Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1992/11/18 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Council Chambers 7:00 p.m. Public Services Building Wednesday. November 18, 1992 276 Fourth Avenue. Chula Vista ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Fuller, Commissioners Carson, Martin, Moot, Tarantino, Tuchscher (arrived 7:11 p.m.), and Ray COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Deputy City Manager Krempl, Planning Director Leiter, Assistant Planning Director Lee, Senior Planner Crowley, Associate Planner Hernandez, Environmental Facilitator Richardson, Community Development Director Salomone, Economic Development Manager Dye, Senior Civil Engineer Ullrich, City Traffic Engineer Rosenberg, Lieutenant Partch, Assistant City Attorney Rudolf, Consultants Marum and Monaco PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chair Fuller and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chair Fuller reviewed the composition of the Planning Commission, its responsibilities and the format of the meeting, and welcomed two new Planning Commission members Frank Tarantino and John Moot. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Robert Tierney, 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego 92101, representing the disabled (HLCC Group), presented the Commissioners with a handout of a report from the Attorney General of the State of California dated September 17, 1992, to all building officials which mandated how accessibility standards at Federal and State levels would be handled. He charged the Commission to meet the minimum requirements of the American Disabilities Act and AB 1077. PC Minutes -2- November 18, 1992 His client requested that the City take action not only on what was before them that night, but also in areas which were not structural change. He urged that the Planning Commission put in their record that all projects now comply with all applicable State and/or Federal accessibility standards and codes, and make that a practice. ITEM 1. PUBLIC HEARING: RESOLUTIONS GPA-93-01, FSEIR-92-02, PCS-92-05, PCS-93-01 - CONSIDERATION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, RANCHO DEL REY SPA I PLAN BUSINESS CENTER AMENDMENT, RDR EMPLOYMENT PARK DESIGN GUIDELINES AMENDMENT, PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN AMENDMENT, AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN, WATER CONSERVATION PLAN AND TENTATIVE MAPS CHULA VISTA TRACTS 92-05 AND 93-01. ORDINANCE PCM-92-16; CONSIDERATION OF EL RANCHO DEL REY SPECIFIC PLAN - COMMERCIAL CENTER AMENDMENT, PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS BUSINESS CENTER AMENDMENT, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, CEQA FINDINGS, MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Community Development Director Salomone, Economic Development Manager Dye, Senior Planner Crowley, Consultant Joe Monaco (of RBF), and City Traffic Engineer Rosenberg presented the staff report. Economic Development Manager Dye updated the information in the staff report, noted a revised condition in the draft Council resolution (which the Commission was being asked to recommend) regarding the development agreement with the Price Club. All sections referring to the Price Club would be eliminated subject to a separate development agreement. Ms. Dye delineated changes to be made in the primary development agreement. She reported that the Chula Vista Economic Development Commission had endorsed the project in concept. At Commissioner Ray's request, City Traffic Engineer Rosenberg clarified passer-by traffic. Commissioner Martin commented on a letter from Mr. Davis which the Commission received regarding unavailability of material on November ll. Environmental Facilitator Richardson assured him that two copies of the EIR had been delivered to the Library as soon as the City had received the EIR as required. Notices had also been sent to everyone who had commented on the EIR that the documents were available at the City. Commissioner Martin, referring to Attachment G, asked what might happen if the Price Club withdrew. Ms. Dye stated that before any building permits could be issued, there must be a development agreement in place on the parcel in question. Any retailer would have to have a development agreement in place with the City before they could pull building permits. Before either of the development agreements could go into effect, there would have to be an PC Minutes -3- November 18, 1992 implementing agreement in place with one of the major retailers. Any of the three major retailers would have to have an implementing agreement with the City before building permits could be pulled. Community Development Director Salomone said he felt that negotiations with the Price Club were concluded successfuly and the documentation was being prepared on that development agreement. Commissioner Tarantino asked about a study which would take into account ail the projects currently being considered and the build-out of an interim 125. He noted building permits would be withheld if mitigation of identified impacts was not achieved to a less than significant impact. He asked if this was for the project being considered, or for projects coming on line. Mr. Rosenberg answered that it was for the current project and others being considered. Commissioner Tarantino noted that the study mentioned that most of the 1200 jobs that would be generated would be minimum wage jobs. He asked how many minimum wage jobs would be available for students within the range of 16 to 18 years old. Mr. Saiomone said the applicant may give that information in their presentation, and stated the retailers were putting together a consortium to work with the Sweetwater Union High School District and Southwestern College to train and recruit students. Commissioner Ray also requested information as to how long the agreement may last--for initial hirings, or a certain number of years. He was concerned that the agreement may dissolve after a certain period. At Commissioner Moot's request, traffic consultant Dan Maxum explained the transportation phasing plan model base condition and how it fit into the anaiysis of the existing traffic and the traffic impact. Commissioner Moot questioned the level of service on certain streets. City Traffic Engineer Rosenberg discussed the travel time, level of service, traffic on "H" Street, and proposed mitigation. