HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1988/12/20 Item 19
.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 19
Meeting Date 12/20/88
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: To Consider Interim Ordinance
Ordi nance JJ., '8"if Emergency measure for the reenactment
of an interim ordinance for the regulation of the processing
of Land Use Proposals which are inconsistent with Part Two of
the Montgomery Specific Plan
Director of Planning C~
City Manager'~b~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes~No_
,J
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
The City Council, meeting in regular session on April 26, 1988, considered a
proposed interim ordinance, which would require proponents of land uses which
are inconsistent with the Montgomery Specific Plan to submit applications for
the amendment of the Specific Plan in conjunction with their applications for
the establishment of the proposed uses.
The City Council members, duri ng thi s consi derati on, di scussed the equity of
the proposed ordinance, and expressed concern over those projects which have
. been substantially processed, or currently within the "pipel ine." Council
after the conclusion of its consideration of the draft ordinance, referred it
back to staff, and requested that the ordinance be revised by the inclusion of
provi si ons whi ch woul d protect the interests of proponents of development
projects which have been substantially processed by the City.
The requested, revised ordinance was prepared by staff, and, on May 3,1988,
was adopted by Council as Ordinance No. 2266, entitled "An Interim Ordinance
of the City of Chula Vista Regulating the Processing of Land Use Proposals
Which Are Inconsistent with Part Two of the Montgomery Specific Plan."
Ordinance 2266 was effective for 90 days, and then expired. On September 6,
1988, a similar interim ordinance, No. 2283, was adopted by Council.
The proposed ordinance is similar in form and content to Ordinances 2266 and
2283.
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached interim ordinance for a period of 90
day s .
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
1. The Montgomery Planning Committee had considered the original, draft
interim ordinance at their hearing of March 16, 1988. The Committee
approved the said interim ordinance, and recommended that it be adopted by
the City Planning Commission and City Council (vote 5-1, one absent).
.
.
.4.
.
Page 2, Item 19
Meeting Date 12/20/88
2.
The City Planning Commission had at its meeting of April 13, 1988, voted
4-3 to recommend that the City Council not adopt the original said interim
ordinance.
DISCUSSION:
1.
The proposed interim ordinance is designed to protect the growth,
development, design, and conservation policies of the Montgomery Specific
Plan, as well as the interests of proponents of development projects which
have been substantially processed by the City even where the said projects
are not consistent with the Specific Plan.
2.
While Ordinances 2266 and 2283 effectively provided the protection
discussed in the above paragraph during their aggregate, 180-day tenure,
this protection is still required.
3.
To date, the interim ordinances have been generally well-received by the
public and have produced little concern on the part of property owners.
On the other hand, they have directly protected owners of two residential
holdings in Otay Town, and the large commercial holding within the
southeasterly quadrant of Third and Orange Avenues.
Staff believes that the rezoning of the lands of Montgomery, as called for
under Part Three of the t~ontgomery Specific Plan, will be substantially
completed in less than a year, and will then obviate the need for
additional interim ordinances. (Please see Exhibit A, Planning Consultant
Anthony Lettieri's draft program for the rezoning of the Montgomery
Communi ty.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
WPC 5705P