Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1982/03/24 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA March 24, 1982 A regular business meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California was held on the above date beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue. Commissioners Present: Pressutti, Williams, R. Johnson, Green, G. Johnson, O'Neill and Stevenson Commissioners Absent: None Staff Present: Director of Planning Peterson, Principal Planner Pass, Principal Planner Lee, City Engineer Lippitt, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Assistant City Attorney Harron and Secretary Mapes The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Pressutti, and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (R. Johnson-Stevenson) The minutes of the meeting of March 10, 1982 be approved as written. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Pressutti asked for oral communications and none were presented. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of General Plan Amendment to redesignate approximately 11 acres located at the southeast quadrant of Oxford Street and Industrial Boulevard, from "Retail Commercial" to "Research and Limited Industrial" Principal Planner Pass advised that this proposed General Plan Amendment is a part of an overall proposal for the establishment of a retail commercial/industrial complex covering approximately 16 acres in its entirety. This amendment would redesignate approximately 11 acres for limited industrial use, with 5 acres to remain in retail commercial. While it is anticipated that the limited industrial use would be placed in the northerly portion of the site, there is no attempt at this time to specify the exact boundary between the two designations. Mr. Pass noted that when this 16 acres was prezoned to C-C-P on June 16, 1981, it was indicated that the developer would ultimately request that a portion of the site be redesignated for industrial use. At the time of the original prezoning a conditioned Negative Declaration of environmental impact was certified, and it has been determined that this proposed amendment to the General Plan does not require additional environmental assessment. -2- March 24, 1982 The 11 acre industrial park proposed for the site was recently approved by the County and this General Plan Amendment is a prerequisite to the change in prezoning to I-L to permit that development in the city. The Commission is asked to recommend to the Council the adoption of the General Plan Amendment. 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 (R. Johnson-Stevenson) The Commission recommends that the City Council amend the plan diagram of the Chula Vista General Plan to redesignate approximately 11 acres at the southeast quadrant of Oxford Street and Industrial Boulevard from "Retail Commercial" to "Research and Limited Industrial." 2. Consideration of Final EIR-81-3 on EastLake Planned Community Director of Planning Peterson advised that although the public hearing on this Environmental Impact Report was concluded at a previous meeting, it is preferable for the Commission to consider adoption of the final EIR in conjunction with the adoption of the CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations after conclusion of the public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment and request for prezoning and approval of a General Development Plan. He therefore recommended that agenda item 2 be considered following items 3 and 4.a. MSUC (Williams-Stevenson) Agenda item 2 shall be considered following agenda items 3 and 4. 3, PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of General Plan Amendment to chanqe the designation of approximately 4.8 square miles from "Agriculture and Reserve," "Residential 1-3 DU/acre" and "Residential 4-12 DU/acre" to a series of urban densities as well as commercial, industrial, parks, schools and public open space in the area between Southwestern College Estates and Otay Reservoirs EastLake/Cadillac Fairview Homes West (continued from March 10) 4. PUBLIC HEARING: a. Consideration of request to prezone approximately 4.8 square miles to P-C (Planned Community) and approve General Development Plan - Cadillac Fairview Homes West (continued from March 10) Director of Planning Peterson advised that in the written report to the Commission for this meeting an attempt was made to answer the questions and address the issues raised by the Commission and the public during the public hearing on March lOth. He noted that one of the issues raised concerned the availability of water under worst case conditions. Information on that subject was obtained and included in the report. After distributing the report, the department was contacted by both of the agencies that supply water within the city. One of those agencies pointed out errors in the tabulated report on water outlook and expressed the belief that it is very unlikely that a worst case situation, as indicated, would ever exist. The Otay Municipal Water District also expressed the belief that the various districts in Southern California would not be limited to their legal entitlements as assumed in the report. It was also pointed out that approval of the General Plan Amendment would not commit the water district to provide water to the area, but that specific plans or tentative maps would be reviewed with that in mind. -3- March 24, 1982 The commitment to provide water does not occur until the final map stage. In any case adjusted figures as to water availability will be furnished to the Commission in a later report. Mr. Peterson advised that City Engineer Lippitt