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public heating was opened. first five of the following (Thd ~q~xl~-f'~,~ speakers gave a group presentation in favor of the project.) Craig Fukuyama, 2727 Hoover, National City 91950, representing Rancho del Rey Partnership and McMillin Communities, noted the types of uses which would locate in the center. He reported the project would provide existing locai business with the ability to expand and reinvest within the City, creates a minimum of 1200 new jobs, provide the City with a minimum of $1.5 million annually in sales tax revenue, provide increased property tax revenues, provide a way for local residents to be train and be given preferential employment opportunities through a program being created between the retailers and Southwestern College. He aiso reported that the Partnership would donate to Southwestern College $20,000 annuaily for three years to underwrite a pilot program to offer subsidized monthly bus passes to its students, thereby PC Minutes -4- November 18, 1992 assisting between 80 and 100 students and contributing direetly to the air quality and transportation improvements. Mr. Fukuyama submitted a petition signed and circulated by approximately 400 community residents supporting the project. The applicant supported staff's recommendations. Kathy Nishihira, representing the Price Company, discussed the building design, buffers, and crime prevention, delivery hours, parking lot maintenance, employment opportunities and salary range, cooperation with Southwestern College in training, retraining and employment. Regarding crime, she had contacted the Chula Vista Police Department who had told her if everyone was as cooperative and followed through with implementation of recommendations, they would not have any problem on Broadway. She noted some of the methods utilized by Price Club for security. She also mentioned that 90% of Price Club employees live in Chula Vista. Ms. Nishihira said the Price Club had an agreement with the City to upgrade or rebuild the facility on Broadway. Jim Lyon, real estate manager for the Home Depot, said they were moving from their present facilities because the building was too small. He discussed some of the benefits of moving to a larger facility, delivery hours, the small amount of criminal activity, the loss prevention representatives who would be in the store at all times, and participation in career training programs. They would not be hiring a great number of new employees since they were only relocating their existing store. Mr. Lyon said the Home Depot owns their present facility and would lease out or sell that building to another retail business as soon as possible. He assured those present that they would not allow that building to be occupied by anyone who would have an adverse effect on the community. Kevin Tweed, representing K-Mart, said they would design their store to fit the area; the parking lot lights would be set to come on at dusk and terminates one hour after the store closes; night lights for security would be attached to the building and would shine down; there would be on-site security personnel; no more crime than other areas, but more reported crime because the criminals are caught. Mr. Tweed also gave the Commissioners a petition which had been signed by approximately 500 Chula Vista residents at the Chula Vista store in support of K- Mart. Ken Baumgartner, of McMillin Communities, concluded the prepared presentation by discussing the major project funding, the non-traditional real estate sources, the message being sent regarding doing business in California. He asked that the Commission consider the new jobs created, the revenues to the City, and the message that Chula Vista would send welcoming quality development and some quality retailers. Chair Fuller then declared a break at 9:00 p.m.; the public hearing reconvened at 9:10 p.m. Robert Tierney, 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, spoke for the disabled community, and stated he had an opportunity to look at the EIR and the disabled community was not addressed. He was not against the project, but was against the way it was brought forth without consideration PC Minutes -5- November 18, 1992 of disabled. Requested that according to the law, that the following phrase be added: "This project in its entirety shall comply with all applicable state and federal access standards and codes. This would include the City of Chula Vista and all concerns involved in entirety." Mr. Tierney said K-Mart had been a good participant with the disabled. The other two principals had not addressed it. He said the EIR was incomplete, and urged the Commission to reconsider the certification of the EIR. (The next five speakers gave a prepared group presentation representing Chula Vista