Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1982/11/10 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA November 10, 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 City Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue. Commissioners Present: O'Neill, Cannon, Green, G. Johnson, Pressutti and Shipe Commissioner Absent: R. Johnson (with previous notification) Staff Present: Director of Planning Gray, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Assistant City Attorney Harron, Redevelopment Coordinator Zegler, and Secretary Mapes. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Vice-Chairman O'Neill, acting as Chairman Pro Tem for the meeting, and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Cannon-G. Johnson) The minutes of the meeting of October 20, 1982 be approved as written. MSUC (G. Johnson-Cannon) The minutes of the meeting of October 27, 1982 be approved with a correction in the last paragraph of page 3 to change the word "landscaped" to "insulated." Commissioner O'Neill abstained due to his absence on October 27. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Pro Tem O'Neill called for oral communications and none were presented. 1. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): EIR-79-6(b) on proposed Rayne Water Systems/UOP Fluid Systems Water Treatment Facility Environmental Review Coordinator Reid advised that this hearing was continued from the meeting of October 26 so review through the State Clearinghouse could be completed by the November 4th termination date. The Clearinghouse submitted comments from the California Coastal Commission which were responded to by Westec Services, Inc. in materials distributed to the Planning Commission. He reported that Westec Services, Inc. has completed their work on the document including response to written and verbal testimony presented during the hearing and a copy of that information was forwarded to the Planning Commissioners prior to this meeting. Chairman Pro Tem O'Neill reopened the continued public hearing. -2- November 10, 1982 Bess Pocklington, 656 Glover Place, noted that the EIR says the proposed plan is in direct conflict with the Bay Front Plan and the City's General Plan. She pointed out it is also in conflict with the goal of creating effective visual gateways to the Bay Front at "J" Street. She asserted that once this land is changed to industrial use, that change is irreversible. She felt the City should not approve this change before a determination is made on the use of the adjacent 10 acres formerly reserved for a SANDER plant. James Cappos, 404 Hilltop Drive, pointed out that of this site only 1.4 acres would be used for the proposed facility and in exchange for that the City would receive the 1.2 acres on "F" Street which would be included in park development at that site. ~rene Maxwell, 473 Berland Way, asked for the response made to issues raised on October 20. Tom Ryan of Westec Services, Inc. summarized their response which will be included in the final E.I.R. with regard to salinity and the possibility of adverse effects in the event of an earthquake. He also reported on concerns raised by the Coastal Commission and the Port District. Redevelopment Coordinator Ze§ler reported that the Redevelopment Agency requested the staff to pursue the possibility of exchanging this parcel of city owned land for Mr. Cappos' property at the foot of "F" Street so that land could be included in the development of a park as desi§nated by the adopted Bay Front Plan. The public hearing in consideration of the E.I.R. was closed. MSUC (Pressutti-Shipe) The Planning Commission certifies that EIR-79-6(b) has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the State CEQA guidelines and the City of Chula Vista's environmental review procedures, and that the information in the document will be considered as the Commission makes a decision on the proposed project. 2. PUBLIC HEARING (Cont.): Consideration of General Plan Amendment GPA-83-3 to redesi~nate 3 acres at the south west qbadrant of "J" Street and Bay Boulevard from "Parks and Public Open Space" to "Research and Limited Industrial" Environmental Review Coordinator Reid advised that this hearing was continued to permit completion of the environmental impact report prior to action on this request. The staff presentation on October 20 pointed out that the existing park on "J" Street is an important element of Bay Front Plan and it implements the gateway concept along a major street to the tourist oriented marine uses to the west. It was also concluded that the proposed General Plan Amendment is premature because of the current efforts to amend the City adopted Local Coastal Program. Mr. Reid called attention to two attachments to the staff report which are submitted in response to concerns raised by the Commission at the former hearing. One attachment discusses the possible availability of other sites within the Bay Front area that could accommodate these water treatment systems while being compatible with the Bay Front Plan. The other attachment affirms that principals of the Brittania project expressed preference for the retention of the subject site in park use as opposed to the change to an industrial use. -3- November 10, 1982 Mr. Reid reiterated the recommendation of the staff that the General Plan Amendment be denied and that the City Council establish a moratorium on new plan amendments in the Bay Front area until the work on the Coastal Plan is complete, or for a period not to exceed one year. Chairman Pro Tem O'Neill reopened the public hearing for consideration of the General Plan Amendment. Clay Gingrich, 768 Riverlawn, expressed his opposition to changin§ open space to other uses, and asserted that this proposal is a desecration to all of the