would address the Commission on the traffic circulation segment of the report, Mr. Pete Rios of the San Diego County Water Authority would address the water availability issue and Mr. Bob Santos would make a presentation rebutting items in the March 10 staff report and discuss some revisions to the plan which they have just prepared. City Engineer Lippitt displayed the circulation diagrams included in the original report showing the projected volumes of traffic on various arterial streets in the year 2000 if the EastLake and surrounding areas are developed. Their study considered the area bounded by Highway 54 on the north, 1-805 on the west, Otay Valley Road on the south and Otay Lakes on the east. The traffic projected by the year 2000 was based on the assumption there would be 50,000 dwelling units within the area as well as commercial and industrial development. There are approximately 10,000 dwelling units in the study area now, so 40,000 additional units are projected of which 11,800 would be in the EastLake development. The traffic networks show the percentage of traffic on each of the major arterials that would be generated from the EastLake development. Street improvements would be required as development is implemented and provision would be made for assessment districts to distribute the cost of those improvements to all developments benefiting from those improvements. Existing dwelling units would not be assessed for the cost of future street improvements. Mr. Rios of the San Diego County Water Authority affirmed that the availability of sufficient water has been a problem in San Diego since its inception. He reported that the County Water Authority was created in 1944 as the agency to provide water to the area of San Diego. Prior to that time local sources of water had been enough to sustain the area. When the Water Authority was created there were 9 member agencies and a total population in the area of about 400,000. At the present time there are 24 member agencies who provide water to about 98 per cent of the county's population. The first water was imported in 1947 and water has been imported continuously since that time until now when about 90 per cent of the water used here is imported. At the present time 50 percent of the water requirement comes from the Colorado River and 50 per cent from the State Water Project. By mid 1985 water from the Colorado River will be reduced over one-half. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, from whom the County Water Authority receives water, renegotiated the water contract with the State of California to make up that loss. At that time the State increased San Diego's allotment by about 500,000 acre feet of water. He pointed out, however, that without the peripheral canal it will be difficult for the State project to provide all of the water Central and Southern California will need. It is estimated there will be a shortfall up to 640,000 acre feet of water for the Metropolitan Water District area, but Metropolitan is taking steps to try to alleviate that problem. They assure the San Diego Water Authority that, present conditions existing, they will be able to provide all of the water all of the areas need in the Metropolitan District service area through the year 1985. After the year 1985, depending on climatic conditions, it could be a touch and go situation until 1990 when the peripheral canal is supposed to be built. Mr. Rios advised that the Metropolitan Water District services about 11½ million people in Southern California; they have the contracts with the Colorado River and the State of California. In the event there was not enough water, Metropolitan -4- March 24, 1982 would ask all member agencies to reduce their consumption. During the years of 1976 and 1977 Metropolitan asked the member agencies to reduce water use by about 10 per cent; in San Diego the consumption was reduced by about 16 per cent, and that was the worst drought since the San Diego Authority was created. Bob Santos, Cadillac Fairview Homes West, project applicant, advised that his presentation will be a response to concerns expressed in the staff report. He reported that they are submitting a revised plan and revised text that will resolve the planning issues in the staff report. The policy issues are issues that, based on discussion with staff, can only be resolved at City Council level. The biggest policy issue is prematurity, and other issues include overall density and developer exactions. Mr. Santos called attention to their written response to the staff report, copies of which are furnished to the Commission members at this meeting for their future review and indicated he would highlight some of the major points of that report. With reference to the issue of prematurity, he pointed out they have five responses to that issue. He contended that their plan is consistent with the City's Growth Management Policy, adopted on October 27, 1981, which states that lands should be considered ready for development if they are substantially contiguous with the city limits and with lands already developed. And further, that the Growth Manage- ment Policy was adopted by the Council after reaching an understanding with the Planning Director that EastLake would be deemed substantially contiguous and, therefore, considered ready for development. The Growth Management Policy states that the Bonita Miguel and United Enterprises properties should remain, for the present time, within the "Agriculture and Reserve Open Space" designation, but does not make that classification for the Janal Ranch property. The staff report contends it is premature