Residents for Responsible Planning - in opposition.) Nick Gistaro, 809 Arroyo Place, CV, said they opposed the zoning change and building of three major retailers in a residential area. Using slides, he showed the view of the project area from some of the back yards of homes on the hills around the project area, the elevations, setbacks, pictures of the existing locations showing tire service centers, outside activity sales, as well as trash, etc. in the parking lots. He discussed the lower revenue shown in this report, abandonment of existing open space public access easement, and substantial grading. He said the General Plan supported the employment park. Concerned about west side businesses. Felt this project would severely impact existing businesses in the western area. He believed the home values adjacent to "J" Street would be lowered, and home insurance would increase. Dave Hand, 1333 Los Coches Ct., CV, said, for the record, that he objected to the meeting and requested that the vote be delayed because they had not had adequate notice and had been unable to obtain information on the tentative map and DDA in sufficient time to prepare. He had addressed the Commission on September 9, but did not received notification that the final impact report was available. He urged that the Commission recommend to the City Council that the project not be approved and that the zoning not be changed. EIR had many flaws. Object to three magnet stores in the same location and the resulting excessive degradation of the quality of life for the residents of the area. He addressed crime, and acceptable alternative alternatives as two reasons for rejection. Klm Brogan, 1365 Los Coches Ct., CV, addressed the air pollution impact with significant ambient air quality in the region which could not be mitigated. She said CalTrans was critical of the premises used in support of the traffic analysis, and stated there was too much emphasis on SR-125 being built, because it was going to be a private toll road. This project generated 1,000 less jobs than the industrial park; need to get a program going from the City to recruit the jobs that were supposed to go in there; objected to traffic increase, degeneration of air quality. Believed Mexican Nationals should be encouraged to come here and spend their money, but they do not have air pollution control devices on their cars, and she did not believe that was adequately addressed in the EIR. Objected to the increase in noise and light pollution, increased crime. She objected to not having time to have her experts review the Final EIR. Brenda Maldonado spoke of the average daily trips and congestion, and said non-US buyers were not reflected in the figures, the impact of the Mexican shopper on the San Diego economy. PC Minutes -6- November 18, 1992 Ruth Young, 1135 Red Maple Drive, CV, said the Rancho del Rey commercial center was not designed with the neighborhood in mind, but rather a 15 mile service area. He asked that McMillin consider meeting with the citizens group to design something that would be amenable to the area as opposed to what was proposed. She invited those people in the audience who were opposed to the project to stand and show their support for non-approval. (About 50% of the audience stood. Approximately 170 people were in attendance.) Tom Davis, 1657 Gotham Street, CV, discussed the current development agreement and the attempt to modify the agreement in June 1985. The agreement was not approved by Council because of density. Gersten had been compensated for zoning the area Industrial by an increase in residential density. He felt this should be a key consideration in these proceedings. He also had not had the opportunity to adequately review the EIR. Rod Davis, 653 Redlands Place, CV, representing Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, was in favor of the project, and urged a favorable vote. Thresholds for growth management were better served with this development, less peak traffic, less demand on water and sewer resources, and more revenue. Sales tax revenue for Chula Vista last year stayed fiat; operation costs rose; choices were to have a new way to tax citizens or build more businesses for more sales revenue. Cost to have only two major businesses in center for regrading and restoration of infrastructure with all amenities would be prohibitive. Therefore, building two would not be economically viable. The Chamber thanked the Commissioners for their service. Ann Law, 953 Maria Way, CV 91911, was in favor of the project because of the convenience aspect. Revenue generated would be positive. Mike Vogt, 4932 Golf Glen Bonita, CV 91902, addressed the economics in light of the military cuts and California's unfriendly business reputation. The vacancy rates in office, industrial, and retail are at an all-time high. Land sales are almost non-existent. Believed it was important to address the community's issues of quality of life; however stressed that economics should be considered and how they impact the quality of life. Felt the City was fortunate to have the three power retailers. He said R&D and office space had not done exceptionally well in Chula Vista. Urged support for the proposal. Danny Ord, 66 Telegraph Canyon Road, CV, supported project because of the convenience, and opportunity for his children to go to school and work close by. Keith Harlan, 155 Millan, CV 91910, supported the project. He felt much of the opposition was based on prejudice. Would like to be able to shop closer to home. Donna Mallen, 693 East "J" Street, CV 91910, said she lived directly across from the project and was