AMENDMENT OF ADOPTED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONSIDERATION OF THE SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN, PUBLIC FACILITIES AND FINANCING PLAN, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - EASTLAKE The Commission asked if items 2, 3, and 6 (CEQA Findings) might be considered simultaneously. Director of Planning Krempl said that because the EIR covers the SPA and the Tentative Map, action on the EIR and SPA is a prerequisite to considering the Planned Community regulations and tentative map. The EIR and the SPA Plan may be considered jointly, however, the CEQA Findings will be affected by any changes or additions to the conditions of approval. Questions relating to the CEQA Findings may be addressed during the public hearings or staff presentations, however, the action on the CEQA Findings should occur last. Director Krempl stated that the SPA Plan and EIR items were continued from the January 9th meeting at the request of United Enterprises to review the staff reports. Director Krempl introduced consultants Gray and Wedin to respond to questions raised at the last meeting. Regarding Commissioner Cannon's question on the improvement of SR 54 between 1-805 and future Route 125, Mr. Gray said that CalTrans is still in the first stages of their study on that link. After outlining the procedures necessary he concluded that the time estimate would be about l0 years. Improvements to Planning Commission Minutes - 6 - January 23, 1985 SR 54 between I-5 and 1-805 are now under construction and will be completed before improvements are made easterly of 1-805 to the point where 125 would interconnect. In reference to questions raised by Mr. Will Hyde, Mr Gray stated that: 1. According to the standards and principles outlined in the Municipal Code, parks of less than 5 acres are permitted if they adjoin a neighborhood school. In this particular case, EastLake's design will combine the two facilities of park and school with shared parking to utilize more fully the land for recreational facilities and school facilities. 2. The SPA Plan recognizes the amount of land proposed for "private" parks by the developer and the extent of the proposed recreational facilities and recommends the developer be given 50-percent credit against the amount of park land dedication required by the City. He added that even with only 50-percent credit, the amount of land for parks would exceed the City's requirements for park land. 3. The parks are recommended as "private" because of the high level of recreational facilities and the resultant maintenance cost which will be borne by the Homeowners' Association. This has the concurrence of the Director of Parks and Recreation. 4. The Director of Public Safety has confirmed that no new police facilities will be needed al though the number of police personnel will increase. 5. Meetings held with the Library Board and the City Librarian indicate the justification for a branch library requires approximately lO,O00 users; and it is questionable if this would be the proper location. The developer is reserving an acre of land until a decision is forthcoming. Provision is made in the Public Facilities Financing Plan for a storefront library. 6. As the City continues to expand eastward, the present location of the Public Works Yard is being discussed but no specific study has been made. Wayne Wedin, Financial Consultant, spoke on the Mello-Roos Act. He said the approximate cost of all improvements would be between $60-65 million. The Mello-Roos improvements (high school, elementary school, park, water facilities, transit center) would amount to approximately $21 million and will be financed at a lower rate (usually 2 or 3 percent) than conventional financing. The remaining improvements, (streets, drainage, grading) amount to approximately $40 million and will be financed conventionally. The total cost of the Mello-Roos facilities, when passed along to the homeowners will amount to approximately $5,400, or $31/month using the current interest rates. Director Krempl pointed out that some of these off-site improvements would be shared by other developers through a facilities benefit assessment district on a "demand and need" basis. That too will have an effect on the cost to the individual purchaser. Planning Commission Minutes - 7 - January 23, 1985 Commissioner Cannon expressed his concern about the possible effect of traffic in the area if 125 is not constructed and maintained. None of the documents has reassured him that the construction of 125 would be completed prior to need. If the facilities benefit assessment district is not formed, there is no guarantee that the developer would complete 125 - only that he would assist in a facilities benefit assessment district for that purpose. He also questioned how findings can be made using the proposed CEQA Findings if they are based on information that is subject to updating. Commissioner Green requested that references being cited by the staff be identified as to the specific source document - SPA Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan, etc,, to avoid confusion. Commissioner O'Neill referred to the Public Facilities Financing Plan review of various off-site improvements necessary such as Telegraph Canyon Road, but was unable to find any