to approve the EastLake project prior to completion of the Contract Planner's study of the hinterland areas and the City's adoption of a plan for those areas. Mr. Santos pointed out the Contract Planner was hired by the City in August, 1981, one year after the EastLake plan was submitted and application fees paid. Cadillac Fairview was advised by the City Manager that their plans would not be jeopardized by the work of the Contract Planner, since his report would not go to the Planning Commission and City Council until January, 1983, and the General Plan Amendment based on that report would likely not be adopted until the summer of 1984. With reference to,the statement in the staff report that indicates "in-filling" the vacant, residentially zoned land within the city could accommodate the projected population growth for the next 15 years without approving the develop- ment of outside areas, Mr. Santos contended that those in-fill areas if developed at the present zoning densities assigned to them would not meet the city's need for additional housing over that period. He also pointed out that the statement indicating 141 acres of R-3 zoned property in the city should be redeveloped from single family housing to 22 units per acre is in conflict with the recently adopted Housing Element which states there are 48 houses in the city which should be torn down. The Housing Element encourages rehabilitation of existing homes rather than redevelopment. Mr. Santos contended that the in-fill areas would be absorbed by 1985, and that if the EastLake project is approved at this time, the first house would not be ready for occupancy until 1985. Mr. Santos briefly reviewed some of the obstacles to in-filling as pointed out in a recent document issued by the State called, "Filling in the Blanks." -5- March 24, 1982 Mr. Santos advised that the second major policy issue is overall density. He contended that density does not relate to quality of development but it does relate to the cost of public facilities. He quoted from a report that indicates that low density sprawl type development, consisting of 75 per cent detached units and 25 per cent attached units costs 43 per cent more per unit than a planned mixed community with a homogeneous mix of densities. He reported that extensive studies of this property have revealed that it is constraint free relative to other sites, and is capable of supporting intense urban development if the City's policy will allow that. He contended that the density proposed for this develop- ment is similar to other planned communities in the area. Mr. Santos pointed out they have a commitment to produce housing for low and moderate income families and with their plan for 11,800 dwelling units they would produce 10% of the units affordable to those families. With a lower density they would not be able to do that. Mr. Santos contended that one of the positive impacts of their project is their proposal to balance jobs with housing. He advised that their study of Rancho Bernardo revealed that this is not accomplished in that development since the people who work there cannot afford to live there, and those who live there work elsewhere. With the mix of housing proposed in EastLake there will be a balance of jobs with houses. Mr. Santos cited developer exactions as the last major policy issue in the report, noting that the staff report proposes some 58 to 60 million dollars in developer exactions which is some 50 million dollars more than was required for the E1 Rancho del Rey project. He affirmed that they have already made commitments to do much in terms of subsidizing public facilities and services. They have proposed to underwrite the cost of schools for the EastLake project which they estimate to be around 48 million dollars including the land. They have offered to participate in the construction of offsite road improvements that would be important to the EastLake project. They have offered to build and equip the fire station, and to build a transit station, and in return for all of this they are getting a 35% negative density bonus. The EastLake project is also being asked for a 1.9 million dollar subsidy of operating costs, which they would expect if the project had a negative fiscal impact to the city, but they anticipate a positive fiscal impact in the first phase of development. Mr. Santos called on Gary Cinti of the Planning Center to discuss the proposed revisions to the plans. Mr. Cinti displayed a new land use exhibit and pointed out a number of changes that have been made. The high school site has been moved into the area of first phase of development and two additional elementary school sites have been designated. This brings the total elementary schools to seven, along with one junior high and one high school site. They have proposed an area for a church complex. Another change was the deletion of residential development adjacent to Proctor Valley Road and redesignation of that area for an employment park. As a result, the overall number of resildential units has been reduced to 11,450. Mr.' Cinti also discussed their planning factors exhibit which indicates special study areas as a response to issues that have come up in the planning program. He pointed out that for a project that will take 20 years, every issue does not need to be studied at the front end, but they can be identified for study in their logical time frame. They have identified the additional school sites, and in the first phase a village center study area. Another study area is for the designated -6- March 24, 1982 12 acre church complex. They have indicated two community parks of 15 