opposed to it because of the noise pollution. Not opposed to the project, but disagrees with the location. She was concerned that there were no parallel streets; freeway in her back yard; increase in accidents. She may not be opposed to only one facility going in. As it was, it was completely unacceptable and degraded the environmental quality. PC Minutes -7- November 18, 1992 Linda Seher, 543 Beacon Pi., CV, was against the rezoning because of the traffic impact. She questioned the figures used in terms of the peak PM traffic and the little impact it would supposedly have. She noted that in Carlsbad, the new Price Club was required to shut down for several hours during the peak PM hours until a new freeway interchange is built. She was not opposed to helping business, but felt a message should be sent to homeowners that when they buy a house with a plan in place, you could trust that plan, because otherwise the residential base could be eroded if people could not trust the zoning when they buy a house. Cindy Resler, 1085 Red Maple Drive, CV 91910, said the notice should state exactly what was being proposed--Home Depot, Price Club, and K-Mart--instead of jargon. Opposed because of traffic. McMillin had generously offered to subsidize mass transit passes for three years, $20,000 a year which would fund about 1130 students a year. She said there was about 900 students a day who take bus transit, 25% of the ridership. It was a kind gesture by McMillin, but she felt the students were a political pawn. She said there were entities involved in the project other than McMillin. RTC was a federal government entity and had more say in what would happen to the area than McMillin. She asked for clarification as to the accountability of RTC to the community. She believed it would be better to accept this, rather than the federal government putting something else in without public heatings. Ms. Resler stressed that she was in opposition because of the environmental impact in the area. She felt the mass transit subsidies were important, but wondered if this would go through even if the proposal did not go through. She suggested that McMillin work with representatives from the community in opposition and in support, and the City, and openly speak with each other to reach a resolution before the Council meeting. Brent Harlan, 332 Alpine Avenue, CV 91910, supported the proposal because he felt the businesses needed to be moved to larger facilities so the citizens could have what they deserve in a retail business center. Ken Screeton, 678 Via La Cuesta, CV, supported because of tax revenues, and believed Eastern Chula Vista needed the project. Sharon Hillldge, 2344-F Greenbriar Dr., CV 91915, supported because of convenience of shopping, time saved by not having to travel out of the area to shop, did not believe there would be impacted severely, many residents in the neighborhood supported the idea of local shopping, sees it as an opportunity to sent out a positive message that Chula Vista is a good place to do business. Charles Smith, 534 Trailridge Dr., CV 91902, supported on the basis that it would create tax revenues, provide needed services, convenient shopping. Roger Resler, 1085 Red Maple Drive, CV 91910, speaking for the student government of Southwestern College, said while his group had no official position paper the students want convenience--not jobs. They were opposed to the project. PC Minutes -8- November 18, 1992 Chuck Day, 845 Southshore Dr., CV 91910, supports McMillin in their ability to deliver on their promise which has been clearly demonstrated. Supports the project because of convenience in shopping, easier access to Home Depot, positive impacts of new business, new revenues. R. Quiles, 583 Vista Miranda, CV 91910, was not opposed to the project or to McMillin, but they had believed small shops would be there and now there would be three large uses. His neighbors felt they did not have the information that had been disclosed. The proper information should be given to each individual, not to just one group. He did not oppose growth; felt the revenue would be good so there would be money for the youth, but thought it was indecent when people didn't deal with honesty. Doug Perkins, 148 E. 30th St., National City, representing South County Economic Development Council, said that on October 30, 1992, they enthusiastically endorsed the project because of the job creation and the increased revenues to the City. They were concerned about the deepening defense cuts, the continuing exodus of business from California, and the increasing failures of small and medium-sized business. The unemployment rate had increased to its highest level in 10 years. This project would create 250 to 300 additional jobs. He urged the Commission to send out a message to the unemployed, the underemployed, those people beginning to climb the economic ladder by supporting the project. Alan Botterman, 600 Alejandra Pl., CV 91910, opposed the project and has a business at 1172 Third Avenue in south central Chula Vista, no one had addressed the problems occurring in Chula Vista as it is now which is on a decline, citing security problems at his store, he is appalled at the idea of three stores and the problems that came with them. He also expressed concern with the air quality and traffic impacts. There is a serious problem with Bonita residents speeding through the Rancho del Rey development as a shortcut to East "H" Street. He was concerned that with the new development, drivers would use their residential streets as a passageway to avoid "H" Street. He was also concerned with police