mention of 125. He referred to information presented at the January 9th meeting that if off-site improvements are not completed, the project would stop; yet, if 125 is necessary for the full completion of EastLake I, there is nothing in the Financial Plan to stipulate the project will cease. A question was also raised about the number of SPAs being considered in EastLake I. Director of Planning Krempl replied that the EIR document considers the entire EastLake Project including two SPAs in EastLake I; the SPA being currently considered covering the north side of Telegraph Canyon Road, and the Greens SPA which covers the south side and will be presented at a future date. He pointed out that two levels of improvement are scheduled for 125; (1) as an interim roadway, and (2) as a freeway facility. Although EastLake is reserving right-of-way sufficient to accommodate an eight-lane freeway, it has not yet been decided if eight lanes will be needed by EastLake I. The developer has indicated in the Public Facilities Financing Plan a commitment to construct a four-lane road within the boundaries of EastLake I and a two-lane road from the boundaries to SR 54. He pointed out that the statement in the SPA Plan that indicates 125 will be built, refers to the interim roadway needed with this SPA, not as a freeway. Director Krempl referred to the Public Facilities Financing Plan that roadway construction will take place along the alignment of SR 125 from Telegraph Canyon Road north to State Route 54. With respect to Commissioner Cannon's question, he referred to the Public Facilities Financing Plan where it is stated that when the development is over a specified cumulative total, or EastLake reaches a certain total, the improvements must be either guaranteed or in place and that this statement gives the City control to stop development if the improvements have not been provided. Planning Commission Minutes - 8 - January 23, 1985 Commissioner O'Neill interjected that he would have been more comfortable if such a statement had been made in the right-hand column with relation to 125. Director Krempl said that if the Commission wishes, that type of change can be reflected in the document before it is forwarded to Council. In reference to Commissioner Cannon's statement re the Finance document being incomplete, Director Krempl aff~.m, ed the Public Facilities Financing Plan is complete in outlining the facilities needed off- and on-site, who would pay and when. The refinements involved are clarifying language and specificity, not in changing the requirements; therefore the CEQA Findings are appropriate to address. Again, if the facilities benefit assessment district is not fomed, and the developer does not wish to assume the financial burden, the City has the ability to stop development by the authority in the Public Facilities Financing Plan and the Development Agreement which will be entered into between the City and the developer. Commissioner Carson referred to the concept of a park in connection with a school and asked what measures have been proposed to protect children from undesirables coming onto an unfenced campus. Also, in PCM-84-9, page 4, paragraph 3, it is indicated that the facilities will be open except for swimming pools; on page ? a reference is made to a swimming park, and asked if it meant the same. She was informed that it should be "pool." Mr. Gray pointed out that the neighborhood park and facilities have been designed so that they may be fenced; however, the control of the school facilities is the responsibility of the affected school District. He added that John Linn, from the School District, would probably address that later. Concerns of the Commission with regard to the private parks included: {1) that the City may be asked to maintain these private parks if the cost proves to be too burdensome for the Homeowners' Association and it decides to dedicate them to the City; (2) the possible reaction of homeowners if busloads of strangers take advantage of the park's facilities; (3) the confusion caused by the use of the word "private" parks pertaining to parks that are open to the public; (4) the question of responsibility of the Homeowners' Association to prevent incidents of a sexual nature from occurring in the rest rooms; and {5) the line of responsibility between the Homeowners' Association and the City Police Department in enforcement procedures in a private park. Mr. Gray replied that {1) large-scale master plan communities with private parks have been built elsewhere and have been successful; the cost of maintaining the private parks spread over such a large project would be very low; and the buyer is advised in writing of all his/her responsibilities and charges when he/she purchases the house; (2) normally, large regional parks instead of smaller neighborhood parks are patronized by large groups of people; (3) the word "private" means maintenance of the parks will be the responsibility of the Homeowners' Association rather than the City. Planning Commission Minutes - 9 - Januar7 23, 1985 Assistant City Attorney Gill explained that the responsibility for enforcement in a private park would depend on the specific facts and whether a criminal act was being committed which would fall within the responsibility of the Police Department. Commissioner