acres each, one to be located adjacent to the relocated high school site. This would replace the originally proposed 30 acre community park and would be consistent with the city's general plan standards. The last exhibit Mr. Cinti discussed showed the phasing of the project. It has now been divided into six phases, instead of three as originally shown. Mr. Cinti advised that substantial changes occur in the text itself where they have tried to incorporate some of the conditions and concerns of the staff at the level appropriate for a plan of 20 years. These include a paleontological monitoring program, a tree planting plan requirement, a street naming program, and a program which at each phase or each S.P.A. plan approval will identify the ownership of open space and recreation facilities and delineate in detail, not possible at this time, exactly how it will be required, who will own it and who will maintain it. Also included is a public facilities plan. Each S.P.A. plan will set forth the public facilities in that area that will be required in conjunction with the development of that S.P.A.; this will include the scheduling, financing and responsibilities spelled out in detail. A companion to the public facilities plan will be the implementation plan for those facilities. In each phase it is proposed that the traffic analysis be updated, also that a noise analysis be required with each S.P.A. It is specified in the planned community district regulations that the lakes within the development will be provided at no cost to the city. Each S.P.A. plan will require a school-park study to determine how and when those facilities will be provided. The Lakeview S.P.A., which is in the fourth phase of development, will include a study to explore the possibility of expanded resort facilities adjacent to the reservoir area. Mr. Cinti pointed out there is a specific requirement for open space beyond that required in the right-of-way reserved for highways. Lot specifications have been deleted from the text and provision made for the establishment of such standards with each S.P.A. plan. A commitment has been made to provide 10% of the housing at prices affordable to low and moderate income persons. Mr. Cinti pointed out that the changes as discussed consist of assurances in the form of additional plans and studies to be submitted for Planning Commission review at each level of the project development. In response to a question from Commissioner Stevenson concerning the location of the affordable housing units, Mr. Cinti pointed out small nodes of 100 units of affordable housing in various locations throughout the project. In response to a question from Commissioner Green as to what Cadillac Fairview's role would be as the project is being developed, Mr. Santos advised that they are land developers, but they are not builders. They select an area and put forth the time and effort to prepare a comprehensive plan and to process that plan through approval. They then perform what they call the backbone of the development--roads, parks, and possibly schools in this case, and install utilities, to make the land ready for a merchant builder. A merchant builder, or building contractor, would purchase a piece of land from Cadillac Fairview which is ready for the construction of homes or other buildings. Through that process Cadillac Fairview can find a quality builder for the various types of -7- March 24, 1982 housing. Mr. Santos indicated that during the first phase of development there might be five or six builders constructing different parts of the development. He noted that the city has ultimate control over the develop- ment but Cadillac Fairview has a vested interest in it because of the millions of dollars they have spent in the beginning. They will establish developer CC&R's which the builder must meet. Mr. Santos also affirmed that they would do everything possible to keep agricultural land in agricultural use until each area was phased for develop- ment. The meeting recessed at 9:00 p.m. and was reconvened at 9:10 p.m. Gene Coleman, Gotham Street, Chula Vista, asserted that every water agency is gearing up to bombard the citizens over the peripheral canal. Water is a problem and things are happening every day to compound the problem. He pointed out that since the previous hearing on this project a federal court in Arizona increased the water entitlement of the lower basin Indian tribes by one-third; that represents 100,000 acre feet. That decision still has to go to the Supreme Court, but the indications are that it will be upheld because the entitlement has been fully justified. That would lower California's entitlement to Colorado River water from 4.4 million to 4.3 million. He further pointed out that water rights are established on the basis first claim, and that the Blythe Valley claim was established 100 years ago and Imperial Valley claimed water in 1902. He would therefore expect that the 100,000 acre feet would be taken from the Metropolitan Water District's share. Mr. Coleman also reported that a few days ago Metropolitan announced that they would relinquish entitlement to 1/4 million acre feet to help out farmers in the San Joaquin Valley. He also noted that one portion of the California Water Project is the San Luis Rey reservoir, where during periods of heavy run off water is pumped up over a dam to the extent of about 1.6 million acre feet and stored, then released in the summer for the farmers in the San Joaquin Valley. In recent months 1100 feet of the dam face collapsed, requiring emergency drainage and it may be another year before total reconstruction is complete. In