protection as it exists. He did not like the position in which McMillin had put the residents by selling under one premise and allowing something else to occur. Rose Lopez, 927 Rosebud Rd., CV 91910, supported the development. (No speaker slips for the following) Donna Marchisot, 1251 Calle Candelero, CV, supported the project. Latter dan Clmn, 1347 Serena Cr., CV, said there was a natural shortcut through Rancho del Rey, drivers drove 50 mph by Discovery Park with children crossing the street. He felt the high-volume stores would have a lot of delivery trucks, double rigs going up a steep grade up "H" Streets. He was concerned about safety, more lights, more stop signs, people working on their cars in the parking lots of the stores. He bought his house six months ago, has a tax bill and two supplemental tax bills, is paying a lot of money to live here. If they had told him, he would not live here. If this project goes through, he would move. He said none of the petitions submitted were signed by people who lived in Rancho del Rey. PC Minutes -9- November 18, 1992 Brent Rivers, 663 Port Dunbar, CV, wanted someone to address how traffic from new projects outside of the Chula Vista planning area, such as Otay Mesa, was taken into consideration. He was concerned about K-Mart sustaining two stores with Wal-Mart planned for National City. Manuel Chizan, 604 Alejandra Place, CV, asked why people traveled out of town to use K- Mart and Price Club and did not use the local stores. He would like to have beautiful new stores, but it didn't make sense if the stores already exist and the people locally don't use them. Why bother to have more? John Yanasheski, 678 Rue Avallon, C¥, said a complete den of noise from the trucks already existed in EastLake. The traffic report in the EIR was seriously flawed. "H" Street was at capacity, and if the project was brought in, the stores would have to close like they do in Carlsbad, or t'H" Street would have to be widened. Then there would be a problem on the freeway. Three stores would be fine, but need to be located close to the freeway. S?.aker slips were submitted by the following who did not s?.~k: (In Support) Robert Baker, 1481 Rimcrut Ct., Bonita 91902 Liz Lebron, 328 Crestview Dr., Bonita 91902 Sharon Vancara, 2122-B Northshore, CV 91913 Patti Boman, 5342 Carolyn Vista Ln., Bonita 91902 Lance Roberts, 210 Malito Ct., CV 91911 Eric Davis, 653 Redlands Pl., Bonita 91902 Les Leininger, 40161 Shadow Rock Ct., Bonita 91902 (In Opposition) Phyllis Ann Brooks, 700 Paseo Del Rey, CV 91910 Thomas Hodo, 624 Via Armado, CV 91910 No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Carson asked Kathy Nishihira, the Price Club representative, if the Otay Mesa area was not developed, would that mean they would not want to locate a second store. Ms. Nishihira answered negatively, saying there were other areas involved also. Commissioner Carson asked about a newscast stating that the Price Club is in the process of being sold, and if there was any truth to that. Ms. Nishihira said there was no inside discussion of selling. They were a little fearful of a takeover, but it was rumor as far as they were concerned. Commissioner Carson, regarding the development agreement, under Home Depot for City requirements, said the City would have the right to approve the Terra Nova replacement tenant and that the Home Depot had indicated an unwillingness to agree to this term. She questioned their reasoning for not allowing the City to have the right to approve the replacement tenant. The Home Depot representative had left the meeting, but Mr. Fukuyama thought it may be that PC Minutes -10- November 18, 1992 they believed it was an infringement of their personal business to be unduly interfered with by the City. He thought that some ability to help encourage some types of uses, but the absolute right for the City to have to backfill that store was somewhat objectional to Home Depot. Community Development Director Salomone said they had been negotiating with Mr. Lyon and Home Depot, and the City found the approval of the backfill tenant to be key to the economics of this project. Mr. Lyons had objected, and said he had a number of clients that the City would approve of. The City felt it was important to the economics of the whole project that that 80,000 sq. ft. meet with the City's approval. Commissioner Carson asked if the other two stores did random drug testing, as did Home Depot. Kathy Nishihira of the Price Club said it was a requirement that all new employees go through drug testing, and do random checking. A K-Mart representative said they did random drug testing through a social security number with a random set of numbers delivered a year in advance. Commissioner Carson asked the City Attorney to speak in relationship to the disability issues raised and how it fit into the EIR, or should it be conditioned. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf answered that it did not fit into the EIR or the project. The City is required to comply with both state and federal law, and those things would be incorporated at the development level rather than the planning level. Commissioner Carson asked Lt. Partch of the Police Department to speak to Priority 1 and Priority 2 calls to let the public know how that was established for the Growth Management thresholds and why it might take a longer time to deal with a problem that is not life threatening. Lt. Partch explained the procedures, and said there had been a number of life-threatening calls which had gone out during the meeting. Calls regarding abandoned cars were handled by a Community Service Officer to keep police officers free to respond to life-threatening calls. Any time a threshold has not been met, he is notified and it is researched as to why it was not met. He also noted that their statistics showed that the number of crimes which occurred at the Price Club on Broadway and the Home Depot was more like one car per week stolen at both locations combined. Commissioner Ray was concerned with the internal circulation of the project, and asked if it had been done through a traffic modeling program or some other system. Mr. Marum said it had been conducted through a manual review of internal circulation, simulating the amount of dwell time--the amount of time it would take to exit the site during peak periods--and took into consideration the delay that had been experienced because of the amount of "greenH time of the signals on "H" Street. Commissioner Ray asked if it there was an acceptable threshold for internal circulation dwell time. Mr. Marum said each project was analyzed based on its own unique characteristics of the ability of the project to meter traffic out of the site. It would operate differently than an employment park in that everyone would not arrive or leave at the same time. PC Minutes -11- November 18, 1992 Commissioner Martin asked if any options had been considered for ingress and egress in the back of the project. Mr. Rosenberg said that option had been rejected because of grade differential between the pad and street below and also would encourage diversion of traffic through the residential neighborhood. Mr. Marum said there would be some green time dedicated to the outbound movement from the Home Depot and the signals would be coordinated to allow traffic movement. Commissioner Tarantino asked if there was any substantiation to the claims of devaluation of property values and increase in auto insurance and home insurance due to the project. Community Development Director Saiomone answered that staff had not analyzed that issue. Mr. Fukuyama could not substantiate it, but felt other factors entered into home values than just the existence of a shopping center. The economy was also playing heavily on the values of properties now, but in other places where the centers existed they had not experienced a change in property values. He lived next to a shopping center, and there had not been any appreciable change in insurance rates, other than normal changes that occur. Commissioner Tuchscher asked about the development regarding upgrading the existing Price Club on Broadway. Mr. Saiomone said the Price Club had covenanted to keep it open for 10 years, create better access from Oxford to Palomar, and rehabilitate (or possibly rebuild) the store. Commissioner Tuchscher, referring to the trips graphics, questioned whether the stores were working with Southwestern College and if there efforts regarding training students were real outreach efforts. He also needed assurances that ADA would be looked at and all planning issues associated with that would be scrutinized with the project. Commissioner Tuchscher, regarding noticing, said it was important to delineate the items as simply as possible. Regarding the California business environment and student transportation, Commissioner Tuchscher said that Cindy Resler had brought up a point regarding public transportation. As a result McMillin and the retailers had put together a program to help underwrite some of those passes for students. He did not believe the students were being used as a political pawn, and wanted Southwestern to be more involved in the projects in the eastern area. Chair Fuller, regarding the mass transit offer, said there was not as much effort at the time of the Draft EIR heating to get the proposed transit system back on line. More effort had been made. She was concerned about the cumulative impacts of traffic on "H" Street. The effort of the College to use mass transit and the offer by McMillin was a step in the right direction, but the Commission needed to make the students and the College aware that employees of the retail stores should be encouraged through employment incentives to use mass transit if it was available. PC Minutes -12- November 18, 1992 Chair Fuller noted that improvements made to the area south of "L" Street had been done since the annexation to Chula Vista by the City and not by the County. Commissioner Moot asked staff to look preliminarily at property devaluation for Council information. Commissioner Moot asked Mr. David Hand if some of the alternatives might have some support from some of the organizations he represented. Mr. Hand said it was the consensus from others that they would accept the alternatives. Commissioner Moot asked the City Attorney if the alternatives could be considered by an alternate motion. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf answered that the first action would be to certify that the EIR complied with CEQA. Discussion ensued regarding Commissioner Moot's question regarding the infeasibility of building one or two stores versus three. The applicant and Mr. Salomone replied that it was a infeasible financially. MS (Tuchscher/Martin) to accept the attached Planning Conunission resolution reconunending that the City Council certify the Final Supplemental EIR and approve the project, with the recommended amendments presented by staff. Chair Fuller asked about the McMillin partnership. Mr. McMillin explained that the shareholders of the corporation was now RTC, but the California Corporation--their partner--was still intact. Commissioner Ray said he was tenuous about traffic. He was comfortable with voting on the EIR, but not other specifics in the recommendation. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf suggested that the Commission first certify the EIR, and separately vote on the rest of the resolution. Commissioner Tuchscher, with the concurrence of Commissioner Martin, restated the motion as follows: RESTATED MOTION To certify the Final Supplemental EIR-92-02. VOTE: 7-0 MS (Tuchscher/Martin-for discussion) to recommend approval of the remaining documents as amended. Commissioner Martin said they had approved the EIR; he questioned whether the Commission approved of the traffic situation or not; and noted that they had to be careful of the information PC Minutes -13- November 18, 1992 fed to them regarding crime; he felt the Commission had to make up their mind one way or the other. Commissioner Tarantino commented that the traffic portion was not an issue for him, because had served on the Growth Management Oversight Commission for several years; he felt there were safeguards built into the system and that the system works well. He was concerned with the internal workings of the project; he did not see it as being as pedestrian friendly as it possibly could be. Commissioner Carson believed SR-125 would not be available by the March 1993 date in the feasibility study; if there was a problem with the traffic, that would be a stop gap. She was unhappy about people racing by Discovery Park and felt it would happen with "J" Street and Paseo del Rey because people would shortcut through there, but there were feasibility studies and controls that would slow that traffic down, so she felt comfortable with that. Commissioner Carson felt the new Commissioners should state that they had read everything and listened to the tapes of everything previously done on the project. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf said this was the first heating the Commission had had on the project itself, and the public review period had been closed on the EIR. They did not need to have listened to the tape. The responses to comments were in the Final EIR. Commissioner Moot stated he had read everything. He was not as satisfied as others about the traffic situation and was concerned that the proposed project may have too much power for the area it was in. He would support two major uses in this particular area, but thought three major drawing stores of this size and magnitude was too much for the area. Chair Fuller said she had also served for two years on the Growth Management Oversight Committee and also felt confident, but had concern over the cumulative traffic effect in the total eastern area. She was confident with the safeguards which had been built into the Growth Management Plan by ordinance and the way the traffic and intersections that are impacted are studied annually, project by project and cumulatively. Safeguards were built in that projects would not happen if points of impact are reached. Commissioner Tuchscher commented that because of previous projects, and comments regarding traffic which had been made, positive things were happening in the eastern areas such as the HNTB study and the negotiations between ail of the developers for an interim facility at the 125 corridor. For those reasons, he was much more comfortable with this project from a traffic standpoint as well. Commissioner Ray referred to several pages in the EIR Appendix which referred to roadways which were below acceptable LOS thresholds. He felt the thresholds were too lenient. He was not satisfied with what he had seen and read. He had some questions he would refer to staff regardless of the outcome of the vote. He was also concerned with the General Development Agreement; he would like to see something included about ongoing mitigation monitoring for PC Minutes -14- November 18, 1992 future years; specific concerns on internal traffic; does not address traffic impacts from Salt Creek, San Miguel, and other non-approved projects which would be going in those areas. Commissioner Moot asked for clarification that, through the GMOC thresholds, if a survey is done two years from now and were wrong about traffic generation and more traffic was generated, some other project may not get built because of the controls and development may be halted somewhere else in the eastern Chula Vista area. Commissioner Tarantino concurred, and added that even this project could be halted. RESTATEMENT OF MOTION To recommend approval of the remainder of the resolution as amended. VOTE: 5-2 (Commissioners Ray and Moot voting against) DIRECTOR'S REPORT Assistant Planning Director Lee reported that at the last meeting, there was an item on which the Commission took action with property located on Anita Street. The owner was confused regarding the hearing process and as a result of that confusion, staff had tentatively set the item for reconsideration by the Planning Commission on December 2. He also reminded them of the joint meeting with the County Planning Commission on Otay Ranch in Conference Room 2/3 at 3:00 p.m. COMMISSION COMMENTS Chair Fuller commented that she was impressed with the homework the new Commissioners had done so quickly and the grasp of the project. ADJOURNMENT at 12:00 a.m. to the Joint Special Meeting with County Planning Commission of November 20, 1992 at 3:00 p.m. in Conference Room 2/3; adjourning to the Joint Special Meeting on December 2, 1992 at 5:00 p.m. in Conference Room 2/3, and the Special Meeting of the Chula Vista Planning Commission immediately following at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Nancy RiCley, S4ecretar~ Planning Commission