Cannon inquired if 125 was needed for the present SPA Plan to mitigate traffic generated by that SPA Plan and was informed that a four-lane roadway within the EastLake boundaries and a two-lane roadway off-site were recommended. Commissioner Green stated that phasing in terms of units is available but not in terms of neighborhoods and sequential development. Director Krempl referred to the Public Facilities Financing Plan which shows phasing for both off-site and on-site improvements occurring within phases of the development. He pointed out that the document is dynamic in that it anticipates the phasing and the sequence to match that phasing over an extended period of time. The Development Agreement requires an annual update of all off-site and on-site developments in order to reassess and readjust the phasing and improvement schedule. Commissioner Green said that it was his understanding that if this project halted at some point, the Public Facilities Financing Plan required that improvements be in place at the time the building permits are granted. Director Krempl affirmed his statement and added that the tentative map covers a broad area and the financial plan is phased in a way the City could determine the improvements necessary for the sub-stages of the final maps. Those improvements would need to be bonded for and in place within 6 months. Commissioner Green expressed his concern about the ability of the City to force the completion of later improvements based upon the Development Agreement. Director Krempl explained that the Development Agreement assures the developer that the density and what is represented in terms of the SPA Plan will remain in effect. The City is assured that the improvements required have been provided in appropriate fashion. If 5 years out, the developer stops the project, there is no way the City can enforce continuation: however, all public facilities required to that point in time will have been installed. If the developer wishes to amend the plan and request new density, it would require a major amendment of the SPA, a new tentative plan, development agreement and necessitate approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. Commissioner Tugenberg inquired about the City's enforcement ability if EastLake were purchased by a different company. He referenced page 42 of the Public Facilities Financing Plan, Stage Ia - that the link through the Hills residential area in the low-density area will not be entirely completed in the first phase. Planning Commission Minutes - 10 - Januar~ 23, 1985 If the road is not completed, the Commissioner expressed concern that the high-density areas might be built up first and then nothing left for the low-density areas. Director Krempl clarified the situation by commenting that Stage Ia shows a partial completion of the street improvements in the Hills neighborhood; however, Stage Ic shows its completion and the phasing is in accordance with the developer's intent that the part nearest "H" Street be completed first. If the phasing were changed, an adjustment would be made that would require completion of the loop and all other improvement, on Ia and Ic. The City has the ability to take any of these improvements and make then an exaction on the tentative map pertaining to that particular phase. Also, with respect to new owners of the land, the Development Agreement states these conditions apply to the land regardless of the owner. Commissioner Tugenberg cited his concern that the R-1 area representing low-density housing had been left to the end of the development. Commissioner Cannon emphasized that if 125 is not built and the project stops, it doesn't make economic sense for the City to have a small development on the eastern fringe of the City. Mr. Gray replied that traffic experts have debated the need for a 125 connection and it has been concluded that it will probably not be needed for this SPA Plan but is being included just in case it is. After an analysis of the Traffic Improvement Plan, Consultant Gary Hansen suggested the City monitor the intersection at "H" and 1-805 and Telegraph Canyon Road and 1-805 to determine when the 125 connection will be needed. He reiterated that if EastLake is forced to stop in year 3 or 4, there will still be a viable community, since the project is planned in units. Bob Sergeant, Traffic Consultant with Wildan and Associates said the intersection at 805 and Telegraph Canyon Road had been evaluated. The four-lane roadway {125) will relieve future congestion on Telegraph Canyon Road and "H" Street; it has much more capacity than the Telegraph Canyon Road-805-"H" Street route. The computer analysis indicates travel times and distances from the center of the EastLake project are virtually identical. The plan provides flexibility because it is difficult to predict with certainty when the freeway intersections will reach capacity. Mr. Gray infoKmed the Commission that two additional conditions have been added to the SPA Plan; namely, (1) a definition of low and moderate income housing to be utilized in considering the SPA Plan, and (2) new language in the SPA Plan that precludes the need of a public hearing to amend the SPA Plan regarding minor changes made to the tentative subdivision map. The meeting recessed at 9:25 and reconvened at 