the meantime, another source of water must be found for farming operations in that valley, and fortunately Metropolitan is in a position of being able to relinquish a portion of its share. Mr. Coleman commented that the Navajo Indian tribes may also claim 5 million acre feet of water from the Colorado River. The Navajo reservation has more usable land than there is within the entire Metropolitan Water District service area, so it is likely that the Navajos will receive a substantial allocation. He recounted the problems of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power with regard to withdrawal of water from Mono Lake. If the courts rule in favor of the groups contesting withdrawal from Mono Lake, the City of Los Angeles will look for water from some other source. That city has first claim on any water imported by Metropolitan Water District because Los Angeles represents 54% of the assessed valuation in the District and is therefore entitled to 54% of the water, but they have never used more than 25% of their entitlement and on the average use only 8%. Mr. Coleman referred to an article which indicated that Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego are the fastest growing counties in the United States in terms of population and are all in the Metropolitan Water District service area. -8- March 24~ I982 He asserted that if the peripheral canal is approved it will be ten years from the beginning of the construction until water flows through the canal. Mr. Coleman further pointed out that every aqueduct carrying water into Southern California crosses the San Andreas earthquake fault and an earthquake could be disastrous to this area's water supply. He urged the Commission to deny approval of the EastLake project. Dick Kau, 4203 Acacia, Bonita, advised that as a native of Fresno, California, he can remember when the well went dry in 1939 so he, too, is concerned about water. He reported that he met on the previous night with major land owners of the Otay Mesa area, the City and County of San Diego, LAFCO, Otay Water District General Manager and a representative of the State of California. It was noted that the City of San Diego has adopted a community plan that runs from 1-805 at Otay Valley Road all the way to Otay Mountain, which encompasses 20,000 acres. Mr. Kau advised that the City of San Diego owns the Lower Otay Reservoir and they will be annexing right to the south of that area. If they consider annexing 20,000 acres, it would be no problem for them to also annex the 3,000 acre Janal Ranch property. One of the problems discussed was whether the City of San Diego or the Otay Water District should supply the water for that area; they indicated they have plenty of water. If San Diego takes that property and the Union Oil property, Chula Vista will be surrounded and lose control of growth in the area. Mr. Kau reported that when Western Salt decided that Janal Ranch should be developed they looked at financial statements and development plans and picked Cadillac Fairview because they are foremo:st in the business. He expressed the feeling that adoption of the General Plan Amendment should move ahead and give Cadillac Fairview a chance to prepare a specific plan, which he felt would be better than allowing San Diego to completely surround Chula Vista. Mr. Kau advised that he negotiates leases for farmers who wish to farm on the Otay Mesa. That land leases for $120 per acre per year; it is level and developed for drip irrigation. The Janal Ranch consists of rolling land and would probably lease for $40 or $50 per acre per year. He indicated there are four or five thousand acres on Otay Mesa that is not being farmed. Developing the Janal Ranch would not be losing the last piece of farm land around to farm. Niek Slijk, representing the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, advised that he is speaking in place of the Chamber President, Mr. Kuntze, who recently suffered injuries in a motor bike accident when he went out to view this property, and cannot attend this meeting. Mr. Kuntze had planned to testify in favor of moving ahead with the proposed plan. Mr. Slijk indicated he could not add to the presentation made by Mr. Santos on the merits of the plan but he did wish to speak to the issue of prematurity. He recalled that in 1962 the Director of Planning approached the Chamber of Commerce with the idea that it was time for the City of Chula Vista to start planning. Together the City and the Chamber created certain committees and those committees prepared what is the foundation for the General Plan of 1990. That was in 1962 and they were talking about a 30 year plan. He felt that is basically what the Cadillac Fairview People are asking today--that the city look ahead and start planning for 30 years. He advised that the Chamber of Commerce strongly endorses this proposal and urges the Planning Commission to endorse it. -9- March 24, 1982 Uwe Werner, 402 D Avenue, Coronado, commented on the desirable rural atmosphere of the Bonita-Sunnyside area, which would be affected by increased traffic from the proposed development. He urged the Commission to consider the impact on other communities outside of the development area. Paul Whitten, 5960 San Miguel Road, Bonita, chairman of the Sweetwater Community Planning Group, reiterated the opposition of that group as expressed at the March lOth meeting. He felt some of the remarks of the developer picture a utopia situation, but in reality low cost housing does not happen until the city takes it over and runs it. In the public market, houses sell to the person who will pay the highest price. He