efforts the City has made in the last few years to establish a pleasing gateway to the Bay Front. W. 0. Pocklington, 656 Glover Place, reported on conversations he had with City Councilmen on this proposal, from which he gained the impression that no serious consideration had been §iven to the location of another site in the Bay Front. He asserted that the use of this park, which will be increased with the opening of a trailer park in the area, warrants its retention for public use. He suggested that a longer period of time is needed to consider other alternatives before a decision is made to give up this public land. Irene Maxwell, 473 Berland Way, asserted that this change of land use would deprive 88,000 residents of a recreational use they now enjoy; the City should compensate Mr. Cappos for the property he owns so he could look for another site. Debra Johnston, 85 Riverlawn, reported on the increase in air pollutants in the Chula Vista area during the past five years. She also contended the proposed use would not fit with the gateway to the marina. She reported on the use of the park for youth activities. Bob Maxwell, 473 Berland Way, asserted that the taxpayers made a decision to put the park there and the City should not replace it with industry; with 88,000 people the City should have greater concerns than putting industry in places like this. He elaborated on National City's industrial development and suggested that if Chula Vista wants to go industrial it should be done right and not located on our beaches. James Cappos, 505 Hilltop Drive, pointed out that by trading property the city would only lose .2 of an acre of park land, and further that it was not his idea to make this trade, it was the City's idea. He asserted that a lot of the land that appears to be vacant belongs to the Port District and is not available. He also pointed out that the further their facility is from the ocean the more energy they would use to pump water to the facility. In response to a question from Commissioner Shipe, Mr. Cappos reported they have considered other sites but have not been able to reach an a§reement with the owners. In response to a question from Chairman O'Neill, Mr. Ze§ler elaborated upon the Local Coastal Program which designates the area where Mr. Cappo$' property is located for open space to provide a buffer between the Day and the development that would occur to the east. The Redevelopment Agency is attempting to acquire that property through some means other than condemnation; and felt the land trade would be a 9ood approach. -4- November 10, 1982 After an exchange of comments between the advocates and the opponents of this proposal, Chairman O'Neill closed the public hearing. In Commission discussion, Commissioner Shipe voiced the opinion that this proposal is premature, and that further consideration should be given to alternative sites. Commissioner Cannon concurred and added that he didn't see any sense in exchanging an already existing park for one that does not exist. He pointed out that if the City wishes to retain a life style that provides open space, that will have to be paid for in taxes. Commissioner Green reported that he uses and enjoys the parks on "J" Street but if there is no other way of acquiring the property on "F" Street to create a larger park, then he would favor the trade. He expressed his intent to support the proposal of the Redevelopment Agency. Commissioner O'Neill agreed that this General Plan Amendment seems premature and that the Commission is probably a year away from having the knowledge to make a good decision on it. He concurred that the City owes Mr. Cappos a lot of cooperation in locating another site. MS (Pressutti-Cannon) The Commission recommends denial of the General Plan Amendment 83-3 to redesignate 3 acres of city owned property from Parks and Public Open Space to Research and Limited Industrial on the plan diagram of the Chula Vista General Plan. The motion carried by the following vote; AYES: Commissioners Pressutti, Cannon, G. Johnson, O'Neill and Shipe NAY: Commissioner Green ABSENT: Commissioner R. Johnson MS (Pressutti-Shipe) The Commission recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance to establish a moratorium on the processing of new plan amendments in the Bay Front Redevelopment Area, to remain in effect until the Bay Front Redevelopment and the Local Coastal Program have been comprehensively amended, but not for a period in excess of one year. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Pressutti, Shipe, O'Neill and G. Johnson NOES: Commissioners Green and Cannon ABSENT: Commissioner R. Johnson DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director of Planning Gray advised that no applications have been submitted for consideration on November 24 and the Commission may cancel that meeting if it is their desire. With the consent of the Commission, Chairman Pro Tem O'Neill cancelled the regular meeting for November 24, 1982. -5- November 10, 1982 Mr. Gray reminded the Commission of the workshop meetin§ to be conducted at 5:00 p.m. on November 17, with adjournment to dinner at 7:00 p,m. Mr. Gray also commented on the Boards and Commissions banquet to be held on November 18 and reminded the members of the need to request reservations. All Commissioners indicated their desire to attend the banquet and the Secretary was requested to make the reservations which had not already been made. Mr. Gray advised the Commission that at the Council meeting this week the Council voted to rezone the property at East "J" Street and 1-805 to R-1-H-P. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Pro Tem O'Neill adjourned the meeting at 8:25 p.m. to the study session at 5:00 p.m. on November 17, 1982. Respectfully submitted, Helen Mapes, Secretary