9:35. Gretchen Burkee, P.O. 321, Bonita, said her main concern is the traffic. She asked:(1) Will the developer improve Proctor Valley Road and San Miguel in phase Ia or Ib and recommended Ia; (2) Will it be feasible for the developer Planning Commission Minutes - ll - Januar7 23, 1985 to bridge the canyon in front of the reservoir if he has to build to 125; (3) What control will ensure construction of the roadways; {4) What will be done about the traffic impact on San Miguel Road and where will the money come from to widen it if that is contemplated? Director Krempl answered that the City has the authority to require the roadway improvements through the Public Facilities Financing Plan and the Development Agreement. Commissioner O'Neill pointed out the improvements on San Miguel Road were scheduled to take place with or without EastLake. Michael Spata, 1007 Fifth Avenue, San Diego, Attorney-at-law representing United Enterprises, said they had requested a continuation at the last meeting in order to study some of the concerns being voiced by the Commission. Their understanding of these concerns has been memorialized and, pursuant to that understanding, United Enterprises does not oppose the project. He then submitted the written statement to the Recording Secretary. Robert Santos, EastLake Development Corp., 701 B Street, Suite 230, San Diego, applicant, replied to some of the concerns voiced by the Commission as follows: Schools - EastLake has developed a schematic plan for the elementary school site which, while it has not been approved by the School District as yet, includes both an upper and lower campus and has provisions for fencing either campus or both. Security - The City's Municipal Code can be enforced in private parks. The parks are for the local population and are designed with the homeowners in mind. Their size corresponds to the demographics of the particular area they serve. Outside people - The smaller parks do not attract large groups of people but there will be a large public park available for large gatherings. Fencing of Pools - The swimming pool areas and tennis courts will be fenced and accessible only by key. Homeowners' Associations the Master Community Association will cover the entire EastLake area. Provisions have been made for local sub-associations for other neighborhoods including condos and detached areas. These sub-associations will have voting rights within the Master Community Association. The park facilities will be available to the public. The $3.6 million in park improvements breaks down to a cost of ~ $20 per household per month. Traffic - A master EIR document was approved previously which addressed ll,O00 dwelling units, the development of the United Enterprises' property, the build-out of the Gersten properties and other developments to the year 2005. One of the strong recommendations that came out of that EIR was the need for Planning Commission Minutes - 12 - January 23, 1985 125 because of the growth of Chula Vista, not just the EastLake project. The Public Facilities Financing Plan is designed to look ahead so that when improvements are ready for construction, the means will be also available. It is a protection for the City and provides that EastLake cannot proceed beyond a certain point until 125 is in place. As other growth will be occurring at the same pace as EastLake, EastLake will not be isolated from the rest of Chula Vista. EastLake, however, would support Commissioner O'Neill's suggested modification of the Table on page 15 if the Commission wishes (to require 125 to be constructed at an earlier stage, if needed). Commissioner Cannon asked Mr. Santos to address the issue of whether 125 would be built regardless of whether there was a joint agreement with the other developers; in other words, would EastLake fund 125 in the absence of a joint agreement on that point. Mr. Santos replied that it is still not certain that 125 will be needed. Commissioner Tugenberg asked if the schools are financed by Mello-Roos and partially by the users of the school, would that establish a quasi-private school system which might run into problems with private busing. He was informed that the school is a public facility and the Mello-Roos is simply a funding technique, not a political entity. For example, a fire station installed with Mello-Roos funds can fight fires in EastLake and outside of EastLake. Mr. Santos referred to Commissioner Tugenberg's concern over the apparent construction of the low density housing at the end of the development and said the chart was misleading. The custom lots of lO,O00 sq. ft. sell slowly - perhaps one every 2 weeks; while the higher density housing might be sold at the rate of 100 the first week. Mr. Santos also pointed out that while the road system might not be completed at one time, an alternative circulation road was available until the phasing advanced to the time of completion of the road system. He confirmed that EastLake wants to make the most efficient use of the circulation roads and supports the staff recommendation in the report. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Green referred to Section 7.2.2 of the Development Agreement wherein it states that the developer will pay his share of financing certain public facilities and that share could be held in an account for the construction of that facility by the City. In Section 7.2.3, the Agreement says that "The City will use its best efforts to supervise and finance the construction of such public facilities." This appears to put the burden on the City rather than the developer. Commissioner Green expressed concern that if by the time construction reaches phase IIb, and if there is no cooperation from other developers, and if EastLake is unable to continue, there is the potential for a lawsuit if it can be claimed that the City did not use its best interests in supervising and financing the construction of the public facilities. He contended, therefore, that the Development Agreement and Financing Plan do not support staff's recommendation regarding this provision. Plannin~ Commission Minutes - 13 - January 23, 1985 Commissioner Cannon concurred with Commissioner Green's statement and maintained that if the Commission merely recommended that staff negotiate with the developer regarding the Public Facilities Financing Plan and the Development Agreement, that the Commission would lose control at that point. He affirmed that the Commission should review the documents to be certain that items staff indicates will be accomplished are accomplished. Also, the documents should be understandable to others 5 years from now, not just to those presently involved. Director of Planning Krempl asserted that the Development Agreement is a means of guaranteeing certain things will occur and making that binding. It is not a required document, at this time, for the Commission or Council in considering the SPA Plan. If the Commission is not comfortable with it, it could recommend to the Council that before they entertain adoption of that document, it be returned to the Commission for further consideration. He then introduced John Lippitt, City Engineer. City Engineer Lippitt said he had many of the same concerns when he looked at the Public Facilities Financing Plan, the tentative map and the environmental documents. He pointed out, however, that the total number of projected units to be built in the eastern area is about 8,400 dwelling units. Of that, only 2,200 dwelling units are EastLake. Therefore, if EastLake does not have enough money, other developers will be required to put up money as they develop. If the 6,200 units outside EastLake do not develop, then there would only be traffic generated by 2,200 units instead of 6,200 and fewer off-site roads would be needed to handle the traffic. Also, the tentative map and the Financing Plan have provisions that the City has to approve every final map - which includes bonding agreements for road improvements. By the time the final map comes forward, the City will have conducted an actual count of traffic on the streets and will be able to modify some of the road improvements. This plan and all final subdivision maps have to go to the City Council for approval. Commissioner Cannon stated that the tendency to allow the developer to go ahead until streets are overcrowded is a poor strategy. If change is needed at that point, how will the traffic situation be controlled? Is it adequate to review it only on an annual basis? City Engineer Lippitt said that the important point was at what point would 125 be needed. Action on Items 2 & 3 Commissioner Cannon remarked that the items are separate and do not reflect on one another and with that in mind he made the following motion: MSUC (Cannon/Shipe) to certify that Final EIR-84-1 has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines, the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista and that the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR. ~ Plannin9 Commission Minutes - 14 - January 23, 1985 Action on Item 3 MSC (O'Neill/Guiles seconded for discussion) that based on findings attached to the staff report {Attachment l) to adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the amendment to the General Development Plan. Commissioners Green, Guiles and Cannon voted "no". Discussion ensued as follows: In response to Commissioner Green's request for clarification on the Amendment, Director Krempl explained that because of the increase in the size of the employment park and the shifts in density, staff felt it appropriate to consider formally an amendment to the General Development Plan which would make the General Development Plan consistent with both the General Plan and the SPA Plan. Commissioner Cannon said that based on the Finding #6 (SPA Plan), that streets and thoroughfares proposed are adequate to carry the anticipated traffic thereon, he could not support the motion. Commissioner O'Neill noted that he is now semi-comfortable about 125 and the SPA Plan and feels that if the development of 125 is tied in with the Financial Plan empowering halting the project if improvements are not completed, he has no problem. Commissioner Green stated he was not comfortable, based on his previous comments. Action on Item 2 MS (O'Neill/Shipe) that based on findings attached to the staff report (Attachment 2) to adopt a motion recommending City Council approve the EastLake I Section Planning Area (SPA) Plan, subject to Conditions of Approval listed in Section 6. Commissioner O'Neill added that he would like to specify when Item 3 was considered that 125 should be added to one of