commented on the comparison of this project to Woodbridge at Irvine and pointed out that development is adjacent to a major freeway and didn't impact a city that is 70 years old. He acknowledged that the city must be progressive and make some changes but did not think the city is obligated to degrade the quality of life for those residents who are now paying taxes just to bring in a developer who is endeavoring to make money. He advised that the Sweetwater Planning Group supports the staff's recommendation and urged the Commission to do the same. John Reiss, 3579 Lomacitas Lane, Bonita, advised that he worked on the North City West proposal and the Sunset Cliffs stabilization project on which he started in 1973 and work on the project will start this summer. He expressed a desire to work with the developer and with the city in developing the necessary findings and mitigation measures to properly approve the project, or to develop clear reasons for denial. Wayne Bon'et, Matisse Lane, Bonita, voiced his concurrence that this project should be judged on its merits. He felt the applicant should be given the opportunity to show that they can meet any objections or problems that are brought up, rather than just denying the project as premature. He contended that if Chula Vista does not start planning for that area some other government agency will move in and do so. He suggested this is an opportunity to work with a reputable firm on a plan that appears to be well thought out and integrated into the whole of Chula Vista. If the plan is denied, there will either be piecemeal development that is difficult to coordinate in a plan or some other community will step in and take over where Chula Vista left off. Stan Waid, 5617 Galloping Way, Bonita Highlands, expressed his support for planned community development. He visited the Woodbridge development and was impressed with what he saw. He is not pleased with the development the County is permitting in his back yard--a mobile home park to accommodate 1,000 mobile homes. That will result in heavy traffic through the residential community in which he lives because the County has not planned an adequate road system to handle the increased traffic. He felt one of the problems is the lack of Route 125 and the city should seek the cooperation of the County and State to reconstruct that route to resolve the traffic problem on Proctor Valley Road and Central Avenue. Gretchen Burkey, P. O. Box 321, Bonita, commented that Bonita presently has a horrendous traffic problem and the proposed project will only make it worse as all northbound traffic will come through the Sweetwater Valley. She urged that some way be found for handling the traffic so it will not impact Bonita. Uwe Werner comments that during the 11 years he has lived in Coronado that city has had traffic problems, which were made worse by the construction of the bridge. He pointed out that whenever a major traffic artery goes through a city it destroys the city. All major studies have lead to diverting traffic around the cities. -10- March 24, 1982 Don Armstrong, 37 Palomar Drive, made reference to an article in Fortune magazine for February, 1981, on the supply and demand for water and how it can be remedied. He contended the EastLake project would benefit the community by providing a place where 70% of the people living there could be employed rather than driving outside of the community to work. He felt the traffic projections are too high. He contended that the city needs to improve its image as an industrial, commercial and residential area where people want to come and that it is easier to make things happen in a planned community than in a haphazard community. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. In discussing a suitable date for continuance of the hearing, Mr. Peterson recommended that adoption of the final E.I.R., the CEQA Findings, and Statement of Overriding Considerations be placed on the same agenda as the General Plan Amendment and Planned Community Zoning, and that review of the revised plans submitted tonight would take longer than two or three weeks. He also suggested that this project be considered at a special meeting with no other applications on the agenda. Commissioner O'Neill reported that he would be on a vacation trip to Europe from April 17 until May 1st. MSUC (Green-O'Neill) The public hearing in consideration of the General Plan Amendment and prezoning to P-C and general development for EastLake be continued to the meeting of May 19, 1982. MSUC (Stevenson-Green) Consideration of the final EIR-81-3, the CEQA Findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations on the proposed EastLake Planned Community be continued to the meeting of May 19, 1982. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director of Planning Peterson reminded the Commission of the April 1 deadline for filing financial statements and that the City Clerk has requested the filing by tomorrow. COMMISSION COMMENTS It was moved by Commissioner Williams that the City Council be asked whether or not they intended for their previous action on the Growth Management Policy to foreclose prematurity as an issue to be considered in looking at the General Plan Amendment proposal. The motion died for lack of a second. Chairman Pressutti expressed the opinion that the Commission is an independent body that can look at prematurity through their own lenses and the recommendation of the Commission in that regard should be forwarded to the Council. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. to the meeting of April 14, 1982. Respectfully submitted, Helen Mapes, Secretary