the three stages. It was then decided to consider Items 2 and 3 together. Commissioner O'Neill amended the motion to include: in the Public Facilities Financing Plan and the Development Agreement to add to any of the stages Ia, b, c, or to IIa, b, and c, the provisions that 125 will be four lanes up to San Miguel and two lanes to 54. Commissioner Tugenberg stated it would be more important to have the area between San Miguel and 54 be four lanes than between the site and San Miguel otherwise a bottleneck is formed. Director of Planning Krempl interjected that staff and the developer would be in agreement that four lanes be built from EastLake proper the entire distance to 54. Planning Commission Minutes - 15 - January 23, 1985 Commissioner O'Neill said he would revise the motion to include that. Commissioner Cannon allowed four lanes was more sensible, however he would vote against the motion. He emphasized that this was not a vote against EastLake as the project has phenomenal planning in numerous instances and many innovative ideas. He has worked with the area, however, and is doubtful that 125 will ever be constructed based on the necessity for agreements among developers, City, County and State entities, plus the geographical problems of spanning the Sweetwater River in 5 years time. He could not visualize the City stopping a development of such magnitude except under the most extreme of circumstances. He would like to see EastLake built in that location if 125 construction can be guaranteed. It is unreasonable for the City to require the developer to develop this on his own if no facilities benefit assessment district can be formed. Commissioner 0 'Neill remarked that every property owner and political entity will profit from the construction of EastLake. It will be good for the City and the County and he did not foresee difficulties in getting 125 if the right of way was achieved. Commissioner Cannon objected that the difficulty is securing money, the lack of agreement on the route of 125, and that CalTrans does not have it on the maps. Commissioner Green said his main concern is lack of sufficient protection of the City through the Development Agreement and the Public Facilities Financing Plan. He believed the City could be pushed into continuing the development through a threat of a lawsuit or stoppage of construction. RESTATED MOTION MS (O'Neill/Shipe) that based on findings attached in the staff report (Attachment 2) to adopt a motion recommending City Council approve the EastLake I Section Planning Area {SPA) Plan, subject to Conditions of Approval listed in Section 6, to approve the Public Facilities Financing Plan in concept and add to Stage IIb the provisions for completion of Route 125 from EastLake across San Miguel Road and up to SR 54 with four lanes. The motion failed by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners O'Neill, Shipe, Carson NOES: Commissioners Cannon, Green, Guiles and Tugenberg ABSTAIN: None Craig Beam, 1700 Bank of California Building, llO West A, San Diego, counsel for the applicant, asked to speak to a point of order. Mr. Beam stipulated that the Planning Commission is advisory to the Council and if action is not taken on PC Regulations and Tentative Map, even negative action, then the Commission is not considered to have acted and Council action is subsequently delayed. Planning Commission Minutes - 16 - January 23, 1985 In answer to the Commission's inquiry, Assistant City Attorney Gill replied that if the Commission wishes to take an advisory vote on the PC Regulations and the Tentative Map, it is suggested that the hearing be opened and testimony taken. Continuing his explanation of procedural action he said Items 2 (EIR) and 3 (SPA) would go forward to the Council and if the SPA Plan is approved, the Tentative Map and PC Regulations would return to the Commission. The Commissioners decided their views had been expressed through the motions and vote, and they would like to see the Council's reaction to the items and have them returned afterwards. The meeting recessed from ll:O0 to 11:05 for legal consideration. Attorney Gill said any further comments at this time were unnecessary. Director Krempl suggested that if the Council acts on the SPA on the 29th, it could be returned, along with the PC Regulations, to the Commission at the first meeting in February. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-85-D - CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT OF THE EASTLAKE I PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS This item not considered. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF TENTATIVE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION MAP FOR EASTLAKE I, CHULA VISTA TRACT 84-9 - EASTLAJ(E DEVELOPMENT COMPANY This item not considered. 6. CONSIDERATION OF "CANDIDATE CEQA FINDINGS" EASTLAKE I This item not considered. DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS Director Krempl suggested that if the Council acts on the SPA on the 29th, it could be returned, along wi th the PC regulations, to the Commission at the first meeting in February. COMMISSION COMMENTS None. ADJOURNMENT AT ll:06 p.m. to the Regular Business Meeting of February 13, 1985 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers Ruth M. Smith, Recording Secretary WPC 1673P